• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge throws out Pennsylvania's ban on gay marriage

Mr.Nick said:
That is epic bull**** but, since you said it I will go with it? so who did go with marriage? 11th century governments?

The truth is marriage has been a spiritual bond/religious bond for the last 10,000 years..

Marriage ritualistic artifacts have been found that are over 10,000 years old -- and none of these rituals have anything to do with government(s), and everything to do with the spiritual/religious.

Governments had NOTHING to do with any of these "unions" unless they were to "unify" families for political or wealth reasons.
Click to expand...

Societies have a claim to marriage. What part of that did you not understand?

13 Facts on the History of Marriage | LiveScience
7. State or church?

Marriages in the West were originally contracts between the families of two partners, with the Catholic Church and the state staying out of it. In 1215, the Catholic Church decreed that partners had to publicly post banns, or notices of an impending marriage in a local parish, to cut down on the frequency of invalid marriages (the Church eliminated that requirement in the 1980s). Still, until the 1500s, the Church accepted a couple's word that they had exchanged marriage vows, with no witnesses or corroborating evidence needed.
Click to expand...

And heck, in this country the state plays a much bigger role in marriage than the church. In fact, the state has held a much bigger role in marriage in the US since the 19th Century.

Marriage, a History | Psychology Today

How marriage has changed over centuries - The Week

The Origin of Marriage (And the Evolution of Divorce) | Dollars and Sex | Big Think
 
tres borrachos said:
I was talking about the treatment of blacks before the civil rights movement versus gays not getting a marriage license. So what the judge cited in his ruling isn't relevant to the context of my post that you quoted.
Click to expand...
You were trying to say that the right denied a homosexual is a long from a right denied to a Black. It is not, since in this CASE, they both involve the most basic of human rights.....the right to marry.
 
tres borrachos said:
Oh. That's nice.

I'm pro-gay marriage.

I'm talking about the treatment of blacks.
Click to expand...
We are talking about the right to marriage, the most basic of human rights. If you cannot see how that underlies ANY civil right, I don't know what else to say other than you have lost all perspective of the context of the debate.
 
tres borrachos said:
And as I said before, here is where we differ. I see the treatment of blacks until the civil rights movement as horrible. I don't see not getting a marriage certificate as "horrible". I also don't see married people as being "first class citizens" in order to get the notion of gays being "second class citizens", but that's just my opinion.

The reason I'm for gay marriage is that I'm just not against it, to be honest. Maybe if I thought this was truly a tragedy that gay couples don't get that peice of paper, I'd be more active in my support of it. I know a lot of people who never married, but were very happy.

I just think people should be able to marry who they want and that's that.

You still haven't said how legalizing SSM will make the prejudices against gays go away, or them being able to get jobs and houses they are not getting today.
Click to expand...

I never said it would but I did answer you:

Lursa said:
And the civil rights movement wasnt about changing prejudice...it was about giving *people*...blacks...equal rights, making sure they were no longer treated like 2nd class citizens and had *equal protection under the law.*

Just like this step in SSM is one piece of recognizing the same for gays.
Click to expand...

And the reason you dont view the struggle by gays as the same is because they were able to 'hide' in society...and had to...otherwise the persecution would have been the same or similar.

Even today gays are beaten to death, just because of who they are. In the past especially, they would have been driven out of neighborhoods as perverts, deviants (people call that that here on the forum), kicked out of church, removed from jobs (like teaching), not hired for jobs, etc etc etc.

To survive, they hid. Blacks could not hide.
 
Last edited:
Gimmesometruth said:
You were trying to say that the right denied a homosexual is a long from a right denied to a Black. It is not, since in this CASE, they both involve the most basic of human rights.....the right to marry.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your opinion. Mine is different.
 
Deuce said:
I'm sure, then, that you agree Christianity has no specific authority to claim the word "marriage."

Side note/fun fact:
The terrible, activist judge in PA that overturned the ban was endorsed by none other than social conservative hero Rick Santorum!
Click to expand...

I never claimed Christianity held the "rights" to "marriage" I merely pointed out that religion/bond was the basis of marriage and that government shouldn't be involved.....

I don't give a **** about Rick Santorum so who gives a ****?

If you're gay then join a church that will marry you - of you're opposed to homosexuality then join a church that caters to your ideas.... It's that simple.

