Let's Revoke The Rights and Protections Awarded to Heterosexual Married Couples

page: 5
29
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Are all FAR more important topics than gay marriage. Don't try and argue they aren't.


You are not gay.

You have Equality.


I'm a happilly married GAY man with 4 kids.

Try again.

~Tenth


That sounds really misleading.

I have seen no evidence that men can bear children.
You must mean you had 4 children with a woman, and then later married a man.

I realize you probably did not mean to infer such a silly notion but I wonder why you would mention these two facts right there in the same statement?

In my pursuit of equality I have the duty of not only questioning and criticizing the motives and beliefs of one side of the issue, but also questioning and criticizing the other side of the issue as well.

In my assessment it appears that people are so emotionally invested into this topic that they are willing to bend things a bit to paint unrealistic pictures of how things actually work in practical reality. Both sides are quite guilty of this.

Although I doubt you will heed my advice, I would suggest taking a less misleading approach, and although you stated two separate facts, they were conjoined in such a manner that unrealistic appraisals would result.




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Jeremiah65
 





If you were a real "Libertarian"...you would not try to take freedom away from someone else


What freedom am I trying to take away from others? I don't recall stating that all marriage should be abolished. Do you even see the irony in your post? Look at how outraged you are over the mere thought of heterosexuals being denied the rights and privileges awarded them by the federal government, yet somehow it is okay that some get to enjoy that and not others?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   


So you don't believe in equal treatment? It's ok for same sex couples to get shafted, but don't you dare touch my rights? Seems kind of hypocritical doesn't it?
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 

What is hypocritical is the idea of using the gov't to interject on what has been a religious institution. As if the gov't doesn't have enough on it's plate like running a country! So a small percentage of the population wants something the larger percentage doesn't want to share. Sounds like high school all over again. I don't see any reason why same sex marriages should not be given the same rights in a "marriage" as a hetro couple. But this crying out for it to be marriage needs to be dropped. Give it a title that is not mocking and give it respect but don't call it marriage. The fact that you need to pay to play so to speak shows that gov't institutions only see it as a revenue generator. Considering the overabundance of lawyers as politicians just cements that view in my mind. If the language used by the gay community was changed in their quest for equality maybe things would be different. Your not going to threaten marriage traditionalists if you term it different. Not all things are going to be cohesive and equal, sometimes you need to settle for separate but equal. Kind of like restrooms.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by freemarketsocialist
 



But I may have consent to euthanize an individual. That does not make it right. Consent and desire to not equal a 'right'.


If the person you are euthanizing wanted the proceedure and agreed to it. How is it not their right, to choose when they end their lives?


Laws make a society.

Asking the government is asking the people. If the people are against euphanasia then euphenasia is wrong. There is no 'right'. People do not have 'rights'.


This is a fallacy. This allows the majority to dicriminate on the minority. If the majority tomorrow device that slavery should be brought back, but only for kids aged 7 to 15. Would that be right? Because the peopel demanded it?

That's a twisted world view.

There should be NO laws that govern a person's ability to make decisions that do not effect others.

~Tenth



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Oh it's just normally what I state in the gay topics, cause the kids thing always comes up.


That's my bad actually, the kids part is not actually necessary. I'll edit that now.

Just FTR, 3 are adopted the 1st was born from a surrogate, my best friend actually.

As for the whole equality issue;

Both sides of the argument are twisted extremists Muzzle. Those at the helm of the "equal rights" movement as well as those who oppose it.

The vast majority of people don't care. But those that do care make a bunch of money off caring. So the issue persists.

~Tenth
edit on 9/7/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

What you have is a minority wanting to have the same rights and protections as the democratically recognized majority. You can't have that.


Yes you can.

America is not a democracy - - it is a Republic that guarantees protection and equality for minorities.


Actually since you support marriage licensing, this means you refuse to grant benefits to single people while granting benefits to those who are married. This is the essence of discrimination and catering to favored constituents while ignoring or punishing those who are not applicable to such labeling.

