Gay Marriage Amendment: Good Idea?

lysergic states,

I thought we are free to pratice any religion here in america. Therefor meaning not everyone has to abide by the christian moral laws.

fine, then i want poligamy legalized too so i can become a hardcore mormon and have 6 wives....

any objections here?

hmmm, what about removing age restrictions for marriage, after all people since ancient times have been marrying off 12 year olds...
objections?

what about removing restrictions required to get a marriage license in some states that require blood tests first...or "pre marriage councelling before being allowed to marry.

what about arrange marriages?

How should our culture define its self (and us) in this reguard?
Should there be ANY defintions on this issue or should we go for a state of "marriage anarchy"?

fine, then i want poligamy legalized too so i can become a hardcore mormon and have 6 wives....

any objections here?

Fine...if it's between consenting adults. Why does the government have the right to say that polygamy is illegal in the first place?

hmmm, what about removing age restrictions for marriage, after all people since ancient times have been marrying off 12 year olds...
objections?

That's funny how when it's about gay marriage....people say "well, it's been this way for centuries, why should we change it now"....so now it's ok to say that "custom and culture" are wrong when it's turned around to fit your views? So, yes since it's been happening for centuries (according to this mentality).

what about removing restrictions required to get a marriage license in some states that require blood tests first...or "pre marriage councelling before being allowed to marry.

Something totally different. Blood tests are for those people who want to marry their sister and to make sure other people can have "normal" kids (by the way, if they are consenting then why not?....discusting, but it's their choice).

what about arrange marriages?

You don't think this still happens?

How should our culture define its self (and us) in this reguard?
Should there be ANY defintions on this issue or should we go for a state of "marriage anarchy"?

Yes, there should be definitions, but if they are consenting adults...then who cares, it's their choice. You don't have to like it, you don't even have to look at it, but quit telling other people who they can and cannot love. And don't give me the pedophile crap either cause I said consenting ADULTS.

It just goes to show that both sides are guilty of the double standard disease.

Obviously we have a system that is based off of christianity and thus rejects gay marriages, polygamy but doesn't do anything about satanic cults ect...

I understand it's hard for people to accept change, but this isn't like it's going ot have any impact on our lives...

If anything this is giving them a sense that we all have a sense of humanity, and we understand that people should be able to practice and do whatever they believe in if it isn't hurting others or affecting us directly in anyway...

Government has no right to infringe on our rights especially for something so innocent as a stupid piece of paper.. All it comes down to is benefits for the couple, the same kinds hetero's have.. We're all human, we all deserve the amount of respect ...

This just shows how ignorant , selfish, and hypocritical they are. I'm sure they wouldn't even care but their just appeasing the people who do...
Nice eh... Appeasing self righteous attitudes instead of setting an example that all men/women were created equal no matter what their sexual preference is..

If people want to be polygamists #ing go ahead, just don't push your #ed up bull# on anyone else, same goes with gays..
Keep it in the bedroom, and don't keep yelling to the world that your gay!
I do think it's pretty sad some people base their whole existence of their sexuality, but it's their right to, and it's also my right to punch them in the face if they get in mine... I'm rambling now, bottom line for my rant is...

Let's just all hold hands and be merry... gay, mormon, straight, snotty.. We're all the same on the inside.. *starts singing kumbya*

TrueLies,

Gays are NOT on the same side a staights!!!!!

They are OPPISITES!!!!

Out,
Russian

Originally posted by Russian
TrueLies,

Gays are NOT on the same side a staights!!!!!

They are OPPISITES!!!!

No # sherlock, but their still human beings, not frikkin dogs where you need to control and command them...
So what if their not on the same side, what you need to understand is why they aren't on the same side... If the world was gay from the beginning of time, heterosexuals would be the outcast. They cry and demand equal rights, while faceing hundreds of years of prosecution, who has the right to deny these people equal rights??

Originally posted by TrueLies


No # sherlock, but their still human beings, not frikkin dogs where you need to control and command them...
So what if their not on the same side, what you need to understand is why they aren't on the same side... If the world was gay from the beginning of time, heterosexuals would be the outcast. They cry and demand equal rights, while faceing hundreds of years of prosecution, who has the right to deny these people equal rights??

