Would this be "news" if a Straight man said Marriage is not all it was cracked up to be?

... I think this is what you call a rhetorical question.

If marriage is sacred why can it be done at drive through chapels?
And why are there so many divorces?
I'm looking forward to the day when my great grand kids have to argue if they can
marry aliens or not.
Or if they can marry a robot.
If you clone yourself and give the clone a sex change will you be allowed to marry he/she/it?

The Gay marriage argument will one day be looked upon as the "good old" days when things were
simple.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Lapislazuli
The sanctity of marriage is ruined every day by people like her, not Gay people. People act as if the word "Marriage" is so sacred, and has not already been defiled. Look around yourselves and hopefully you can realize a homosexual man being "married" would not have an iota of an effect on you. Live and Let Live.

The sanctity of marriage is such a crap argument.

Ever read the history of marriage? It is NOT a pretty picture. Women were property - - bought/sold/bartered for various reasons.

If you look at some of the mideast - - you get a picture of what marriage used to be for all women.

Even in my own lifetime - - women here in America had very little rights in a marriage.

Sanctity my Butt!

Thank you Phoenix. Marriage has ALWAYS been a business arrangement and has ALWAYS benefitted the man more. But religion and society has people so brainwashed so as not to be able to see the forest through the trees.

It's sad really.

I think marriage in general should be banned. I've come to the conclusion that it is just slavery and that it benefits just one group of people ... divorce lawyers.

---

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

---

I have yet to meet or hear about a gay couple who weren't having sex with other people on the side. It seems to be in their nature??? but then again I could probably say the same thing about heterosexual couples, it is just they hide it better.

I think there may actually be a bit of a conspiracy here with this whole "I just don't want them to use the term 'marriage'" thing - let me explain. I currently live in Spain, and a few years ago, in 2005 to be exact, they finally legalized gay marriage here (hard to believe Spain is more morally advanced in this aspect then the US, eh?). I don't remember when it started exactly, but sometime in the year or so leading up to that there started to be talk, mostly from right-leaning conservative types, but not exclusively, about them only really having a problem with the term "matrimonio", which is of course literally the translation of "marriage" in Spanish. Other than that, they said, there was no problem, just the term, same as the OP stated here in this thread repeatedly.

Anyway, many people here on this thread have pointed to the basic ridiculousness of this premise, and it is ridiculous, for many reasons:

1. As someone said a few posts back, since when does anyone, with the exclusion of grammaticians and suchlike, give a crap about the misuse of a word??!! We screw up words and definitions ALL THE TIME and nobody cares.

2. I've yet to see any kind of proof that the term marriage, or matrimonio, or whatever it's called in the rest of the western countries, is defined anywhere important as being necessarily between man and woman. The bible isn't a legally binding document anywhere in N.A. or Europe. If the bible invented the word (and that's gonna be a tough argument to prove for anyone whose native language isn't Aramaic or Hebrew...), show me the proof that they invented it - and patented it. It sounds silly just asking for that, lol.

3. Dogs?! Dead people? Toasters?!!! I mean really....anyway, other posters have already shown that contractually they make no sense, apples and oranges, people, as they say....if people are apples, then dogs are oranges for example, and let's say women can be Golden Delicious apples and men can be Granny Smiths....still apples, still same species, I really can't believe anyone argues this lol. - and I "lol" with all due respect to your entitled opinion!

4. I could go on, but I'll get to the point about the possible conspiracy I see with this "marriage" term debate, which I've now personally experienced, word for word, in 5 different countries and three different languages (Canada, US, England, Spain and France, in English, French and Spanish), the EXACT SAME argument - and THAT is the conspiracy. It IS a silly argument, no matter how you look at it. I could think of several other arguments that would be more convincing and even slightly more reasonable, but that's exactly the point - all of a sudden we're spending all our time debating whether gay couples who tie the knot should be allowed to call their union a marriage! WhoTF cares!? That was not what they asked for, they were asking for equal civil rights, which happens to imply that they'd need to use a word from the dictionary to define the thing they wanted their civil rights for, and that word is of course "marriage". And if it's called GAY-marriage, that's adding a prefix to the word, it's already saying that it's not the exact same thing anyway...but I digress...

