Like it or not, all 50 States must now recognize Gay Marriages!

a man is doing a man... whats there to allow?? its pure insane and crazy. If a guy wants to do a guy in the butt go do it behind your own doors, there is no need to get married and junk.

marriage = man+woman ... otherwise call it something else and pass it to accept it in states

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I hear you, but this leads down the slippery slope of 'separate by equal' nonsense. Hence why I deal in absolutes. Same thing for everyone. Now if it were 'civil unions' for all in regards to the state, and only marriage in the Churches, I could go for that.

You know, I've actually thought this myself. People always say that a marriage is recognized by God. So that's why gays shouldn't be married, because God would (supposedly) never recognize a gay marriage. This insinuates that since God doesn't recognize marriage then the state shouldn't either, but that's obviously violating separation of church and state.

I mean, since it's obviously NOT the case that states only recognize marriages recongized by God (supported by the fact that they recognize marriages that aren't preformed in a church, by a priest/reverend/pastor, and even ones preformed by Wiccan priestesses (as was the case with ex-friends of mine)), then the state merely recognizes civil unions.

So what is the problem with people accepting the state recognizing the union of two people who want to spend the rest of their lives together regardless of sex.

No one is forcing them to recognize it, nor the churches. The underlying issue here, as it always has been, is whether or not the state should be able to define what a marriage is without using religious beliefs to back it up. It's very hard to say it's between a man and woman only without bringing religion into it.

It's easy to say it's between two consenting adults without violating the separation of church and state.

In that definition, this also dispels the ridiculous notion that some people have that people will be able to marry animals and pedophiles can marry children.

TWO CONSENTING ADULTS. Pretty much leaves no gray areas anymore. Case closed, IMO.

reply to post by NickT916


Men do women in the butt. And women even do men in the butt. Their still allowed to get married. What's the problem? Dont' forget the lesbo's. They do it all sorts of ways.

I always find it perplexing when someone who obviously finds homosexuality unnatural and perhaps even just plain wrong only mention guys doing it. It's as if they only have a problem with anal sex and don't want the images to even cross their mind, but they pretty much never mention two girls scissoring or something like that. They don't seem to have a problem with that crossing their minds.

Aside from all that, what does the way they have sex have anything to do with it? I don't know if you're married, but if you are and anybody else who is will tell you almost 100% of the time that their marriage has nothing to do with their sex life or even how the perform the act.

I suppose I understand how you think gay marriage should be called something else. But how does that suddenly make you okay with it?

I mean, if I called someone a with pedophilia a person who just loves kids...alot, would you be okay with it all of a sudden?

So you're okay with two guys getting betrothed to one another AS LONG AS it's not called marriage? I wonder if this is how a lot of people feel.

edit: punctuation errors. I'm sure I'll find more though. may be another edit on the way...

[edit on 2-9-2009 by nunya13]

reply to post by NickT916


The definition of marriage is a partership between INDIVIDUALS. But since your clearly religious that definition has been warped, so having a debate with you is meaningless.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

You can't go fishing for knowledge and enlightenment without opening a can of worms once in a while!

As to the religious aspect, I disagree from two standpoints. First, there are plenty of atheists and agnostics who are married. Should marraige now only be between one religious man and one religious woman?

Second would be that there are plenty of religious and spiritual homosexuals who attend Church weekly. Should they not be allowed to marry because the religious majority disagrees with their sexuality? I'm sure that the clergy from the Metropolitan Community Churches would disagree with you on that one.

[edit on 2-9-2009 by JaxonRoberts]

thats a great point for all the religious objectors. How 'bout 'dem apples, hmm?

Originally posted by nunya13
I always find it perplexing when someone who obviously finds homosexuality unnatural and perhaps even just plain wrong only mention guys doing it. It's as if they only have a problem with anal sex and don't want the images to even cross their mind, but they pretty much never mention two girls scissoring or something like that. They don't seem to have a problem with that crossing their minds.

This is something that just grinds my goat! At least the religiously motivated individuals have a reason for their prejudice (albeit misguided) and I can at least respect that. But the nonreligious straight guys who think it's 'sick' for two guys to go at it would kill just to watch two 'chicks' doing it (as long as their hot)! Double standard, anyone? Hell, triple standard, since the 'chicks' have to be hot!

I would also bring up another point. Why is it perfectly legal for me to marry a dude if I have a sex change? My DNA still contains that pesky Y chromosome, and the plumbing is just for show and completely nonfunctional, so why the difference? What, does the operation fool 'God' too??? And what about hermaphrodites? Since they have both sets of plumbing, do they get to choose either sex to marry, or are they excluded from getting married at all??? What about those with two X and one Y chromosome (appear male with male plumbing)??? And if you are already married to a member of the opposite sex, then get a sex change and stay with your spouse, does this render your marriage null and void???