The world was doing great with no gay marriges till now.

Is it going to fall apart if we unban gay marriges?

World is a better place with no gay marriges.

Out,
Russian

Originally posted by Russian

The world was doing great with no gay marriges till now.

Is it going to fall apart if we unban gay marriges?

World is a better place with no gay marriges.

So sweep em under the rug like they don't exist, is that your solution to a not so big problem??

It's really not a big deal, it's so simple it's stupid...

These gays want to live in peace with their significant other.. How the hell is this going to affect you in anyway russian?? Really, are you going to be physically affected by it? Are you going to get some disease, is it going to take a toll on your well being?? What? What is the problem with this?

Who's to say it's wrong? Certainly not you, and certainly not me..
It's only wrong because society has thought this forever and we're just carrying the same tune as everyone else through time..

It's time to evolve nothing sinister is going to happen, the world isn't going to be in danger, these people just want stupid piece of #ing paper, so give it to them, anybody thats going to deny another persons basic rights shouldn't be in power... That's not what this country was founded upon...

Republicans are letting their politics and religion get in the way.. We have separation of church and state so why doesn't this apply??
And why do these people have to wait any longer because people are too busy playing politics and sticking their finger out to see which way the wind blows??
Russian I garantee you your life will be ok and so will everyone else's if they get their piece of paper... Nothing is going to happen to you...

MacMerdin asks,

Why does the government have the right to say that polygamy is illegal in the first place?

What about sociology and democratic principals dont you get? If the majority in a democracy decide that this or anything is/is not for their culture and wish to adopt/ban it, then this is DEMOCRACY IN ACTION...weather you agree with the "right/wrong" of the issue at hand.
Why are we ignoring democracy and a societies right to define itself thru its laws and cultural values?

Me and then MacMerdin exchange views,

hmmm, what about removing age restrictions for marriage, after all people since ancient times have been marrying off 12 year olds...

That's funny how when it's about gay marriage....people say "well, it's been this way for centuries, why should we change it now"....so now it's ok to say that "custom and culture" are wrong when it's turned around to fit your views? So, yes since it's been happening for centuries (according to this mentality).

I think this is funny because i was refering to the pro gay marriage people using "gays have ben around for centuries" argument to support their position.
Yet, marrying 12 yearolds HAS been recognized by past cultures, while marrying gays has not. (yes gays were around in ancient times, but never has any culture sanctioned their marriage before now, while marrying 12 yr olds HAS been adopted in some cultures.

MacMerdin states,

Blood tests are for those people who want to marry their sister and to make sure other people can have "normal" kids (by the way, if they are consenting then why not?....discusting, but it's their choice).

Blood tests are also used so that all parties involved know about any sexual diseases or other major medical conditions that one may have but not told their soon to be spouse.
And i see that at some point culturlaly, Mac has determined that siblings marrying are "disgusting"....(yes youd open this up to be "fair" tho)
Hmmm, so its okfor you to have drawn a line at no siblings marriage..(for whatever reason this disgusts you) but it is NOT ok for a democratic culture to do the same thing? What a selfish double standard.

MacMerdin asks about arranged (forced) marriages...

You don't think this still happens?

No I dont think this happens in a western country, UNLESS because of cultural (family) preasure...the person willingly gives in and allows this to occur.....Otherwise, how do you force someone to sign the marriage license and then stand there and say "I do"? Forcing someone thru what means...sounds like coersion at the least...up to mabey assault and illegal detention (kidnapping) at the top end of the scale if violence is threatened/used. All that one must do to not be in an arranged marriage is dont sign the certificate....while the cultural preasure you might be under to do so might be uncomfortable (up to violent) it would likley be criminal in some way to force a person to marry someone.

MacM comments on cultural rights to self determination,

Yes, there should be definitions, but if they are consenting adults...then who cares, it's their choice. You don't have to like it, you don't even have to look at it, but quit telling other people who they can and cannot love. And don't give me the pedophile crap either cause I said consenting ADULTS.