You are mixing tyranny and liberty into one backwards belief system. You cannot enforce liberty in tyrannical manners, it isn't liberty anymore it's just tyranny.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by watchesfromwall
 


I see. I misunderstood you. We are of the same thought on this.



One Q: How is your woman your wife if you aren't married?


I apologize if I somehow gave out the impression that I'm not married. I'm married to a wonderful woman. I meant that marrying her is not what makes her know that I love her.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

What you have is a minority wanting to have the same rights and protections as the democratically recognized majority. You can't have that.


Yes you can.

America is not a democracy - - it is a Republic that guarantees protection and equality for minorities.


This is for you


Why do people not get that? In a pure democracy, the mob rules...that is all fine and dandy when you are part of the mob...but say you have a personal issue that separates you from the mob....should your voice and opinion be silenced or overruled?...NO! That is why we are a Republic....the morons that think we are a democracy need to go back to 6th grade and pay attention this time. A Republic is "the rule of law"...it doesn't matter if it is 1,000 or 100 or one...in a Republic, your voice is heard...regardless how few the numbers...and the lovers of the mob do not understand this until they are the ones on the wrong side of the mob....

The mob DOES NOT rule in a Republic...the Mob ruled In the Soviet Union and Germany...how does that make you feel now? It should make you feel like sh!t....which is what that position is....



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by hangedman13
 


Except that same sex unions are not recognized by the federal government, 'marriage' is. I doubt anyone would run around crying about the word if the same rights and privileges were awarded to both, they are not and that is the heart of the issue.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by Jeremiah65
 





If you were a real "Libertarian"...you would not try to take freedom away from someone else


What freedom am I trying to take away from others? I don't recall stating that all marriage should be abolished. Do you even see the irony in your post? Look at how outraged you are over the mere thought of heterosexuals being denied the rights and privileges awarded them by the federal government, yet somehow it is okay that some get to enjoy that and not others?


I have been arguing this one for quite a long time.
I will assure you that you will face hard-line opposition from every section of society including the so called libertarians who are equally as brainwashed as everyone else into false dichotomies.

We have been subtly coerced and led into the false belief that government licensing equates to a "right", when in reality and all available legal texts, licensing is a privilege that is granted by the state and can be withheld at any time they deem necessary.

Do not allow their misunderstandings of liberty or legal terminology to dissuade you from your realizations of truth and justice.
It is you who have gained an intimate understanding of what is actually going on here, as is apparent from the tonality and disposition of your comments.

Keep fighting for the truth, we will eventually win and abolish this discriminatory system.

And as a big bonus, when we do abolish this system, the whole "gay marriage" issue will evaporate as a result, among many other glaring problems that the current system entails. And that will free up our time to discuss more pressing matters such as infrastructure or geo-politics.

Abolish discrimination in marriage, abolish licensing.
edit on 7-9-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


I do not understand you Kali....what do you want? Do not speak in poorly stated metaphors, just say it...you want a tax credit for eating carpet? what are you talking about? I will pul the plug and speak candidly...if you want a tax credit for beng gay....fine...as libertarian...I do not care....you should get all the same benefits of a heterosexual union...Does that make you feel better now? Does that make you feel kinda stupid for wanting to crush everyone because you cannot have your way? Stop being a 12 year old child....change takes time and change is in the air....if you continue to try to hurt us to get what you want...I might open season....leave me alone....I am not in this fight but I will support you...until you try to [snip] me...then it's game on...
edit on 7/9/12 by masqua because: Censor circumvention



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by hangedman13
 


Except that same sex unions are not recognized by the federal government, 'marriage' is. I doubt anyone would run around crying about the word if the same rights and privileges were awarded to both, they are not and that is the heart of the issue.


