[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kingarthur wrote: [/QUOTENAME]well if gays can get married why can't my goat and I hitch up?[/QUOTE]
Becouse gays are people too.You know that or that's news for you?But goat is not human.
I have nothing against them. If 2 people love each other and marriage would made them happy why not? It's just a signature on a paper.
They should have the same rights as evry other person
Thread
Posts in chronological order
It's not just a signature on a paper, it's a legal contract with far reaching consequences. If you are married you have rights and duties which are protected by the state. Therefore it is discriminating if gay people have no right to get married or to have some other sort of legally protected partnership which equals marriage. In Germany we have had gay marriages since 2004 and it helped gays to be accepted in society.
kingarthur, if a goat does it for you, I am all for it - if mutual consent is guaranteed.
kingarthur, if a goat does it for you, I am all for it - if mutual consent is guaranteed.
Whoever wants to get married should be allowed to do so...goats and all.
Bahhh baahhhhh
Bahhh baahhhhh
*BUMP* And a big thank you to those who have voted! :-D
I'm definately all for it.
It's funny listening to the arguments against it that people have. Like, gays are going to hell...well, if you can prove it (which means proving that hell exits) then I'll believe it. Or that because god said it's bad they can't...well, prove to me that got exists and that he said that, and I'll buy it. Or that it's damaging the institution of marriage...nope, 24 hour marriage houses in Las Vegas (and same day annulments) are more of a threat here.
Bottom line, the government shouldn't have the right to sanction marriage at all, because marriage is a religious state and a religious event, and the seperation of church and state clause would mean that government recognizing marriage is a violation of that clause. But since the government has chosen to recognize marriage and place all of the benefits on it that it has, then it should make marriage legal for everyone who are consenting adults, whatever their race, color, creed, sexual preferences, whatever.
It's funny listening to the arguments against it that people have. Like, gays are going to hell...well, if you can prove it (which means proving that hell exits) then I'll believe it. Or that because god said it's bad they can't...well, prove to me that got exists and that he said that, and I'll buy it. Or that it's damaging the institution of marriage...nope, 24 hour marriage houses in Las Vegas (and same day annulments) are more of a threat here.
Bottom line, the government shouldn't have the right to sanction marriage at all, because marriage is a religious state and a religious event, and the seperation of church and state clause would mean that government recognizing marriage is a violation of that clause. But since the government has chosen to recognize marriage and place all of the benefits on it that it has, then it should make marriage legal for everyone who are consenting adults, whatever their race, color, creed, sexual preferences, whatever.
I am DEFINITELY for it. If they aren't bothering you, why can't two people who love each other get married? And I don't see why so many REALLY religious people think gays are satin worshippers or whatever. They have their own opinions too, you know. And also, doesn't the Bible say to accept others despite thier differences? One more thing, when people say that God doesn't want gays, then whay are they here? I just think religion is being brought into politics here. By the way, this has always been my opinion, it is not biased just because I'm a Queen fan. I am also, despite the fact that it may seem different from the above post, not against any certain religion. I just feel REALLY strongly on this issue.
I hope to live in a world one day when everyone, despite the difference in creed, gender, sexual orientaion, religion and political views can come together and be at peace.
I hope to live in a world one day when everyone, despite the difference in creed, gender, sexual orientaion, religion and political views can come together and be at peace.
it really depends. my religion forbids it... i'm catholic. but putting the religion thing aside, i'd be okay with it. :)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Bottom line, the government shouldn't have the right to sanction marriage at all, because marriage is a religious state and a religious event, and the seperation of church and state clause would mean that government recognizing marriage is a violation of that clause. But since the government has chosen to recognize marriage and place all of the benefits on it that it has, then it should make marriage legal for everyone who are consenting adults, whatever their race, color, creed, sexual preferences, whatever.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that marriage is a religious event, but rather that religion has been the means by which marriage has been traditionally carried out. The romantic union of two people is something inherent in all of us, as is the security of the certification of marriage.