Originally posted by NickT916
a man is doing a man... whats there to allow?? its pure insane and crazy. If a guy wants to do a guy in the butt go do it behind your own doors, there is no need to get married and junk.

marriage = man+woman ... otherwise call it something else and pass it to accept it in states

Marriage is whatever two people choose it to be. It used to be a means to cement two tribes, kingdoms or families. Love played no role in it. Women were means to an heir and not necessarily the owner of her husband's heart. Marriage used to be an uncertain and/or terrible institution for women, depending upon her husband's inclinations towards her. Actually, it still is in some parts of the world.

However, with the Art of Courtly Love and its platonic leanings marriage became a venture of romantic love. Now, we think "love and marriage". Marriage morphed into something more emotion-driven and less consumer driven.

Marriage changes with the times.

According to my church, marriage is for the purpose of children and must be done in your lifetime unless taking Holy Orders. Other churches, other people think that is archaic, and believe marriage is for the purpose of love and that children don't play a part in it. My church allows one marriage and one marriage only. Protestant churches allow you to remarry if you repent of your sins. My church doesn't allow interfaith marriage between a Catholic and a Mormon, but other churches would.

Whose version of marriage is correct?

I agree that marriage is a religious institution because it is performed by a religious person historically, and that as such the Federal Government has no right to decide who can OR who cannot marry under the right to free exercise of religion.

Taking this stance I believe if the Unitarian Universalists want to marry gays in their church, and they do then those marriages under the right to free exercise ought to stand in whatever state a gay couple resides.

I also believe that as marriage has been historically defined by a merging of finances that the federal government has authority over civil unions.

So in both of my belief systems there is nothing prohibitive towards gay marriage in the United States.

I realize there are those that believe that homosexuality is the worst sin imaginable, but I daresay none of those individuals read the Bible in its native language or have a contextual knowledge of the time it was written. To "sin" is to "miss the mark". That is all "sin" means in the Greek.

Obviously, there are males of the species with sperm and females with egg, and the logical path to procreation means male + female, so in that sense, homosexuality "misses the mark", but it is not "evil". Evil is the purposeful act of harming another, evil is the purposeful act of neglecting those in need... evil is obvious. We see it in murder, in rape, in torture, in hate. Where there is love you won't find evil. No one will convince me that two people who truly love and care for each other are doing evil.

As a conservative I have always been against same sex marriage, but lately (ATS?) I've come to the conclusion that if that's what they want to do, then rock on.

Really.

It won't affect me, my job, my life, my family. If we are TRUELY going to treat people as people then, what ever!! We've got 9 trillion dollars in debt, swine flu, double-digit unemployment, government take over of everything, and we sit and worry about two gay guys getting hitched?

Get married. Hell, I'll throw rice religious people won't like it, but heck, religious people didn't like different races, mixed races, people with red hair. . . they'll get over it.

Just let my wife know where you're registered, she loves to shop.

Last night i was walking my cat through the dog park.
It was quite late when i saw a gay person step onto a banana, falling right on top of it... Naturaly i went to help the poor guy who was oozing in pain of his back bone being squeezed onto the banana. After helping the guy up he was ready to go in perfect condition after cudling with the poor cat who was frightened initialy away by his steep fall... MAybe he wasn't all that gay since he cudled with the cat. Then again the cat was male...

I do not have anything against gay, as long as they do not step onto bananas and hurt themselves.

I guess having helped the gay doesn't make me gay. Right!?

I am straight. After all i checked with my wonderfull woman a few mins ago!

I support equallity for all sexualities but i am straight all the way.

The guy was in the right place at the time.

He just did not notice the banana. Thats all his fault was, rather than being gay.

I even helped him!

I support rights for women too!

As long as its not on my burden.

I rarely see a woman as a burden.

I stated earlier that i am not racist.

I am a member of Greenpeace and Unesco.

I have an occasional sense of humour too!

I just do not thing that gay fits with the church.

Unfortunately many priests are gay.

Unfortunate because some like little boys... (rare)

Is that normal too??????

NOT TO ME...

Should perversion become normal certainly not.

Luckily i believe in God and mostly never go to church.

Most of the time i dial direct connection to HIM. Straight talk and direct.

