Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Gay Marriage. I am honestly confused

page: 62
19
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by nenothtu

If gays are too weak to keep their own promises, then by all means get the State to force them to keep them.


It has nothing to do with keeping promises. Or force.


That is YOUR personal issue. There is no need to invoke the compulsion of law unless there is some compulsion determined to be necessary.

A commitment has EVERYTHING to do with keeping promises. if that commitment is not strong enough that your word is your bond, then no piece of paper is, either. State issued or not.




I have objections to gay marriage myself, so I just won't enter one.


So you are saying you are gay?



No. I have objections to gay marriage, so I won't enter one. that is the extent of my rights in the matter. What anyone else wants to do is their own business. I also have objections to Wall Street stock trading, so I don't enter into that. either. Doesn't mean I'm a misguided stock broker.



edit on 2012/9/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

You seem to be the only one STUCK on the issue of Legal Marriage.

This is not about your personal issue with Legal Marriage. Its about Legal Marriage - - - and having that right.


Baloney. people seem to be confusing one form of marriage (legal) with the entire institution. I'm making that distinction. If you can't, then that your issue, isn't it?


edit on 2012/9/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by nenothtu

If gays are too weak to keep their own promises, then by all means get the State to force them to keep them.


It has nothing to do with keeping promises. Or force.


That is YOUR personal issue. There is no need to invoke the compulsion of law unless there is some compulsion determined to be necessary.

A commitment has EVERYTHING to do with keeping promises. if that commitment is not strong enough that your word is your bond, then no piece of paper is, either. State issued or not.



I have objections to gay marriage myself, so I just won't enter one.


So you are saying you are gay?




No. I have objections to gay marriage, so I won't enter one. that is the extent of my rights in the matter. What anyone else wants to do is their own business. I also have objections to Wall Street stock trading, so I don't enter into that. either. Doesn't mean I'm a misguided stock broker.



You just need to start your own thread.

This is not about your personal issues.

edit on 5-9-2012 by Annee because: DAMN QUOTES!



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

You just need to start your own thread.

This is not about your personal issues.

edit on 5-9-2012 by Annee because: DAMN QUOTES!


Nor is it about yours.

Well, no, maybe it is. You seem to have a pathological need for legal compulsion and State insinuation into private life, which sort of IS the topic, isn't it? I reckon if I answer that, then I'm on topic, whatever your opinions of my opinions or or your attempts to insist that one sort of marriage (i.e. the state-sanctioned sort) is the ONLY kind there is. That. really, isn't much different than the hyper-Christians insisting THEIR sort of marriage is the only valid sort.



edit on 2012/9/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
This is a legitamite question, seeking legitamite discourse on the topic.

Marriage is a religious institution.


Real History of Marriage: onespiritproject.com...

(I use this particular site because I have read many sites - - and this site has compiled most info I've read on all other sites)


Something in ancient times that was a bond created before peoples God. God was the one who said (according to religions) what marriage is, and what marriage is not, what the duties of the couples were to one another, and in marrying, they agree with God that they will follow His laws in their marriage.


Basically - America is a secular government. When our forefathers created a Legal Government contract entitled Marriage License (to prevent interracial marriage) - - - they took God and church out of marriage. It may not have been their intent - - but it is the result.


My religion says I cannot marry someone who does not practice my religion, because I am a woman and someone who is not in my religion may not grant me the rights my religion affords me, and one of the things we say when we get married is that we will follow all applicable religious laws in the marriage.


Is anything stopping you from doing this?


Therefore, if I decide to marry someone who is not in my religion, why would I marry them? My religion says I cant, so how can I enter into a contract before God saying that I will follow all the applicable laws of my religion within my marriage if I am breaking those laws at the time of entering the marriage?


You have personal choice of belief and your own actions.


Therefore, if I decided to be with someone who was not a member of my religion, I might not marry at all, because it might not make a whole heck of a lot of sense to do so. The law does not say unless I personally think its ok, it says no, plain as day.


You have personal choice of belief and your own actions.


Therefore, why do gays and lesbians want to get married under a God who has already made clear His position about such a union? (obviously one of opposition to it, plain as day)


You have the right to believe in any god you choose. You have the right to follow his rules.

