• 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!

New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

Navy Pride said:
Horse ****........they can marry anyone of the opposite sex just like I can.......they want special treatment...........
Click to expand...

You're allowed to marry the people you're attracted to, they aren't. That's not equal treatment.
 
molten_dragon said:
You're allowed to marry the people you're attracted to, they aren't. That's not equal treatment.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that, but at the same time I think that marriage isn't about 'attraction' it's about love (something we seem to be forgetting in this country with a divorce rate over 50%.) Yes I know that's mental attraction, but true love knows no gender, and most importantly, Life isn't fair. And while that's no excuse to go on perpetuating inequality of someone who's being treated as such, it is a good reason for those being treated unjustly to continue the good fight and accept what they are given instead of trying to get exactly what they want. The Gay-Marriage crowd could easily settle with Civil Unions or Domestic partnerships with the same rights as the Heterosexual married couples and call it a day. They want a word, not just the rights associated with it.


There is a happy medium but no one wants to give any ground, on either side it seems.
 
Last edited:
EpicDude86 said:
I can agree with that, but at the same time I think that marriage isn't about 'attraction' it's about love (something we seem to be forgetting in this country with a divorce rate over 50%.) Yes I know that's mental attraction, but true love knows no gender, and most importantly, Life isn't fair. And while that's no excuse to go on perpetuating inequality of someone who's being treated as such, it is a good reason for those being treated unjustly to continue the good fight and accept what they are given instead of trying to get exactly what they want. The Gay-Marriage crowd could easily settle with Civil Unions or Domestic partnerships with the same rights as the Heterosexual married couples and call it a day. They want a word, not just the rights associated with it.


There is a happy medium but no one wants to give any ground, on either side it seems.
Click to expand...

I'd be perfectly happy with civil unions or domestic partnerships or whatever you want to call it. The problem is that gay couples can't get the same legal rights and benefits as straight ones, any solution that fixes that problem is fine in my book.

'Marriage' should be between you and your spouse(s)-to-be and any friends/family/religious group/etc. that you want to include. It should mean what you decide it should mean, and if a church wants to bar someone from getting married there for any reason, they should be a allowed to.
 
molten_dragon said:
I'd be perfectly happy with civil unions or domestic partnerships or whatever you want to call it. The problem is that gay couples can't get the same legal rights and benefits as straight ones, any solution that fixes that problem is fine in my book.

'Marriage' should be between you and your spouse(s)-to-be and any friends/family/religious group/etc. that you want to include. It should mean what you decide it should mean, and if a church wants to bar someone from getting married there for any reason, they should be a allowed to.
Click to expand...



Ugh, if only everyone thought as clearly as you do.
 
molten_dragon said:
'Marriage' should be between you and your spouse(s)-to-be and any friends/family/religious group/etc. that you want to include. It should mean what you decide it should mean, and if a church wants to bar someone from getting married there for any reason, they should be a allowed to.
Click to expand...

How do you know the bill in question was anything other than that?
 
A few comments generated by this thread other than the comments by Scott the troll:

1. I remember watching an interview with an elderly lady in Idaho (or Oregon?) when they voted down gay rights legislation. When she was asked why she voted against it she said "I can tell if someone is female, or black, or hispanic, or whatever when I look at them. I can't tell someone is gay or not by their looks. So if I refuse to rent a room to someone based on their financial situation and they come back with "But I'm gay and that's why you didn't rent to me!" what can I say?"

2. Most of the gays I have talked to about the marriage thing is that its about coverage by insurance and equal rights under Federal laws. This is a major issue when you consider that the gay population has a much higher rate of serious illness and disease than the normal population. One of the reasons many companies refuse to extend the benefits to gay lovers is because it raises the cost of health benefits across their company.

3. I have seen in several states (Michigan, Illinois, and California) where it has been introduced that perhaps they should be trying for a legal status equivalent to marriage. This seems to have been repeatedly shot down because the gays want it to be called marriage and nothing else. They could probably pass laws that would give them equal status without the label but they insist on the label and thus lose the battle.

4. As to why the NY State Senate turned down the vote? I think it has a lot to do with the ground swell of public outrage about 'Change'. I would have to read the actual law that was voted down for further insight (something I admit I probably won't do - little interest and no impact to me in Michigan) but I am willing to listen to someone else's INTELLIGENT analysis of it.
 
EpicDude86 said:
I can agree with that, but at the same time I think that marriage isn't about 'attraction' it's about love (something we seem to be forgetting in this country with a divorce rate over 50%.) Yes I know that's mental attraction, but true love knows no gender, and most importantly, Life isn't fair. And while that's no excuse to go on perpetuating inequality of someone who's being treated as such, it is a good reason for those being treated unjustly to continue the good fight and accept what they are given instead of trying to get exactly what they want. The Gay-Marriage crowd could easily settle with Civil Unions or Domestic partnerships with the same rights as the Heterosexual married couples and call it a day. They want a word, not just the rights associated with it.


There is a happy medium but no one wants to give any ground, on either side it seems.
Click to expand...

If this was only about equal rights this problem could have been settled long ago.......The problem is that is not what it is about.........Its about the acceptance of a lifestyle and making it equal to a straight lifestyle and shoving that lifestyle down peoples throats who don't agree with it and that pisses people off...........
 
Navy Pride said:
If this was only about equal rights this problem could have been settled long ago.......The problem is that is not what it is about.........Its about the acceptance of a lifestyle and making it equal to a straight lifestyle and shoving that lifestyle down peoples throats who don't agree with it and that pisses people off...........
Click to expand...

