Southern Baptists - 'Same Sex Marriage is Not a Civil Rights Issue'

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by deepankarm

 

Originally posted by deepankarm
It's just a pathetic idea to force the meaning of marriage on others...

You mean like saying marriage is between a man and a woman and its purpose is to procreate? Because there seem to be PLENTY of people forcing THAT meaning of marriage on others...

Just don't pretend that you are fighting for love or freedom.

I am fighting for love and freedom. I'm not pretending in the least. Just curious, what do you think my motivation is for advocating it? Keep in mind I am in a 20-year (tomorrow!) very happy heterosexual marriage.

I am against forcing any meaning of marriage.Get it.
Oh i see, your marriage is 20 years old.
What's the bragging point??
Marriage is meant for lifetime, isn't it??
You have my pity for how ignorant you are??
So if tomorrow government withdraws the benefits and recognition away from marriage, will you abandon your marriage??
I think not.
You will probably say the only thing you need is love. Right.
That's what i mean.
If you love someone, you don't need anything else.
But if you want something from others to validate your love, then there is something wrong with your love.

reply to post by deepankarm


Well, I am having some trouble understanding your posting and it doesn't look like it's a good idea to wade in deeper.

Let me just clarify that I wasn't bragging about my marriage, I am just happy about it and I wanted you to know that I am not advocating marriage equality so I could get the government benefits, as I already have them.

Have a nice day and work on that communication, OK?

Originally posted by deepankarm
If you love someone, you don't need anything else.

Many times you need that official marriage certificate to be able to visit family members in the ICU in the hospital, or to be asked about final directives, etc etc There are benefits that are given to family members that are not given to just 'the person that you love'. People who love each other want to take care of each other in the best possible way. Some times the only way for that to happen is with the official certificate.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Well, I am having some trouble understanding your posting and it doesn't look like it's a good idea to wade in deeper.

You may be right as english isn't my first language. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Let me just clarify that I wasn't bragging about my marriage

Then why mention it??

I am just happy about it and I wanted you to know that I am not advocating marriage equality so I could get the government benefits, as I already have them.

No.
You are saying that government benefits are the only reasons determining who are married and who aren't.

Have a nice day and work on that communication, OK?

Sorry it's night here.
I would love to improve my English. Thanks.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by deepankarm
If you love someone, you don't need anything else.

Many times you need that official marriage certificate to be able to visit family members in the ICU in the hospital, or to be asked about final directives, etc etc There are benefits that are given to family members that are not given to just 'the person that you love'. People who love each other want to take care of each other in the best possible way. Some times the only way for that to happen is with the official certificate.

Those are legal aspects and please don't tell me that there aren't solutions to that other than marriage certificate.

Originally posted by deepankarm
Those are legal aspects and please don't tell me that there aren't solutions to that other than marriage certificate.

Actually.

No there is not.

Originally posted by deepankarm
Sorry for the inconvenience.]

No problem.

Then why mention it??

I told you why I mentioned it. I wanted you to know that I wasn't advocating gay marriage because I am gay and want the benefits. I'm not gay. I'm married and already have all the benefits.

No.
You are saying that government benefits are the only reasons determining who are married and who aren't.

So, now you're telling me what I'm saying? I never said that.

I did not marry for government benefits. I married for love. But each married couple defines their own marriage. Some marry to have a steady sex partner. Some marry for love, companionship, money, financial security, to have a family, to become a citizen, and some marry for reasons I cannot comprehend. But the bottom line is that straight people can marry for ANY of those reasons, or make up one of their own. But anti-gay folks think they have the right to deny gay people's marriage for ANY reason.

There are no states that have civil unions equal to marriage. The only way to get the benefits of marriage are to BE MARRIED.

Originally posted by deepankarm
don't tell me that there aren't solutions to that other than marriage certificate.

.... there aren't solutions to that other than a marriage certificate. Really.
It goes for health insurance as well as hospital visitation rights, etc etc.
It's amazing what a piece of paper saying 'married' will get two people in love ...

reply to post by beezzer

what part of society conforms to either individual or their genetic behaviors ??
none that i'm aware of, you ??

thre are no public "societal adjustments" to accomodate autistics or the LGBT community.
i challenge you to identify one.
there aren't even group advisers (specific to either issue) in a public setting like the Boys & Girls clubs.

yes, there are private endeavors (not denying that) but you specifically claim there are public "societal" changes that accomodate either group and i'd like to know where.

LGBT bus passes ??
LGBT schools ??
LGBT only jobs ??
LGBT hospitals ??
LGBT churches ??

so, since none of the above exist, what does ??

autistic specific educators ? - yep
autistic specific therapies targeted to develop their specific skills ? - yep
autistic specific education modifications - ESOL and the like ? - yep
autistic specific mobility supplements ? - yep, see any caseworker for details
autistic specific training for those who impact the life of an autistic ? - yeppers

so, once more beez, how does society conform to the LGBT community ??

reply to post by petrus4


Your argument makes no sense. In order for it to be a "RIGHT", it has to be something that you cannot biologically live without? So... Breathable Air, Water, Food, and Shelter are rights?