The reason that the government doesn't have the right to sanction marriage is primarily due to the rights that are granted to married couples - rights that the government really has NO power to grant! Marriage should merely be an enforeceable legal contract that is formed by any two (or more, even) persons (forbidding any particular person or group from making such a contract is a SEVERE infringement of our negative liberties). Marriage should not provide implicit benefits from the law or government, but rather, the only benefits should come from the agreements of the two or more persons.
Bottom line, the government shouldn't have the right to sanction marriage at all, because marriage is a religious state and a religious event, and the seperation of church and state clause would mean that government recognizing marriage is a violation of that clause. But since the government has chosen to recognize marriage and place all of the benefits on it that it has, then it should make marriage legal for everyone who are consenting adults, whatever their race, color, creed, sexual preferences, whatever.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that marriage is a religious event, but rather that religion has been the means by which marriage has been traditionally carried out. The romantic union of two people is something inherent in all of us, as is the security of the certification of marriage.
The reason that the government doesn't have the right to sanction marriage is primarily due to the rights that are granted to married couples - rights that the government really has NO power to grant! Marriage should merely be an enforeceable legal contract that is formed by any two (or more, even) persons (forbidding any particular person or group from making such a contract is a SEVERE infringement of our negative liberties). Marriage should not provide implicit benefits from the law or government, but rather, the only benefits should come from the agreements of the two or more persons.
"The reason that the government doesn't have the right to sanction marriage is primarily due to the rights that are granted to married couples - rights that the government really has NO power to grant!"
The civil marriage was introduced in the Code Napoleon after the French revolution and it was considered as a progress in strengthening the power of the state compared to the power of the church. Before the civilian marriage you had to be in a church to get married and it's needless to say that the church never granted equal rights to all people (let alone gays!)
Today many marriages are divorced and you do not need to be married to live together, to have children together or to rent a house together - or women do not need to be married to be respected, so maybe marriage will be outdated in a few decades, anyway. But now you need to be married to have certain legal rights and of course the government has the right to regulate these rights. After all, you need to follow legal procedures laid down by law to buy a house, too.
If you do not want the commitment and if you do not want to take responsibility for your partner, you just do not get married.
The civil marriage was introduced in the Code Napoleon after the French revolution and it was considered as a progress in strengthening the power of the state compared to the power of the church. Before the civilian marriage you had to be in a church to get married and it's needless to say that the church never granted equal rights to all people (let alone gays!)
Today many marriages are divorced and you do not need to be married to live together, to have children together or to rent a house together - or women do not need to be married to be respected, so maybe marriage will be outdated in a few decades, anyway. But now you need to be married to have certain legal rights and of course the government has the right to regulate these rights. After all, you need to follow legal procedures laid down by law to buy a house, too.
If you do not want the commitment and if you do not want to take responsibility for your partner, you just do not get married.
I am for Gay Marriage i don't care what sex you are wheather its Man or Woman but if your happy with your current seaxuality you should get married to your partner
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=lime>KillerQueen840 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I am for it. If it's such a problem to call it "marriage" call it something else.[/QUOTE]
Why should someone with a different sexual orientation have a special name just for them?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kingarthur wrote: [/QUOTENAME]well if gays can get married why can't my goat and I hitch up?[/QUOTE]
So you put homosexuals and goats on the same level? Very nice display of tolerance and understanding of people who see things differently than you.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In Germany we have had gay marriages since 2004 and it helped gays to be accepted in society.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Europe is further ahead of most of the world in philosophy, and thus in tolerance. Well, except for the catholic countries, of course. The church simply slaps the "institution" label on anything they think shouldn't change, and millions of people still buy into it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]it really depends. my religion forbids it... i'm catholic. but putting the religion thing aside, i'd be okay with it. :)[/QUOTE]
But - there is the option to think for yourself, instead of letting the church tell you what to think. The church is an institution that uses morals and values that were important 1000+ years ago, not today.
