ATS temperature on same sex marriage

Originally posted by hapablab
reply to post by Annee

 

No I hear the music outside and wonder whats going on, then to my surprise I see an orgy float past me.
and its not a few people its around 100,000 or so, see in Chicago they have a community called boystown where wonderful establishments called "The man hole" and "the back door" light up the night and two men tounge kiss on the corner at 3 pm in broad daylight, all I ask is keep it behind closed doors. Some of us unfortunately have to pass thru 35th north halsted for other reasons.

So?

And Mardi Gras?

Love is love,doesn't matter if it's between man and woman,man,and man,woman and woman.
It's better than a kid growing up with a single mother and no father.
Let them be,let them live free and enjoy there life.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by hapablab
reply to post by Annee

 

No I hear the music outside and wonder whats going on, then to my surprise I see an orgy float past me.
and its not a few people its around 100,000 or so, see in Chicago they have a community called boystown where wonderful establishments called "The man hole" and "the back door" light up the night and two men tounge kiss on the corner at 3 pm in broad daylight, all I ask is keep it behind closed doors. Some of us unfortunately have to pass thru 35th north halsted for other reasons.

So?

And Mardi Gras?

and as for mardi gras, I have always been against people in public getting drunk and white trash flashing their ta ta's for beads, thats a mess of its own.

reply to post by youdidntseeme

Thank you, (and you too Annee). Though, homophobia is not as rampant in Canada, we've had our fair share of disheartening incidents and acts. However, over time, it has slowly been decreasing.

I don't hate Conservatives. I would be a hypocrite (and ignorant) to assume that all Conservatives have the same prejudices. I will agree though that not all Conservatives are entirely.... shall we say comfortable.... with the gay community. But that could be said of any group, politico or otherwise.

My hope for the future is that in a generation or two people will stop calling it a heterosexual/homosexual relationship and just call it what it is, a relationship.

Originally posted by hapablab
reply to post by Annee

 

Have you been to the gay parade - - or is this an opinion from what you see in the media?

Do you feel the same way about Mardi Gras?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------

No, I hear the music outside and wonder whats going on, then to my surprise I see an orgy float past me.
and its not a few people its around 100,000 or so, see in Chicago they have a community called boystown where wonderful establishments called "The man hole" and "the back door" light up the night and two men tounge kiss on the corner at 3 pm in broad daylight, all I ask is keep it behind closed doors. Some of us unfortunately have to pass thru 35th north halsted for other reasons.

and as for mardi gras, I have always been against people in public getting drunk and white trash flashing their ta ta's for beads, thats a mess of its own.

edit on 11-2-2011 by hapablab because: (no reason given)

Well if you know the way around the gay community and its events, then you should be an expert in circumventing the areas you don't approve of. It's this real novel idea, they only recently thought of it, what's it called again... oh yeah, Free Will.

I just want to add, I am not a homophobe, I would never stop another human being of fighting for what they believe in, I can have my opinions and I respect others, they're have been unfortunate instances of people going to boystown specifically to hurt others and if I caught these bad people I would make sure they couldn't hurt anyone again, I just do NOT like the flamboyance, thats all I see here, I wish more "Yuppie gays" as someone put it lived here, I would be happy not to see again assless chaps and tounge kissing in the streets, I dont want to see that with straight people either, their is pride and then their is taking to far and I see way too much of that around here, this last summer they had an almost completely naked man standing on the main part of the float with only a leaf on his area and they were spraying him with water hoses while another man snuck up behind him and starting gyrating, and that made it on the evening news!! COME ON!!!.

Originally posted by NthOther
The real question is why government licenses are necessary in the first place. Marriage licenses, in the US, were originally intended to prevent interracial marriage. It had nothing to do with "sanctity". Once the government realized they could use it as a method of social control, they also saw they could make a lot of money charging fees for the licenses.

It's not really about who can get married and who can't--marriage is an abstract interpersonal commitment--it's about who can get a license to benefit from the legal jungle they've set up to regulate the transfer of property and the custody of children.

