Breaking in for Gay marriage

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Actually, in Massachusetts, the court decided that there was no legal reason to deny gay folk their right to marry. The legislators that decided they had to do something before the ruling goes into effect. Their constitution has to be amended or they have to pass a law that limits the rights of gay folk...the law isn't to give gay folk the right...its to take it away. If they don't get something passed by May they'll have to start handing out marriage licenses to gays.

I think the president is playing on folk's bigotry. His whole speech was a bunch of bigotry and only a bigot can agree with him. He may as well come right out with it...notice how he avoided using the words "ban on gay marriage". Why won't the bigot just say what he means instead of trying to sugar coat it. By now, everyone knows that he's a bigot. Nobody's shocked. The speech should have been this short..."I'm a bigot, so you know where I stand."




posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Obviously with a divorce rate of over 50% in this country, a lot of straight people don't believe in the sanctity of marriage anyway.

If something is broken and you don't know how to fix it, then what harm is there in experimenting with it? How is letting gay couples get married going to do any harm to the idea of marriage? What about dumbass straight people like Brittney Spears who get married and divorced in less than 3 days?

I thought this country was built upon the idea of people having the right to the pursuit of happiness. Well, if happiness includes the right of marriage, then not letting gay couples get married is blatently unconstitutional.



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by MorningtonCrescent

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Homosexuality is a sin (which means to fall short or miss the mark) to God because it is a distortion of what God intended.


whoa. hold up the Jesus parade, captain. what makes you think that we believe in the same god? if this is entirely an issue of what you think God thinks, then it's a religious issue. so if it's a religious issue, by passing this law, the government starts making laws that favor the views of a particular religion. which just won't fly...unless, the government wants to make allowances for the beliefs of all religions. so unless the law can be written so that the beliefs of every religion represented in the United States are respected, it shouldn't stand.

unless, of course, your justification for your stance isn't purely religious. in which case, give it another try.


what parade? in my first point, all i'm saying is that a church should be able to still refuse to marry a gay couple if it holds beliefs against it. many marriages, probably the majority, are done through a church or with a pastor. i just wanna be sure that the government doesn't legalize gay marriage, and then enforce it so that churches must marry them. it would have to be purely secular, which then wouldn't conflict with separation of church and state, and then i couldn't complain about that fact. i would still view it as wrong however, but at least the church wouldn't be violated.

the rest of my points were describing why people such as i disagree with same-sex marriage, because i'm not sure a lot of people understand our view. we are just called biggots or intolerant. and i'm tired of being called a biggot. like i said, there are some who really are hateful, but you must separate them out. if you really read my previous post and understand it, you would see that i'm not. read it again if you have to or point out things that you don't understand about it and i'll clarify.

but here are some non-religious arguments against gay marriage as well.
first of all, it's a given that some gay marriage will yield more families of gay parents bringing up children. having two parents of the same sex will be negative for the child. why? because children need an influence from a mother and father while growing up. statistics show that children who lack either a mother or father are more prone to problems in school, jobs as they are older, and life and society in general.
also, a child, growing up with two moms or dads is gonna grow up being confused. chances are, the child will be heterosexual, so how will their parents impact the child? the child will probably be unstable sexually which will affect their psyche overall. and worshipthemoon, yes, our marriage and family system is royally messed up already, but your logic isn't gonna help. the "let's just make it worse or just give up or ignore it" mentality is really a copout.


and about believing in the same god or not. does the fact that you don't believe in God, therefore make him non-existant? will his ways not apply to you, or will he ignore you because you simply don't believe in him? that's like saying that, "whoa, you believe the earth is round? well, i don't believe what you do. i think it's flat." well that statement is nice, but if someone says that, it doesn't have any affect on the fact that the earth is indeed round. and they can keep on believing it's flat, but day in and day out, they are experiencing the affects of the globe shape and the rotation and all despite what they think or believe. well, the shape of the earth is physical scientific truth. and just as there are truths in science, and math, there are moral truths. just because you don't believe in God as i do, changes nothing. His truths and commandments and wishes are still there whether you want to believe them or not.



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Why should non-gays have a say in wether or not gay people should get married? It's not like we straight people are going to be forced in to homosexual relationships if we allow gay marrige. I think that politicians should just back of and stop shoving their conservitive-christian propaganda down peoples throats



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slayer
Why should non-gays have a say in wether or not gay people should get married?

This is a fundamentally flawed arguement. People do it all the time. Can non-drunk drivers tell them what to do? Of course. It's a matter of what kind of society the people want.

It's not like we straight people are going to be forced in to homosexual relationships if we allow gay marrige.

Of course not, and I don't think I have ever seen anyone say that ONCE. Yet it keeps coming up.

I think that politicians should just back of and stop shoving their conservitive-christian propaganda down peoples throats.

Is it worse than the liberals shoving theirs down ours? Welcome to the land of propaganda, take a tray, there's plenty to go around.




posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 06:13 PM
link   
this is so funny, do any of you actually know what rights the Constitution gives you ?