Government can stay out of all of that!
 
Amandi said:
I found a couple of stories/blogs. I dont know about finding actual polls or research but I will continue to try.

Prop 8: Let’s Get Rid of Marriage Instead! | Women's Media Center
A Gay-Marriage Solution: End Marriage? - TIME
Click to expand...

And those show a couple of legal scholars and a single blogger who are suggesting it. That is not major support. That is simply a couple of people who support it. I recognize that a few people support this. But I believe the majority of this is really one of two situations. One; those who are against same sex marriage but recognize that it will legal soon so they are desperate to maintain their claim to the word. Two; those who do not like confrontations and are looking to appease everyone, and this is their proposal of doing it. The problem is that this will become a non-issue once same sex marriage is completely legal everywhere. Most won't even notice it after a couple years. Sure, some will still grumble about it, just as some now grumble about interracial marriages or about sodomy laws being struck down.
 
roguenuke said:
There is a difference in some places. Plus, not everyone wants the federal recognition. Others do. There is a reason that some opposite sex couples would prefer to have a civil union vice just getting married when the state allows them to. (What their reasoning is, I don't know. But they wouldn't exist at all for opposite sex couples if they didn't want something other than marriage.)

Civil union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Hey, I have no problem in adjusting my stances if presented with the information. I will look into it but until I find a difference, I will still think the best alternative would be doing away with legal marriage entirely. I dont think that will happen so my actions will be supporting marriage equality.
 
tres borrachos said:
Thank you for sharing your opinion. Mine is different.
Click to expand...
But apparently, you cannot logically explain how your "opinion" that a human right (marriage) is different from a civil right (interracial marriage) is different from a "gay" right (gay marriage).
 
roguenuke said:
And those show a couple of legal scholars and a single blogger who are suggesting it. That is not major support. That is simply a couple of people who support it. I recognize that a few people support this. But I believe the majority of this is really one of two situations. One; those who are against same sex marriage but recognize that it will legal soon so they are desperate to maintain their claim to the word. Two; those who do not like confrontations and are looking to appease everyone, and this is their proposal of doing it. The problem is that this will become a non-issue once same sex marriage is completely legal everywhere. Most won't even notice it after a couple years. Sure, some will still grumble about it, just as some now grumble about interracial marriages or about sodomy laws being struck down.
Click to expand...

I did say it was a personal observation. I agree with you on what the end will be though.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
But apparently, you cannot logically explain how your "opinion" that a human right (marriage) is different from a civil right (interracial marriage) is different from a "gay" right (gay marriage).
Click to expand...

Oh well.

I'm pro-gay marriage. You may want to go after someone else.
 
Deuce said:
Stop. Stop right there.

Explain to me how your marriage, my marriage, or anyone else's marriage has been "redefined."
Click to expand...

How we define our relationships has nothing to do with this. It is how the government has redefined marriage that has ended an institution as it was originally defined. Half of this country does not agree with the new definition. By states getting out of the marriage license business and switching everything to civil unions, it no longer defines any relationship only to the point for legal purposes.
 
tres borrachos said:
Oh well.

I'm pro-gay marriage. You may want to go after someone else.
Click to expand...
I'm going after you because you claimed, believed, that these examples of (civil) rights (involving marriage) were "a long way away from each other".
 
roguenuke said:
Societies have a claim to marriage. What part of that did you not understand?

13 Facts on the History of Marriage | LiveScience


And heck, in this country the state plays a much bigger role in marriage than the church. In fact, the state has held a much bigger role in marriage in the US since the 19th Century.

Marriage, a History | Psychology Today

How marriage has changed over centuries - The Week

The Origin of Marriage (And the Evolution of Divorce) | Dollars and Sex | Big Think
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but we're not even on the same page here...

I'm looking at marriage as a historical anthropological idea and you're throwing me western religious ideas.

I don't disagree with you, but I can't agree either.
 
vesper said:
And according to half the population in this country you don't own the definition to marriage for sure. The traditional one has been around for thousands of years.
Click to expand...

no it hasn't....certainly not how we define it from your perspective.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
I'm going after you because you claimed, believed, that these examples of (civil) rights (involving marriage) were "a long way away from each other".
Click to expand...

Oh. Oh well. Can't help you, sorry. I don't consider marriage the "most basic of human rights". You do. We disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom