Gay Marriage. I am honestly confused

page: 69
19
<< 66  67  68    70 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strainz
Give the civil union the same benefits and wallah, same same, you can keep on practicing your religion whatever it is and gain the benefits of legal marriage.


Or, how about getting rid of civil unions, and instead, hand out marriage licenses to same sex unions - and wallah, everyone can keep practicing their religion whatever it is and gain the benefits of legal marriage. It's just as simple as your suggestion, AND its even more same, same.


If all it takes is to enable the same rights as marriage through a tittle like "Civil Union" why wouldn't you?


All it takes to enable the same rights is to issue the same license for all. It doesn't get any easier than that.
edit on 24-9-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strainz

Unfortunately marriage is a religious/biological term and its meaning would have to be changed for it to accurately apply to same sex couples, this is a fact, so it IS religion and the definition of the word that is stopping the RIGHTS and BENEFITS to use that TERM to gain these RIGHTS and BENEFITS, so for the love of your god, sidestep the formality and gain your benefits without the grief of fighting a thousand year old plus religion.

That being said I am in support for everyone to have the same rights no matter your religion, sexuality or disposition. So lets stop farting around and get it done. Just to clarify you don't call a heterosexual person a gay person because the definition is wrong.

Change the meaning of the word first maybe that will help, and then you wouldn't have to change the titles of those who use the word for its correct meaning. I understand what your trying to say. I love you.



mar·riage/ˈmarij/ Noun: A) The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife. B) A relationship between married people or the period for which it lasts.
edit on 24-9-2012 by Strainz because: (no reason given)


The meaning has already changed, as there are legal gay marriages allowed in some U.S. states, and in several countries. Your dictionary needs to be updated.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I stand corrected, then it is religion that is stopping gay marriage. I generally follow the Oxford dictionary and instead of changing the meaning of marriage it added "gay marriage" with its relative meaning.
edit on 24-9-2012 by Strainz because: Oxford Dictionary



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
There are differences between a civil union and a marriage. Marriage is protected on the federal level. Civil unions are protected on the state level, and often the state level will not have the federal benefits of marriage.

According to a 1997 GAO report, civil marriage brings with it at least 1.138 legal protections and
responsibilities from the federal government, including the right to take leave from work to care for a
family member, the right to sponsor a spouse for immigration purposes, and Social Security survivor
benefits that can make a difference between old age in poverty and old age in security. Civil unions bring none of these critical legal protections.

Here is the report, in PDF format:

www.marriagedebate.com...

edit on 24-9-2012 by EvilSadamClone because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strainz
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


I stand corrected, then it is religion that is stopping gay marriage.


Primarily. There are also non-believers and even some gay's who do not support Marriage Equality.

Marriage Equality is the correct term. It's not really "gay" marriage.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


true America is a secular country, but marriage as an institution is another control mechanism, and it is not a right...it is another in the long list of things that have been passed off as rights to confuse people and keep them from realizing what their true rights really are...issues to sidetrack people...

as far as federal trumping states rights...wrong again, that is a fallacy they try to push on us by mandating things federally, but in reality, states rights trump federal, and it is clear in the fact that gay marriage has been an issue tackled at the state level, dont believe that? well then, why do some states say it is legal, while others do not?

each state has the right to self determination absent federal interference, just as each individual should have the right to self determination absent federal interference, but unfortunately, the lines have been blurred on this so the federal government uses this confusion to force everyone into their way of doing things...

this is how they have circumvented the constitution with convoluted/complicated schemes to give the illusion of equality...in reality if we look at the bill of rights it says nothing about gay marriage specifically, but the pursuit of happiness covers this quite adequately...we dont need more legislation to prove a point...instead we need less government regulation of people, so they can determine their own lives...

one of the checks in place that is resident in states rights is the fact that if you do not like the policies of one state, you can always move to one that supports your views, this used to be a governing factor, which forced states to reconsider their policies if they wanted to keep constituents and a strong economy, but if things are federally mandated, this dynamic is lost and people no longer have any choice...that is not freedom...that is not equality, that is fascism...

