• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Same sex marriages!

L

Lee

Guest
#1
Title should speak for itself. Been hearing this on the news since 2.am this morning for past 4 hours, myself it aint me so I don't care.

Tell me what you think!
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#3
Interesting this is brought up just now since it was a major issue a few months back, specifically in Massachusetts and California.

I'm not going to state my view but instead comment on a point that is frequently made by those who support gay marriage. Supporters state that homosexuals deserve equal rights under the law, and so same-sex marriages should be allowed.

Here is my thought: homosexuals do have the right to marry, just like heterosexuals do. Homosexuals do not have the right to marry a person of the same sex, and neither do heterosexuals. So equal rights already exist. Homosexuals have no fewer rights than heterosexuals... the rights are the same. To say that homosexuals do not have equal rights is to make a false premise for the argument supporting same-sex marriage.

Changing subjects a bit, yesterday a same-sex couple that was married earlier this year in California filed for divorce. This is the first instance of such an occurrence, and since the legality of their marriage is still uncertain, a California court will have to decide if their marriage was legitimate to begin with. If the court finds that it was not, then this will apply to all same-sex couples who were married in California. The funny thing about this is the couple filing for divorce is hoping that their marriage will be found to be null, while every other same-sex married couple in California will be hoping for the opposite. A bit of pressure for the court there. :)
 

Tittles

Dabba Dooba
Political User
#4
right on muzi...i aint against the marriage thing but i kinda am scared of gay men i unno why i just do. No lesbos dang thats a different story :).

Anyway...I think they have the same rights as us hetero people do just like muzi said.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#5
muzikool said:
Interesting this is brought up just now since it was a major issue a few months back, specifically in Massachusetts and California.

I'm not going to state my view but instead comment on a point that is frequently made by those who support gay marriage. Supporters state that homosexuals deserve equal rights under the law, and so same-sex marriages should be allowed.

Here is my thought: homosexuals do have the right to marry, just like heterosexuals do. Homosexuals do not have the right to marry a person of the same sex, and neither do heterosexuals. So equal rights already exist. Homosexuals have no fewer rights than heterosexuals... the rights are the same. To say that homosexuals do not have equal rights is to make a false premise for the argument supporting same-sex marriage.

Actually not true... Heterosexuals have the right to marry and it is assumed that since they are heterosexuals that they will marry one they love of the opposite sex. Homosexuals do not have this right due to the fact that they would love and want to marry one of their own sex. And due to the fact that they are not permitted to do so they are denied medical benefits as a spouse in a heterolsexual marrage would recieve nor Social Security benifits or Insurance benefits if one's spouce would die as in a heterolsexual marrage.

Many benefits that a heterolsexual would recieve if they were married are not allowed to a homosexual in a same sex marrage unless the laws are changed to make them an equal in the choice of marrageand to recognize same sex marrages. So to say that homosexuals do not have equal right is very true.

Strange that it's similar in the way women were not given rights either for years. It is not the same in many respects but the underlying end result is. They don't have equal rights. They luv the same sex person, oh well. But the bottom line is they are humans we are all humans and as such we all should have the exact same rights by law. And not have the law written that "oh you can marry like everyone else but only if said person is of the opposite sex". That is not an equal law.

My point of view for or against in irrelevent in this matter. But this has been the debate for a long time.

In a perfect world there would be no boundaries as to who or what you may be and whom you marry, this situation would not matter. But this is not a perfect world... not by a long shot.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#6
TittleBitties said:
right on muzi...i aint against the marriage thing but i kinda am scared of gay men i unno why i just do. No lesbos dang thats a different story :).

Anyway...I think they have the same rights as us hetero people do just like muzi said.

To think that gay men weird you out but gay woman don't is to have strange issues. I'm not saying you do but a gay man is the same as a gay woman. They luv their own. Now that seeing gay women doing things together gets you all warm and fuzzy is... what? normal? What is normal?

I luv women all women. To see a gay couple, be it man or woman is no big deal to me. I live in San Francisco, born and raised here. I have always seen it. I ignore it. It's their life not mine. I can understand people that are raised in middle America or in a highly religious environment. They have always been told that to be gay is a devilish thing, that it is abnormal. Who the hell really knows. I was raised in a Catholic family but I have always thought, "you live your life... I live mine. As long as your life dosen't infringe into mine I'm cool".

There are some (homosexuals) that want to throw their lifestyle in yer face. Those make me very mad. They are the ones that want to be extremists. I hate them because they are not just living their lives they want everyone else to live it with them. I don't care as to the sexual preference just don't try to trow it in my face.

Now you said " No lesbos dang thats a different story :)" Why?

So if you see two women getting it on in a park, that gets you goin? But if you saw two men, that would make ya puke?

It's the same thing, two people of the same sex doin it. And don't give me that "but they're woman" excuse 'cause they are still the same sex doin stuff to each other. Not man and woman.
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#8
Yours is a well thought-out argument, gonaads, but I'm not sure that I can agree. I found this in the Legal Dictionary. I believe it is the definition that the courts have used for years to define marriage.
MARRIAGE. A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between husband and wife.

By this definition, marriage is not defined as ...a free man and the person he loves. By law, we are not specifically given the right to marry whomever we love. We are all free men and women, and accordingly we are all afforded the right that is layed out by the definition of marriage. In turn, we all have the same rights.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#9
Anyway... this is the way this debate will be for years. Some day humans will think as humans and not as moralists, leftists, liberals, consevatives, religious rightists or whatever extremists. I don't know when... But I do know it won't be in my lifetime.
 

