Why don't gays/lesbians deserve to have the right to be married?

cbtwohundread said:

bsically this all comes down to ethics,,,,i dont want the next generation growing up a sodom town,,,i dont agree with sodomites ways so i dont advocate them any of the rights iman and a woman have togetther because its not the natural way,,,,as i would say,,,,,rome burned down for a reason

Click to expand...

so you want to take away the rights of a minority because your opinion is not the same as theirs...


"i dont like it, so make it illegal"


do you think about anyone but yourself....


LOLLLLL so your saying rome burned down because of homosexuals? LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

jiggs2269 said:

Yes in some jurisdictions it has been adopted. And I checked the "Oxford" dictionary and there was no mention of man and man or woman and woman. The word "marriage" comes from the old french word "Marier," or the latin word "Maritus" which again means husband or wife. Lady and man. It's just a word and for the millionth fucking time!, they have all the same rights as every one else! They are not restricted from doing anything or going anywhere they want. The only people that are a threat to them are the ones who feel that a gay persons lifestyle will some how effect their life. A gay couple can get united under the eyes of the law. It's just not called a marriage. It's called being united. Then there life partner can get on their benefits from work, they can be claimed on the others taxes blah blah blah...

I have never had a gay person tell they feel oppressed or left out. I live in the S.F. bay area, the birth place of free gay love. I have even been to a few gay pride parades. They're fun, if you don't mind being hit on by a bunch of mo's, and I go to show my support of there lifestyle. It's fine with me what they do and how they live there lives. What's not fine with me is how so many self righteous peolpe feel they have to protest every day because of the self made dilussion that they have no rights. And that goes for EVERYONE.

To further prove my point I think we should start a petition. The word "American" should not only include those born i the u.s. but those who share the same ideals as the u.s. Let's change the definition so we can include everyone. I don't want any one to get their feelings hurt because we said they can't be "American." But what if some one really really wanted to be an American? There are steps to becoming American now. You either are born here or you wait for your green card. This definition was pulled straight from dictionary.com. "American," noun 4.a citizen of the United States of America.5.a native or inhabitant of the Western Hemisphere.6.an Indian of North or South America.7.American English. a steam locomotive having a four-wheeled front truck, four driving wheels, and no rear truck

Hell, we can
change that. Who cares about what the actual definition is. All we need, is to be labled the same. That's all that matters right? (FYO: this last paragraph was all sarcasm.)


Now if we were all able to get "married" then what else would the gay and lesbian communities have to protest about? Oh I'm sure they'll find something later on. And if they don't then someone else will. It's a vicious cycle that wont end until EVERYONE is happy. You can't please evryone all the time and the sooner everyone realizes that then the better off we'll be. People are natually displeased by whatever they see. Then they talk to someone else who feels the same way and next thing you know the snowball effect begins, and then you get a buch of people talking about the meaning of a word on a pot forum.

The last thing that I'm gonna say is if anyone ever tries to tell me that gays don't have the same rights as straights I'm gonna flip my lid. My aunt, who I had mentioned in my last post, is the exact opposite of what you would call, "Powerless." Have any of you heard of a little company called Oracle? Well she happens to be the C.F.O. In this "Straight Male dominated," society she's found a way around it. There are always ways to get around the system. You just have to be smart and willing to put in the effort. And letting a little word like, "Marriage" ruin your day, just because the defintion doesn't include you, sounds like you have your own personal issues.

Click to expand...

Sorry ...I should have specified. I pulled my definition out of the 2008 edition of the Oxford English. It has the updated definition that I posted earlier which mentions same sex marriages.
I completely agree with you: a word is a word. I merely was responding to jiggs's comment that the definition of a word can't be changed.

Marriage predates Christianity so keep your moral arguments to yourself.

Marriage is a legal status - that is why you have to have a witness when you get your marriage certificate, and go through the court system to dissolve the contract (divorce).. There is no conscionable reason that the government can discriminate based on sex when it comes to legal contracts.

Illegal Smile said:

I think what is a right is all the legal rights that come with marriage. Civil union contracts that confer all the same rights as marriage should be available to everyone. But frankly, I see no right to take what has been an institution between man and woman for thousands of years and is an underpinning of society and suddenly redefine it into something else so gays don't have to be filled with doubt about whether their marriage is as good as our marriage.

I don't mean to get testy, but my message to gays is that if you can't evolve and define your own version of marriage then that's your problem. You should have 100% of the legal rights but not the name marriage. Call it being "partnered" or whatever, but the ages old institution of marriage does not have to stretch to accomodate gay union.