Why should someone with a different sexual orientation have a special name just for them?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kingarthur wrote: [/QUOTENAME]well if gays can get married why can't my goat and I hitch up?[/QUOTE]
So you put homosexuals and goats on the same level? Very nice display of tolerance and understanding of people who see things differently than you.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In Germany we have had gay marriages since 2004 and it helped gays to be accepted in society.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Europe is further ahead of most of the world in philosophy, and thus in tolerance. Well, except for the catholic countries, of course. The church simply slaps the "institution" label on anything they think shouldn't change, and millions of people still buy into it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]it really depends. my religion forbids it... i'm catholic. but putting the religion thing aside, i'd be okay with it. :)[/QUOTE]
But - there is the option to think for yourself, instead of letting the church tell you what to think. The church is an institution that uses morals and values that were important 1000+ years ago, not today.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
The church simply slaps the "institution" label on anything they think shouldn't change, and millions of people still buy into it.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The church is an institution that uses morals and values that were important 1000+ years ago, not today.
[/QUOTE]
This is a bit of a contradiction. The Church's morals and values still have a significant impact on a vast portion of the world's population, as do several other Christian religions that have parallel views.
However, I look forward to the day when the Church catches up to the rest of the world. Surprisingly, I do see an improvement that is gaining momentum.
The church simply slaps the "institution" label on anything they think shouldn't change, and millions of people still buy into it.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The church is an institution that uses morals and values that were important 1000+ years ago, not today.
[/QUOTE]
This is a bit of a contradiction. The Church's morals and values still have a significant impact on a vast portion of the world's population, as do several other Christian religions that have parallel views.
However, I look forward to the day when the Church catches up to the rest of the world. Surprisingly, I do see an improvement that is gaining momentum.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]it really depends. my religion forbids it... i'm catholic. but putting the religion thing aside, i'd be okay with it. :)[/QUOTE]
I was raised catholic, and has had...very little affect on me..so, yah, more power to them if they wanna get married.
I was raised catholic, and has had...very little affect on me..so, yah, more power to them if they wanna get married.
Im against gays and lesbians
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]This is a bit of a contradiction. The Church's morals and values still have a significant impact on a vast portion of the world's population, as do several other Christian religions that have parallel views.[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, I see how you saw that as a contradiction. But just because millions of people believe in these so-called values doesn't mean they're doing what's right for today's world.
[QUOTE]However, I look forward to the day when the Church catches up to the rest of the world. Surprisingly, I do see an improvement that is gaining momentum.[/QUOTE]
You must be seeing things I don't see yet. All I see is the ignorance and primitive thinking. I see the seccular world moving along, and the church staying put. Well... except for maybe the United Church. They're the ones who are performing gay marriage... at least in Canada. Socially they're moving forward, but theologically, they're still keeping the common person in the dark about history and scholarship, like all the other denominations. Church leaders are obviously afraid that most people can't hold a properly informed faith, and therefore must keep people in ignorance as best they can - although the numbers are consistently dropping in most places (except in ultra-conservative circles, which is a whole other story and frame of mind).
Ah yes, I see how you saw that as a contradiction. But just because millions of people believe in these so-called values doesn't mean they're doing what's right for today's world.
[QUOTE]However, I look forward to the day when the Church catches up to the rest of the world. Surprisingly, I do see an improvement that is gaining momentum.[/QUOTE]
You must be seeing things I don't see yet. All I see is the ignorance and primitive thinking. I see the seccular world moving along, and the church staying put. Well... except for maybe the United Church. They're the ones who are performing gay marriage... at least in Canada. Socially they're moving forward, but theologically, they're still keeping the common person in the dark about history and scholarship, like all the other denominations. Church leaders are obviously afraid that most people can't hold a properly informed faith, and therefore must keep people in ignorance as best they can - although the numbers are consistently dropping in most places (except in ultra-conservative circles, which is a whole other story and frame of mind).