i dont care what color it is painted as, including the rainbow, it is fascism plain and simple, and our government is not supposed to be totalitarian, but wishing legislation like this were forced across the board is one more step towards true dictatorship...

gays would not like it if they were forced into legislation the other way around...so why would they want it forced unilaterally the other way? dont they see the danger in buying into this shell game?

i say let it play out on the state level, that way if it really is beneficial for all the states to follow suit, then they eventually will, but forcing it across the board does not give each state the right to figure out how they can best accommodate their citizens...

one size does not fit all...



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by studythem1
reply to post by Annee
 


true America is a secular country, but marriage as an institution is another control mechanism, and it is not a right...it is another in the long list of things that have been passed off as rights to confuse people and keep them from realizing what their true rights really are...issues to sidetrack people...

as far as federal trumping states rights...wrong again, that is a fallacy they try to push on us by mandating things federally, but in reality, states rights trump federal, and it is clear in the fact that gay marriage has been an issue tackled at the state level, dont believe that? well then, why do some states say it is legal, while others do not?


I am not interested in these conspiracy theories. Or ideologies of how you think things should be.

We are a secular country.

What we have TODAY - - RIGHT NOW - - - is a Legal government contract entitled Marriage License - - - which is a civil right - - and discriminatory in excluding a minority group.

The Civil Rights act is Federal - - so is the Disability Act - - Fair Housing Act - - etc. They all trump state rights.

States were given marriage rights purely for discriminatory purpose. To prevent undesirables from being part of their community.

Marriage Equality is heading toward the Supreme Court. It will someday be a Federal Equality.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I have one question, who gave the federal and states workers or their representatives the right to govern peoples life's as if they are somehow more "elite", or to put it simply, who made them the owners of humanity, their decision making and overall our life style?



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


In America, it's a government for the people and by the people.

At least, it's supposed to be that way.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


Exactly, supposed to be, people gave these criminals the power by submitting to their statutes just because it's comfortable for others to tell you what to do and think instead of doing it our self's naturally like we did for thousands of years without these gangsters. I just don't understand how people live their life's thinking it is okay for others to govern their beliefs and practices, the church is there to accommodate the people's needs and so are the politicians and so forth, but it's not like that, and people are fighting for these guys, i mean they are actually defending the people that branded and own them, its weird to say the least.

It is no ones right to tell gay's they cannot marry just because the person in charge of that decision does not believe in gay marriage, they are there to represent the people, not the other way around, that's what the government was designed for in the first place.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


conspiracy theory? nope just simple historical fact...and that historical fact has been muddied by the confusing politics and corruption that pervade throughout the government...

that corruption did not just disappear when Obama became president, its even more entrenched now...

do a complete study on how we got to this point...and you will see how screwed we all are...

its funny how people are led to believe that it is a right to be taxed, a right to be pigeon holed, counted, enslaved further, controlled, and leveraged...

here is a list of things that are not rights, but people are led to believe are rights:

its a right to have a computer...its a right to have the government force their kind of education on people...its a right to get free money and abuse the welfare system...its a right for a murderer to get a psychiatrist to we can all have a pity party about how rough their life was and that is what made them kill...its a right to have insurance...its a right to be entitled to all sorts of things that used to be earned...

well guess what, people are going to be in for a rude awakening when they find they no longer really have any rights at all, but privileges, which is really what the whole marriage equality thing boils down to in the eyes of politicians anyway...they think they have the right to pass out privileges, and then take them away...what are we children?

i say if people really want to be happy, they dont need a piece of paper or a law to do it...just do it...

that is a right...

giving a government further control over who fits what criteria is not a right...thats giving them up...

all im saying is that the whole thing needs to be looked at closer before agreeing to something that sounds good, but is a huge trap...

if we really want to have equality for all across the board, then how about repealing the restrictions that were originally imposed instead of creating new restrictions or adding new groups of people to them?