Click to expand...

Civil Unions are just as good. I'm not religious at all, but however I am spiritual. I'm not gonna get married in a church by a priest or a minister. I'm gonna go to the court house, with my lady, and get a civil union. Then we'll have our ceremony elsewhere. I technically wont be married but I'll have the same rights as everyone else. Gay or straight. Even trannies have the same rights as everyone else, and they can even have sex with themselves. Eeeeeewwwww....

Illegal Smile said:

I think what is a right is all the legal rights that come with marriage. Civil union contracts that confer all the same rights as marriage should be available to everyone. But frankly, I see no right to take what has been an institution between man and woman for thousands of years and is an underpinning of society and suddenly redefine it into something else so gays don't have to be filled with doubt about whether their marriage is as good as our marriage.

I don't mean to get testy, but my message to gays is that if you can't evolve and define your own version of marriage then that's your problem. You should have 100% of the legal rights but not the name marriage. Call it being "partnered" or whatever, but the ages old institution of marriage does not have to stretch to accomodate gay union.

Click to expand...

Civil Unions are just as good. I'm not religious at all, but however I am spiritual. I'm not gonna get married in a church by a priest or a minister. I'm gonna go to the court house, with my lady, and get a civil union. Then we'll have our ceremony elsewhere. I technically wont be married but I'll have the same rights as everyone else. Gay or straight. Even trannies have the same rights as everyone else, and they can even have sex with themselves. Eeeeeewwwww....

America is one nation under God.AND GOD SAYS NO GAY SHIT

happyface said:

America is one nation under God.AND GOD SAYS NO GAY SHIT

Click to expand...

Again ...marriage has nothing to do with god.
The sooner people realize that, the sooner this country will rid itself of mindless prejudice.

happyface said:

America is one nation under God.AND GOD SAYS NO GAY SHIT

Click to expand...

ok, whats with this tourette's syndrome form of debate you got going?

For the people saying that homosexuals should just go get a "civil union" and quit their bitching.... In most states there IS NO SUCH THING. Gays can't enter into ANY kind of binding contract that would bestow on them the same LEGAL rights that married couples enjoy. They also can't just "make up their own marriage", like someone suggested. The union has to be legally recognized by the state, or it's really just make-believe. They wouldn't be able to file taxes together, buy insurance policies, open bank accounts, or any of those little things that hetero couples take for granted.

Dystopia said:

The problem with the word “marriage” is that it is part of a tradition, a religious institution, and a legal system. In order to come up with a truly “equal” solution all three of these areas must be addressed.

If I'm looking at something through "the eyes of the law" I don't care why the law exists, only that it exists. On a personal level, I may BELIEVE that incest or homosexuality or fat women in spandex are fundamentally wrong. However, I can't let my personal beliefs override what the law says. If I don't like the law, then I need to lobby to get IT changed. That is why I don't like the way this is being approached; if you don't want ANY individual sector of society to have the right to get married, then you need to make it illegal for that sector to exist. As long as that sector is doing nothing illegal, then they should have the same rights as any other American in the eyes of the law. The trend in America, at least legally, has been to make marriage secular in nature, to match the secular nature of the Constitution.

If you want to “keep marriage historically defined” then you must legally define it; if you legally define it then you must choose a cultural or religious tradition to use as the model. The history of marriage in the United States has been to move away from the traditional non-secular Protestant model of “between a man and woman of the same race, whereby the man is the head of the household, the decision-maker, and the sole owner of all property”. After woman’s suffrage and the elimination of the ban on interracial marriage, all that is left is “man and woman”. You could say that the tradition of marriage in America is to move to a secular, generic model. Legally defining marriage in any sense is a move back to a non-secular model of marriage. The Constitution forms a secular document…hopefully you can see the need to keep non-secularity out of it.

If you look at marriage SOLELY as a tradition, then you have to ask, “Why should we hold onto this last tradition when it hurts other people? How does giving up this last non-secular tradition harm the marriages of opposite-sex couples?”

Finally, your proposal fails to address the religious aspect of marriage. I’m assuming that your traditional view of marriage includes the union being “blessed by God” and there would be some sort of paperwork so indicating. Many religious institutions believe that homosexuality is an abomination or perversion. Others take a less harsh stance, and still others have no problem at all with homosexuals practicing or even getting married within their walls. If you define marriage as a contract between “a man, woman, and God” then you violate the faith of religious same-sex couples by saying that others' religious beliefs can keep them from legally marrying.

To sum it up, no matter HOW you slice marriage up, it still comes out equal but separate. The only solution is to keep marriage whole and open it up to everybody.