Hmmm, MacM accepts that cultural definitions are acceptable, yet he's not satisfied with the ones as they are now. Seemingly MacM from his comments would go for the "marriage anarchy" situation where anything goes.

He also talks about adults making the choice to marry, and therby Not to marry is also a choice....please note that we're talking about a choice NOT a right here....Marriage is not manditory for anything in life. (except to get a tax break, insurance access and legal ties)

No we dont have to like it, neither do gays have to like not being able to wed...so?

No one is telling anyone who they cant love....be in love all day, just dont expect that the overall society accepts or approves of your situation.
Can anyone prove "love"? Some people dont marry for love now, some marry as a business arraignmemt.

"pedophile crap"...hmm as noted earlier in my discussion....past societies saw no problems with this, but at some point,various cultures started to rule this out (as it stands now). Who are you to say a culture would be right/wrong to adopt this (democraticaly) or ban this act? Why is this NOT ok to ask for, or include in discussions? (Not that I approve of this behaivior either) We are talking about sexuality and its applications to marriage, and the resulting cultural impacts to the overall society right?
Certantly then as "child marriages" have occured before, "why is now any different" is a valid question.
Has ANYONE even looked at the legal system or the tax system to asses the impact on them? What laws are affected, where are the loopholes...
To liberals that say the Bush tax cut was bad, now think about any combination of 2 people getting to pay less taxes and ask yourself about the budget...wouldnt less tax be collected as more of the unions occured? Why not get married at 18 just to save $$ in the long run? An interesting hidden tax cut it seems.

Let me pose a "loophole" scenario....
2 men, friends but not in love, can decide to save themselves some money, and decide to get married to get a tax break, and to get to share the cost of insurance. "we can just get a divorce later when we both go seperate ways to mary our girlfriends after college" they agree....who cares, its only a piece of paper.

ITS ONLY A PIECE OF PAPER!? If this is your view of marriage, then you should avoid it at all costs.

Bush and company knew full well that this would never pass. Narnia had it right almost all the way - it's a ploy to flush out all the politicians' stance on it, but it is also a tactic to solidify the extreme right-wing conservative vote.

Leave it up to the states to decide how they want to handle it. It's only going to be a battle for the next 10 years anyway, then gay marriage will be yesterday's news. It's not a good enough reason to amend the US constitution.

TrueLies states,

It just goes to show that both sides are guilty of the double standard disease.

I would agree, but see some differences in the motivations behind this.
One side is trying to gain at the expence of accepted cultural definitions, the other is trying to say "this is how we are defined, where we came from, and how we'd like to be percieved"
The first side seems selfish and greedy
the second side unwilling to be flexible.

TrueLies says,

I understand it's hard for people to accept change, but this isn't like it's going ot have any impact on our lives...

My responce here is I have only seen a demands list from the pro side and NO real in-depth examinations of how the laws would be affected, which laws are affected? How? any loopholes for abuse?

What about the tax system?....we now have one group that gets a marriage tax break (M/F) Now lets add 2/3 more combinations to this tax break (M/M) and (F/F)....how many of the new couples are projected and how much $$$ will be then taken out of the federal budget because of all these new breaks given to new couple combos?

Are there any other unseen, issues that could be affected? Insurance costs? medical costs? Terrorists have stated that one reason they cut off our decadent heads is they are very against homosexuality.....let alone institutionalized homosexuality. What would they think about that?

I think we need an impact study before we say there is NO impact.

TrueLies again,

people should be able to practice and do whatever they believe in if it isn't hurting others or affecting us directly in anyway...

Sounds kind of like anarchist ideology...all the fun and none of the responsibillity...this also smacks of religion (wiccan and potentially satanism as well) so whos religious dogema are we using to definine our culture? More so, how can we blend these ideologies? Are they even compatible? (Islam is clear on its anti-homo stance...do we exclude their ideas?)

Also what is your definition of HARM? what kind of acts constitute HARM, or at what level does HARM kick in? How much HARM is HARMUL?

TrueLies states,

Government has no right to infringe on our rights especially for something so innocent as a stupid piece of paper..

