This May Be A Very Important Day For Gay Rights

I have a quick question relating to the topic. Is the Supreme Court doing something with Prop 8 and something else with gay marriage. Also will they vote on it today? Just curious.

In my humble opinion gay marriage is not a big deal PERSONALLY. I am a youth and gay myself, but I never plan on getting married and personally can't see why it is such a big topic. I support the right of other gay people to marry but I just think marriage is a christian institution and because being gay is damned by them why is it important to get married if you are gay.

I guess I haven't considered all sides and this is just how I feel personally and I am not speaking for everyone. I just think the states is in enough trouble and the citizens need to band together and take a stand, not fight over petty issues.

Originally posted by vendettent
In my humble opinion gay marriage is not a big deal PERSONALLY. I am a youth and gay myself, but I never plan on getting married and personally can't see why it is such a big topic. I support the right of other gay people to marry but I just think marriage is a christian institution and because being gay is damned by them why is it important to get married if you are gay.

I guess I haven't considered all sides and this is just how I feel personally and I am not speaking for everyone. I just think the states is in enough trouble and the citizens need to band together and take a stand, not fight over petty issues.

If marriage is a Christian institution, then we must deny Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Wiccans, and atheists the right to get a marriage license. Getting a marriage license from the state doesn't have anything to do with religion. Getting married in a church DOES have to do with religion. That's not what gays are fighting for. They are fighting to get equal treatment from the state in getting a marriage license.

reply to post by teslahowitzer


Being gay is not a "Lifestyle Choice". Who on earth would choose a lifestyle where they are victimised because of their sexuality. If you honesty believe that this is a "choice" then I can only assume that you are bisexual but chose to lead a "heterosexual lifestyle".

I ponder the thought on if we were all around when slavery was obolished in the US and had ATS back then, would the argument still be the same as it is now. I think the same issues would be discussed and probably by he same people.

I'm gay and personally I'm not for gay marriage. In my mind gay couples can have civil ceromoneys which gives the same rights as our heterosexual counterparts. In my mind a marriage is religious and I have no idea why any gay couple would want to marry in religious premises, when that same religion shows intolerance to them. The other reason is that some religious people do view this extremely personally and in my mind what's the reason to antagonise the situation. We have the same process currently going on in the UK and it's not Gay Activist that's calling for this, it's seems to be the goverment. Unlike Washington, we don't have "Lobbyist" in Parliment dictating policy to our elected officials. I have no gay friends that support gay marriage, they also don't oppose it but we just want to be treated the same as everyone else. What we do in the privacy of our own homes has no bearing on anyone else, and if it does, then take a very close look at yourself.

If Gay marriage is made legal on a Federal level it will destroy the church. The agenda is not to give gay couples equal rights. The agenda is to destroy the church. Once it is made legal on a federal level, church's that refuse to marry gay couples will be sued out of existance. There is far more to this than it seems. Civil Unions will give gay couples the same rights as married couples. This is a war on Christianity. No ifs, ands or buts.

Originally posted by jimmiec
If Gay marriage is made legal on a Federal level it will destroy the church. The agenda is not to give gay couples equal rights. The agenda is to destroy the church. Once it is made legal on a federal level, church's that refuse to marry gay couples will be sued out of existance. There is far more to this than it seems. Civil Unions will give gay couples the same rights as married couples. This is a war on Christianity. No ifs, ands or buts.

Good as Emile Zola says.

“Civilization will not attain to its perfection until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest.”

reply to post by jimmiec


There are already laws in place protecting churches rights to NOT marry those they choose to not marry.

The only thing the "legalization" of "gay marriage" will do is insure that all spousal benefits (for GLBT's), including tax, property and visitation, are broadly protected under the same laws MY rights are already protected by re: my wife. That's it. All this nonsense about a war on Christians is just that -- nonsense. It isn't a war against you if people who aren't Christians don't want to be legislated according to your 2000 year old book.

And frankly - as we have already discussed - if you haven't beaten or killed your disobedient children, or owned a Canadian or Mexican lately, you suck at being a "Christian" anyway, because that nonsense is in your Old Testament too.

Try living like Christ: Love your neighbors, and protect them, even if they are gay, or worship differently than you (or even not at all). Until then, it's just talk anyway.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Ah well since laws can never be changed and you have assured me that they can not be changed i feel much better. PFFT

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Looks like you are wrong. It is already happening.

Dear Fellow Pastors,

I am writing to you today with an urgent message about the Gay Marriage Equality bill, SB 6239 introduced on Friday, January 13, 2012 in Washington State. This is a deceptive and dangerous bill. It represents a radical shift in the definition of marriage and would be a serious threat to religious freedom.