Click to expand...

So i agree with you as far as the law part. The whole issue with Prop 8 was that if the prop had past then the marriage liscence that you would recieve would say Union Liscence or something along that sort. It wouldn't read Marriage Liscence anymore. So every one who got united would all be the same title. Some people wanted to see it changed and yet there were more peole who wanted it to stay the same. That was what prop 8 was about. The heading on a piece of paper. Nothing more. But as you know politics, they stretched it so bad that come voting day I believe majority of people were confused. I had no idea that the prop was about what the title said on your Marriage Liscence. I was in the same boat with everyone else. I thought it had to do with them actually gaining or losing rights. I was going to vote against it. Then I read the fine print. It was always about the title of the stupid little piece of paper that you would recieve after being united. To me what a legal piece of paper labels you as is the last thing I really care about. So I chose not to vote on it. Sorry the prop didn't pass. I strongly believe that the gay/lesbian community did a half assed job on the campaign. Had they approached it in a diiferent way I also believe they would have won.

If you think every one has the same rights or should have the same rights, ask yourself this question. In this present day society, does a person born into wealth have the same rights ans someone born into poverty? In America? Yes they do. Now ask yourself this. Do those same two people have the same oppertunity? Most likely not. The person in poverty will be eligable to earn the same oppertunities as the wealthy but he will have to struggle much harder. For that, he wil be a better person. Ten times the person the wealthy one will ever be because they uderwent ten times the amount of hardships. Or they could take the easy way out and just skate by and accept their reality. The wealth person will be handed everything, every door and path already laid out for them. So they can take it all and just skate by without a care and accept their reality. Or they can forsake it all and learn about life the hard way. Figure stuff out on their own. And for that, they will be more wise then they were ever before.

The point is when you change, you grow. That's what it means to be human. To grow. The people who want to hold on to their word "Marriage" don't want to change. So they wont grow. Sucks to be them. And the gay/lesbian who want nothing more than to have that "word" are not gonna change. So they wont grow either.

So I go to club (hypothetically) and the bouncer stops me and says, "Hold up buddy. I gotta check with all the customers inside to see if you can come in. We're gonna take a vote." And then he came ouside and said "Nope, 52% said no." I would be kind hurt but I would go make my own club and invite who ever I wanted. I know it sounds childish but what if my club accepted everyone. Not that same old pish posh "Club Marriage," but a new one where anyone regardless of creed, color, or sex can be dancing together. Now we're moving on instead of butting heads.

doobnVA said:

For the people saying that homosexuals should just go get a "civil union" and quit their bitching.... In most states there IS NO SUCH THING. Gays can't enter into ANY kind of binding contract that would bestow on them the same LEGAL rights that married couples enjoy. They also can't just "make up their own marriage", like someone suggested. The union has to be legally recognized by the state, or it's really just make-believe. They wouldn't be able to file taxes together, buy insurance policies, open bank accounts, or any of those little things that hetero couples take for granted.

Click to expand...

It's simple if a person doesn't like the state laws, then move. Find a state that suites you. There's 50 of them.

jiggs2269 said:

So i agree with you as far as the law part. The whole issue with Prop 8 was that if the prop had past then the marriage liscence that you would recieve would say Union Liscence or something along that sort. It wouldn't read Marriage Liscence anymore. So every one who got united would all be the same title. Some people wanted to see it changed and yet there were more peole who wanted it to stay the same. That was what prop 8 was about. The heading on a piece of paper. Nothing more. But as you know politics, they stretched it so bad that come voting day I believe majority of people were confused. I had no idea that the prop was about what the title said on your Marriage Liscence. I was in the same boat with everyone else. I thought it had to do with them actually gaining or losing rights. I was going to vote against it. Then I read the fine print. It was always about the title of the stupid little piece of paper that you would recieve after being united. To me what a legal piece of paper labels you as is the last thing I really care about. So I chose not to vote on it. Sorry the prop didn't pass. I strongly believe that the gay/lesbian community did a half assed job on the campaign. Had they approached it in a diiferent way I also believe they would have won.

Click to expand...

