• 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!

They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex marria

Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

They look very happy in their pictures, good for them.

Also it's not really a 'marriage' that would be recognized legally, it was a Buddhist ceremony.

Exactly. There are people in polyamorous groups here in the US who would call themselves married even though they can't do it legally.

Yea for all the people involved in this marriage; I hope they can make it work
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

I'm fine with that as well. I also am of the strong opinion that the government should be out of the marriage business all together.

You can be, but it's hardly a realistic or pragmatic position to take. The government has never been disconnected from marriage. As a matter of fact, marriage is an institution of government and has been for a myriad of reasons including: population controls, conversion, power alliances, etc.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Well, that's the thing. They should be allowed. They just shouldn't expect the state to recognise it. The Thai example shows that marriage can exist within a religious setting and not conflict with a legal definition of the word. They were married under Buddhist law. The state didn't have to recognize it. In the US what people are asking is for the state to recognize gay marriage, not that the churches recognize it.

But since we DO recognize marriage between two people here in the US - we're just saying the state can't discriminate by saying the spouses can't be of the same gender.

If marriage had been strictly religious here in the US, that would be different. But it's a civil institution, buttressed by many benefits and responsibilities granted/allocated by the state. And the state shouldn't discriminate.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

You can be, but it's hardly a realistic or pragmatic position to take. The government has never been disconnected from marriage. As a matter of fact, marriage is an institution of government and has been for a myriad of reasons including: population controls, conversion, power alliances, etc.


If the government simply registered "civil unions", this whole "Gay marriage" issue would disappear.


Let people call thier unions whatever they want, the government should have no say.,
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

If the government simply registered "civil unions", this whole "Gay marriage" issue would disappear.

Marriage is just another name a civil union. If the government "regulated" civil unions tomorrow, we'd have other people trying to ban gays from getting them. Just look at the gay adoption issue. You have people arguing that legally married gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. If that doesn't give you a clue that the hatred is towards gays doing what straights are allowed to do and not a meagre definition of a word, I don't know what will.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

If the government simply registered "civil unions", this whole "Gay marriage" issue would disappear.


Let people call thier unions whatever they want, the government should have no say.,

A myth. Conservatives turn out in droves to vote against same-sex civil unions. Numerous states banned civil unions in their constitutions. This "let's just compromise and call it something else" is just a smokescreen, attempting to appear reasonable mostly because they know the fight is already lost.

The religious do not own the word marriage. They don't get to take it away from everyone else.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

So the question is why do we think having all these benefits for married couples are a good idea.
There's no argument against you and your spouse moving to Thailand. Lot's of reasons against turning America into Thailand.

Good luck with having no Social Security or virtually any retirement benefits, access to non-corrupt court systems, fair or reasonable tax policies (or even the pleasure of knowing that the government will actually receive your tax money), assurance that your family will receive any benefits from your spouses' employer, or after you spouse dies, any benefits whatsoever from anyone.

Good luck in paradise!!
 
Last edited:
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

??? What's the issue here? Polygamy is legal in many countries.

Wouldn't this technically be polyandry?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Wouldn't this technically be polyandry?

No idea. What's the term that covers 'marriage between multiple participants?'
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Marriage is just another name a civil union. If the government "regulated" civil unions tomorrow, we'd have other people trying to ban gays from getting them. Just look at the gay adoption issue. You have people arguing that legally married gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. If that doesn't give you a clue that the hatred is towards gays doing what straights are allowed to do and not a meagre definition of a word, I don't know what will.


I'm telling you the solution. just call em all civil unions, if the government stopped calling it marriage, that whole argument goes away. you have far fewer people screaming about gay adoption than you do gay marriage.

Take the religious word out of the unions and there is little to fight over.


plus, if you decide you are "against gay civil unions" there is no doubt you are calling for the oppression of peoples, not simply "protecting the sanctity, blah blah blah of marriage".
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

A myth. Conservatives turn out in droves to vote against same-sex civil unions.


Link.

Numerous states banned civil unions in their constitutions.


which ones?

Link?



This "let's just compromise and call it something else" is just a smokescreen, attempting to appear reasonable mostly because they know the fight is already lost.


I hate this stupid comment.


I support gay marriage. I always have, you can search my posts. I simply think that if you get the government out of the marriage business and have it's ONLY role is to register "civil unions" for census or whatever purposes, you take the wind out of the anti-gay marriage bigots.


