It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When was the first instance of marriage? that might help you figure out who created it. The one that created it has charge over WHO it can belong to. If i had my way you would get no benifits for being married unless your raising a child. Its stupid to get a tax break just for moving in together.
The creation of life has ALWAYS been religiously tied.... Its always been for reproduction and has always carried religious overtones.
I will tell you why ...most Christians believe that if they did vote for it ..they would be condoning it (Which it would be ) ...so you will never get their approval for it ...And they are not trying to get all gays to turn to the Lord right now ...they are just saying we will not condone this behavour so we will vote no ..........
As long as it does not become a MANDATE that Churches,Priests etc have to marry a gay couple ..then I personally see no problem with allowing them a marriage with the State
California is about as liberal as they come and not that much of a Christian state .......if you cannot even convince them (Liberal Californians) to vote in your favor ..then I dont know what to tell you .......
Originally posted by Simplynoone
[It is none of any ones business]
Then why are you making it the States Business ..we are the state remember ..All of us (well we were anyway) ...we are all the voters who change laws etc (at least we used to be ) ...............
Your making it everyones business by asking we the people (who you say is not any of our business) to get involved to help you vote it into law (your making it our business) ..Or am I missing something here ?
The reason that my "Hubby" and I do not go and get married by the state ..is because we DONT THINK IT IS ANY OF THEIR BUSINESS ..and I do not feel as if I need their permission to marry ....I believe that it is between my hubby and me and GOD >>>..no one else ..
And I am not with him for what I can get after his death ..or what I could get while being married to him in the eyes of the state ....I could care less about any of that .
I came in with nothing ..I will go out with nothing ..I care not for worldy goods....
[edit on 16-11-2008 by Simplynoone]
So do you not vote then on the issue? If not voting against it, then you are not the ones I am referring to. I am talking about those hell bent and determined to MAKE SURE there can be no legal union between gays.
For some people it is important for there to be a legal union.
[edit on 16-11-2008 by Simplynoone]
Originally posted by Mystery76
Without the state legalizing it, you can not get insurance in many places through your spouse, collect their social security if they die, and so on. They got the love filled union already, now just want the rights.
I do believe I could go along with civil marriages. If they are not done in a church and not a relligious ceremony. I would vote for that.
Separation of church and state.
I personally find it curious that people seek out permission from the state in order to spend their lives together. And that goes for all couples. If you want to make such a statement, then make it to each other with god as witness. To seek permission from the state is to assume the state has the right to tell you yes or no.
Homosexuality is a behavior people choose....Plain and simple, argue all you want but that is pretty much the bottom line. Do what you want in private but stop trying to make the rest of us "accept or die" because that is really getting annoying.
its hypocritical to even suggest that a christian has the duty to change the law so as to force his beliefs on others.
When you say "civil right" what do you mean by that? I don't mean the consequnce of such a right being recognised but what that notion of "right" in itself means. What is their source and how do we discern them? Who define's them? Can the definers abrogate them?
Originally posted by jakyll
Are you wanting to talk semantics maybe??
According to Britannia Encyclopedia,Civil rights are a class of rights ensuring things such as the protection of peoples' physical integrity;procedural fairness in law;protection from discrimination based on gender,religion,race, sexual orientation,etc;individual freedom of belief,speech,association,and the press;and political participation.
"Rights" are that which is just,they are are legal or moral entitlements and permissions.
Governments and organizations such as the UN are the source,they define them.They cannot be abolished because that is to breach the civil rights.As stated in the OP,they have tried that in the US,i gave the laws they are in breach of.
[edit on 17-11-2008 by jakyll]
Originally posted by jakyll
Short answer,the people.
And the people are made up of believers and non-believers.
Government organizations have to protect the rights of both groups.And common sense tells us that oppressing one group while letting others do what they want,is not just.Oppressing on group because of the beliefs of another is not just.Taking someones civil liberties away from one group because it upsets another is not just.
These laws are based on equality and morality.These 2 things can exist without religion,and do exist without religion.
Originally posted by jakyll
Re-read what i said.This is about equality not majority and not who is the most upset.Regarding this case Christians are in the wrong,they are trying to take away someone elses rights.If gay people demanded that they be allowed to get married in a church and said that Christians would have to comply,then they would be breaching the Christians rights.
[edit on 17-11-2008 by jakyll]
No this isn't about Christianity is it? It's about the proposition that "Civil Marriages are a Civil Right."
So why,when two homosexuals want to get married,do Christian religions throw their toys out of the pram? The union is not religious,most of these people are not Christians,so what right have they to demand that this practice be stopped?
Is everyone's wants or desires to be given equal opportunity for fulfillment?
Originally posted by jakyll
This thread is about some Christians who want to stop homosexuals having the civil rights they are entitled too.
You can keep going on about 'who does what' and 'what happens when.' But it won't make any difference.Civil rights are being breached,is that too difficult to understand?
Sigh...i told you a cpl of posts earlier what a person's civil rights are.Those are the rights i am talking about.Which ones are you talking about?
[edit on 17-11-2008 by jakyll]