|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:59 pm
Thought that title would get your attention.
So, It's been a few years since I had a good debate that didn't end in name-calling, post-bashing, or stupidity leaking all over the place. Let's go to one of my favorite topics then: Gay Marriage.
As it all goes, the USA currently only has a certain number of states that allow this as well as the better part of the country subscribing to DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) from 1990 under President William Clinton that so stated that a state could refuse to respect one's marriage outside of it's state lines if it was to the same sex.
This is utter stupidity.
Just because a person is in love enough to marry someone doesn't mean the someone has to be the opposite gender for people to acknowledge it. A marriage is a bonding of two people, not "a man and a woman" like many people argue. I have had gay people come up to me (since they know I can legally preform marriages) and asked me about marrying them. I fully support gay marriage and have marriage a gay couple before. I also have another couple who are putting together their final things before their ceremony at New Year's. And before you can start saying "it's in the bible" crap, I was forcefully raised a Roman Catholic. I know that thing inside and out. Not once is it so stated in there that they can't wed. Only that the act of homosexuality itself was wrong.
And you know why this was said?
That's for another debate thread.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:15 pm
The way I see it, let government have civil unions where two people can contract themselves to each other with conditions they set (prenup agreement included, possible limit?)
That's the whole point of marriage and government anyway. Figuring out property rights, recognizing the trust and power placed in someone else (s'why I'm my husbands beneficiary and medical overseer when he can't make his own decisions), and taxes to help those people possibly raise families.
If two men want to contract, fine. Two women? Awesome. A man and a woman? Just a cool. Hell, if FIVE people want to contract together, more power to them, as long as everyone is informed and gives consent.
Colloquially call it marriage, it's pretty much the same thing to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:20 pm
I am all for gay marriage. Up here in Ontario, it isn't a huge deal. Sure we have a few old codgers griping about it now and then, but most of the younger generation is all ok with it.
I don't think it's right for people to sit around and say who can marry and who can't based on their sexual preference or at all. Honestly, let them have their wedding day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:37 pm
I'm for gay marriage, but I wish that there was a net of sorts that stopped dumb asses from entering intelligent threads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:45 am
I am your Mord Sith I'm for gay marriage, but I wish that there was a net of sorts that stopped dumb asses from entering intelligent threads. I'm not dumbass... lol j/k Anyway, the whole thing is everyone has their underwear in a twist because they don't want gays to call their unions "marriage" and gays want to be able to call it that. Most gays can have civil unions but it's not the same feeling as an actual marriage. That's where all the problems come into play. Everyone is essentially fighting over a title.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:51 am
It's a stupid fight really. They say they want to "Save the sanctity of marriage!", when half these bastards are out cheating on their wives/husbands, treating each other like s**t and getting divorced. neutral Doesn't really sound so sacred to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:00 am
SorceressJacklyn I am your Mord Sith I'm for gay marriage, but I wish that there was a net of sorts that stopped dumb asses from entering intelligent threads. I'm not dumbass... lol j/k Anyway, the whole thing is everyone has their underwear in a twist because they don't want gays to call their unions "marriage" and gays want to be able to call it that. Most gays can have civil unions but it's not the same feeling as an actual marriage. That's where all the problems come into play. Everyone is essentially fighting over a title. It all sounds retarded. Marriage is marriage, love is love. People need to realize this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 pm
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE FTW ._. I've asked people to defend their point against gay marriage without religion, and none could. So let love be love, and marriage marriage. Look at all the money we're wasting! .____.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:01 pm
SorceressJacklyn Not once is it so stated in there that they can't wed. Only that the act of homosexuality itself was wrong. Depending on your interpretation, it might not even say homosexuality is wrong, either. My stance on same-sex marriage is that it's ridiculous more places don't legally recognize it yet. Religious groups keep trying to make everybody jump through semantic hoops just because they want to reserve exclusive rights to an institution they don't even have a monopoly over. Secular marriage has been performed in the United States since the 19th century, and it's about time people stopped thinking that marriage = religion. Religions can keep matrimony. Let's keep marriage for everybody.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:27 pm