See my last post about marriage is a CHOICE, not a right....As well as marriage meaning more that a piece of paper....this idea cheapens the concept of marriage, and its no wonder that divorce rates are so high if people treat this bond/union with soo little respect. Marriage involves a long term commitment and constant vigilance in order for it to grow and be successful. Marriage is WAY more than a piece of paper, which this IS a hot issue. Marriage and amily form the basis for civilization, and adjusting this idea is not going to be as simple as getting/giving a piece of paper.

TrueLies says,

We're all human, we all deserve the amount of respect ...

REALLY? Lets look closer....
Using culturally accepted definitions of what behaivior is and is not acceptable for our democratic society, we have created laws that define not only the unacceptable behaivior, but the resulting punnishments for violating the societal accepted norms. (NOTE there are no punnishments for being gay)

Criminals are NOT afforded the same amount of respect in our society because they chose to do things that were outside the cultures definitions of acceptable behaivior. They lose their liberty(prison), right to vote, right to carry(own) a firearm, right to run a legitimate business from prison (Poor martha Stewart....LOL) and indeed forever after carry a stigma attached to going against accepted socetal norms when they go to get a job (Please check this box if you have been convicted of a felony and explain).
Some criminals never get to be unmonitored by society even after theyve repaid their debt to society (sex criminals), and some criminals lose their lives for severe violations of society (death penalty).

There are plenty of other examples of "legalized discrimination" that exist in this culture, and i could put up an entire PAGE about them (I have on another post)

SO it seems like all people DO NOT have the same rights as everyone else, as determined by democratic societal boundaries (cultural definitions).
I dont see where any society could be "ALL inclusive" along these lines....how do you know what your cultural values are if everything is included, or if there are no cultural definitions for you to go by?

All mankind may be created equal, but where the individule goes after that is wide open, especially with no cultural guidelines to help the individule determine things.

TrueLies says 2 things here

It's time to evolve nothing sinister is going to happen, the world isn't going to be in danger

Why is it time to evolve? because a vocal MINORITY in a democracy demands it? Where is majority rule? what are we governing ourselves with if were not using democracy?

nothing sinister is going to happen, the world isn't going to be in danger

Tell that to the terrorists that hate us in PART because we sanction homosexuality, the guys that cut off our peoples heads and have openly stated their disdain for our culture in PART because of this idea.
Tell me again that their statements are hollow.....they have put thier words to action IN PART because they dont like homosexuality. Tell me that nothing sinister hasnt already happened IN PART because of this idea.

TrueLies asks,

why do these people have to wait any longer because people are too busy playing politics and sticking their finger out to see which way the wind blows??

Because in a huge democracy/buerocrasy, it taks time to make the gears work in the culture. Also they might have to wait until the majority opinion swings into their favor...isnt that how democracy works?

I do not agree that there should be an amendment, but would love to see this issue put to a national referendum in all states at once...a national vote to determine weather this should be adopted or not democratically.

TrueLies promises,

I garantee you your life will be ok and so will everyone else's if they get their piece of paper... Nothing is going to happen to you...

Bold promise!!! How do you intend to verify that prediction as well as back up the garantee?

OK Caz......

I have one question (well more than one) for you. You say that in a DEMOCRACY the majority wins right? Well, in SEVERAL states, medical marijuana has passed the MAJORITY vote. Why is this not legal then in these states? Because a MINORITY of people are against it. So much for your MAJORITY always wins stance eh?

It is because it would violate FEDERAL laws against it....the federal laws override the states laws for mary jane...thats why

Originally posted by Russian
TrueLies,

Gays are NOT on the same side a staights!!!!!

They are OPPISITES!!!!

Out,
Russian

Gays are NOT on the same side a straights? Exactly what is meant by that statement? It seems sort of ambiquous.

The current divorce rate for heterosexual couples hovers around 50%. What does this do to their children, friends, relatives, and society as a whole? I don't think heterosexual people have much bragging rights in this regard.

