Government recognizing Gay and Lesbian

Options
13567…17

Replies

  • ShannaDBowser
    ShannaDBowser Posts: 88 Member
    Options
    Just to lighten the mood---- if we did change the laws, we would take care of our failing economy REAL QUICK! Just imagine all of the "fabulous" and financially spectacular weddings gay men would have! The economy would BOOM! :)

    Oh my! That would be both hilarious and lucrative. Can we all mail our congressmen/women and/or senators and present the issue that way? :flowerforyou:
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    Isn't marriage a religious thing therefore as most religions don't recognise same sex marriage then they can't happen? Hence civil partnerships?

    Er, many people marry in registry offices or similar, with no religious content at all - in fact, many civil ceremonies ban music and readings with any religious themes. Heterosexual people who marry in this way are no less 'married' than those who marry in a religious setting, surely? Why does the same not apply to homosexual couples? Why the insistence on a different terminology for what is essentially the same thing?

    You're right which is kind of my point... Marriage is religious although the terminology used sort of gets used a bit haphazardly. Nothing wrong with civil ceremonies for people to commit to each other forever.
  • aqua_girl
    aqua_girl Posts: 17 Member
    Options
    Well said Packersfn7!
  • alyson820
    alyson820 Posts: 448 Member
    Options
    Two consenting adults should be able to marry, regardless of gender.

    And marriage is a civil act, matrimony is religious. Let the churches decide who can have a matrimony, but the state should allow everyone to have a marriage.

    Love living in a state that allows gay marriage! :drinker:
  • kyle4jem
    kyle4jem Posts: 1,400 Member
    Options
    Isn't marriage a religious thing therefore as most religions don't recognise same sex marriage then they can't happen? Hence civil partnerships?

    Er, many people marry in registry offices or similar, with no religious content at all - in fact, many civil ceremonies ban music and readings with any religious themes. Heterosexual people who marry in this way are no less 'married' than those who marry in a religious setting, surely? Why does the same not apply to homosexual couples? Why the insistence on a different terminology for what is essentially the same thing?

    You're right which is kind of my point... Marriage is religious although the terminology used sort of gets used a bit haphazardly. Nothing wrong with civil ceremonies for people to commit to each other forever.
    Marriage is most certainly not a religious "thing" but very much a legal entity, which is why in most European countries you need to first marry in a register office (to do the legal bit) and then you can get married in church (for the ceremonial bit) if you so desire. In the UK, churches also perform the legal signing of the register so you do it all at the same time.

    When I got hitched to my husband it is classified as a Civil Partnership although it affords us exactly the same (legal) rights as any man & woman have when they get married. Even the registrars referred to it as our wedding day, they're just not allowed to call it a marriage. Purely semantics.

    However, the Civil Partnership ceremony has to be entirely secular and religious readings or music are not allowed (I don't know if that is also the case for a civil marriage) and I think that's where the idea that marriage is a religious institution comes into play. Also at present, it is not possible for same-sex couples to actually have their Civil Partnership legally recognised via a ceremony in a church and in fact many of the religious organisations in the UK are openly opposed to ever allowing this, which is very sad.

    I don't care what "name" they call it, as long as I can get legally partnered to my lovely husband, but I guess not being able to call it a marriage in legal terms is still ludicrous in the 21st Century!
  • Italianyc84
    Italianyc84 Posts: 192 Member
    Options
    I'm gay, and my partner and I got married in Connecticut in 2008, shortly after that state legalized it. A couple of weeks after we got married, we were talking to one of the parking ticket ladies whom we would chat with from time to time. When we told her we got married, she said "see, I don't believe in that because in interferes with my spiritual relationship with my husband"

    umm...what does that even mean??? If you're marriage is in trouble, it's nobody's fault but you're own! :-)

    And when people say "same sex marriage, what's next, people wanting to marry their dogs???" umm--no. A dog can not consent to marriage nor sign a marriage license. Now, if dogs suddenly start talking and reading and writing, THEN we'll talk!! :-)

    I pay the same taxes as everyone else, yet am denied the full rights in my own country. That is ludicrious and just plain sad, in a country that was founded on all men being created equal.

    I don't feel as though it has anything to do with religion--I'm not seeking to be married in a church. I was raised catholic and understand the church's stance on the issue. I don't agree with it and hope it changes someday, but I'm not trying to interfere with religion. I just want equal treatment by the federal government.

    I'm 27 years old and proud of my sexual orientation--I have nothing to hide--but even I find it demoralizing hearing politicians on TV say I don't deserve the same as others. I can't imagine what it must be like to be a teenager coming to terms with their sexuality right now. It's depressing enough for a grown up!

    People love to say we want special treatment--no--we want EQUAL treatment! Why in the world should I, as a tax paying citizen, receive less than others, simply because someone else doesn't agree with who I love? Mind your own business. My life doesn't effect you.
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    Cool Im gonna marry my dogs so my insurance will pay for their vet bills, Those Vet bills get pricey

    There is a lot of truth in this statement.

    There needs to be a line somewhere. Marriage was designed for families, and for a man and woman to enter into a life together-not so they can get extra benefits.

    I don't care if someone is gay or not, that's their choice. I do think homosexuals should have visitation rights and all that stuff regarding hospitals. But I don't believe the meaning and reason behind an important societal building block should be changed because a group has political backing.
  • Jessaustx
    Jessaustx Posts: 130
    Options
    If you don't like gay marriage then don't get one. That easy.

