Minnesota Becomes the Twelfth State to Sanction Same-Sex Marriage

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mindlessbrainpower89

Why do you think Jews where Kippahs on their heads? It shows their marriage with G-d and reminds them that there is a G-d above.


Hang on a minute here.....

Kippahs are worn by men and you are saying that they wear them to show their marriage to God. God is a dude , Jesus reaffirmed this when he taught us to call him father....

This would mean that Jews believe in the ultimate form of gay marriage - the men are all marrying a male God!

I can go with the brides of Christ thing with nuns, but you have just shot your own argument down in flames there.




posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

I dont think the government would be messing with it if there wasn't demand
edit on 19-6-2013 by SearchLightsInc because: (no reason given)


That's interesting. So government never gets involved in something unless people want it to?


In this case, the people are demanding they do - which the government are responding to.


Even if that were true should popular demand dictate how others live their lives?


No im sure they like to get involved in things against the peoples wishes - Like going to war when everyone says NOOOO.


Other people are not your property.


I never insinuated they were



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
I dont think the government would be messing with it if there wasn't demand
edit on 19-6-2013 by SearchLightsInc because: (no reason given)

Government control was instituted long before your government was a twinkle in the eye of another country that didn't even exist when the marriage was bastardized.

So, please enlighten us as to what 'demand' constituted government intrusion into a pure private matter?


Basically, religions are to slack to realise that people of the same gender fall in love and want that love to be recognised under the eyes of the law that they are in a relationship equivalent to that of marriage.
Due to this failing to recognise a natural human occurrence, people have decided the government needs to step in and do something right for a change - Correct the inequality in society.
The government is running this country, not religion. They have the right to dispense marriage as they are the ones who have actual use for it, so it makes much more sense really.

So yes, people are demanding that political arms of states begin changing their laws. More to a point, the national government should be making it mandatory that all states allow gay marriage for the simple fact that its not stepping on anyone's freedom or devaluing marriage in anyway.

Only if they were forcing religious institutions to perform these marriages would they be at fault.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Condragulations Minnesota!

California is failing girl!



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


In this case? As in laying their order and regs over more people?

They wouldnt be involvrd in "this case" if they werent involved in marriage at all.

Which is my whole point.

Government wouldnt have had to declare an end to slavery if government hadnt sanctioned it in the first place.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


In this case? As in laying their order and regs over more people?

They wouldnt be involvrd in "this case" if they werent involved in marriage at all.

Which is my whole point.

Government wouldnt have had to declare an end to slavery if government hadnt sanctioned it in the first place.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Well, were at this point in history where they ARE involved and it seems that people WANT them involved in this, right or wrong, this is currently how it stands.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Government wouldnt have had to declare an end to slavery if government hadnt sanctioned it in the first place.


Whether the government should be involved in marriage at all, is a separate argument from Equal Rights for All.

Right now a minority group does not have the same rights as everyone else.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Well, were at this point in history where they ARE involved and it seems that people WANT them involved in this, right or wrong, this is currently how it stands.


And supporting it doesnt help.

Just because Steve has always beaten his wife Steve should continue to beat his wife?

It's okay if we get Steve to beat everyones wife equally? Maybe just switch from using his fists to using something softer like a paddle?

How about we get Steve to stop beating his wife?



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Government wouldnt have had to declare an end to slavery if government hadnt sanctioned it in the first place.


Whether the government should be involved in marriage at all, is a separate argument from Equal Rights for All.

Right now a minority group does not have the same rights as everyone else.


It's the very same argument. We can get everyone the same rights one of two ways:

1)increase government interference in the personal lives of people

or

2)stop government interference in the personal lives of people.

Pains me to see us sitting on the precipice of real change for the better and all the fools can do is push further in the wrong direction.

Government involvement here is what is preventing the "equal rights" in the first place.
edit on 20-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by billdadobbie
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


i do not give a dam either way if someone is straight or gay as long as they do not bother me but i find it weird that at the same time world wide that this is getting pushed through the law and question what next ??


Worldwide? Like in Russia where they have been rolling BACK equality laws, deeming homosexuality almost illegal, and allowing violence against GLBT people to go unreported and unpunished?

Or how about in African nations where homosexual relationships are so taboo that men and women are killed in the street?

How about JAMAICA (yes, that beautiful country) where gay people can be executed in the street and no one is arrested for it?

How about Iran, a regime that likes to execute young men for being gay by stringing them up on rope in the town square for all to see?

How about North Korea, where even the idea of discussing consensual sex between men and women is a taboo, let alone same sex intimacy.

