It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay Marriage Ban=State Sponsored Discrimination?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by reaper2
I believe marriage was and is mainly a religous affair, and spiritual one.
I dont understand why guy's would want to get married when it is clear these kinds of unions are a abomination to god.
To be married is simply religous purposes or the added security for raising a family. ijust don't get it why do gay's want the blessing from a god who does not love them.
And if the ceremony has nothing to do with god, then why do it when most men have to be dragged to the alter, there are also no kids involved so why? both partners probably work if not then why and how do you devide the assets when one has contrbuted more than the other.

They are beeter of cohabiting as they always have.


Excuse the hell out of me. MY God loves everyone and any one. My God created me this way. My God accepts everyone, for he created them. My god is caring. My God is loving. My God is kind. My God is real. I Don't know who in the hell told you that God is unkind and descriminatory. AND I personally Don't know which God you are worshiping, cause it don't sound like mine.




posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Who the heck said that Marriage was about having kids????


The bible? .. Please. Do you know how different marriages are between now and then?? Do you HONESTLY think a man in Jesus's age "loved" their wife and that was the entire purpose of marrying? no, a marriage is a legal contract and that is that. Final. Nothing more to it buddy, no lovey dovey bs, no producing unwanted babies, no care involved. Legal contract. I do not need to proclaim my undying love to anyone before I marry... I do not need to sign a contract stating I will have X amount of babies in X amount of time. Know who you sound like? Mussolini.


Fun fact about your Christ and his marriages.

In Jesus's time you had a baby, the man would leave for 12 years, the baby raised by the mother. The man did not fool around with any other women
then he comes back, has a baby, leaves for 12 years. Lots of love. Feel the connection. Why was Christ's father not mentioned often as his mother? .. he wasn't there.

Secondly, for those of us who 1. do not conform to your lord, and 2. do not abide by laws made for different people at a different time 2,000 years ago, your definition means jack. You cannot say "oh but Jesus said this" when not everyone follows your Christ.

It is also not in the governments place to say who can and who cannot marry based on sexual orientation. If two individuals want to become legally bound, it is their right as much as anyone else. If you can find another reason why they should not be able to be legally bound side from your Christ being a bigot, then go a..

Marriage for children. Mine will be accidents.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay
Again, I must make a distinction between those who are unable to have children and those who choose not to have children even though they can. The first are innocent, the second type are, by choice, aborting the primary purpose of marriage.


Who are you to say what the primary purpose of marriage is? It's obviously not the primary purpose of MY marriage. Who are you to blanket every marriage with your perception of it?

Even if I could have children, we choose not to have children. We could have adopted. We don't like children. We don't want children. Yet, we wanted to be married. It was a choice. And regardless what your religion says about it, the LAW says we can be married. Children are NOT a requirement of marriage by law.

My point is that you have a certain idea of marriage and that's fine. But I don't think you have the right to force everyone to think in the same terms about marriage as you do.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by SkyWay
Again, I must make a distinction between those who are unable to have children and those who choose not to have children even though they can. The first are innocent, the second type are, by choice, aborting the primary purpose of marriage.


Who are you to say what the primary purpose of marriage is? It's obviously not the primary purpose of MY marriage. Who are you to blanket every marriage with your perception of it?

Even if I could have children, we choose not to have children. We could have adopted. We don't like children. We don't want children. Yet, we wanted to be married. It was a choice. And regardless what your religion says about it, the LAW says we can be married. Children are NOT a requirement of marriage by law.

My point is that you have a certain idea of marriage and that's fine. But I don't think you have the right to force everyone to think in the same terms about marriage as you do.


This is not what I say....it's what I believe. The Creator of Man and Woman is the One who says this. "Be fruitful and multiply.." He created men and women with the capacity to have children so that they DO have children. The talents and gifts that our Creator bestows on us are meant to be applied. The Lord does not impart human abilities to us only to have them lay idle.

I am not forcing anyone to think anything. I couldn't force anyone to do anything even if I wanted to. You have freewill to decide for yourself what to think and do. So, to suggest that I am forcing anyone to do anything is an outrageous overestimation of my influence.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:36 PM
link   
So you believe that marriage is for children. Great. I hope you have many if that's what you want.

Can you accept that I (and others) believe marriage is for other reasons?
Can you allow others to have their beliefs about marriage?
Can you accept that not everyone marries so they can have kids?
Can you say that you marry for your purposes and it's ok for other people to marry for their purposes?

Or are you saying that everyone should marry for the reasons that you think are valid? Because that's what it sounds like to me. It sounds like only your reasons are valid and anyone who gets married for other reasons isn't doing it right or something.

You say gay people shouldn't marry because they can't procreate. Well, I can't procreate either and it's ok with you that I'm married, isn't it? I'm just saying that your argument falls completely apart if you follow it for 2 seconds.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay
This is not what I say....it's what I believe.


Fine. Believe that way.



You have freewill to decide for yourself what to think and do.


Yes, I do. Because I'm straight, I can decide what to do. But unfortunately gay people do not have that luxury because of people like you who vote to discriminate against them by not allowing them to make a legal commitment of marriage to each other. (I'm not saying you voted to do this, but many people who share your beliefs are voting to disallow them to marry LEGALLY, not religiously)

Marriage can be religious, but it can also be legal. Mine had NO religious words spoken and it wasn't in a church. There was no minister and God wasn't mentioned. That's what gay people want. Legal marriage. Just like mine. You have a problem with that?



