|
Post by DarkAngel on Mar 15, 2004 21:31:15 GMT -5
My final opinion on it is let them. They should not be treated as second class citizens JUST because of their sexual orientation. We dont have slavery, or segregation anymore, so why not give equal rights to another minority in the country, the gays.
|
|
|
Post by Static Burn on Mar 15, 2004 22:42:05 GMT -5
Well, if you want to get technical, marriage is not a right, even for straights. Nowhere in Federal Law is there anything guaranteeing anyone the right to a marriage. Plus, the fact that you have to buy a marriage license now, makes it a privledge that is granted by the government.
Like I said before, there is no solution to this problem that will leave everyone happy, but I think that if both sides would compromise and allow a 'union', which is essentially marriage under a different name, then that would probably be the best option for everyone.
|
|
(LK)
Artificer
Posts: 733
|
Post by (LK) on Mar 15, 2004 22:55:27 GMT -5
I don't think we should care if it's allowed or not, it's just an argument that will probably never end.
|
|
|
Post by stalin on Mar 16, 2004 13:53:12 GMT -5
The problem with a union is that you don't get some of the major tax breaks that you do from marriage. Now I like that German way of doing it. That is to completly seperate the church from the actual marriage. Omeguz can varify this but I believe that in Germany if you get married in a chuch its not ratified until you get married by a judge aswell, or just by the judge. I think that doing this would kill a huge amount of the movement against homosexual marriage because most everyones argument against it, whether they say so or not, is because of religion. Now I happen to be catholic, but I have a strong belief in 100% seperation of church and state aswell as allowing homosexual couples to marry. It really does hurt me to see how homophobic and reactionary Americans can be these days. So many of Americans want to keep going back to traditional ways of the constitution. No one seems to realize that times change and even our beloved constitution becomes outdated. Americans, aswell as many other people in thw world, need to move on with their lives and accept change and realize its for the better.
|
|
|
Post by Static Burn on Mar 16, 2004 16:17:03 GMT -5
Here's the thing, though. Marriage is a ceremony that is completely derived from religion, so to take that ceremony which is regarded as sacred, and allow it to happen in a way that, according to the book of Leviticus, is "an abomination", would be like throwing sand in the eyes of all major religions. Now, since most countries, including America, are rooted in religion (although they have been trying to break away from it) and most of the population of America belongs to some religion or another, you'd also be throwing sand in the eyes of a good portion of the citizens of this country.
|
|
|
Post by SuperBassX84 on Mar 16, 2004 17:33:06 GMT -5
As much as I'd love to hand out points here, everyone is deserving of many, so I'll give 25 to Devo for an educating look/argument on the election system. YAY DEVO!!!
Despite my dislike of homosexuality in general, I think, as I've said before, gay marriage will eventually happen regardless. There is little anyone can do about it. Eventually it will be allowed. Homophobes and the church need to get the hell over it and realize that they're eventually going to lose this argument. It's just reality.
|
|
(LK)
Artificer
Posts: 733
|
Post by (LK) on Mar 16, 2004 17:38:36 GMT -5
why not just make a different type of marriage which isn't upheld by religon
|
|
|
Post by Static Burn on Mar 16, 2004 19:08:58 GMT -5
They already did in some states, it's called a legal union. It acts like marriage in cases like life insurance, and is legal in 2 or 3 states I think.
|
|
|
Post by piñata on Mar 17, 2004 9:52:52 GMT -5
Why not just allow gays to form their own religion? Then they could marry without the blessing of the Christian church.
|
|
|
Post by Alicia on Mar 17, 2004 10:22:12 GMT -5
Well you don't need the blessing of the church to marry, it can be preformed by a judge as well. That's how I intend to be married. There are some gay people who go to church, follow an organized religion even Christianity, and over look the idea that they shouldn't be gay. I guess it's the same concept as people who have sex before marriage but still call themselves Christians. In most cases the gay people are upset for the lack of benefits they get with being married. Benefits straight people get.
Some people say gay people are born gay...I don't honestly believe that's always the case. I know a couple girls who screw around just because it's fun or they're lonely. It's kinda creepy....but not the point. I don't see how a gay person would have chosen to be gay. How do you choose a life like that? They go through so many hardships with society. I think gay people deserve all the benefits of marriage, with or without a church's blessing.
|
|
|
Post by DarkAngel on Mar 18, 2004 14:17:24 GMT -5
Why not just allow gays to form their own religion? Then they could marry without the blessing of the Christian church. A gay religion, that would be the day
|
|
|
Post by Static Burn on Mar 18, 2004 16:17:22 GMT -5
I wouldn't be surprised if one already existed. There are so many religions out there that you would never know about... Like, for example, I had this Guiness Book of World Records book from 2000 I believe it was, and one of the records was for world's smallest religion, which had something like 7 people in it.
|
|
JacenSolo
Artificer
Aim: JacenSolo55
Posts: 1,048
|
Post by JacenSolo on Mar 18, 2004 16:44:18 GMT -5
Then it's called a cult.
|
|
|
Post by Static Burn on Mar 18, 2004 18:19:33 GMT -5
A cult isn't defined by its size, but more by its ideas. This was some protestant religion, so its ideas weren't too far off mainstream. However, there are larger religions that are considered to be cults.
|
|
|
Post by SuperBassX84 on Mar 19, 2004 10:05:36 GMT -5
You mean like the.... PANTLESS CULT!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Which, by the way, currently has................ ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... 10 members. Yay.
|
|
|
Post by DarkAngel on Mar 19, 2004 20:20:38 GMT -5
You mean like the.... PANTLESS CULT!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Which, by the way, currently has................ ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... 10 members. Yay. Yes...But...You See...But...Wha?!
|
|
|
Post by SuperBassX84 on Mar 20, 2004 13:04:59 GMT -5
Ah, DA knows not of the Cult of Pantlessness. Ask one of the other members, I'm too lazy to explain it all right now.
|
|
|
Post by DarkAngel on Mar 21, 2004 16:02:48 GMT -5
Quick question bass, do g-strings count as pants...cuz if they dont, i want in your "cult"
|
|
|
Post by SuperBassX84 on Mar 21, 2004 16:08:59 GMT -5
No, G-Strings do not count as pants. Neither does underwear or thongs. We're not obscene, we do wear underwear. Longjohns are accepted in the winter, and sweatpants are accepted, but heavily disliked. ie you become part of the cult, but one of the lesser respected members.
So yes, DA, I suppose you can be part of the Cult of Pantlessness
Now then, BACK ON TOPIC!! Gay Marriage
|
|
|
Post by kemykal on Mar 22, 2004 6:47:57 GMT -5
Now then, BACK ON TOPIC!! better yet, combine the topics. Gays having pantless wedding ceremonies. DISCUSS!
|
|