You do not have the right to dictate those beliefs to others and expect them to abide by them.


Why are gays and lesbians not fighting to simply have the same rights as married people under the law, without entering into a religious institution?


LEGAL Marriage is a secular government contract. It affords privileges not available by any other means. To deny these government sanctioned privileges to some is unconstitutional.


I do not get the whole wanting to marry thing at all! I get the wanting to be with someone you love, and I get its no ones business what you do in your own home so long as its not harmful to another human being....


Love does not require a government contract. Why do God believers get one?


I just do not get the whole entering into a contract before God who does not approve thing


That is your personal belief.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


actually Annee, I did originally create this thread to find out the 'why' it was so important to the gay and lesbian community. I wanted to hear from gay people and speak with them to gain understanding of the whole matter, from their perspective. As you know, there were some gay people who did speak with me, and others who helped me to understand their points of view and their perspective.

I really dont know why you want to beat a dead horse so badly.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I found this article and thought it was cool! Even though these people are Christian this can apply to anyone! I thought to share it in this thread.

ncrenegade.com...
edit on 5-9-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Annee
 


actually Annee, I did originally create this thread to find out the 'why' it was so important to the gay and lesbian community. I wanted to hear from gay people and speak with them to gain understanding of the whole matter, from their perspective. As you know, there were some gay people who did speak with me, and others who helped me to understand their points of view and their perspective.

I really dont know why you want to beat a dead horse so badly.


Beat a dead horse? Do gays have Legal Marriage yet? NO - they don't.

I'm so glad YOU are satisfied.

It has been my focus for 20+ years. I worked at a company where I was the minority being a straight female. My co-workers were my friends and opened up to me in many ways.

My mother was a polio victim in the 1952 epidemic. I experienced prejudice as a child when restaurants and other businesses refused her admittance - - just because she was disabled. "It might upset the other customers".

I was a senior in high school when the Civil Rights Act was signed. It has a major impact on me that this happened in my life time.

My first work experience at age 17 was before there were laws against sexual harassment.

When Legal Marriage for everyone becomes a Federal Right - - - then I'll pic a new focus if I'm still alive.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I found this article and thought it was cool! Even though these people are Christian this can apply to anyone! I thought to share it in this thread.

ncrenegade.com...


You forgot to mention something.

They have a choice.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Marriage only benefits a certain group of people. They are called divorce lawyers.

Couples should exist for as long as they are happy. If unhappy, move on.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThreeNF
Reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Marriage only benefits a certain group of people. They are called divorce lawyers.

Couples should exist for as long as they are happy. If unhappy, move on.



The POINT really is about CHOICE.

Everyone should have the same choices to make things EQUAL.

If everyone does not have the same choices - - it is not EQUAL.

Also - - - for common law marriage - - each state has its own laws. Beware!



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
You seem to be confusing the separation between church and state, and apparently believe there is some sort of equity between religious law and secular law. ...Just because YOU don't fall under it doesn't make it any less "real"...


Yep, you're right in that religious law and federal law are in no way "the same". But between the run on sentences and the convoluted reasoning and the apparent lack of a "point" in that last paragraph, I will still try to explain. (just promise to take your fingers out of your ears this time).

Arguments against gay marriage by anti-gay-marriage activists are based in their religious belief. However, religious law does not dictate state or federal law because: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion". People's personal religious law and state law are two separate things entirely. State (gov't) law applies to all of us. Every citizen falls under federal/state law whether they like it or not. By contrast, religious law applies to members who choose to follow said religion and said law. Those who are not part of this religious group do not have to follow bible law, nor can they be compelled to do so. The two are separate. Therefor, when religious people (in the U.S., mostly Christians) advocate basing state/federal law around their religious beliefs, they are compelling everyone else to follow their religious doctrine, shoving thier "god" and beliefs down everyone else's throat. Religious belief as justification for federal/state laws is unconstitutional (still, sometimes unjust laws are passed anyway, see, slavery, women's suffrage, etc.). I can probably guess how you, the OP and others (myself included) would feel if a Muslim group started pushing for a federal law requiring all women, whether these women are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist etc. to wear headscarfs in public (so this is how people feel when Christians do the same thing with their religious beliefs)...Religious belief should never form the basis of state/federal laws.