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by studythem1
reply to post by Annee
 


conspiracy theory? nope just simple historical fact...and that historical fact has been muddied by the confusing politics and corruption that pervade throughout the government...


I've had it with all the excuses - conspiracies - and attempted diversions.

We have TODAY - RIGHT NOW - - - Legal Government Marriage. That's pretty damn simple.

Marriage Equality is about it being available for everyone. That's also pretty damn simple.

I am not interested in anything other than Full Legal Marriage Equality.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by Annee
 


I have one question, who gave the federal and states workers or their representatives the right to govern peoples life's as if they are somehow more "elite", or to put it simply, who made them the owners of humanity, their decision making and overall our life style?


This is about Equality.

A minority group having the same Civil Right as everyone else.

I'm not interested in your attempt of diversion to make it about anything else.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
There really isn't an argument - legalise marriage between same sex couples on a national level and get it over with. Government officials and religious to hate people need to put their personal beliefs aside and accept equality, like most of the religions say to do.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Dear
Annee

I am not making it about anything else, who governs Equality? and why is someone governing Equality in the first place? Who labeled these people as a minority, and who took the Civil Rights away from these people?





edit on 25-9-2012 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
Dear
Annee

I am not making it about anything else, who governs Equality? and why is someone governing Equality in the first place? Who labeled these people as a minority, and who took the Civil Rights away from these people?



Yes you are. I am not asking Why or Who.

I am fully aware of how Legal Marriage License came about in this country. It is irrelevant.

Straights have it - - Gays don't. Simple.

edit on 25-9-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strainz
There really isn't an argument - legalise marriage between same sex couples on a national level and get it over with. Government officials and religious to hate people need to put their personal beliefs aside and accept equality, like most of the religions say to do.


YES!

It's that simple.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
for Washington...marriage equality is about revenue...see politicians do not support something unless there is some sort of payoff for them or for government to cash in on...and like it or not, gay people who are in committed relationships tend to be much better off financially than most straight people...so i think it really does explain why they want to make it a rights issue, and play off of peoples emotions about it...to divert people from the truth, that they want to tap into all that gay money that they cannot get their grubby hands on under the current laws...but play off of peoples emotions and make them think they are getting what they want, and wham...hit them with all kinds of new taxes and fees that go with being married in the official sense...

i still think it should be on an individual basis, let people do the work of filling out the proper forms to get their legal marriage if they want, but that can be done without adding any law, just changing the definitions of already existing ones and removing the restrictions already in place...

its called amending...

but mark my words, that with new laws...there is going to be new B*llS#!+...



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by studythem1
for Washington...marriage equality is about revenue...



I don't care.

When gays can marry - - then we'll have Marriage Equality.

Maybe you should start your own thread - - - instead of trying to derail this one.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   
not trying to derail anything...but what i do think is a right, is for people to know the truth about things and then be aware enough to make better decisions...

there is a solution that doesn't involve a back door for people to get a deal they didn't bargain for, but it takes informed people for that to come to fruition...

im not contesting marriage equality, but i am contesting the solutions that are handed to us, especially when the politicians involved tell us to ignore the fine print...

the same type of thing happened when the union freed the slaves...it was an equality issue, at least thats what they said, but the result was that everyone else was shoved down to the level of slaves...economically and status wise, it was just a shell game of shuffling the terminology, but the result devastated the rights of all citizens, and in reality made the average person impotent politically...and that opened the door to all kinds of things that put the citizen at a disadvantage...in short its one huge mess...

seems like you dont want to think about the consequences of what politicians think marriage equality should be...but please be aware of what else they want to sneak in along with it...and i can guarantee they do just exactly that in every case of legislation...

and speaking of derailing, its only fair, but it seems like that was your goal in this thread, to derail the OP...not saying i agree with their point of view, but you did sort of hijack the thread a bit...

what happened to debate? trying to find out what the truth is?
edit on 26-9-2012 by studythem1 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 66  67  68    70 >>

log in

join