Let me tell you, there is no protected right to the word "marriage".

Getting married is not a "protected right" under the Constitution, not for straight people and not for gay people.

The word "marriage" is not protected, thus can not be used as a form of defence from discrimination.

As the one poster said, "marriage" is an act of faith, but further more since "marriage" is NOT a Constitutional right then the term "marriage" and what it is defined as is left to the public to decide. In the case of California and Prop 22 the public decided that "marriage" is the union of a man and a women.

I will assume that soon we will see a Bill introduced and ratified in Congress that says the 'Federal definition of the term "marriage" is the consenual union of a man and a women'

The amendment that is being proposed currently allows each state to define the term "marriage" but ALSO gives another state to view the same "marriage" as not in effect if this "marriage" condradicts the definition of "marriage" in that state.

Additionally since Federal Statutes overrule State Statutes, any state with a Pro-Gay "marriage" definition would be overruled when applying to any Federal activity. ie tax return, social security benefits etc.

So there you go, the states that want gay marriage can have it and those that dont agree can make those marriages not in affect, with the additional federal regulations that would affect gay-marriage financial decisions.

So if your gay and want to be "married" then I suggest you stay in Massachutes (spelling? lazy) until such time that the normal people in Mass get tired of having so many "gays" around that they vote to change the states definition of marriage. And so who ever is gay and married no matter for how long will be just gay at that time.



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 07:14 PM
link   
To discriminate:

1 a : to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features of b : DISTINGUISH, DIFFERENTIATE

2 : to distinguish by discerning or exposing differences; especially : to distinguish from another like object
intransitive senses

3 : to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit

Let's keep it real people. To keep gay families from access to the same rights as other families is bigotry and discrimination plain and simple. They have the same rights afforded all citizens in this country by the constitution. The 1st admendment says that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. An admendment banning gay marriage on the bases of religious beliefs is unconstitutional. This isn't a christian nation--its a simply a nation of different people. All should be treated equally under the law regardless of their life partners.



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Article. IV.
Section. 2.
Clause 1: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Sorry man, there is no Constitutional protection for the word "marriage".

You as a citizen of the United States do not have the Constitutional right to marry anyone, whether straight or gay. Just as you do not have a Constitutional right to drive. The State dictates the conditions for which you may have the "privilage" to do so.

UNLESS the Federal Goverment sets a ruling that overcedes the State.ie MAximum Speed Laws, Drug classification/legalization, Drinking age, retirement age, tax bracket etc.

Many times in our nations past states had rights to regulate conditions within their own state. Until such time that the FEDS decided it was in everyones best interest to make a Federal Standard that all states must follow.

Marriage will be one of these issues, without altering the Constitution. When the Supreme Court rules that "marriage" is not a Constitutional right. But rather a process that may be regulated by both State and Federal Regulations.

Sorry, but this will be the only outcome on this issue



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 07:33 PM
link   
see the part 'without due process of law'

Guess what that means. IF the FEDS want to they can drive the issue through court to have them either declare that marriage IS or ISNT a Constitutional right. And if they rule it IS then people who are not currently married can demand to be married because its a Constitutional right that they can. This can not happen has you can not FORCE a marriage, which would thus breach the other person's right to personal freedom.

Therefore the court will not be able to rule that "marriage" is a right that is protected by the Constitution.



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 07:47 PM
link   
you get a better tax break not to be married don't you?



posted on Feb, 25 2004 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Man all this gay bashing in the media and here on ATS has gone far enough. Im really sick and tired of people feeling that they have the "right" to tell other people, who are not breaking any laws, what to do. The United States is supposed to be the land of the "free", the home of the brave. Where you the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So what if gay people want to get married? Thje government has NO RIGHT to tell people how to live their lives in a free society. Bush has some nerve. An amendment to the constitution? Are you F***ing kidding me!!

So gay people want to have the same rights as everyone else eh? They are entitled to EVERY SINGLE RIGHT everyone else has. This reminds me of the civil rights movements. It astounds me that in the year 2004 people are still so goddamned stupid in the US. WHAT RIGHT DO ANY OF YOU OR THE GOV. HAVE TO TELL SOMEONE HOW TO LIVE THEIR LIVES IF THEY ARE NOT HURTING ANYONE? I'll tell you...NONE.

If a gay couple who is in love wants to get married then they should have the right to do so. That's the bottom line. All you NAZI bastards dennying them their happiness are just plain sad and pathetic.

Im also sick and tired of people using GOD as an excuse to bash Gays. I hear people say all the time "well it says in the bible that homosexuality is bad and all them gays are going to burn in the fires of hell". Oh then it must be true because it says so in the bible. God's not here to vouch for that is he?
. Do me a favor all you homophobic ass***es out there.... get your head out of your asses. People make it sound like if gays are allowed to marry the country would collapse.

There are more important things going on that people need to be foccused on. Like the fact that the economy is in the #hole. Millions of jobs have been lost. A war started under false pretenses costing the lives of hundreds of American soldiers. The fact that drugs are destroying thousands of families. Millions of people lack basic healthcare coverage. The fact that the education system in the US is so bad that most people dont even know their ow history much less who even the secretary of state is.