Is that clear enough for you or do you want to continue to infer things that are not true?


The religious do not own the word marriage. They don't get to take it away from everyone else.


How does what I propose do this? anybody is free to call thier whatever, a marriage.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

ROTFLOL... how long until this "right" is bestowed on US citizens?

Oughta be a field day for divorce lawyers.

Will it be limited to only homosexuals? LOL...
If we're going to proclaim that people have a fundamental right to have their "marriage" recognized by the state, there's really no way to stop it.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

ROTFLOL... how long until this "right" is bestowed on US citizens?

Oughta be a field day for divorce lawyers.

Will it be limited to only homosexuals? LOL...

Why do other people's relationships bother you when they have no bearing on you whatsoever?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Don't care, people should be able to marry as many people of any sex they want.

Will you marry me?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

If the government simply registered "civil unions", this whole "Gay marriage" issue would disappear.


Let people call thier unions whatever they want, the government should have no say.,

as long as opposite couples also got civil unions, it would probably be legal.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Marriage is just another name a civil union. If the government "regulated" civil unions tomorrow, we'd have other people trying to ban gays from getting them. Just look at the gay adoption issue. You have people arguing that legally married gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. If that doesn't give you a clue that the hatred is towards gays doing what straights are allowed to do and not a meagre definition of a word, I don't know what will.

excellent post.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

No idea. What's the term that covers 'marriage between multiple participants?'

Doesn't Polyamory cover it?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Doesn't Polyamory cover it?
Group marriage is a better term because polyamory doesn't necessarily imply marriage.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

There's no argument against you and your spouse moving to Thailand. Lot's of reasons against turning America into Thailand.

Good luck with having no Social Security or virtually any retirement benefits, access to non-corrupt court systems, fair or reasonable tax policies (or even the pleasure of knowing that the government will actually receive your tax money), assurance that your family will receive any benefits from your spouses' employer, or after you spouse dies, any benefits whatsoever from anyone.

Good luck in paradise!!

Actually we have moved. But that is a rather weak argument. And mentioning the social security system is rather doubtful, as that is a very poorly organized and intellectually miserable economic activity, where we are stuck in a historical loop we cannot escape for populist reasons.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

ROTFLOL... how long until this "right" is bestowed on US citizens?

Oughta be a field day for divorce lawyers.

Will it be limited to only homosexuals? LOL...

You spend a lot of time crying about the lives of other people that has absolutely nothing to do with you. Why do you care? Is your life not fulfilling enough that you have to try to tear down other people's happiness?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Link.




which ones?

Link?






I hate this stupid comment.


I support gay marriage. I always have, you can search my posts. I simply think that if you get the government out of the marriage business and have it's ONLY role is to register "civil unions" for census or whatever purposes, you take the wind out of the anti-gay marriage bigots.


Is that clear enough for you or do you want to continue to infer things that are not true?





How does what I propose do this? anybody is free to call thier whatever, a marriage.

You're missing another option: screw the bigots altogether. They're losing the equal marriage conflict pretty badly as it is. No compromise is necessary.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

They look very happy in their pictures, good for them.

Also it's not really a 'marriage' that would be recognized legally, it was a Buddhist ceremony.

Just wait until one of them leaves the toilet seat up too many times.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

You spend a lot of time crying about the lives of other people that has absolutely nothing to do with you. Why do you care? Is your life not fulfilling enough that you have to try to tear down other people's happiness?

Why is it wrong to be concerned about the impact social changes will have on society?
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

ROTFLOL... how long until this "right" is bestowed on US citizens?

Oughta be a field day for divorce lawyers.

Will it be limited to only homosexuals? LOL...

Any bets as to how long this farce will last? I say no more than six months. Attention whoring freaks.
 
Re: They look like a new boy band... but it's the world's first THREE-WAY same-sex ma

Why is it wrong to be concerned about the impact social changes will have on society?

... What other social changes are conservative people this concerned about? The popularity of vegetarianism? The growing number of tattooed people? Lower birth rates? What other social changes are people so concerned about that they'll make hundreds of threads on an internet forum, demonstrate at their local city hall, attack on radio, etc? I mean, if we're going to be concerned about social changes, why is it that they don't all get equal airtime in the conservative mindset? ;) It could probably be that this isn't a concern but outright opposition.
 
Back
Top Bottom