rob Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Now you're talking! But really, marriage is different from those actions IMO. But obviously people have fundamental differences of opinion on this and all issues. Yes, they sure do. Some people had a HUGE problem with ending slavery, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Rob, if two women get married how will the court know which one to fuck when they get divorced? They both will be fucked, just like straights who have been getting reamed in the divorce process. Welcome, gay folks, to divorce court. That is why people can't marry trees or dogs. Que up Mr. Hands post explaining man/horse love in 3...2...1.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Whatever Rob. I think is is a fair compromise to let the religious fanatics keep their sacred marriage. After all, isn't marriage a religious institution in the first place? Then again, I could care less if Billy Bob wants to marry Johnny Joe. Whatever. Yeah, seems like we do have much more pressing issues in our society that our beloved gubment could be spending it's time on. Like I said, I'm not convinced either way, but some compromises need to be made to keep the peace... If it's a religious institution, than why is government involved at all? You think we should compromise civil rights and liberty to "keep the peace?" I'm glad you weren't around in the 1860's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denalidave Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Whatever Rob. I think is is a fair compromise to let the religious fanatics keep their sacred marriage. After all, isn't marriage a religious institution in the first place? Then again, I could care less if Billy Bob wants to marry Johnny Joe. Whatever. Yeah, seems like we do have much more pressing issues in our society that our beloved gubment could be spending it's time on. Like I said, I'm not convinced either way, but some compromises need to be made to keep the peace... If it's a religious institution, than why is government involved at all? You think we should compromise civil rights and liberty to "keep the peace?" I'm glad you weren't around in the 1860's. A yeah, that was my point, why is the gubment involved. I'm glad I was not alive then, too. What is wrong with civil unions anyway? Seems like a fair compromise to me? I'm open-minded about the options, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denalidave Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Whatever Rob. I think is is a fair compromise to let the religious fanatics keep their sacred marriage. After all, isn't marriage a religious institution in the first place? Then again, I could care less if Billy Bob wants to marry Johnny Joe. Whatever. Yeah, seems like we do have much more pressing issues in our society that our beloved gubment could be spending it's time on. Like I said, I'm not convinced either way, but some compromises need to be made to keep the peace... I'm glad you weren't around in the 1860's. Well, then again, being a white, heterosexual male, I would likely not be the one of the folks feeling the wrath of societies injustices back then... Just sayin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 (edited) Whatever Rob. I think is is a fair compromise to let the religious fanatics keep their sacred marriage. After all, isn't marriage a religious institution in the first place? Then again, I could care less if Billy Bob wants to marry Johnny Joe. Whatever. Yeah, seems like we do have much more pressing issues in our society that our beloved gubment could be spending it's time on. Like I said, I'm not convinced either way, but some compromises need to be made to keep the peace... If it's a religious institution, than why is government involved at all? You think we should compromise civil rights and liberty to "keep the peace?" I'm glad you weren't around in the 1860's. A yeah, that was my point, why is the gubment involved. I'm glad I was not alive then, too. What is wrong with civil unions anyway? Seems like a fair compromise to me? I'm open-minded about the options, however. Nothin wrong with civil unions, just like there is nothing wrong with separate drinking fountains for minorities, right? civil unions are not the same as marriage, or they'd be called the same. How demeaning, if you're gay, you can't say "we're married," you have to say, "we're civil unioned?" Why should gays and lesbians have to be singled out like that? You know what that's called? Segregation. Edited August 24, 2010 by rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Nothin wrong with civil unions, just like there is nothing wrong with separate drinking fountains for minorities, right? civil unions are not the same as marriage, or they'd be called the same. How demeaning, if you're gay, you can't say "we're married," you have to say, "we're civil unioned?" Why should gays and lesbians have to be singled out like that? You know what that's called? Segregation. The other option is Civil Unions for anyone (gay and straight) not wed via an ordained minister. It gets government out of religious ceremonies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 The other option is Civil Unions for anyone (gay and straight) not wed via an ordained minister. It gets government out of religious ceremonies. Could gays and lesbians get a Marriage, if it was carried out by an ordained minister? Or would Marriage still be reserved only for straight couples (who used a minister)? I think a better solution is that marriage should be a purely religious/social event, with zero legal recognition. We have our own social mores regarding what marriage really means, and that should be good enough to define it. I don't see why the government even got involved in the first place. I mean, the functional trappings of marriage are much more easily created via existing legal bindings anyway, such as powers of attorney, wills, etc. AND, those documents are MUCH easier to dissolve. So, I view marriage as a dead institution already. BUT, if one class of citizenry can enjoy it's dubious legal benefits, then I guess we all should. Otherwise, it's as crazy as disallowing mortgage interest deductions for people who like blonde women. Totally arbitrary and insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_leclerc Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I personally don't support gay marriage... but being a dick to someone because they are gay is totally wrong. I have no problem with the people, I just choose not to agree with or partake in their lifestyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pink Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I personally don't support gay marriage... but being a dick to someone because they are gay is totally wrong. I have no problem with the people, I just choose not to agree with or partake in their lifestyle. so it what ur saying is that you don't fuck guys then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summitchaserCJB Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I personally don't support gay marriage... but being a dick to someone because they are gay is totally wrong. I have no problem with the people, I just choose not to agree with or partake in their lifestyle. But do you support legislation that removes civil liberties from them because they are gay? That sounds like being a dick to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 The other option is Civil Unions for anyone (gay and straight) not wed via an ordained minister. It gets government out of religious ceremonies. What would get the government out of religious ceremonies is make civil unions for everyone the legal basis for all marital rights. Then if people want a religious ceremony on top of that then knock themselves out, but it would carry zero legal recognition or rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldfinger Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I personally don't support gay marriage... but being a dick to someone because they are gay is totally wrong. I have no problem with the people, I just choose not to agree with or partake in their lifestyle. Yeah that makes sense, guess you want the wedding cake and eating it too. Since when are we all implicated in each and every marriage on the face of the earth, nevermind partaking in them? Two straight idiots get married in Tacoma and I partake in that here in Wyoming how? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 we serve hoes like flapjacks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Why are we even debating this? Let them marry ferchrissakes and give them the same tax advantages (and misery) that the rest of us enjoy(?). WTF is the difference? It doesn't affect my life, nor does it affect any of yours. Live and let live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Simple solution If you don't like gay marriage then don't get one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 EXACTLY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 BUT THE BIBLE SAYS IT IS WRONG!!!!! WTF PEOPLE????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinB Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 BUT THE BIBLE SAYS IT IS WRONG!!!!! WTF PEOPLE????? Source? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 BUT THE BIBLE SAYS IT IS WRONG!!!!! WTF PEOPLE????? Source? JESUS, MOTHERFUCKER! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Now you're talking! But really, marriage is different from those actions IMO. But obviously people have fundamental differences of opinion on this and all issues. Would you, personally, tell two human beings who love each other they can't marry? Not a tree or a dog, you dumbshit, but two consenting adults. Try answering 'yes' and watch the admiration flow from your adoring audience. If your answer is 'no', then you believe in the equal marital rights, so STFU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted August 25, 2010 Author Share Posted August 25, 2010 Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Yeah but these people are from a fictional book. You might as well quote characters from Lord of the rings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinB Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Yeah but these people are from a fictional book. You might as well quote characters from Lord of the rings. Does that make the Egyptians the orcs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.