Those are the real issues that need to be addressed in this country. The fact that Bush is making such a huge deal over this proves that he's trying to deflect attention for his shortcomings as president.

There are real more important things to focuss on. Do me a favor people..... GROW UP

Ocelot



[Edited on 25-2-2004 by Ocelot]



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Ocelot, wow you sure proved yourself to be above all those "nazi-homophobes-#$%^&@#-gay bashing-haters-etc etc etc." You're so much more tolerant appearing, aren't you? You are much more benevolent towards people.
Oh, and believing in the bible is just stupid isn't it? Yeah, God should have no part in any of our lives. Screw anyone who happens to have convictions. We have to be TOLERANT and ACCEPTING of everyone, so let's just can the bible, because we can't have that hanging around. You are such a hypocrit. You displayed more hatred in your post than anything I've posted on the topic, and I happen to be against same-sex marriage.
And the definition of a grown-up probably doesn't include someone who resorts to spouting expletives, or someone wjp lets their anger take control instead of being rational and collected. That's how debates are constructive, when people don't lose control. Please Ocelot, read my posts again, and tell me again that I'm a homophobe and biggot and a nazi.

Saphronia, thank you for the definition of discrimination. It would be a good idea to clearly define words and terms we use more often to avoid misunderstanding and so we can make sure we all agree on what means what.
Having said that, the original definition of the word is not something bad. We just adopted that word to label racism and other similar acts or remarks, which is fine I suppose. But the differentiation and exposing features and such is not something wrong. We do it all the time. We discriminate while we shop, we have discriminate tastes in food. It is a part of choosing. It is a discernment. In fact, if we were to abolish discrimination, the world would have chaos, because anything goes. Locking up any type of criminal would be saying that people who steal should be filtered out of society and go to jail, and therefore discriminated against. The fact that you and everyone else on this site has opinions means we are all discriminating.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ocelot

Im also sick and tired of people using GOD as an excuse to bash Gays.

To say that someone is doing something wrong, in their opinion, is not bashing.

I hear people say all the time "well it says in the bible that homosexuality is bad and all them gays are going to burn in the fires of hell". Oh then it must be true because it says so in the bible. God's not here to vouch for that is he?
. Do me a favor all you homophobic ass***es out there....

Yes, we are the Nazi's. You are the one who doesn't want like minded people here in the US. Let's all think like you.

get your head out of your asses. People make it sound like if gays are allowed to marry the country would collapse.

There are more important things going on that people need to be foccused on. Like the fact that the economy is in the #hole.

It is not in the #hole.

Millions of jobs have been lost.

Jobs come and go. There are jobs out there.

A war started under false pretenses costing the lives of hundreds of American soldiers.

Yet saving lives at the same time. Hmmm

The fact that drugs are destroying thousands of families.

Yes, well the war is still on.

Millions of people lack basic healthcare coverage.

That is their own fault. Not ours

The fact that the education system in the US is so bad that most people dont even know their ow history much less who even the secretary of state is.

I agree with you there.

Those are the real issues that need to be addressed in this country. The fact that Bush is making such a huge deal over this proves that he's trying to deflect attention for his shortcomings as president.

Did you miss the fact that Bush has address all of those issues as well?

There are real more important things to focuss on. Do me a favor people..... GROW UP

Ocelot



[Edited on 25-2-2004 by Ocelot]



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Ocelot, wow you sure proved yourself to be above all those "nazi-homophobes-#$%^&@#-gay bashing-haters-etc etc etc." You're so much more tolerant appearing, aren't you? You are much more benevolent towards people.
Oh, and believing in the bible is just stupid isn't it? Yeah, God should have no part in any of our lives. Screw anyone who happens to have convictions. We have to be TOLERANT and ACCEPTING of everyone, so let's just can the bible, because we can't have that hanging around. You are such a hypocrit. You displayed more hatred in your post than anything I've posted on the topic, and I happen to be against same-sex marriage.


believe whatever you want. I still stand by my comments. People need to live and let live. You want to call me a hypocrite? You think I hate you because you disagree with me? No I dont hate you. I think you're very very wrong... but i dont hate you. I dont really hate anyone...(well except Bush).



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Its not discrimination if both straight people and gay people are not provided the "right" based on the Constitution.

This will be a Constitutional argument whether or not the term "marriage" is protected by the Constitution. And IMO it is not. And I would expect that the judges will rule that it is not defined as such in the Constitution therefore it is not a protected "right" and is subject to State and Federal Authority.

Sorry but the concept of "marriage" is not a "right" that was given and protected by the Bill of Rights.



posted on Feb, 26 2004 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jonna
The world is on the brink and he is worrying about where some stranger sticks his rod.
I have to agree that there are many other things that take priority right now....like all of them.


It's election time. So anything to capture votes, he's gonna say/do it.

If he were directed to smack babies because there is a majority of baby smacking voters, he'd do it. And don't doubt it for a second...





new topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join