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.

 

Is Same Sex Marriage A Government Or Religious Issue? How Do We Untie This Knot?

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 

are you genuinely woried about someone else having rights or has this issue been marketed by the Democrats to gain a vote base?

I happen to think this question has merritt




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Government has no business being involved in marriage. The government should do no more than issue contracts and those should be available to any two individuals (of age) who wish to have a union. Churches should conduct marriage ceremonies as they see fit without any government interference.

Divorce should be the same. The dissolution of a government contract, but what the church requires can be different.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   


Is Same Sex Marriage A Government Or Religious Issue? How Do We Untie This Knot?


Marriage is, in my opinion, a civil issue that should be dealt with on a state-by-state basis.

Historically, marriage really came into bloom with the advent of the medieval catholic church. The institution of marriage was embellished and corralled by the church to control the royal bloodlines of Europe. There were, in fact, just too many male nobles spreading their wild oats and from that, too many one-night-stand pretenders to the various thrones.

So, the church used the holy bonds of matrimony to make sure that the 'right' people were in place to lead the various nations.

As time passed, getting married became an accepted bond between a man and a woman for the purpose of both procreation and legal claims in the event that one (or both) died prematurely. Early death in renaissance Europe was not uncommon and with wealth and land estates growing, there had to be some legal avenue for claims to what was left behind.

Over the centuries, marriage became more religious and less civil... with one's faith playing a major role in who and how one wed. Today, it is strictly illegal for a Muslim to marry outside their faith unless their partner converts. If the Muslim converts to the faith of their partner, the sentence is automatic death.

The question now becomes one whether this institution must, by law, be extended to include homosexual couples. There is absolutely nothing constitutionally related to this subject and since each state regulates marriages laws in said state, it comes down to the states to decide this one... again, in my personal opinion.

If left to the states to decide, there will be those who embrace the change and those that don't... but, that's always been the way we do things in this country. We let the people decide these issues... not biased judges or political partisan potentates. We the People, in each state, should make the choice... with each state's final decision being respected regardless of which way it swings.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


I'm not a democrat (I actually just recently changed my voter registration from democrat). I am an American who believes in equal rights. I'm not a lesbian, not a democrat and I'm a white person that doesn't suffer from white guilt. I'm just a human that lives in America and believes that all Americans are to be treated and protected equally.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
edit on 12-5-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


should the Government then stay out of the wreckage of a failed marriage?

should we feeling so strong about Marriage then be allowed to divorce,,,,,


see the slippery road is how big do we make the box where by everything in the box is RIGHT and everything outside the box is WRONG!!!

where is the Liberal reply to this very question?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


In my view marriage is one of two things:

1. Social engineering to encourage child birth and care
2. A societal recognition of monogamy and love

If its engineering to encourage reproduction, I don't think restricting it based on sex can be considered discrimination. If its some kind of reward for being in a monagamous, loving relationship then it would be discrimination to exclude gays but the greater sin, in my opinion would be the governments involvement at all.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by rebellender
 


I'm not a democrat (I actually just recently changed my voter registration from democrat). I am an American who believes in equal rights. I'm not a lesbian, not a democrat and I'm a white person that doesn't suffer from white guilt. I'm just a human that lives in America and believes that all Americans are to be treated, protected equally and guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


Ok are you one that thinks every petition should be signed so as to put it up for a vote


ETA Happiness is to be chased around like an apple on the end of the stick in front of a horse. Because happiness isnt a place arrived at it is only a state of mine not relative to place or position. thus it is always pursued and never attained
edit on 12-5-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Equal protection is about treating similarly situated things similarly. Without a definition of what the rights of marriage are intended to promote and accompish, Just blindly invoking equal rights makes no sense.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


No.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by rebellender
 


No.


good for you Kali.
If we all agree that marriage between two people isnt our business why are we discussing it?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


Feel free to not participate.

ETA We are discussing it because the government IS involved. If it were not then some couples would not have rights that other couples do not.
edit on 12-5-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by rebellender
 


Feel free to not participate.

ETA We are discussing it because the government IS involved. If it were not then some couples would not have rights that other couples do not.
edit on 12-5-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)


what ever Kali,
I thought you were smart enough to see through the agenda.

you are strait and white, you dont have a dog in the fight, yet here you are fishing off the back of the gay boat pulling their bait for them ....its like paying too much for a used car off a lot and leaving their license plate covers on it for their free advertising



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 




its like paying too much for a used car off a lot and leaving their license plate covers on it for their free advertising


No, actually it's like living in a country that toots it's own horn every second of every day about how free we are but we clearly have full fledged American citizens who are not afforded the same freedoms as other full fledged American citizens. Is that the America you prefer? I prefer the America that doesn't support double standards and hypocrisy.
edit on 12-5-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
It is something the federal government needs to get out of. But it has become a political issue for liberals especially, since they want THEIR morality legislated to everyone else. Forcing their will on everyone - real "tolerant" of them, yes?



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Feel FREE to live in the Muslim country of your choice to gauge what freedom means......

Oh, say Iran.

Nobody is coming inside your home telling you how to live. You are free, you just want to gripe about something...thats where I gotta leave.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by rebellender
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


should the Government then stay out of the wreckage of a failed marriage?

should we feeling so strong about Marriage then be allowed to divorce,,,,,


see the slippery road is how big do we make the box where by everything in the box is RIGHT and everything outside the box is WRONG!!!

where is the Liberal reply to this very question?





Where's the question?
If equal rights are delegated to one party or another,
I'm glad I'm a democrat.

There's no slippery slope.
Equal rights for all isn't that difficult a concept
to understand and uphold.
Are some proud to be against integration
of blacks in white schools in the south in the and 60's?

The same group that said no to that
issue are the same group saying no to gay rights.
Not a group I'd be proud to be associated with.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


If all you're going to offer is straw man arguments then by all means...
You clearly didn't read about the differences between Marriage and Civil Unions or you would realize this goes beyond private homes.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I'm largely a liberal, and I will reply to this question.

Her's my answer: if it's taken you fools this long to figure out how to solve this problem, and you're still only halfway there, then I don't see anyway I can help resolve the issue, besides politely requesting that all of you oppressive types remove your heads from your rectal cavities. Free will has no conditions, except in harming other people. Where's the harm here? Exactly.

That's all I have.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


My reply is that I would like to see liberty promoted.

The government should be involved only to the degree that there is a dissolution process for those who opt to end their contract.

The church can have its own standards for those who wish to divorce (from a church sanctioned marriage) yet want to remain in fellowship within their chosen denomination. We do not live in a theocracy.

This is the only way I see that we can ensure equal rights, yet keep the separation of church and state. I do not want the government to have any means to interfere with what the church can do.I don't want the church to impose standards onto citizens who do not ascribe to any particular religious ideology. In my opinion what I propose is the only way to keep that separation.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   


'Nuff said

Second line



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join