Or how about Poland, where there is a veneer of democracy but millions of gay people still have to live in hiding because Nazi groups would firebomb their homes and no one would even investigate it?

How about...

If you think gay marriage law is being passed all over the world, then you need to get off of this forum and actually start reading, educating yourself and getting in touch with the real world around you.

The only reason these equality laws are finally being passed in our countries is because we are simply better than those hellhole countries where some are more equal than others.

You should be damned proud your country is FINALLY coming out of the dark ages and catching up. It's embarrassing to see Americans claiming the USA is the "best country in the world" when you still don't treat people equally.
edit on 20-6-2013 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Government wouldnt have had to declare an end to slavery if government hadnt sanctioned it in the first place.


Whether the government should be involved in marriage at all, is a separate argument from Equal Rights for All.

Right now a minority group does not have the same rights as everyone else.


It's the very same argument. We can get everyone the same rights one of two ways:



NO it isn't.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Well, were at this point in history where they ARE involved and it seems that people WANT them involved in this, right or wrong, this is currently how it stands.


And supporting it doesnt help.

Just because Steve has always beaten his wife Steve should continue to beat his wife?

It's okay if we get Steve to beat everyones wife equally? Maybe just switch from using his fists to using something softer like a paddle?

How about we get Steve to stop beating his wife?


You are completely missing the point obviously.

The government are having to intervene because religions are never going to allow same sex marriage off their own back. Its simple really, government is basically picking up the slack of religious institutions.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

NO it isn't.



Well, gee. That's airtight reasoning right there.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

The government are having to intervene because religions are never going to allow same sex marriage off their own back. Its simple really, government is basically picking up the slack of religious institutions.


Wait. Are you saying all the gay Catholics cant get married in a Catholic ceremony and it's governments job to force the Catholics to perform the ceremony?

You do realize that even in states which recognize gay marriage as another extension of government intrusion religions that disapprove of homosexuality are still not mandated to perform service, right?
edit on 20-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Annee

NO it isn't.



Well, gee. That's airtight reasoning right there.


Is there any reason I need to REPEAT from my original post?


Whether the government should be involved in marriage at all, is a separate argument from Equal Rights for All.

Right now a minority group does not have the same rights as everyone else.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Need I repeat mine? What dont you get about government having created the inequality in the first place?

The two option are viable. One creates more liberty the other more intrusion.

Or do you simply disagree that removing government oversight of peoples interpersonal relationships would not create equality?



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

The government are having to intervene because religions are never going to allow same sex marriage off their own back. Its simple really, government is basically picking up the slack of religious institutions.


Wait. Are you saying all the gay Catholics cant get married in a Catholic ceremony and it's governments job to force the Catholics to perform the ceremony?


Actually if you had been listening you'd see i was referring to the government stepping in and making it legal. They shouldn't be forcing religious institutions to perform gay marriages, that would trampling on peoples free will.


You do realize that even in states which recognize gay marriage as another extension of government intrusion religions that disapprove of homosexuality are still not mandated to perform service, right?


And rightly so. But its legal and that's all that counts at the end of the day.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

And rightly so. But its legal and that's all that counts at the end of the day.


I dont think you believe that. Otherwise you'd concede that removing government intrusion altogether brings us to the same end.

To remove something of illegal status one can either explicitly declare it "legal" requiring more government intervention, or remove the language/structure that makes it "illegal" resulting in less government intervention.
edit on 20-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Annee
 


Need I repeat mine? What dont you get about government having created the inequality in the first place?

The two option are viable. One creates more liberty the other more intrusion.



NO they're not.

Why government created Legal Government Marriage is not relevant to the issue.

The only thing that is relevant is what Legal Government Marriage is Today.

Legal Government Marriage provides rights, privileges, tax breaks etc ----- that are not available by any other means.

Today --- a minority group is being denied those rights, privileges, tax breaks etc. --- by a government that professes Equality and non-discrimination.

The only argument being presented is religious based --- which doesn't "fly" in a secular government.

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

If you want to debate abolishing Legal Government Marriage all together ----- which is a completely different subject --- perhaps you should start a separate thread on it.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

And rightly so. But its legal and that's all that counts at the end of the day.


I dont think you believe that. Otherwise you'd concede that removing government intrusion altogether brings us to the same end.

To remove something of illegal status one can either explicitly declare it "legal" requiring more government intervention, or remove the language/structure that makes it "illegal" resulting in less government intervention.
edit on 20-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


I disagree with your points. Can see no further point in debating them. Nice chat though





top topics
 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join