Simply put, the government has no legitimate business in defining or regulating interpersonal relationships whatsoever. Its motivation is nefarious at best, and downright evil at worst.

THANKYOU!!! YOU have brought RELEVANCY to this otherwise divisive discussion. The blockheads who bicker day in and day out about left and right issues forget to examine the premise and to question it. The government has no right to meddle in the great majority of things that they do (education, transportation, trade, DRUGS e.c.t)

Originally posted by hapablab
I just want to add, I am not a homophobe, I would never stop another human being of fighting for what they believe in, I can have my opinions and I respect others, they're have been unfortunate instances of people going to boystown specifically to hurt others and if I caught these bad people I would make sure they couldn't hurt anyone again, I just do NOT like the flamboyance, thats all I see here, I wish more "Yuppie gays" as someone put it lived here, I would be happy not to see again assless chaps and tounge kissing in the streets, I dont want to see that with straight people either, their is pride and then their is taking to far and I see way too much of that around here, this last summer they had an almost completely naked man standing on the main part of the float with only a leaf on his area and they were spraying him with water hoses while another man snuck up behind him and starting gyrating, and that made it on the evening news!! COME ON!!!.

Not a homophobe? You are the same person who posted a few pages back about how gays just want marriage to be normal right? The implication to me was that you don't think gay people are normal ipso facto homophobia/discrimination/ignorance.

Originally posted by hapablab
and as for mardi gras, I have always been against people in public getting drunk and white trash flashing their ta ta's for beads, thats a mess of its own.

You do stereotype.

Don't you.

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
The government has no right to meddle in the great majority of things that they do (education, transportation, trade, DRUGS e.c.t)

I find this a very naive statement.

The government is responsible for the safety of its people.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
The government has no right to meddle in the great majority of things that they do (education, transportation, trade, DRUGS e.c.t)

I find this a very naive statement.

The government is responsible for the safety of its people.

If the government didn't regulate and/or fund some programs like education and transportation, who would provide it? History has proven that in some aspects we can't really govern ourselves because then we start excluding the poor from education because, well, they're poor and what good are they.

But... I am with V on "people shouldn't fear their governments, governments should fear its people" which now seems very apropos with what happened in Egypt.

Originally posted by Annee
I find this a very naive statement.

The government is responsible for the safety of its people.

Correct and we can add:
source

Verbto govern (third-person singular simple present governs, present participle governing, simple past and past participle governed)

1.(transitive) To make and administer the public policy and affairs of; to exercise sovereign authority in.
2.(transitive) To control the actions or behavior of; to keep under control; to restrain.
Govern yourselves like civilized people.
a student who could not govern his impulses.
3.(transitive) To exercise a deciding or determining influence on.
Chance usually governs the outcome of the game.

reply to post by Helmkat


Yeah.. I changed my own mind while typing that post and believe I support gay couples adopting too.
Not that I need to make a disclaimer.. that kinda shows a lack in character in my opinion, but just for clarity (i think it was obvious) i'm not gay. However my best friend in the world is and I support anything that makes him happy.

As I thought about it I realized the kids will of course be whatever sexuality they turn out despite their parents since people are born gay or straight. There will undoubtedly be cases where gay couples (weird ones, not the norm) push their sexuality on the kid and it will probably be in the news. Those people of course will be fringe and no different than straight parents disowning their kids or sending them to some "turn you straight church" for being gay.

However since gay couples won't be put in situations where they are raising kids before they are ready (like straight couples that accidentally get pregnant) 99 percent of gay couples who adopt will be bringing that child into a better life.

So my final thought is that I not only support gay marriage as I have from the start, but my wondering on gay adoption has subsided and I support that as well. As I said from the start though, I never was against it, just could see where people would question it.

reply to post by Annee


See my above post, same reply for you.

In my opinion the whole legal act of marriage should be done away with. It is pointless. It has been so convoluted and torn apart it's a dead concept that breeds nothing but conflict.

If you are the kind of person that needs a legal title to feel like you are really connected with a person, then I don't think you really know what commitment of love really means.