Originally posted by nenothtu"Bible law" doesn't apply to her, either. She's not a Christian. Just because you happen to have a hard on for Christians, don't assume everyone who disagrees with you IS one.


First of all, I never said she was a Christian so don't go putting words in my mouth. She in fact did make references to the bible and mentions believing in, at least, certain parts of it, but I'm not making any assumptions about her religion, she could subscribe to some new religion that she herself invented, it doesn't matter and it's not really relevant. I could care less what others choose to believe or do in their personal lives. What is relevant is that in the U.S. it is mostly CHRISTIANS, especially fundamentalist Christians, that are advocating against equal rights (among other contentious issues) based on their religious beliefs (and in many states have passed discriminatory laws). So you see, a lot of people get rightfully annoyed when you have a certain religious group trying to compel people of different religions and people of no religion to follow their belief system. The reason I and others keep mentioning Christians, is because in this country it IS fundamental CHRISTIANS who are advocating for state and federal laws based on their religious doctrine...and I hope I don't have to explain here as to why this is wrong / unconstitutional.


Originally posted by nenothtu
If they don't "give a hoot about religious marriage", then why do so many push for a church marriage?

Here you are wrong. Gay people are not pushing to get married in church. What gay person would want to be part of an organization that hates and discriminates against them? Go back and read the dozens upon dozens of times this has already been said. Gay people want what everyone else has. The ability to obtain a state marriage license and the 1000+ benefits and rights that come with it. They want legal equality with every other consenting heterosexual adult in this country, and that means either everyone has access to these rights via a marriage contract or the state stops granting marriage licenses to people altogether. Either everyone is allowed to get married under federal law or no one is. This has nothing to do with "church", "god", or anything else concerning religion.

CONT...



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



Originally posted by nenothtu
A)"marriage" predates religion, ... I've seen that claim made here, but nary a shred of evidence to support it. So you tell ME, Sparky, what prompted the inception of a marriage ceremony if it wasn't some sort of religion?


Hey Sparky, a marriage ceremony held in your church, and a marriage license issued by the state are two different matters entirely. Do you understand this? Really? Because it's been repeated out about a million bazillion times already. The subject is LEGAL marriage, the marriage license issued by the state is what gay people want. This has nothing to do with "church" or "god" or marriage as defined by priests. One does not need to have a marriage ceremony in a church in order to get married, ask the millions of Americans who are married and did not get married in a church, or by a priest or as part of anything having to do with religion.


Originally posted by nenothtuWhy did we stop just dragging them back to the cave by their hair and forcing them to shack up with us without benefit of the ceremony? How did ceremonies start at all if not from some sort of religious thought?

Really? Do you find it that far fetched that humanity is incapable, and nay, has made many advancements in all areas of life, science, arts, etc. without the aid of religion? You know that some people also believe that religion actually may have hampered some discoveries and the advancement/spiritual growth of humanity? (heard of the Dark Ages) Living, evolving, being a decent person, having a society, culture, etc. is not dependent upon believing in a "god" or "gods".

Did you read the link that Annee posted? Family structures, which later became the basis for what societies consider "marriage" existed long before "religion". It also says that the church did not start getting involved in marriage until the 12th century, and did not require that ceremonies be performed in a church by a priest until the "Council of Trent" in the 1500's. More importantly, the history is a lot more nuanced than anti-gay advocates like to argue. Societies concept of marriage has in fact changed and evolved over time, whereas child marriage used to be common and accepted, we have made it illegal. Whereas in some societies marriage was treated much like a property/political transaction (women and children being considered "property") we now reject this idea. Gay marriage also has roots in history and has existed for centuries. Although I understand certain people have difficulty with nuance (and some people even have trouble with facts @_@). I would suggest actually reading up on some of this material because repeating the same thing over and over again will not make it any more true or correct. Saying that marriage was invented by religion does not make it true. Actually, I'm wondering why you and others still seem to be so mis informed about the history of both marriage and religion...again, this has been explain ad nauseum throughout this thread.


Originally posted by nenothtuAnd none do. they claim THEIR ceremonies and forms, ... You ARE aware that there are more religions than Christianity, right? They've ALL got their own traditions and forms in the matter.