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
ok, so we all kind of agree that people tend to vote this down because of personal religious/moral beliefs.

ok, fine. we live in a representative governed country and majority, sadly, rules.

however, i guess my real question is why is it even an issue with the govt?

i dunno, i guess there is no simple answer and we have to only hope that people wake up and realize that to discriminate for any reason goes against anything that their god teaches them.

but a last thought, its illegal to discriminate against gays in the job place...why the double standard?



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Be fruitful and multiply

To me, this means impregnate as many women as possible.

Orgy parties should be sponsored by churches so that we can all be fruitful.

Now this I think, would get some church numbers up eh? A little more excitment to following the bible. I see nothing about "Be married to only one person and be fruitful with just that one person"

so we can only assume Jesus liked orgies.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Because folks are Afraid of CHANGE



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
It wouldn't be a change though... I mean how many people can tell exactly who is gay and who is straight? .. Even I know a straight guy with a lisp lol. How would you tell someone is married to the same sex or.. what difference will it make is gays live next door (they already do, they just are not married) except their yard might be cleaner then yours lol.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I never undersood the big deal about Gay Marriage. If a gay man wants to marry a gay woman, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with this. In fact there is no law or state amendment against this. This is called Equal Rights.

The problem comes in when a gay man or woman wants to have Special Rights to marry another gay man or woman. Emphasis on special rights.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You say gay people shouldn't marry because they can't procreate. Well, I can't procreate either and it's ok with you that I'm married, isn't it? I'm just saying that your argument falls completely apart if you follow it for 2 seconds.


But the critical difference between you and homosexuals is that you are UNABLE to have children, whereas they CHOOSE an arrangement that doesn't produce children. If a person is born deaf, that person cannot be blamed if they don't produce music, but if a person has good hearing and is blessed with musical talent, yet wastes that talent and CHOOSES not to produce beautiful music, that would be a tragic wasted capability and a golden opportunity passed by...a loss to themselves and to the world. Children unborn are an immeasurabley greater loss to the world.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
I never undersood the big deal about Gay Marriage. If a gay man wants to marry a gay woman, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with this. In fact there is no law or state amendment against this. This is called Equal Rights.

The problem comes in when a gay man or woman wants to have Special Rights to marry another gay man or woman. Emphasis on special rights.


but why is it "special" for a man to expect the law to allow him to marry another man and have the SAME EQUAL rights as i have to marry a woman? why is there even a differentiation? theres nothing "special" about my rights to marry, so whats the difference?

i just do NOT get it.....am i just stupid? (no comment requried that was rhetorical)



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Because I put my trust into the United States system for a reason. Why should there be any reason straight people should marry. Love is what matters. Don't think about gender, think about love
.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   

But the critical difference between you and homosexuals is that you are UNABLE to have children, whereas they CHOOSE an arrangement that doesn't produce children. If a person is born deaf, that person cannot be blamed if they don't produce music, but if a person has good hearing and is blessed with musical talent, yet wastes that talent and CHOOSES not to produce beautiful music, that would be a tragic wasted capability and a golden opportunity passed by...a loss to themselves and to the world. Children unborn are an immeasurabley greater loss to the world.

I did not choose to be gay.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay
But the critical difference between you and homosexuals is that you are UNABLE to have children, whereas they CHOOSE an arrangement that doesn't produce children.


I knew before I married that I couldn't have children. I CHOSE an arrangement that does not and could not ever produce children. What's the difference again?

And whether or not gay people are married, they still cannot produce children. I mean, even if they don't marry, they still cannot produce children. You would punish them by not allowing them to marry because they're not capable of having kids???



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   
If the whole 'no gay marriage' law is based on religious values (I'm not going to call them Christians values because not all Christians agree on the interpretation of certain parts of the bible), then I have a few questions.

Why is incest frowned upon? If it was good enough for Lot, why isn't it good enough for the rest of us?
Why is divorce legal?
Why are people allowed to remarry, which God considers adultry?
Why do men think it's OK to waste sperm during oral sex?
Why is it OK to waste sperm having anal sex with a woman but not with a man?
Why is it legal to sell cheeseburgers?
Why can David and Jonathan declare their love for each other without being smited?
Why was it acceptable to God for Abram to have sex and procreate with Hagar when he was married to Sarah?
Why is it OK to point at that mote in someone else's eye when we all have 2x4's sticking out of ours?
Why is polygamy illegal?
Why are shops open on Sundays?

I have many more questions, but I think that's enough for now.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You say gay people shouldn't marry because they can't procreate. Well, I can't procreate either and it's ok with you that I'm married, isn't it? I'm just saying that your argument falls completely apart if you follow it for 2 seconds.


But the critical difference between you and homosexuals is that you are UNABLE to have children, whereas they CHOOSE an arrangement that doesn't produce children. If a person is born deaf, that person cannot be blamed if they don't produce music, but if a person has good hearing and is blessed with musical talent, yet wastes that talent and CHOOSES not to produce beautiful music, that would be a tragic wasted capability and a golden opportunity passed by...a loss to themselves and to the world. Children unborn are an immeasurabley greater loss to the world.


Umm, if they are gay, they won't have kids whether they marry or not, so if they get married it makes no difference. So why should you care?



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And whether or not gay people are married, they still cannot produce children. I mean, even if they don't marry, they still cannot produce children. You would punish them by not allowing them to marry because they're not capable of having kids???


I didn't make the rules...the Creator did. And I didn't design people the way they are...the Creator did.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kacen
Umm, if they are gay, they won't have kids whether they marry or not, so if they get married it makes no difference. So why should you care?


If they can't have kids why marry? Besides, you can be with someone whether you are married or not. If, as some of you claim, love is the important thing, then what difference does it make if you are married or not....you can still love each other. There is no need to marry since you can love just as much without being married as you can married.




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join