It comes as no surprise because historically the practice of dealing out marriage licenses has always served the purpose of discrimination in the event it is not awarded.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
reply to post by Kali74
 


I do not understand you Kali....what do you want? Do not speak in poorly stated metaphors, just say it...you want a tax credit for eating carpet? what are you talking about? I will pul the plug and speak candidly...if you want a tax credit for beng gay....fine...as libertarian...I do not care....you should get all the same benefits of a heterosexual union...Does that make you feel better now? Does that make you feel kinda stupid for wanting to crush everyone because you cannot have your way? Stop being a 12 year old child....change takes time and change is in the air....if you continue to try to hurt us to get what you want...I might open season....leave me alone....I am not in this fight but I will support you...until you try to F#@& me...then it's game on...


If you were fully 'libertarian' in philosophy than you would be against all of these illegitimate forms of taxation especially the IRS system.

Marriage licensing serves no real purpose in a free society where illegitimate forms of wage taxation are abolished.

So abolish these licenses AND abolish the Federal Reserve taxation system.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


It's ironic that people don't understand that everytime you give somebody a 'right', you also create the ability of a governing body to remove said right from you, at any time.

~Tenth



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Rights are naturally endowed capabilities and can not be given to anyone by a state just because they sign a contract or jump over a broom or get rice thrown in your face.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by zonetripper2065
 





If a single male can get buy with it out two MEN can get by better. Do they really want the problems. Like who is awarded everything if they get a divorce?


If I understand what that segment of the population is asking for, then yes I think they want the protections offered there as well. Having tossed more than one woman out, who I was simply living with, I can say it's more difficult to divide the assets.
edit on 7-9-2012 by tamusan because: I've divorced more than one woman as well.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
Same-sex marriage does have an effect upon everyone. For one it expands the definition of marriage, thus altering our understanding of the word and thus changing our language.


Language has been evolving for thousands of years, as has the meaning of words. Why should it stop now?



Second it solidifies the acceptance of sodomite lifestyles as equal to that of heterosexuals, which are not equal; sodomy is unnatural and immoral - period.


So why do heterosexuals also engage in the activity?



And third it allows for the legal right of sodomites to raise children, which is to inflict the acknowledgement of perversion and degeneracy at a young age; forever corrupting innocent people who should not even be exposed to such concepts.


Because what - the heterosexual lifestyle is so much better? Because people in heterosexual lifestyles are complete paragons of virtue all the time? Because no kid in a heterosexual family has ever seen their parents have sex, fight, be abusive towards each other etc - because what? thats the only thing that gay people do?

Seriously? I mean... seriously?

Sorry and all that, but this is the modern world.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
A marriage should be in a church and have nothing to do with gov.
The government should recognize unions of two people with no definitions of sex or race only they should be of legal age and of human decent.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 





This is a fallacy. This allows the majority to dicriminate on the minority. If the majority tomorrow device that slavery should be brought back, but only for kids aged 7 to 15. Would that be right? Because the peopel demanded it?


Morals and ethics are just an invention or our imagination.

'This is why morals and ethics cannot be applied to culture.

If the majority of a population believe that children should be slaves from 7 to 15 then it is 'right'.

Homosexuality is illegal in a place like Iran. That is up to them.

Capital Punishment is legal in the United States. That is up to them.

There is no right or wrong. There is no good or bad.

edit- And its not really the majority that directs things. It is the strong. A mojority must be achieved but the strong dictate the direction.

Affirmative action and 'equal rights' are destroying societies.
edit on 7-9-2012 by freemarketsocialist because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Jeremiah65
 




I do not understand you Kali....what do you want?


Liberty. Non-discrimination. I want my fellow citizens to not have to pay thousands of dollars for the right to be legally next of kin regardless of their gender or their partners gender. I think it's stupid to ask the government for permission to partner and even more stupid that the government can say yes to some people and no to others.


Do not speak in poorly stated metaphors, just say it...you want a tax credit for eating carpet?


I'm not gay. But I think those of my friends who are lesbians should get a tax credit for doing such if my straight male friends do. Or neither should.

And no, I don't feel stupid at all... Can you legibly tell me why I should feel stupid?





top topics
 
29
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join