ATS temperature on same sex marriage

Didn't read through the whole thread, so my opinion is likely mirrored by others here already, however OP is asking for everyone's opinion, so here goes:
Ban the word marriage from government use. Change the wording to civil union. If you want a "marriage", go to the church of your choice and get it done. This will solve two things I think:
1) leaves the idea of "marriage" up to one's faith. If ones faith says no gay marriage, don't perform the ceremony.
2) A civil union, as applied by the government, would share all the exact same benefits (and curses, ha!) that the current government-sanctioned marriage would, except this is extended to both same and opposite sex relationships.

The government, IMO, has no place determining whom should be married to whom. All couples should be afforded the option of being in a government endorsed/approved civil union if they choose. There is no need for the government here at all. Leave it to the churches to decide if they want to marry a gay/lesbian couple or not. The two concepts should not be linked together at all.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I entirely support gay marriage.
However, and I don't think I have ever said this in a forum or anywhere before, I am torn on gay couples adopting.
I mean I am not outright against it, but I can see where people would wonder.

There is research (no I don't have a link) - - that says children of Lesbian couples are the happiest and most well adjusted.

I really don't see where having one man and one woman as parents is particularly ideal.

Love is the only answer - - and I don't see how gender matters. There are so many programs available today - - if you think a boy needs male bonding or a girl needs something more girly.

The big problem with being a child of same sex parents - - - is the hate and ridicule that comes from others outside the family.

Originally posted by BiggyMcBigPants
Ban the word marriage from government use. Change the wording to civil union. If you want a "marriage", go to the church of your choice and get it done. This will solve two things I think:

The Jim Crow law has already been done.

Separate but equal is never the answer.

reply to post by Annee


I am not advocating a separate but equal existence. I am advocating that the only institution that should be acknowledged by the government are civil unions. No marriages at all would be recognized as those are religious events. A civil union should be extended to all couples while a marriage is determined on the individual faiths of the church and/or congregation.

I am 100% for gay/lesbian civil unions and marriages, assuming the faiths of the couple allow them to have a marriage.

Originally posted by BiggyMcBigPants
reply to post by Annee

 

I am not advocating a separate but equal existence.

But - you really are.

Words and meanings change over time.

When Marriage became the name of a legal government document: "Marriage License" - - with no mention of god in that document - - the terminology and meaning of marriage changed forever.

A license is a contract. This particular license/contract protects rights and property of those joining as one household. And affords certain rights and advantages.

If we had started out with Civil Union - - then there would not be a problem. But we didn't.

Besides that - - - companies are going to differentiate. It will become a huge mess trying to legislate if you can deny Civil Union and accept marriage.

Here is one problem that occurs today: Insurance. Insurance companies buy and sell policies. If a gay couple is in a state that has legal marriage or legal union - - and buys insurance - - - that insurance can become invalid if sold to a state that does not recognize gay marriage or gay union.

So - - you could have an insurance company that says it will only accept Marriage but not Civil Unions. I know its easy to say companies will have to accept both Marriage and Civil Unions - - - but you know its just gonna cause a new hornets nest.

When is the last time you had anyone object to Atheists getting married? They don't believe in god - - so therefore they should not be allowed to marry.

NO - - - Marriage is the legal word - - and needs to be recognized as such.

For what it's worth.....

Marriage for all adults or none.

Just a classic deflection topic by the NWO to keep you weak minded dsheeple from turning your attention to the real matters at hand with humanity. The NWO does not want you foolish mcdonalds eating gas guzzling "civilized" societies turning into Egypt.

So lets argue over trivial cnonsense like legalizing a spiritual physical union between species. Moronic if you ask me.
Just as moronic as having a heterosexual pride parade. haha.

Damn, you sheeple on this website are so uninformed. You need to up your intake of Vitamin B complex.

Separation of church and state. That's all I have to say. If a church is willing to marry then the government need no say.

If two people are happy together let them be together.. Its nobody elses concern .. What matters is that theyre happy together.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme

So I ask you this, membership of ATS, what are your thoughts on the issue. What is the overall tenperature of my fellow ATS-ers on the issue of same sex marriage?

I think same sex marriage is horrible. Awful. Barbaric and I cant believe anyone would want to do it. Its disgusting.

But because of the marriage part, not the same sex part. Why people feel the need to go through some archaic property transfer is beyond me. I think the state should just allow you to nominate anyone you want to be a beneficiary, or have say over what happens to you if you are incapacitated. Why should the state have any say at all in who I want to handle my business or inherit my possessions, or visit me in the hospital, or whatever? There should be no tax benefits or penalties for being married, either, imho. Why should someone pay less taxes because they got married? Or more? (When I was married it was more) Its ridiculous.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
Again we have to point out that this should e looked at on an even playing field. As it stands today intrafamilial relationships of a sexual nature are an illegal act. Therefore, by extansion, marriage intrafamilial is also an illegal act.

Why do you assume the relationship would be of a sexual nature? It is the religious institution of marraige which creates the assumption of physical intimacy, two bodies becoming one etc. etc. There is no such implication when you're talking strictly about a civil/legal arrangement.