pidgezero_one SorceressJacklyn Not once is it so stated in there that they can't wed. Only that the act of homosexuality itself was wrong. Depending on your interpretation, it might not even say homosexuality is wrong, either. My stance on same-sex marriage is that it's ridiculous more places don't legally recognize it yet. Religious groups keep trying to make everybody jump through semantic hoops just because they want to reserve exclusive rights to an institution they don't even have a monopoly over. Secular marriage has been performed in the United States since the 19th century, and it's about time people stopped thinking that marriage = religion. Religions can keep matrimony. Let's keep marriage for everybody. Yes, in Christianity, this is true. But Catholicism focuses on the Old Testament. I really don't wanna delve into that accursed tome again. (Not trying to start religious bashing. It just reminds me of childhood abuse) So I'm not too sure where It was. I wanna say in Job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:31 pm
SorceressJacklyn pidgezero_one SorceressJacklyn Not once is it so stated in there that they can't wed. Only that the act of homosexuality itself was wrong. Depending on your interpretation, it might not even say homosexuality is wrong, either. My stance on same-sex marriage is that it's ridiculous more places don't legally recognize it yet. Religious groups keep trying to make everybody jump through semantic hoops just because they want to reserve exclusive rights to an institution they don't even have a monopoly over. Secular marriage has been performed in the United States since the 19th century, and it's about time people stopped thinking that marriage = religion. Religions can keep matrimony. Let's keep marriage for everybody. Yes, in Christianity, this is true. But Catholicism focuses on the Old Testament. I really don't wanna delve into that accursed tome again. (Not trying to start religious bashing. It just reminds me of childhood abuse) So I'm not too sure where It was. I wanna say in Job. If we're talking about how "homosexuality is wrong", that was in Genesis with the story of Lot and Soddom and Gommorah. I personally believe that it's wrong, a person loves who they love. Gender has nothing to do with it, the heart has no gender!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:20 pm
Marriage is not a religious binding. At least not in America. You need to file with the government for marriage because it's a LEGAL thing. Separation of Church and State.
There should be no argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:08 pm
Hester Peche SorceressJacklyn pidgezero_one SorceressJacklyn Not once is it so stated in there that they can't wed. Only that the act of homosexuality itself was wrong. Depending on your interpretation, it might not even say homosexuality is wrong, either. My stance on same-sex marriage is that it's ridiculous more places don't legally recognize it yet. Religious groups keep trying to make everybody jump through semantic hoops just because they want to reserve exclusive rights to an institution they don't even have a monopoly over. Secular marriage has been performed in the United States since the 19th century, and it's about time people stopped thinking that marriage = religion. Religions can keep matrimony. Let's keep marriage for everybody. Yes, in Christianity, this is true. But Catholicism focuses on the Old Testament. I really don't wanna delve into that accursed tome again. (Not trying to start religious bashing. It just reminds me of childhood abuse) So I'm not too sure where It was. I wanna say in Job. If we're talking about how "homosexuality is wrong", that was in Genesis with the story of Lot and Soddom and Gommorah. I personally believe that it's wrong, a person loves who they love. Gender has nothing to do with it, the heart has no gender! I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? I’ll erase this feeling…
I still have a long life don’t I?
kono omoi wo keshiteshimau ni ha
mada jinsei nagai deshou? Actually the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing to do with homosexuality. It had more to do with being hospitable. The reason why Lot and his daughters survived is because they were hospitable to their guests who were God's angels. Also the whole supposed homosexuality is a sin crap stems from Leviticus. In Levi 18 the verse goes Lying with someone of your own sex is an abomination. (Paraphrase) However the hebrew word toevah does not mean abomination it actually means that which is ritually unclean. In other words unkosher. The placing of the word abomination is a nice little translation fail brought to you by King Jame. I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan I’m missing the feeling…
so this pain is also welcomed!
natsukashiku naru
konna itami mo kangeijan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:13 pm
broken_bleeding_angel I am all for gay marriage. Up here in Ontario, it isn't a huge deal. Sure we have a few old codgers griping about it now and then, but most of the younger generation is all ok with it. I don't think it's right for people to sit around and say who can marry and who can't based on their sexual preference or at all. Honestly, let them have their wedding day. Hooray for Ontario!!!!!! heart XD ...I'm totally fine with gay marriage, yes there are some idiots who are against it...but most people I know are fine with it...It isn't right to say that two people of the same sex who love each other cannot be together...It's a direct violation of people's rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:07 am
if you love some one enough to marry them you should be able to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