I guess the point I want to make is that this same argument is being used in diverse countries around the world (or the western world anyway as far as I've seen), despite the fact that anyone can see it's not even the right argument to use (not that I think there is a "right" argument personally...so....Who exactly has instilled this idea into people of a certain persuasion's heads? And in quite a few different countries to boot!? Maybe it's something as simple as the Vatican, I dunno, whoever it is, it's obviously a concerted effort to distract from the true discussion at hand, forcing us to talk about something else only partially related to the true topic, which is quite clearly simply a question of civil liberties, and certainly not semantics, I don't think the gays had any interest in a semantic or etymological discussion.

Hope that all made sense, I've had a couple tonight, hehe,

-internationalcriminal

Originally posted by musashi9
I have yet to meet or hear about a gay couple who weren't having sex with other people on the side.

You actively seek out gay couples to ask this of them or just relying on the two you know of?

OK people, as i understand it, there are two purposes to marriage: love, and to produce children. As i understand it, no same sex couple has ever produced children. Im not anti gay or anything, but i believe this is...well the second part, is the main argument against gay marriage.
Oh, and another thing. while infedility/divorce rates between married couples makes for interesting debate, it is not really relevant to the issue of same sex marriage.

"Marriage" is for man + woman.

"Civil Union/Partnership" is for gay people.

Alot of gay people agree with that, it's really not that big of a deal. Elton John is an example of someone in a Civil Union. I have nothing against him, he's a nice guy with a big heart, I have all the respect in the world for him. With that being said, it doesn't mean I hate gay people, or that people against gay "marriage" are homophobes. (really?) We would prefer marriage as it were to be left alone, just as it was for thousands of years.

I really don't understand why some gay individuals feel they need to barge in and take over things, being provocative, rattling their sabre's, and causing a fuss. It's really quite disrespectful to be blunt. I would never trample on the beliefs and institutions of others, and I would expect the same respect in return.

If alien beings moved to planet Earth, and had a partnership ceremony called "Googlash", and they wanted to keep it between a Glok and Nanook, I would respect that. Of course gay people would come along and say "we want Googlash too!" Well to that I say: No gay people, you can't have Googlash! Sheesh!

Originally posted by Seektruthalways1

Keeping a good morality in life is how we keep order. If we all eventually just allow all things to happen, there will be chaos. Putting aside religous beliefs, those who are gay will affect me and everyone I dont care what people say. I dont treat them with hate, but I do know what they are doing is wrong. Those who are homosexual tend to have more partners, spreading more disease, and bringing down morality of this world.

There are plenty of gays who don't sleep around, I know a few. There are plenty of heterosexuals who sleep around a LOT, I know a few of those. Gays will only affect you if you are prejudiced against them.

Let me think of an example........
If someone you work with, was a known thief who stole money from other companies through forgery, lying or whatever, asked you to borrow money from you using your debit card, giving him your pin number for an emergency cause he really needed it? Would you treat him differenty compared to your best friend asking you for money in an emergency?Would you treat him the same even though you know he steals money from others?.......

Is this a gay thief or a heterosexual thief?

Or how bout this example.....
You recently found out your one brother is sleeping with another woman, and he is married with 1 child. You overheard this one day when he was talking on his cellphone, dont ask how its an example. Now you meet him again with his wife, saying everything is great the wife is happy, the little girl is happy and things are well with them. Yet, you think you wouldnt say something about it, because his lifestyle wouldnt affect your morals? You wouldnt want to invade their privacy? Who is the one being used here, the mother or the child? Who is the one suffering from this? Would you just let it be, and let his wife with a child continue in ignorance knowing he is sleeping with another woman? But you wont say "Brother! You are doing something very wrong by being with another woman, ignoring your wife and little one, you must stop this". Are you saying dont get involved its none of your business?

I KNOW this guy is heterosexual, not gay. That must mean ALL heterosexuals are cheaters and evil, right?

The way people are, WILL affect my decisions and how I react to them. I will treat everyone with no partiality. They all get the same treatment, if it be my dad or a stranger. If they are doing something wrong, they will hear about it. And if someone is gay/homosexual, they will know that I am against it. I will not force them to change, but they will know my choice, and I will choose my actions accordingly to show I do not agree with their lifestyle. My lifestyle will not conform to what people believe is right, it will conform to what my Heavenly Father Yahuwah says. That is the standard, it will never change.

You are in the minority. More and more people are becoming accepting of gays. Most people know that gays are not evil just because they are gay. There are so many gay people who are decent, kind, loving individuals, who hurt no one, and help those in need - and no god that I would ever believe in would condemn them. Thank goodness our country welcomes many different religions and religious beliefs (apparently some more tolerant than others), and no one religion rules this country.