Tittles

Dabba Dooba
Political User
#10
well...i unno. I just never be around a gay person really and its not that i dont like them its just i unno. About the women thing i aint really talkin about the same sex marriage i am talkin about how u see in naughty movies where they r doin stuff. My friends sis is a les and i talk to her when she comes up here from chicago. I dont think i ever talked to a gay guy and if i have i didnt notice. What i dont get tho is if by law everyone has equal rights isnt the government breaking the law? i mean gay people r people i hope r gov isnt that slow in the head to not think of that.
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#11
gonaads said:
There are some (homosexuals) that want to throw their lifestyle in yer face. Those make me very mad. They are the ones that want to be extremists. I hate them because they are not just living their lives they want everyone else to live it with them. I don't care as to the sexual preference just don't try to trow it in my face.
I completely understand and sympathize with this point. "Gay Pride" as it is often referred to makes me sick. You ask to be treated equally, but then you do things to make you stick out like a sore thumb. Proud homosexuals aren't the only ones who do this sort of thing either. In parts of Texas, it is a big deal to have certain stickers on your car bumper if you are homosexual. I'm not just talking about rainbows either... there is one in particular I see often that is blue with 3 yellow stripes. I don't drive around with a "Straight Pride" sticker on the back of my car! I don't understand! :p
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#12
muzikool said:
Yours is a well thought-out argument, gonaads, but I'm not sure that I can agree. I found this in the Legal Dictionary. I believe it is the definition that the courts have used for years to define marriage.
MARRIAGE. A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between husband and wife.

By this definition, marriage is not defined as ...a free man and the person he loves. By law, we are not specifically given the right to marry whomever we love. We are all free men and women, and accordingly we are all afforded the right that is layed out by the definition of marriage. In turn, we all have the same rights.

You just defined it with that quote.

MARRIAGE. A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between husband and wife.
That's why they (homosexuals) want the Law(s) to specify "same sex marrage" and to have them be legally binding. Because under the "letter" of the law they (homosexuals) can't get the same rights as heterolsexual men and women. Marrage... man and woman. Not marrage... man and man, woman and woman. So when a same sex couple goes to apply for any benefits that are automatic to "normally" married couples they can not.

Again, not the same rights. As to the "letter" of the law.
 
L

Lee

Guest
#13
Well myself, it makes no difference to me what they do in their own back yard.

I was not going to say nething further till kool mentioned gay pride. I have always been confused why people that need to go on marches to scream about their sexuality.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#14
Now if the law was worded as to MARRIAGE. A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and/or a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between human and human.


Then it's equal and everyone gets the same benefits as anyone else.

That is where their argument has always been. Remember that all court cases have always hinged on a "loophole". Wording is the way the law goes round.
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#15
I understand that they want to change the law, but I don't see how that definition alienates them. They are "free men" and "free women," too. The definition doesn't specify "heterosexual men" and "heterosexual women." If it did then it certainly would be leaving them out, but that's not the case.
 

muzikool

Act your wage.
Political User
#16
gonaads said:
Now if the law was worded as to MARRIAGE. A contract made in due form of law, by which a free man and/or a free woman reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union which ought to exist between human and human.


Then it's equal and everyone gets the same benefits as anyone else.

That is where their argument has always been. Remember that all court cases have always hinged on a "loophole". Wording is the way the law goes round.
I posted before reading this. Still, a homosexual is given the right to be a husband or a wife, in the same way that a heterosexual is given the right. I see that as equal rights.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#17
Lee said:
Well myself, it makes no difference to me what they do in their own back yard.

I was not going to say nething further till kool mentioned gay pride. I have always been confused why people that need to go on marches to scream about their sexuality.

Yep... If they are gay, so what. If they aren't, so what. I don't care live yer life, be happy.

But sometimes it's like many of them want that extra attention. It's like they are a nation unto themselves. We have may holidays that we celebrate as a collective whole. I guess they want the same with that one thing. I don't know.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#18
muzikool said:
I posted before reading this. Still, a homosexual is given the right to be a husband or a wife, in the same way that a heterosexual is given the right. I see that as equal rights.

But the State they reside in does not. Because of the way it is "worded".

Husband: male gender... So they think it as to the law

Wife: female gender... Again, as to the way they think of it by law


It's all in the wording and the way any given State or Country wishes to interpret said wording. Some laws are created in such a way on porpose to exclude certain things or people and/or even races.
 

gonaads

Beware the G-Man
Political User
#19
Anyway... that's all for me.

For me it really doesn't matter one way or another. But it all comes down to humans having human rights, no matter how you word it. Some day...


You people have fun with this. :)
 

j79zlr

Glaanies script monkey
Political User
#20
Where's Perris, he's gonna like my response. I'm sure some of you know that I am fairly conservative in politics, but I don't see this as a political issue. I do not think it is important enough for a constitutional amendment, but then it leaves it up to the states, which will cause some to allow it and some to not. This isn't right either. Personally, I say what goes on behind closed doors is their business, but I also don't see gay marriage as an unalienable right. I don't know, I guess I see marriage itself as an old custom that maybe should go away. Hell, half end in divorce anyways.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,017
Latest member
bettyicrewsi