Gay marriage.so what?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
I don't get the whole gay marriage debate. Why? Marriage to me is a religious vow, meant to sutain and hold together a family. It just doesn't make sense. Is it for health insurance? Not that long ago Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder. This is crazy.




posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   

There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law.


www.hrc.org...



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


being a women I probably use 5 so whats the big deal the sanctity of the family?



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrieBird
reply to post by Annee
 


being a women I probably use 5 so whats the big deal the sanctity of the family?


Marriage is a Civil Right that belongs to everyone.

I really don't care what your personal issues are.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I am a heterosexual, and I think that if you truly love someone and want to spend the rest of your life with them, the commitment is important. I know a lesbian couple that buts a heterosexual couple to shame with their amount of kindness and considerations for one another. They truly work as a team to make"their" lives better.....That is more then I can say for my last two Husbands.
edit on 23-10-2012 by zbeliever because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


No personal issues just an observation. Gay marriage is just noise.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrieBird
reply to post by Annee
 


No personal issues just an observation. Gay marriage is just noise.


You asked a question. I answered it. YOU refuse to accept it. Which means you have personal issues with it.

Here is your answer again.


There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law.

www.hrc.org...



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
One more point I'd like to point out.... Heterosexual marriages in our country don't seem to be working out; according to the divorice rate...We need to allow someone else take a go at it....I support Gay Marriage. I bet their weddings are a great time, too.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
This is now the only response I have to anything regarding 'marriage'

Sexual Orientation is not a status. It should not be treated as a status, nor should it be involved in a conversation regarding rights.

The problem is simple. A group of people, are ineligible to participate in a government program.

A program which enables them to take advantage of certain services and financial savings, for attempting to work as a team.

The 'Family Unit" so to speak. The family unit is no longer traditional and we must stop attempting to return to this 1950's nuclear mentality. What we must focus on are healthy families, not traditional ones, or culturally accepted ones.

The only logical and moral action, is to afford the right to any legal, consenting "Team" to participate in this program for the betterment of their family unit.

The law actually requires this as one of it's basic tenants.

~Tenth



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I am kind of fond the way Canada handles the marriage equality issue by stating ALL marriages are civil and leave the religious part to individual couples. Fair and Fair.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MonkeyFishFrog
 


I like that I really think its a non issue that takes up way to much space in the national dialogue



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BrieBird
 


I agree. It was not even put to a referendum because allowing the majority to vote for a minority went against the Charter of Rights & Freedoms.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MonkeyFishFrog
I am kind of fond the way Canada handles the marriage equality issue by stating ALL marriages are civil and leave the religious part to individual couples. Fair and Fair.


All Legal Government Marriage in the USA are Civil Marriages.

There is no god in the Legal Marriage Certificate / License.

Homosexuals are denied this Legal Government Marriage License.

edit on 23-10-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I'm on your page. Two people elect to make a legally binding vow toward each other, and the gender of the two should not matter, imo. Married folk enjoy certain tax, insurance and other benefits. If two people choose to be untied, let it be so -- non of my business................ I'm just glad -- once again -- that two people feel that strongly as to make a legal (and sometimes moral/religious) vow.

Let it be so written. Finally. At last.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


That's good to know. I was unaware of how marriage was classified in America. Are marriage laws decided on a state-by-state basis or can the federal government make ultimate decisions? I have heard that one of the difficulties to passing same sex marriage is that it is up to individual states to make the decision and some have made changes to make it even harder in the future to try and pass it.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by MonkeyFishFrog
reply to post by Annee
 


That's good to know. I was unaware of how marriage was classified in America. Are marriage laws decided on a state-by-state basis or can the federal government make ultimate decisions? I have heard that one of the difficulties to passing same sex marriage is that it is up to individual states to make the decision and some have made changes to make it even harder in the future to try and pass it.


Its kind of a tricky complicate question and a tricky complicated answer. Mostly based in discrimination.

In America predominately state marriage laws/licenses were enacted to make interracial marriage illegal.

The Bush administration enacted DOMA - - defense of marriage act.

The thing is - - anyone can marry. If you want a religious wedding - get married in your church.

But do you see any of those religious people giving up their Legal Government Marriage License?

This is about equal Civil Rights on a Federal Level.


Better if you read the links I've provided.

law2.umkc.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Thanks to everyone that participated in this thread. You have given me many answers and rebuttals when this topic comes up. Much love to everyone willing to fight for others liberties.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
It should be illegal for one reason, it has opened the door for gays to adopt and raise children. Children should not be exposed to that kind of perversion. If you think a heterosexual child's psyche will not be damaged by the fact that his two dad's are in the other room buggering each other, then think again. God forbid he walks in on them.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by kingkool
It should be illegal for one reason, it has opened the door for gays to adopt and raise children. Children should not be exposed to that kind of perversion. If you think a heterosexual child's psyche will not be damaged by the fact that his two dad's are in the other room buggering each other, then think again. God forbid he walks in on them.


Why gay parents may be the best parents: www.livescience.com...

The Kids Are All Right: Gay Parents Raising Children: www.huffingtonpost.com...

Gay Parent Magazine: www.gayparentmag.com...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The biggest problem in same sex parenting comes from the outside. Mostly from religious groups.

Since Legal Marriage is a Civil Right - - - religion/religious belief should have no input.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Marriage should be between individuals. The Government needs to butt out.

The laws that are being considered and those that are enacted have no relevance to me, with the exception that the Gov't is now telling me what to think. Not going to happen.

Companies should not have to pay family healthcare benifits, but rather a livable wage so that the family can afford insurance.

To me, this is a non-issue.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join