The bill's introduction says it would not force clergy or churches to marry gays. However, it adds a section to state marriage law dealing with discrimination. There has never been a section on discrimination in the Washington Marriage Code. This is a pretty clear warning about the future. You don't add discrimination for the first time without an intention to use it. First they label it discrimination then they criminalize it. They say they are respecting clergy and churches but they place refusal to marry gays in the category of discrimination. Sexual rights are more important than the violation of a core tenant of our religious beliefs.

A bill which describes the conditions under which a church can be sued for discrimination against gays is not about marriage equality and it certainly does not protect religious freedom. The Gay Marriage Equality bill is a serious threat to religious freedom in Washington State. It takes aim at the heart of religious freedom.

Churches and ministers who participate in the newly defined "discrimination" against gays would be subject to lawsuits and legal penalties. You will be bludgeoned into acceptance and submission. They want the church to accept and approve of gay marriage whether we like it or not.

reply to post by jimmiec


From the actual passed bill:

(5) No religious organization is required to provide
19 accommodations, facilities, advantages, privileges, services, or goods
20 related to the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.
21 (6) A religious organization shall be immune from any civil claim
22 or cause of action, including a claim pursuant to chapter 49.60 RCW,
23 based on its refusal to provide accommodations, facilities, advantages,
24 privileges, services, or goods related to the solemnization or
25 celebration of a marriage.

apps.leg.wa.gov...

reply to post by jimmiec


On this, I would agree with you. No church should be forced to marry gays if they deem it against their religious tenant.

Not serving bacon at the local mosque would have to be discrimination as well if this were to develop.

reply to post by jimmiec


For the record: I would fight against any "law" that attempted to compel any religious group - anywhere - from performing "marriages."

This law specifically prohibits that behavior.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


That is just one state. A Methodist church has already been sued. It will be the end result.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Well thanks for that anyway. By then it may be too late though.

Originally posted by jimmiec
reply to post by 0zzymand0s

 

That is just one state. A Methodist church has already been sued. It will be the end result.

Sounds like fear mongering to me. Where are you supporting links?

Originally posted by FireDragonDan
reply to post by teslahowitzer

 

Being gay is not a "Lifestyle Choice". Who on earth would choose a lifestyle where they are victimised because of their sexuality. If you honesty believe that this is a "choice" then I can only assume that you are bisexual but chose to lead a "heterosexual lifestyle".

I ponder the thought on if we were all around when slavery was obolished in the US and had ATS back then, would the argument still be the same as it is now. I think the same issues would be discussed and probably by he same people.

I'm gay and personally I'm not for gay marriage. In my mind gay couples can have civil ceromoneys which gives the same rights as our heterosexual counterparts. In my mind a marriage is religious and I have no idea why any gay couple would want to marry in religious premises, when that same religion shows intolerance to them. The other reason is that some religious people do view this extremely personally and in my mind what's the reason to antagonise the situation. We have the same process currently going on in the UK and it's not Gay Activist that's calling for this, it's seems to be the goverment. Unlike Washington, we don't have "Lobbyist" in Parliment dictating policy to our elected officials. I have no gay friends that support gay marriage, they also don't oppose it but we just want to be treated the same as everyone else. What we do in the privacy of our own homes has no bearing on anyone else, and if it does, then take a very close look at yourself.

edit on 27-3-2013 by FireDragonDan because: (no reason given)

This issue is NOT about religion. It is about being able to apply for and receive a marriage license from the state, with ALL things being equal. Atheists can get a marriage license from the state - there is no reason why two gays can't.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by jimmiec
reply to post by 0zzymand0s

 

That is just one state. A Methodist church has already been sued. It will be the end result.

Sounds like fear mongering to me. Where are you supporting links?

Totally!

As it stands right now, churches can pick and choose which heterosexual couples they will allowed to be married in their church and it's their right to do so. The legalization of same sex marriage won't change that one bit. I'm not sure I would call jimmiec's words "fear mongering"; rather, it's just plain fear. Nevertheless, I too would like to see a link to a court docket showing pending or past lawsuit(s) he speaks of.

We will not know until the opinion has been presented, and it could take several months to come out. It is important to read both the majority and the dissenting opinions as all other cases will be based on. They could also turn around and dismiss the cases stating that now is not the time and they are not qualified to make a decision at this time frame.

Originally posted by jimmiec
If Gay marriage is made legal on a Federal level it will destroy the church. The agenda is not to give gay couples equal rights. The agenda is to destroy the church. Once it is made legal on a federal level, church's that refuse to marry gay couples will be sued out of existance. There is far more to this than it seems. Civil Unions will give gay couples the same rights as married couples. This is a war on Christianity. No ifs, ands or buts.

Making claims doesn't mean much if you don't have the means to back them up. Gay marriage is about giving gays equal rights, not destroying the church.

You (as well as many others) try to make it out like it is because if you didn't, you would otherwise have to come to terms with the fact you're denying a group of consenting adults the right to do something that has no effect on your life whatsoever, and given how you've guys have been trying to justify that premise (especially in this thread), I can't blame you guys for trying to play the victim.