The government should stay completely out of personal relationships, and personal trade. There should be no gift tax, and no inheritance tax. If I want to give one million dollars to someone, or they want to give one million dollars to me the state has no right to stick their dirty hands into it. It's my money, it's not commerce, I should be able to do with my wealth and possessions what I wish. Stop meddling with my life.

There should also be no tax difference for people who are together, I see no point why they are so special they deserve a tax break.

If a couple are together for awhile, have a child, and then split up, they should either share the child 50/50 and nobody pays anybody anything, or whoever gets the child gets awarded an amount of money from the other parent that is an ACCURATE half of the upbringing costs of the child. No woman living off her ex-partner's hard work just because she has the child. If you decided to give up a career in order to raise a child that was your choice, and if things go sour in the relationship you have no right to be supported by someone else. Only the child deserves to be HALFWAY supported by the other person, and you have the responsibility to provide the other half.

If these things happened, the issue of "gay marriage" would NOT EXIST AT ALL. That's what I think is so damn stupid about the whole issue. I have absolutely no problem with someone that wants to love, and be with, a member of the same sex, but fighting for a silly title just shows how petty you are. If it's not the title, then it's the tax breaks, which is covered by my previous idea, that couples regardless of gender, should not receive any special treatment.

As far as the religious aspect, if my previously mentioned ideas were in place, it would be quite easy. A couple who want's the formal religious title of marriage will go to a church and get married. At that point it is UP TO THE CHURCH if they support the marriage of same sex couples or not. It is NOT the states right to grant/deny marriage license. It is also NOT the right of the state to FORCE a church who's religion is against same sex couples to endorse such a marriage.

This all comes from a straight male, who claims no religion whatsoever, if that matters to anybody claiming I'm biased. The bottom line is, becoming a committed couple is a personal matter, not a matter of the state to grant or deny special privileges. And if said couple is religious, and wants the blessing of the church, it is up the church to grant that blessing or not.

Originally posted by Violater1
The temperature of same sex marriage? It's either hot, or cold, as Hell.
G_D created Adam and Eve, NOT Adam and Steve (cue the flaming *snip*s in 4..3..2..)

You have got to be the most clever person on ATS. I don't think I've heard that since 4th grade. I don't think you belong here, the ATS motto is "DENY IGNORANCE"

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
But what about someone, like myself, who is of no organized religion? Or atheists or agnostics?
Should they be denied the right to a 'marriage' because they have no church in which to marry?
Are they destined only for a civil union?

If you are not religious, you should not care about being "married" in the eyes of god. You should care about your partner, and nothing else. A title does not make it any more legitimate. If you want to be "legally married" for tax reasons, refer to the previous part of my post, as I don't believe any couples should receive any sort of preferential treatment.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Annee

 

See my above post, same reply for you.

I admire you. We all question things.

But not everyone has their minds open to move forward.

I wonder how many posters on this thread are married, or have been married?

How many of them have children?

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

I wonder how many posters on this thread are married, or have been married?

How many of them have children?

Why?

What is the purpose of this question?

reply to post by Annee


I think all of us are the product of our experiences.

I am curious about the life-experiences of that have shaped the viewpoints each of us hold.

I expect that many of the folks who are in a rush to re-define marriage have not been successfully married.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
reply to post by Annee

 

I think all of us are the product of our experiences.

I am curious about the life-experiences of that have shaped the viewpoints each of us hold.

I expect that many of the folks who are in a rush to re-define marriage have not been successfully married.

Oh OK - - that helps. Yes I agree we are products of our experiences. I embrace mine - even the bad ones - in moving forward.

I was married about 12 years to first hubby - who I had to divorce because he was jealous of his own children. He was not abusive - but it was a type of psychological abuse to both me and our two daughters. He just didn't want to share me with anyone.

I just celebrated my 21st anniverary marriage to second husband who is 21 years younger then me. We both believe in marriage - - giving us that common goal to work through the differences. Marriage is not about Lust (heaven knows I know about that as I got divorced right in the middle of the sexual revolution). Its about respect and commitment. Love is not definable.

I was raised by my mother and grandmother.

So - I'd say I support "traditional" marriage - - - which has nothing to do with gender.