    Simple.
  • stacygayle
    stacygayle Posts: 349 Member
    Options
    I personally think the Government has ZERO rights to ANY marriage straight or gay.

    I agree. the government should stay out of everyone's marriage. It should be a personal thing and the government already has its fingers in too many pies IMHO. As long as kids aren't getting married against their will, I have no problem with gay marriage, poligamy or any other type of marriage and the government shouldn't care either. They just need to stay out of marriages and people's bedrooms and deal with other problems like the national debt. :smile:
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    I am a Christian..but believe that God made everyone..regardless of sexual orientations..(God doesn't make mistakes). So anywhooo..the sermon was about standing up for what is right. The pastor went to talk about the movie The Help..and how many of those who opposed civil liberties were God-Fearing Christians... He put it out there..would we be pushing for the equal rights..or would we be the ones hindering the progress.

    I know most of the congregation would be they would be helping with the rights..but then he said flip it to today..what Civil items are these "Christians" trying to fight..so he said that if they are trying to stop certain civil liberties today..they would have been the same ones who would have been against the Civil Liberties in the 1960s...I thought it was very interesting..and hoping some of those God Fearing Christians...squirmed in their seats.


    So minorities had the same rights as gays do today before the civil rights movement? To equate two is not only wrong, its show a complete lack if historical knowledge on the part of your pastor. In fact, it trivializes what black people went through.
    I think its funny how lots of people think Gays getting married destroys the sanctity of marriage...but its OK for Kim K to divorce after what ...60 days..and same with Brittney Spears...
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    Agree with the OP.

    If straight couples didn't keep having gay babies the problem wouldn't exist. Its completely natural.

    There are so many shades of grey in this life. Live and let live.

    As for god, we all know about Lilith, Eve and Adam etc, so if its anyones fault, its god for making the partnership unequal rather than leaving it balanced :wink:

    Where has it been proven that it's genetic?
  • Wileyjoe
    Wileyjoe Posts: 282
    Options
    http://provopulse.com/?q=node/1557


    Link - views from non-religious standpoint against it.
  • sammi402
    sammi402 Posts: 232 Member
    Options
    The problem with the government is they have all seem to forgotten that whole separation of church and state, and they want to make the issue of gay marriage a religious one. It's not. Marriage is a legal agreement entered into by two consenting adults. If those adults want to attach religious significance to their marriage, that is their business. What goes on between two consenting adults is really none of the government's business as long as we pay our taxes. People (gay, straight, bi) get married for all sorts of reasons: tax breaks, benefits, LOVE, whatever. It's a damn shame that we live in a country that's all about "Freedom" but my brother can't marry his partner and my gay friends, who have been together longer than I have been alive, can't get married either.
  • brittanidigby
    brittanidigby Posts: 247 Member
    Options
    Homophobic ****s make me hate this website even more.
  • Sharyn913
    Sharyn913 Posts: 777 Member
    Options
    Someone PLEASE tell me what this has to do with fitness and eating. I think there are better venues for topics such as this.
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    The problem with the government is they have all seem to forgotten that whole separation of church and state, and they want to make the issue of gay marriage a religious one. It's not. Marriage is a legal agreement entered into by two consenting adults. If those adults want to attach religious significance to their marriage, that is their business. What goes on between two consenting adults is really none of the government's business as long as we pay our taxes. People (gay, straight, bi) get married for all sorts of reasons: tax breaks, benefits, LOVE, whatever. It's a damn shame that we live in a country that's all about "Freedom" but my brother can't marry his partner and my gay friends, who have been together longer than I have been alive, can't get married either.

    So should we allow marriages to be run in accordance to Sharia Law? After all, two people entered into the agreement.
  • ka_bateman
    ka_bateman Posts: 230 Member
    Options
    Someone PLEASE tell me what this has to do with fitness and eating. I think there are better venues for topics such as this.

    Seriously...talk about beating a dead horse.
  • Italianyc84
    Italianyc84 Posts: 192 Member
    Options
    Cool Im gonna marry my dogs so my insurance will pay for their vet bills, Those Vet bills get pricey

    There is a lot of truth in this statement.

    There needs to be a line somewhere. Marriage was designed for families, and for a man and woman to enter into a life together-not so they can get extra benefits.

    I don't care if someone is gay or not, that's their choice. I do think homosexuals should have visitation rights and all that stuff regarding hospitals. But I don't believe the meaning and reason behind an important societal building block should be changed because a group has political backing.

    but--what about all the heterosexual couples who marry without any intention of having children?? marriage isn't simply for breeding.
  • _SusieQ_
    _SusieQ_ Posts: 2,964 Member
    Options
    Someone PLEASE tell me what this has to do with fitness and eating. I think there are better venues for topics such as this.

    It's called "Chit-chat, fun, and games", in case you missed that when you clicked on the topic.


    I have a friend who is having an affair. Does this affect MY marriage? No, it does not. In the same manner that allowing two people of the same gender to be LEGALLY married will not affect MY marriage. The opponents to this have yet to bring up a valid reason for not allowing anyone to be married that does not have roots in religion, IMO.
  • JanetLM73
    JanetLM73 Posts: 1,277 Member
    Options
    I believe you should have the same rights gay or straight.

    Because my hubby and I had a child out of wedlock....yes we did the evil deed of sex before marriage, the church would NOT marry us, so I stopped going.....I don't think anyone, any church has any right to say who should be married and who shouldn't.

Categories