Now, people want to make sure gay couples can't get married? Most gay couples have been living together for several years. I think the heterosexual community would probably be embarrassed if gay marriages are allowed and someone kept statistics for release 20 years from now on divorce rates.

I can't stand this... I think gay marriages should not be allowed. Cumon, it's plain wrong... you look in the bible it's frowned upon.

Also look at majority, and those who follow the bible whole heartedly, they see to people of the same sex kissing or something in public with kids around, those parents would probably start flamin the hell outta them.

This stuff makes me sick anyway.

The main thing here is that Gay marriage should not be a political issue. I think it is a bad thing and people shouldn't do it (even though I can't do anything to stop em) but there are far more important things going on in the REAL world.

I really love that moveon.org commercial that has the couple sitting there talking about America's problems and how GWB isn't doing anything to help them and then they say, "Well Bush said he's against gay marriage" and the woman goes "Hah, there are actualy issues facing this country"

Good stuff :-)

the very idea of homosexuality kind of disturbes me, i don't think gay's should be allowed to marry, but i also don't think we should start a witch hunt after them

Homosexuality is not natural, look at the basic purpose (sorry this bits emotionless) of two genders, it's to produce OFFSPRING, that is the basic purpose of any species, homosexuality defies natural purpose

homosexuality shouldn't be stamped out but it should also not be promoted in anyway

sorry if i've affended anyone

[edit on 17-7-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
the very idea of homosexuality kind of disturbes me, i don't think gay's should be allowed to marry, but i also don't think we should start a witch hunt after them

Homosexuality is not natural, look at the basic purpose (sorry this bits emotionless) of two genders, it's to produce OFFSPRING, that is the basic purpose of any species, homosexuality defies natural purpose

homosexuality shouldn't be stamped out but it should also not be promoted in anyway

sorry if i've affended anyone

[edit on 17-7-2004 by UK Wizard]

Nicely said!!!

I agree with you 100%.

Dont kill the homos but dont lets them infect the rest the of the world by promoting it.

Out,
Russian

are civil liberties not sucessful without promotion??

Having to promote equality among us heterosexuals is what needs to be done to get to the ends.

How the hell do you think things get done?

I'm sorry but your arguments about promoting is not a really strong argument.

CazMedia you state

"Fine, then I want to practice polygamy and marry 6 wives"

Well, who's to say you can't? Whoever made it rule of law that somebodies have to decide whats right and whats not?

All i'm saying is that you nor I should get in the way of gay couples wanting to marry.
America's pride is based off civil liberties for all...

We made mistakes in the past at little rock, with police officer's letting go of prisoner's so they could get their revenge their way.. We're not perfect by far, but civil liberties is something for all of us no matter what our sex is, race, religion, sexual PREFERENCE...

To deny that to other people just shows society how intolerant some of us are, we might not like, shugo thinks it sick, it is , but guess what you can't deny people a right like the rest of us do just because it's sick...
It's a weak argument, it's a weak argument to assume that this country should be about just men and women getting together... In no way do we as a society have the right to deny people of different status rights and liberties.. That's not what America is about.. And it's not going to affect society... They need to promote their issue so they get results.

See what happens when you try and sweep things under the rug, especialy social issues..
Look at AA, look at black oppression, Indian oppression, women's rights...
None of the above are nearly perfect and after how many years??
When you sweep social issues under the rug like they don't matter they will come back even worse and even more screwed up, and the lasting impact will go on and on as you see today...

Again it's not our right as a society to say whats right and wrong, if people believed in true freedom this wouldn't be an issue, as with blacks, as with women's rights, as with the witches vs christianity, as with AA aka RACIAL PROFILING...

Society has been wrong in the past when it comes to picking and choosing who gets freedoms like themselves, and look at the impact it's left, look at the emotional scars it's left, look at the unfairness still to this day..

The gay issue is just as important as the above ones.. Why because it's based on principle and that principle is freedom.. freedom for all.....

Sexual prefrance, libirty, rights, etc.

I dont give a shyte.

Do not let gays get promoted any further.

Its enough to where they got already.

How the world was made to be is the man and a wife get married and reproduce.

There is no gays in it.

And there should not be.

Out,
Russian