A right is the ability to act without the permission of others. There's no such thing as a right that some people get, but not others.

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by Annee
Science is close to propagating through cloning.

I see; and that's going to be something positive, is it?

So people who don't or can't have children shouldn't be allowed to marry? There's no logical reason why people of same gender should not be allowed to marry. There are a few religious reasons, but if you're a Christian, then they aren't logical AT ALL due to inconsistencies and outright conflicts throughout the various bibles available.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

There are authentic genetic reasons for the prohibition of close relatives marrying. There is no medical reason why two consenting non-related gay people can't be married. ...

Doesnt matter....
They are still asking for the privelage of marriage, while exempting others

Marriage is and has always been defined as the union between a man and woman.
That simply isn't true. Many cultures, including the native american indian culture, had gay marriage. here
, in the native american culture it was considered 'good luck' for a man to have both a woman-wife and a male-wife. Gay men were considered to be specially touched by the creator.

From what ive seen they call it a" Two-Spirit-type relationships"...i've never read anything specifically stating they called it a "man"husband/man"wife"
Sorry to say, but Gay couples are undefinable as partners.
There is no man wife or woman husband its an oxymoron

BTW i meant what the definition of marriage has been in culture(what the arguement is about)...not a past civilization

Poppycock! People get married all the time and don't have kids either by choice or because they physically can't. Are you saying that people who can't have kids shouldn't be allowed get married? That's absurd.

thats not even what i stated!
I said "possibly"
of course marriage isnt completely definitive on raising kids(or your own for that matter)
Most would believe marriage is paramount to proper child management(for men and women specifically)
And i will say this. Marriage is the planet's only institution whose core purpose is to unite the biological, social and legal components of parenthood into one lasting bond. Marriage says to a child "The man and the woman whose sexual union made you will also be there to love and raise you." In this sense, marriage is a gift that society also bestows on its children
Marriage sets a positive exaple for a couple...a certain maturityFor the interpretaion of the law to be refined would be a huge slap in the face of tradition

YOUR version of tradition. As I said, in many cultures through the centuries this was just fine.
Change is the only constant in the world. Cultures change all the time. That's a fact.

MY VERSION?..
that would be the one were talking about...My version as it stands today is marriage in the united states

homosexuals have all the "equal rights" as any other person in this nation
No they don't. If they did, they'd be allowed to be married. Marriage is a civil right.

Marriage is not a civil right...yadda yadda yadda...refer to the numerous posts stating this

Besides .. what do you care anyways? If two guys who love each other get married it doesn't have anything to do with you. You still live your life and they live theirs. What business is it of yours or anyone elses on who people marry?

Yes why dont they just live their life,
Instead of fighting tooth and nail to have homosexuality legitimized in the publics view.

edit on 23-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by Honor93

 

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

You're adding intent to it that it does not cover.

Can a man get married? …..Yes
Can a woman get married? ….Yes

Since both sexes can equally get married, its not sexual discrimination.
trying to stretch it to mean things it doesn't is not going to work either.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

So is there any reason other than religious to disallow men and women to marry others of the same sex? If marriage is a legal process that confers rights, it's a civil right. If they removed the legal rights from the process, then I don't think it would be as big an argument from either side. But marriage started with and will always be a legal process. Taking rights away never fixes the issue.

Saying that men and women have the right to marry, but not the right to marry WHO they want is disingenuous.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

(beezzer stirring the pot, poking the hornets nest, whizzing in the oatmeal. . . . . )

Sexual preference is a behaviour.

Race, gender are not.

Let's look at behaviours.

Do we apply civil rights for ALL behaviours that are "outside" the mean?

edit on 23-6-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)

Attraction of a white woman to a black man is behavior, yet the marriage of a white woman to a black man is legal, YET was not. So legislation has definitely been used to grant rights based on behavior. Even between a MAN and a WOMAN.

Because it IS or WAS illegal doesn't mean that it's not a right. It just means that the current lawmakers are holding on to their bias and once the next generation gets in, the issue will be resolved. It's just too bad that it takes so long for bigots to die or retire. Change would happen MUCH quicker.

If you feel bad about rights being granted to blacks, then you won't get this argument. I know quite a few blacks that don't feel that gays should get the same rights as heterosexuals. I know men who feel that women shouldn't have the right to vote. These people are just holding back the rest of society. Acceptance of who were are is the only way we'll stop fighting.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by petrus4

 

Originally posted by petrus4
I've been self-censoring where this topic is concerned, and I've noticed myself doing it. I'm not going to do that any more.

Oh, goodie! I can't wait to hear how you really feel! Especially since your position is so expertly laid out and meaningful.

Pssst! Gay advocates aren't necessarily gay.

And I'm not so much a gay advocate as an equal rights advocate. But it's OK that you're not. I know it's hard for some people "allow" others to be equal to them.

Absolutely! I'm a straight guy in favor of people getting equal treatment. There's NO logical reason to prevent gays from getting legally married. More states allow relatives to get married than gays.