Well, that's the first reasonable thing you said. Aside from the fact that you are essentially repeating the same argument I just made (and then for some reason rhetorically ask me if I am AWARE of this argument that I just made...which I find quite funny for you to say, but hey, I gotta give you and the OP some slack because you guys ARE confused). So then, if you agree with me that no one group of people can claim a monopoly on marriage. Then what exactly is your beef with gays getting married?

CONT.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
A slab of paper does not a marriage make. If you doubt that, I direct your attention to current divorce statistics. that is precisely why a State license has no place at all in my own marriage. My word in the matter carries more weight...


That's just plain incorrect. It's fine if you don't want to get a state marriage license. It's fine if you don't want the benefits and rights that come with this certificate...you don't need anyone's permission to not get a marriage license. That's your choice to make of course. However, and this had been repeated literally AD NAUSEUM. A LEGAL marriage, a state sanctioned marriage and the benefits / rights / tax benefits etc. that come with it are NOT dependent upon whether or not someone is religious or gets married in a church. In fact that "slab of paper" DOES say that two people are LEGALLY married in the eyes of the law. No church ceremony is necessary. No religion necessary. No priests, shamans, or aliens from the planet Xenu are necessary. Atheists, agnostics, and the generally "non-religious/non-practicing" get married all the time...religion does not inform or define their marriage. Go ask them. In fact, it's already been pointed out several times in this very thread! Furthermore, citing divorce statistics as a reason why "a slab of paper does not a marriage make" is just illogical. Fact is, to be legally married one simply needs to go down to the clerks office and obtain a marriage license, this, so called "slab of paper", a contract between two consenting adults.


Originally posted by nenothtu
That remains to be seen, since it has not yet been done, but for now I'll agree with you on that - tentatively.

Actually, we can just look towards Canada and other countries that have been issuing licenses to gay people. California also issued marriage licenses for a time and I did not hear of any instances of religious people's rights being denied as a result of gay people getting married there. However myself, and I'm sure others here, are open to being proved wrong if the evidence does exist.


Originally posted by nenothtuThe OP SUPPORTS gay marriage - secularly. She is looking for a reason WHY she should support it.

I did not see in the original post where she says she supports gay marriage. She said she was for "equal rights" but then goes on to imply that gays should not be allowed to marry. (and actually, that would mean she is not really for equal rights). Besides, I find this statement here does not make a lot of sense. Try, some simple word substitution: "The OP supports gun rights. She is looking for a reason WHY she should support gun rights". One does not follow the other logically. Unless you are implying that she is pro gay marriage but she just doesn't know WHY she is pro gay marriage, in which case no wonder she is confused.


Originally posted by nenothtuI think your hatred of Christians has blinded you to any attempts to win friends and influence people, even among non-Christians.

I think your hatred of Polar Bears has blinded you to any attempts to win friendship with Polar Bears, even among non-Polar Bears. And why do you hate peanut butter so much and why can't you stop sucking your moms toes? Oh wait, did you say you were a member of the mom-toe-sucking church? Because I just kinda assumed that.

[this thread should come with a warning for head injury, via "head meet wall" - pound. pound. pound." ... and sorry for long posts...some of this was just so frustrating I just had to respond]



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by meeneecat
 


question

do you believe there is freedom of religion in this country?



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Yes, freedom of religion is protected under the constitution...technically it's "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion" (freedom of religion also includes the freedom not to practice religion if one so chooses.) Are you implying that if gays were allowed to marry than other people would be denied freedom of religion? If so, how are they denied their freedom of religion.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by meeneecat
 


I am not discussing gay marriage at the moment, Only the one question in a very singular way. Freedom of Religion.

Yet....

Where it concerns marriage, religious people are prevented legally from excersising that freedom... did you know that?



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


What freedom is your marriage lacking? What is it that restricts you and your marriage personally? How would your marriage be different if your freedom of religion was being practiced in full?



edit on 5-9-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I found this article and thought it was cool! Even though these people are Christian this can apply to anyone! I thought to share it in this thread.

ncrenegade.com...


You forgot to mention something.

They have a choice.


Didn't read the article, did you? They didn't ask for State permission, so everyone else has the same choice they had.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Gay marriage will be the stepping stone to pedophilia and bestiality marriages





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join