How is it shoving anything down your throat for you to stay the hell out of other people's relationships?

I could understand your sentiment if you were being forced to gay marry someone, but you aren't. You are being asked to leave other people alone and not use the law to leverage your disapproval against them.
 
I hope you guys realize that the best way to deal with a troll is to ignore them until they are banned by a moderator.

That is all.
 
Navy Pride said:
If this was only about equal rights this problem could have been settled long ago.......The problem is that is not what it is about.........Its about the acceptance of a lifestyle and making it equal to a straight lifestyle and shoving that lifestyle down peoples throats who don't agree with it and that pisses people off...........
Click to expand...

No it is most certainly not. Some gays already shove their lifestyles down our throats while some of them live in secret, and even more live open and without incident. It's not about a lifestyle it's about people's perceptions, on both sides, and not wanting to give any ground. Some gays feel entitled to the term marriage because they're whiney bitches who feel they've been wronged, (look how far that mindset got certain members of the Black community, nowhere) and Straight people feel like their way of life and the 'sanctity' of their 50%+ divorce rate is at stake.
 
Navy Pride said:
Another nail in the coffin of Gay Marriage Disney Dude...........


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/nyregion/03marriage.html

By JEREMY W. PETERS
December 2 2009

ALBANY — The New York State Senate decisively rejected a bill on Wednesday that would have allowed gay couples to wed, providing a major victory for those who oppose same-sex marriage and underscoring the deep and passionate divisions surrounding the issue

The 38-to-24 vote startled proponents of the bill and signaled that political momentum, at least right now, had shifted against same-sex marriage, even in heavily Democratic New York. It followed more than a year of lobbying by gay rights organizations, who steered close to $1 million into New York legislative races to boost support for the measure.
Click to expand...

That is very sad that some of our citizens cannot enjoy their freedom and constitutional rights like the rest of us. Very sad.
 
formerroadie said:
That is very sad that some of our citizens cannot enjoy their freedom and constitutional rights like the rest of us. Very sad.
Click to expand...

What the gays should do is start marrying other opposite sex gays. Like a lesbian and gay couple get together, and one of each sex marries each other and then cheat the system. if enough of them do it perhaps they can send a more efficient message.
 
EpicDude86 said:
No it is most certainly not. Some gays already shove their lifestyles down our throats while some of them live in secret, and even more live open and without incident. It's not about a lifestyle it's about people's perceptions, on both sides, and not wanting to give any ground. Some gays feel entitled to the term marriage because they're whiney bitches who feel they've been wronged, (look how far that mindset got certain members of the Black community, nowhere) and Straight people feel like their way of life and the 'sanctity' of their 50%+ divorce rate is at stake.
Click to expand...

I have to point out something...

IF seperate but equal had ever worked before, I would be all for it. But as long as there is some distinction in the institution, there is going to be some class distinction between gay and straight. If the institution is equal all the way, right down to what it is called, then this class inequality is going to be a lot harder to keep pushing.

There are straight people who are always going to try to diminish the rights of gay people by making their marriage "a little more equal". If it's the exact same institution, you are much less likely to have "family advocacy" groups try to diminish the rights of gays for fear they will be diminishing their own rights, too.
 
EpicDude86 said:
What the gays should do is start marrying other opposite sex gays. Like a lesbian and gay couple get together, and one of each sex marries each other and then cheat the system. if enough of them do it perhaps they can send a more efficient message.
Click to expand...

Interesting proposal, but that still doesn't give a spouse the right to see their loved one in the hospital, or take care of death issues, etc etc. There are a whole line of issues that are taken from them and doing it that way may get attention, but I hope it doesn't stay that way.
 
Navy Pride said:
If this was only about equal rights this problem could have been settled long ago.......The problem is that is not what it is about.........Its about the acceptance of a lifestyle and making it equal to a straight lifestyle and shoving that lifestyle down peoples throats who don't agree with it and that pisses people off...........
Click to expand...

Their lifestyle should be accepted. I fail to see how it would be 'shoved down your throat' if gays were allowed to get married unless someone was forcing you to marry a gay couple.
 
carlkay58 said:
2. Most of the gays I have talked to about the marriage thing is that its about coverage by insurance and equal rights under Federal laws. This is a major issue when you consider that the gay population has a much higher rate of serious illness and disease than the normal population. One of the reasons many companies refuse to extend the benefits to gay lovers is because it raises the cost of health benefits across their company.
Click to expand...

That has to be the biggest pile of BS I have ever read. The gay people I know are monogamous and have had life partners for ages. This idea that gay people are somehow more promiscuous and therefore more disease prone is a myth conjured up by homophobes and hateful people. Also, why would anyone believe a Health Insurance company?!
 
molten_dragon said:
Their lifestyle should be accepted. I fail to see how it would be 'shoved down your throat' if gays were allowed to get married unless someone was forcing you to marry a gay couple.
Click to expand...

This is exactly right. I'm not sure how the marriage of a gay couple across the street is going to affect my marriage to my own spouse. It makes no sense at all.
 
liblady said:
there certainly is a tax benefit to being to married. and many companies will not provide insurance benefits to same sex couples.
Click to expand...

Until a few years ago, when the marriage penalty tax was changed, people like me (middle-class, married) payed more in federal income taxes than unmarried couples in the same bracket. I don't know about other tax issues and marriage, but this one definitely existed.
 
This is the quote of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom