The Gay fight.

Ok about the whole gay marriage thing.... is the debate over civil unions or are they fighting for the "right" to get married in a church and the power to take legal action if a minister refuses?

Forgive me for being ignorant, I haven't been keeping up with gay matters in detail.

A "Union" is not the same as marriage. Like, say, if one of the partners were hospitalized and are unconscious then the other has no right to stay with his partner if the doctor says to leave. "Married" couples have that right.

That's just one example. I am sure someone else is more educated on this than me though, so hope one of them drops by.

They are fighting for the legal right to be married. A church can refuse to perform any kind of rite they want to. There are plenty of churches that would not have a problem with this - there are plenty of churches who would refuse this rite these churches have some perverted view of their christianity, and should be avoided anyway.

Marriage has legal implications on inheritance and rights of "sharing" for instance if I end up in an emergency room my spouse has the right to sign off on surgery or even end of life. This is the stuff that is important - the religious stuff is really of no consequence in this issue -- and the religions should really STFU about this.

I dont really understand why gay, lesbian, straight would want to be married if they are not of faith. I know some gay couples that are of faith (that throws me through a loop evertime, religion doesnt favor homosexual couples so why join that religion?) and would love to be married. I simply dont get it, love is strong enough to be true to just one another wholey. Why do you need a peice of paper to tell you that? Why be part of something that ostrocises you? It makes no sense.

EDIT: Marriage is a religous ceromony, why go through with it if you are not of faith. As well, since it was devised as a religous ceromony, they should have full legal rights on who they allow and dont allow to go through with said ceromony. As well, its a failing and dying trend to marry.

reply to post by AaronWilson

I dont really understand why gay, lesbian, straight would want to be married if they are not of faith.

Because marriage isn't just about faith, it's also about interpersonal bonds, and it's also about socioeconomic factors.

I know some gay couples that are of faith (that throws me through a loop evertime, religion doesnt favor homosexual couples so why join that religion?) and would love to be married.

That would be between them and their creator in my opinion. If I were you, I wouldn't loose sleep over it.

I simply dont get it, love is strong enough to be true to just one another wholey. Why do you need a peice of paper to tell you that? Why be part of something that ostrocises you? It makes no sense.

Like the two posters above you said, there are socioeconomic reasons why. And honestly, if two consenting adults want to marry each other, who am I to refuse them?

EDIT: Marriage is a religous ceromony, why go through with it if you are not of faith. As well, since it was devised as a religous ceromony, they should have full legal rights on who they allow and dont allow to go through with said ceromony. As well, its a failing and dying trend to marry.

In fact I agree, I don't think that if all states agree to gay marriage that churches should be forced to marry gay couples. It's also their right under their religion to not be tolerant of others. Of course, marriage in the United States is more of a legal contract than a religious one. (you find this out painfully when getting a divorce in this country.)

Me, I say if two consenting adults want to live in a loveless sham of a marriage making each other miserable, they should have that right just like anyone else.

true it's a failing trend to marry but when i told my buddies that i got married they all married their girlfriends. so trendsetting can flow any direction. but the issue of gay marriage doesn't bother me i'm married to a beautiful woman. if two people want to be married then there should be no grounds for legal intervention. what's next? interracial marriage banned because of eugenics?

I got married at a wedding - we had a hundred guests. It was performed by a judge legal in the state of Georgia -- nothing was mentioned -- "of faith" (whatever that might mean) so you are saying that I am not married, that my spouse and I don't share the mortgages and the financial responsibilities. The doctor came to ask me during an emergency room visit about my wifes care. The license that we have from the state says marriage license - they did not specify that the wedding call on the iron age myths to be a marriage. The judge was a friend. The party consisted of friends that we shared the big day with and witnessed the wedding.

How do you have the gaul to say that we can do this but that a gay couple can't - I find that arrogant, naive and bigoted.

Additionally I have attended two weddings of gay friends - even though it is not legal in the backwards state of Ga. These weddings were conducted by ministers -- so I guess they were "of faith" these folks are married in the eyes of god but the state of Ga. can't bring themselves to recognize this joining - ironic ain't it -- we the heathens have the marriage license they don't. Like I said this is none of the churches business. The constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, why can't the religious fanatics figure out what that means.

Originally posted by rockoperawriter
. what's next? interracial marriage banned because of eugenics?

Unfortunately where I live that is considered a valid argument.