- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 69,534
- Reaction score
- 15,450
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
So you are say that not give same sex marriages is injustice?
Yes, they are being treated differently by our government arbitrarily.
So you are say that not give same sex marriages is injustice?
Do you not feel that by denying same sex marriages, we are treating homosexuals as second class citizens?
No, I do not feel like second class citizens.
Yes, they are being treated differently by our government arbitrarily.
So you are homosexual, and do not think homosexuals should be allowed to get married?
I do not agree with this. They be treaded like homosexuals.
I do not agree with this. They be treaded like homosexuals.
I do not know about to be homosexual, I am still thinking about this. No, homosexuals should not be allowed to get married. It did not change anything in Finnland or Canada when this happen. It only give some political support during election.
Yeah, I think gay-marriage should be created through legislation.
Got a problem with that?
Which would be fine if when a partner left a business, they got to take a certain percentage of the business with them, but that's just not how it necessarily works. Like I said, there may be a solution to these questions, we just haven't had it worked out yet. My issue with it is not that I care if the polygamous get married, I just don't want to see the courts even more clogged with messy divorces for which we have no idea how to solve.
Right, so long as we understand each other.
Gays want to marry? Fine, great, pull up a chair; but gay-marriage will be what hetero-marriage is for, raising children, and NOT the expression of individual rights, AND gay marriage will be established through perfectly constitutional means, not the court system.
A citizen and voter with the civil duty to stand up and demand that due process be respected.
Fine, great, no problem, let's do it, but it happens through due process or it doesn't happen at all.
Do you say that most of those who oppose legalizing polygamy are also ignorant bigots and none of htem understand the basics of morality or logic?
I am all for gay marriages. But I admit the one aspect that I do not like is adoption. But that is an argument for another day.
Call it exclusivity, tradition or what ever so why change it?
I do not agree with this. They be treaded like homosexuals.
So are you against gay marriage, or gay marriage being used as a political tool?
The thing homosexuals are more than anything else is people. We should treat them as just people, not as some separate class with separate rules.
This is the life they choose. If I choose this life then I will have this separate rules. Homosexual and Hetrosexual are different. Yes we are all people but we have different religion, different education, different sex, different choose of life. Then we have different rules for this.
I do not see the difference. The radical group use this as political tool to get same sex marriage in Canada as they try in California. When this success in Canada then they think of something else.
This is the life they choose. If I choose this life then I will have this separate rules. Homosexual and Hetrosexual are different. Yes we are all people but we have different religion, different education, different sex, different choose of life. Then we have different rules for this.
I do not see the difference. The radical group use this as political tool to get same sex marriage in Canada as they try in California. When this success in Canada then they think of something else.
This is the life they choose. If I choose this life then I will have this separate rules. Homosexual and Hetrosexual are different. Yes we are all people but we have different religion, different education, different sex, different choose of life. Then we have different rules for this.
What social problems has gay marriage caused in Canada?
You haven't proven it's a choice. But if we suppose it is, then I suppose one could say the same thing about somebody becoming a Christian. Now, if they lived in some Muslim countries, they would be punished for this. But I guess they made the wrong choice huh? I guess laws that treat Christians differently because they chose the wrong religion are totally just, by your logic?
In question of marriages, my debate is homosexuals don't have there own children to make a family.
So then, you have a problem with how anti-miscegenation laws were struck down against popular opinion?
Prove that marriage is only about raising children.
Very few civil rights advances happened through democratic (or even legislative) processes. They were mostly executive or judicial decisions based upon things like the equal protection clause.
...........
............
Hold on, have to Google "anti-miscegenation" to find out wtf you're talking about.....oh, you're talking about interracial marriage. It simply doesn't apply because interracial marriage shares nothing in common with gay-marriage.
Sure they share something in common. In both cases, marriage was denied some one due to characteristics beyond their control. An interracial marriage ban and gay marriage ban are both discriminatory, and both are foolish.
See, lots in common.
Gays can marry gays, though....I mean, yeah sure the other gay has to be of the opposit sex, but they also have to be of age and unrelated...etc..so, so what?
They have nothing in common. Create gay-marriage if you wish, but it's not a civil rights issue.
When you have to twist meaning like that, it pretty much always means you are wrong, as you are in this case.
Jerry's right and he's not twisting meaning. This is why it is NOT a civil rights issue, but a family and personal well being issue.
I think he is actually. How about I rephrase abit to make it more clear and more accurate. Both interracial marriage bans and gay marriage bans deny people the ability to marry who they choose for no reason beyond societal discrimination.
Please show where and why the government would have a stake in allowing people to marry who they want...for the sole reason of marrying who they want, no other factors may be included. You are talking about legalities, not moralities. Morally, I agree with you, but without some legal backbone for your argument, morals don't mean much.