Originally posted by Ookie

Originally posted by AshOnMyTomatoes
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

That's really what you think, is it? Do I have to be the guy who points out interracial marriage, suffrage for women, the end of slavery, Jim Crow laws, etc?

The majority is not always right.

Why do I have to be the guy to point out that anyone who has a brain can see now that those laws were good and kept things working well? It is no coincidence that our modern society is what it is only after we repealed these laws. Their removal has done more to destroy the fabric of this nation than any other event or cause.

It was a bad idea to end slavery. The wrongs that were done to blacks could have been addressed and solved without removing the institution of slavery. It was the absolute king of all stupid ideas to end it. Before, blacks were fed, housed, clothed and made to do productive work. We still feed, house, and clothe them, but we get nothing but crime and mayhem for our efforts. How can any thinking individual see this as being good? Jim Crow laws mitigated the damage from the stupid decision to end slavery and the laws worked. You prefer the mayhem we have now?

Women voting? How has that helped anything? All I can see is we now elect presidents based on looks and not character. Women voting has given us monsters like FDR, Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. They have voted with their hearts and feelings and that is a certain way to ruin a country.

And then interracial marriage......how can a compassionate human think it is a good idea to make mulattoes? The poor creatures get to be rejected by both races. I know, I was young and stupid once and made one. The poor kid is struggling with his identity and it was wrong of me to have sex with is black mother. No person should be put through that.

I think it is clear in hindsight that we have destroyed what made this nation great by being wusses and allowing rights to people that should not have them. It has to stop. We can't fix it, it is too late to go back. But really, we do not need to make it any worse.

Are you serious or are you just trolling? Because anyone who feels that enslaving someone against their will is the right thing to do isn't showing any common sense.

reply to post by grahag


i wrote this in an earlier post but..... since people keep using the same "civil rights" rhetoric, i'll post it here


"The court decisions overturning these laws made clear that the institution of marriage shouldn't be hijacked to advance other objectives, in this case the rightly discredited idea that one "race" was superior to others. Marriage was only one tool. "

Marriage clearly has nothing to do with race.Repeatedly saying it does is an insult to the civil rights movement.As well as the likes of interracial relationships similar to my own.
This also wont garner any help from the black community neither.They are just as against gay marriage as any other

Originally posted by Ookie

Originally posted by AshOnMyTomatoes
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

That's really what you think, is it? Do I have to be the guy who points out interracial marriage, suffrage for women, the end of slavery, Jim Crow laws, etc?

The majority is not always right.

Why do I have to be the guy to point out that anyone who has a brain can see now that those laws were good and kept things working well? It is no coincidence that our modern society is what it is only after we repealed these laws. Their removal has done more to destroy the fabric of this nation than any other event or cause.

It was a bad idea to end slavery. The wrongs that were done to blacks could have been addressed and solved without removing the institution of slavery. It was the absolute king of all stupid ideas to end it. Before, blacks were fed, housed, clothed and made to do productive work. We still feed, house, and clothe them, but we get nothing but crime and mayhem for our efforts. How can any thinking individual see this as being good? Jim Crow laws mitigated the damage from the stupid decision to end slavery and the laws worked. You prefer the mayhem we have now?

Women voting? How has that helped anything? All I can see is we now elect presidents based on looks and not character. Women voting has given us monsters like FDR, Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. They have voted with their hearts and feelings and that is a certain way to ruin a country.

And then interracial marriage......how can a compassionate human think it is a good idea to make mulattoes? The poor creatures get to be rejected by both races. I know, I was young and stupid once and made one. The poor kid is struggling with his identity and it was wrong of me to have sex with is black mother. No person should be put through that.

I think it is clear in hindsight that we have destroyed what made this nation great by being wusses and allowing rights to people that should not have them. It has to stop. We can't fix it, it is too late to go back. But really, we do not need to make it any worse.

Dafuq?????
Something very effed up is going down at ATS, as of late. I can't even believe what I just read, here.
This *is* 2012, right?

Originally posted by Ookie]

Why do I have to be the guy to point out that anyone who has a brain can see now that those laws were good and kept things working well? It is no coincidence that our modern society is what it is only after we repealed these laws. Their removal has done more to destroy the fabric of this nation than any other event or cause.

Let me guess. You are a white male.

(no offense to other white males)

reply to post by Annee


Nope. I am an American Indian male. I am just smart enough to know that our grandparents weren't stupid and they had laws for a reason and those laws worked for the most part. Laws that worked for over 100 years. No, it wasn't perfect. There was nothing inherently unequal about being separate. The Supreme Court could have easily required white schools and black schools to have parity of funds and equipment. But no, they threw out the baby with the bathwater and ruined schooling for everyone. I had kids in school not too long ago. I know what they went through because blacks were allowed to be in the schools with them. There is no way that was a good idea.

I am a realist. I do not let stupid emotions control me. I can objectively see that those laws we had were mostly good. Sure, there were abuses. But that is true of any system. I do not let compassion tell me to do things that are stupid. This nation does not use it's head. Thanks to women voting it uses it's heart. That is a sure fire way to disaster.