If same gender "marraige" is recognized than there is absolutely NO rationale for not extending the same legalities to brothers etc. etc. (whether they are gay or not), if they wish to enter into that civil/legal arrangement.

If you think there is a rationale, please explain, it seems that you can't though...

And by the way... do you think it should be illegal for two adult gay brothers to have sex? If so, why?

reply to post by youdidntseeme


People can be Gay all they want, but marriage is between a man and a woman not a man and a man or woman and woman. Being Gay is fighting nature itself and that is wrong. Two men or women getting together takes away the chance of a doctor, a president, or just a regular Joe from being born. Homosexuality is a contradiction of nature itself an this bill should not be passed. I'm tired of everyone trying to be politically correct and putting kissing and whatnot in movies and TV shows. They don't even warn you. Being gay should be private and not posted everywhere like it's alright. And don't even get me started when people say they were genetically made to be gay. It's a load of bull. It's just an excuse and it is not alright to be gay. But that's my opinion.

The vast majority of couples (at least in the US) are heterosexual. But suddenly we are supposed to re-define it or quit using the "m word" altogether because of 5% of the population.

Once again, the tyranny of a tiny minority over the other 280 million people.


Every government has a role, in teaching its people what is good and right vs. what is not. Every time the government changes the healthcare laws, or gives certain businesses a waiver, the government is engaged in picking winners and losers.

There once was a time when society believed that getting married and having children was a good and wholesome thing, all by itself. But now, the government can no longer teach any values at all, for fear of offending some mutant group or other that will be oppressed unless we claim they are normal.

This society is dysfunctional because it cannot say that ANYTHING is wrong, or even preferred any more.

When peoples "feelings" matter more than society itself, that society is on its way out.

The Muslim brotherhood doesn't have any trouble defining marriage. And they will win the popularity contest of demographics, because they have easy answers when it comes to good versus bad; whereas the West can only say "there is no such thing as evil."

.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
I think same sex marriage is horrible. Awful. Barbaric and I cant believe anyone would want to do it. Its disgusting.

But because of the marriage part, not the same sex part. Why people feel the need to go through some archaic property transfer is beyond me. I think the state should just allow you to nominate anyone you want to be a beneficiary, or have say over what happens to you if you are incapacitated. Why should the state have any say at all in who I want to handle my business or inherit my possessions, or visit me in the hospital, or whatever? There should be no tax benefits or penalties for being married, either, imho. Why should someone pay less taxes because they got married? Or more? (When I was married it was more) Its ridiculous.

EXACTLY!

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
But now, the government can no longer teach any values at all, for fear of offending some mutant group or other that will be oppressed unless we claim they are normal.

LOL so true. Well said.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
This society is dysfunctional because it cannot say that ANYTHING is wrong, or even preferred any more.

When peoples "feelings" matter more than society itself, that society is on its way out.

The Muslim brotherhood doesn't have any trouble defining marriage. And they will win the popularity contest of demographics, because they have easy answers when it comes to good versus bad; whereas the West can only say "there is no such thing as evil."

Hear hear, exactly correct.

.

Originally posted by AnnunakiRageTheChosenPeop
Just a classic deflection topic by the NWO to keep you weak minded dsheeple from turning your attention to the real matters at hand with humanity. The NWO does not want you foolish mcdonalds eating gas guzzling "civilized" societies turning into Egypt.

So lets argue over trivial cnonsense like legalizing a spiritual physical union between species. Moronic if you ask me.
Just as moronic as having a heterosexual pride parade. haha.

Damn, you sheeple on this website are so uninformed. You need to up your intake of Vitamin B complex.

So we're weak minded for discussing a law that is in process of being passed in our country? Yeah makes a lotta sense. You randomly bring up the NWO when we're talking about gay marriage. Why don't you go to the thread that is exclusively for the NWO and share your paranoia there. It is quite rude to call us weak minded when we're sharing our opinions on something that is REALLY happening. Besides I believe in One World Government with all my heart. Thank you

all of you are sick...

It's scary how so many people don't have the ability to think logically. They just go with whatever the popular talking point is at that point in time, such as "equal rights". First of all, marriage is NOT a right and it's downright insulting to compare homosexuals to blacks or women not being allowed to vote. With traditional marriage, homosexuals are not discriminated against in any way. A homosexual man faces the same options in marriage as a heterosexual man. People choose to ignore this simple fact because they are submissive to homosexuals and want to be seen as some sort of "equal rights" advocate hero. Marriage is simply an institution for the union of a man and a woman. It's no different than a "man's club" or "woman's club". The average homosexual relationship only lasts a year and a half anyway. It's only because of their overinflated egos that they demand we redefine marriage.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

the West can only say "there is no such thing as evil."

.

Are you saying that homosexuality is evil?
Because unless that is your point, it kinda makes half of your point invalid.

I am not sure that even your 95% / 5% analogy is correct either. Unfortunately many gays stay in the closet or hide their relationships because of the social implications. Perhaps the percentage is much closer than imagine, but it is just hidden from sight.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


No, homosexuality is not evil.

Nothing is.

Happy now?

So my analogy was bad. Maybe it is what 6% of the population? Or do you think it is half the population? Are gays the majority, is that what you're saying? If so, why haven't they just voted their agenda into place, in california or somehwere?