Dude, Prop 8 was simple. All Prop 8 “did” was add a new amendment to the California Constitution which says, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California". Everything else was a smoke screen.

jiggs2269 said:

If you think every one has the same rights or should have the same rights, ask yourself this question. In this present day society, does a person born into wealth have the same rights ans someone born into poverty? In America? Yes they do. Now ask yourself this. Do those same two people have the same oppertunity? Most likely not. The person in poverty will be eligable to earn the same oppertunities as the wealthy but he will have to struggle much harder. For that, he wil be a better person. Ten times the person the wealthy one will ever be because they uderwent ten times the amount of hardships. Or they could take the easy way out and just skate by and accept their reality. The wealth person will be handed everything, every door and path already laid out for them. So they can take it all and just skate by without a care and accept their reality. Or they can forsake it all and learn about life the hard way. Figure stuff out on their own. And for that, they will be more wise then they were ever before.

Click to expand...

The “opportunity” to become wealthy is not the same as the “right” to be wealthy. I don’t believe there is any “right” to be wealthy defined anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, so your example doesn’t really apply in my opinion. And I don’t believe that homosexuals as a whole will be any “wiser” or “accepting of their reality” due to their struggles.

jiggs2269 said:

The point is when you change, you grow. That's what it means to be human. To grow. The people who want to hold on to their word "Marriage" don't want to change. So they wont grow. Sucks to be them. And the gay/lesbian who want nothing more than to have that "word" are not gonna change. So they wont grow either.

Click to expand...

I disagree with your premise on a logical basis. I agree that growth implies change (you don’t grow if you remain status quo). However, change does not necessarily imply growth. So “The people who want to hold on to their word "Marriage" don't want to change” believe that change will not mean growth, and that we are better off remaining status quo. And the “gay/lesbian who want nothing more than to have that "word" are not gonna change. So they wont grow either” do in fact want change, and believe the change will lead to growth.

jiggs2269 said:

So I go to club (hypothetically) and the bouncer stops me and says, "Hold up buddy. I gotta check with all the customers inside to see if you can come in. We're gonna take a vote." And then he came ouside and said "Nope, 52% said no." I would be kind hurt but I would go make my own club and invite who ever I wanted. I know it sounds childish but what if my club accepted everyone. Not that same old pish posh "Club Marriage," but a new one where anyone regardless of creed, color, or sex can be dancing together. Now we're moving on instead of butting heads.

Click to expand...

This is a good analogy, but basically what you are saying is that homosexuals should all move someplace and form their own state or country and make their own laws, kinda like what the Mormons did when they were persecuted. And maybe we should marginalize Christians while we’re at it, make them form their own state. And what about fat people, they can’t get into posh clubs either. Again, separate but equal just don’t work.

whoever is arguing that gays sould be able to get married is just retarded for real. EVERYTHING WE DO IS UNDER GOD!if they wanna leave outside the normal way of life then they need to do that shit behind closed doors.and preferably in france with all the other sissys. just lucky God is forgiving thats all i have to say about that.

Fuck god, we don't need to listen to that fag.

I don't do sh*t under god.
So when you finally figured out that Santa wasn't real, you didn't realize god wasn't real either? Maybe some fat guy should dress up as god at the mall for all the kids to get their picture taken with.

hom36rown said:

Fuck god, we don't need to listen to that fag.

Click to expand...

I heard that god gave jesus a hj ...but he was wearing a glove so it totally wasn't gay.

t@intshredder said:

I don't do sh*t under god.
So when you finally figured out that Santa wasn't real, you didn't realize god wasn't real either? Maybe some fat guy should dress up as god at the mall for all the kids to get their picture taken with.

Click to expand...

Haha. I wish I had that job. I'd make a great God.

i don't care if gays marry and i do feel sorry for them, but i would vote to ban gay marriage if they start teaching that crap in school. To my understanding they have been teaching about gay lifestyle to young kids, that i don't approve of.

jiggs2269 said:

It's simple if a person doesn't like the state laws, then move. Find a state that suites you. There's 50 of them.

Click to expand...

Simple? Since when is moving to a new state "simple"? Especially NOW with it being so hard to find a job, most people are stuck where they are.

Have you ever tried to find a job in another state? Was flying (or driving) back and forth across the country for job interviews "simple"? How about finding a place to live from halfway across the country. Was that "simple" too?

Do you have ANY IDEA how much money it costs to move a whole house full of stuff (and people) to another state?

Simple, my ass.

I love these dumb kids who think everyone can just pack up and move across country on a fucking WHIM. They're right up there with the kids who think all coffee comes from Starbucks at $8 a cup.

strangerdude562 said:

i don't care if gays marry and i do feel sorry for them, but i would vote to ban gay marriage if they start teaching that crap in school. To my understanding they have been teaching about gay lifestyle to young kids, that i don't approve of.

Click to expand...

gay lifestyle 101? i find this hard to believe.
kids learning that gay people exist and that they are not inherently evil? well i would hope so.