I feel retarded many times, but i never am or feel gay.
Sometimes i get hungry but i still pay my dues to my beliefs and Unesco.
I am white, but i like black people.
Sometimes i am wrong on all accounts.

Mostly i am terrible with spelling too...

I do not mind gay up to a certain point. I understand their situation.

I have a right in being straight and not feel provoked by things i do not like.

Have you ever seen a cat ask you for a bath upon arrival to home?

Mine did last night....

Must have a straight cat. . .

reply to post by va1963


For those that did not follow my previous post it was a reply to the one indicated herein!

My cat is all fine now.

He is Persian.

I like all races and characters!

He brought in a Siamese chick this afternoon too! She is as cool as it gets!

It may sound strange but they kinda match NATURALY !

I wonder what the future holds.

TAKE CARE ALL!
GTG

reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK


As a reply to my own post i have a question

If they decide to stick together will i have to take them to the church and make all the necesary arrangements???

Originally posted by GEORGETHEGREEK

Have you ever seen a cat ask you for a bath upon arrival to home?

Mine did last night....

Must have a straight cat. . .

way to keep it classy on ATS!...
possibly the most retarded post ever.
did "a gay" really slip on a banana in the park?
jfc...

Emperor Palpatine: Well done, fools. Keep spreading NWO depopulation agenda. Keep spreading leftist propaganda that break up the family without realizing it.

Soon nobody will be having children, only focusing on their own lives, acquiring possessions and becoming wealthy. People will no longer strive to impart wisdom upon a second generation, only working for themselves to become successful, and their INFERIOR genetics will die off and eliminate themselves from the gene pool.

Soon, Lord Vader! Soon! We elites can rule the world! Once we make this... "lifestyle" we should call it, the norm, we can then make our own sexual deviancy of pedophilia acceptable. It is only a matter of time...

We seem to be breaking the morality and standards of society much faster than expected, Lord Vader. Soon they will accept ANYTHING different and new, because of a herd mentality. Anything new, regardless of its substance, will be seen as fashionable. We will make all things acceptable, to the point that Communism and Fascism is chic. Those who do not accept our social agenda rank and file will find themselves labelled "homophobic," "archaic," "Christian," "bigoted," and will become social outcasts.

We will have everyone firmly in our grasp. Our next step is to promote these deviant lifestyles through mass media. We've been focusing too much on feminising the men, the leaders of society who would fight us, don't you think? We should put a popular song out there promoting lesbianism, what do you say, Lord Vader?

Darth Vader: Uh, didn't you hear that Katy Perry song?

Palpatine: OH, yes. "I kissed a girl!" What a great song, I love that song. Well, what do you think about humiliating Miss California for standing up for ancient ideals of the family? I think that would be a wonderful symbolic display of the death of morality.

Vader: At your wish, Emperor. What do you think if we made a rap album with a pig gettin it on with a human?

Palpatine: Hmm, I like your thinking, Vader. I'm going to give you a 10% raise on your next check! It's easy, with all the trillions we've stolen from them keeping them distracted. Why these foolish civilians drinking their sodium fluoride and taking their mercury cancer vaccines will never see it coming. They will be too drugged up and medicated to resist our social agenda. Too busy infighting amongst themselves over pointless football issues such as "abortion" and "gay marriage," that they won't even see the walls of their empire crumbling around them letting the barbarians sack Rome.

To acidtasic..........

see what I mean?

The truth hurts....

Just answer the question...

What do you have if you put 100 gay "people" on an island for 125 years?

"Hiding" my prejudice" (or whatever you said) "hiding"?.......hahahahah

good one....you make me so happy...or gay...not sure which....

It's a real simple solution.....do you know what it is?

live long and prosper...(and that can't mean being gay....)

Not my rule...just the universes'....

Let's all try it your way for a couple of hundred years and we will not have to worry about it... No life ..no internet..no "blogs..no life!!!!!!!!!!

I chose to not procreate with a woman...or even try it with a man...and you want to bash me in some way....
get a life.....
try and be selfish and make yourself happy for once and you will help the whole world...

live long and please don't procreate...

reply to post by northexpedition


Sweet mercy! If ATS had an ignorance detector, you would have never been allowed to join! In the last 100 years alone, there are 5 BILLION more humans on the planet, and you're worried about population control??? I would also point out that homosexuals have always comprised 10% of the general population since the dawn of man, and still we seem to be multiplying like frakkin' rabbits!!! Also, allowing Gay marriage will not change the number of homosexuals, nor will it make us less likely to have children! So, Luke, try your Jedi Mind Trick elsewhere! Your mastery of the Force is very weak!

I also noticed that you added me to your Respected Foes list. I would do the same except that I have no respect for complete lunacy! I would be more inclined to place you on my 'ignore' list, but the motto is Deny Ignorance, not Ignore Ignorance!

Now toddle on back to the kiddie table!

reply to post by northexpedition


I'm a Jesus loving freak and I think the only way that "Christian" becomes a dirty word is when the people who claim to love Jesus use his good name to hurt other people. Christians, not atheists, have made "Christian" a dirty word. People claiming to love Christ give non-believers fuel for their fire with hypocrisy, with their mean spirit, and with their lack of generosity.

If Jesus suddenly appeared today preaching the same thing as he did 2000 years ago most of the Christians I know would yell at him out their car window: Get a life, hippie!

If you want to dislike homosexuality then do it on your own, don't bring Jesus or Christianity into it unless you can point out a passage in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John where Jesus addressed it, or where he said to be anything other than kind, generous, loving, non-judging, and forgiving with people. If you can do that, if you can point out a passage in the Gospels (that doesn't mean Paul's writings) then I will concede.

Let Jesus speak for himself and you speak for yourself.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Nice!

I just hope the Polygamist get to have as many partners as they want now, and the pedophiles get to lower the legal age of consent to 13, and let’s not leave out those who practice beastality.

Its all normal rght?

Although I disagree with the specifics of the post(ie: pedophiles etc..) I do agree that the door is now open and if gays can be married then all other sexual deviants may now be allowed to practice. It is now the norm to be anything other than heterosexual and monogamous and it is sad really. I hold no ill will towards any of these people however we shall see the end results in time and it won't be good. Just think about the scientific ramifications on society and the populations here in North America.

oh god, how could anyone oppose gay marriage?

they want preserve the good name of marriage? in this day and age, people are getting divorced over VIDEO GAMES. MARRIAGE IS A CROCK.


who cares? gay dudes will shell out for an awesome wedding, money will be spent and help our economy. oh let's not forget that what people do sexually HAS NO BEARING on your stupid life. you're disgusted? who cares? our country is sinking into debt, there's more to think about than what "marriage" is.


homophobics are literally holding us back.


-a straight person

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Originally posted by John Matrix

Originally posted by NoJoker13
When gays can get married everywhere that will be a happy day, I'm all for equal rights. As far as I'm concerned we're not equal toward the homo-sexual race (cleary) and I'm a hetero-sexual male.

There is no homosexual race. They are not a special race or special breed of humans. They are humans with a sexual paraphilia (a deviant sexual fetish). They are males that prefer sex with other males rather than with females.

How males have sex with males should be discussed so everyone knows what goes on. They can't procreate (reproduce), so they recruit....and it's all about building a lifestyle around getting off with their fetish partner.

Strange I did not know I suffered from a Fetish? And I'm a little confused as to why you only spoke about males? Do lesbians not exist in your closed minded little world?

And no we do not recruit. Only a simpleton things that the gays are out to change everybody to gay. We are who we are, we only ask that you folks unti the knot in your panties and learn to live with it.

~Keeper

Gays and Lesbians alike, chose to participate in a deviant sexual manner. Choice is what it is, go ahead but Deviant it is in the minds and hearts of a majority of the populace in North America. When a minority wins in a democracy there is a problem.

Originally posted by habfan1968

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Nice!

I just hope the Polygamist get to have as many partners as they want now, and the pedophiles get to lower the legal age of consent to 13, and let’s not leave out those who practice beastality.

Its all normal rght?

Although I disagree with the specifics of the post(ie: pedophiles etc..) I do agree that the door is now open and if gays can be married then all other sexual deviants may now be allowed to practice. It is now the norm to be anything other than heterosexual and monogamous and it is sad really. I hold no ill will towards any of these people however we shall see the end results in time and it won't be good. Just think about the scientific ramifications on society and the populations here in North America.

Perhaps you ought to define "deviant". Do you mean deviates from the norm? As in just not the majority?

There are heterosexuals who dress up in furry animal costumes to have sex.
There are heterosexuals who practice BDSM.
There are heterosexuals engaging in anal sex.
These are deviant, yes?

I just don't understand how two adults marrying will lead to people marrying animals or marrying children, nor do I see how prohibiting gay marriage in Iran and Saudi Arabia has led to children not being forced to marry adults.

Young girls are married off to old men in cultures that not only prohibits homosexuality, but uses physical punishment (to include death) on those who practice it.

So, again, to those that think that gay marriage will lead to child marriage, please explain how relegating it to heterosexual only prevents it.