Do you support *** marriage?

Oops... something didn't work up there... I'm new to this place ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What I was saying is that the marriage we are getting has absolutely nothing to do with your religion... it has nothing to do with Christianity or religion at all... and when you want to STOP us from doing it just simply because YOU disagree with it, does make it forcing your beliefs down our throat. It isn't harming anything. And don't EVEN say something stupid like "Well, I disagree with killing... but soem people like it... so it should be legal, RIGHT?! LOLOLOL!!!11". No.... Killing actually harms people. Gay marriage doesn't. Sorry, I have seen that scenario dozens of times... wanted it to get shot down right away.

However, that is like me saying that I don't like green shirts.... so we should ban them... no one can wear green shirts... I don't like them.

There comes a time when you can DISAGREE with things, but RECOGNIZE.... that other people have differen't opinions, and it is a free country so people should be able to do the things they want to do. I know you disagree with it--many do. But in all honestly, there really isn't a reason to ban it. There just isn't.

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"][QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="Deathxcore"]

But Marriage is a Christian tradition, and an oath under God.

So it will always be called marriage. Since it isnt really so much that the government hates gays its just that Churches wont wed a gay marriage either. Its like wedding two muslims in a jewish cynagogue. They arent on the same page to begin with.

ShuLordLiuPei

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_marriage#Traditional_marriage_rituals

Marriage is now a Chinese tradition.

Again, (even though this isn't an evolution vs. creation thread) not everyone believes God made Adam and Eve. Again, seperation of churchand state.

[QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"]the family unit is very important to society and procreation of the human race.

oh, and if you dont think religion is not a legitimate reason to think gays getting married is wrong, thats your problem, dont make it my problem

mig_killer2

Will allowing gay marriage destroy the family unit? No.

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"][QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"]the family unit is very important to society and procreation of the human race.

oh, and if you dont think religion is not a legitimate reason to think gays getting married is wrong, thats your problem, dont make it my problem

ShuLordLiuPei

Will allowing gay marriage destroy the family unit? No.

[QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"][QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"]the family unit is very important to society and procreation of the human race.

oh, and if you dont think religion is not a legitimate reason to think gays getting married is wrong, thats your problem, dont make it my problem

mig_killer2

Will allowing gay marriage destroy the family unit? No.

The first question of the OP was: "Do you support the legalization of gay marriage in all of the states, and not just one?" I thought you were answering that.

Okay then, do you think we should legislate against gay marriage?

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"][QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"][QUOTE="ShuLordLiuPei"][QUOTE="mig_killer2"]the family unit is very important to society and procreation of the human race.

oh, and if you dont think religion is not a legitimate reason to think gays getting married is wrong, thats your problem, dont make it my problem

ShuLordLiuPei

Will allowing gay marriage destroy the family unit? No.

The first question of the OP was: "Do you support the legalization of gay marriage in all of the states, and not just one?" I thought you were answering that.

Okay then, do you think we should legislate against gay marriage?

No. Marriage is between a man and a woman, not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman,or a man and a dog, or a woman and a cat, period.

No. Marriage is between a man and a woman, not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman,or a man and a dog, or a woman and a cat, period.

CRUNK3050

But is that really right to deny our love? Have you read what I wrote in the topic?

No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Taegukki

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

[QUOTE="CRUNK3050"]

No. Marriage is between a man and a woman, not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman,or a man and a dog, or a woman and a cat, period.

Capn-Circus

But is that really right to deny our love? Have you read what I wrote in the topic?

Love has nothing to do with a ceremony though....:|

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Ring_of_fire

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

Sure, before people discovered the rest of the world and intermarried. FYI, that was a long time ago. Marriage is universally between a man and a woman, no matter what their race is.

[QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"]

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Taegukki

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

Sure, before people discovered the rest of the world and intermarried. FYI, that was a long time ago. Marriage is universally between a man and a woman, no matter what their race is.

and it stayed that way in America till the late 60s. A long time after the discovery of the rest of the world, don't ya think?

My observation is that religion is not the issue here, which many people seem to see it as. The issue I think in the bigger picture is political. Legal marriages afford certain tax benefits that partnerships do not. I think the reason many homosexuals want legalized gay marriage is for these benefits because if you want a spiritual marriage you can easily gather a few friends and, with them and whatever god(s) you believe in as your witnesses, declare yourselves spiritually bound to each other. Unfortunately that means nothing to the government and that government recognition is what is sought.

My personal opnion is not that gay MARRIAGE per se should be legalized. I am all for homosexuals receiving the same tax breaks as heterosexuals. Although, historically and currently, marriage is defined as the binding of a man and a woman. I believe a man and a man or a woman and a woman should be able to be bound in such a manner, but I do not believe it should be called marriage. Marriage has had such a meaning for thousands of years but I see nothing wrong with making civil unions and marriages equal for example.

[QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"]

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Ring_of_fire

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

Sure, before people discovered the rest of the world and intermarried. FYI, that was a long time ago. Marriage is universally between a man and a woman, no matter what their race is.

and it stayed that way in America till the late 60s. A long time after the discovery of the rest of the world, don't ya think?

The whole world isnt America, and slavery/racial segregation made it a little hard to marry an African American.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionThe_Ish

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

It was originally, and it is universally an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Since America was founded on Christianity (like half the world was), I doubt it will ever be legal there. Especially since most Presidents or all of them are Christian.

[QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"]

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Taegukki

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

Sure, before people discovered the rest of the world and intermarried. FYI, that was a long time ago. Marriage is universally between a man and a woman, no matter what their race is.

and it stayed that way in America till the late 60s. A long time after the discovery of the rest of the world, don't ya think?

The whole world isnt America, and slavery/racial segregation made it a little hard to marry an African American.

yeah, I'm not dumb, ya know. But I live in the US, stating how it is here, how definitions of marriages vary.

And in the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, and Canada allready have gay marriages.

I am for gay marriage, firstly marriage under the government has nothing to do with Christianity.. Its a legal binding in our secular government that gives certain benefits to the couple.sSubZerOo

Just to be historically accurate....marriage existed pre Christianity.....heterosexual marriage. You act like Christianity came along and changed marriage. It did not. :|

[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionTaegukki

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

It was originally, and it is universally an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Since America was founded on Christianity (like half the world was), I doubt it will ever be legal there. Especially since most Presidents or all of them are Christian.

So, may i ask, is it a bad thing for gays to get married? :|

[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionTaegukki

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

It was originally, and it is universally an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Since America was founded on Christianity (like half the world was), I doubt it will ever be legal there. Especially since most Presidents or all of them are Christian.

and in America, there's a seperation of church and state. Making that totally irrelevant.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] I am for gay marriage, firstly marriage under the government has nothing to do with Christianity.. Its a legal binding in our secular government that gives certain benefits to the couple.LJS9502_basic

Just to be historically accurate....marriage existed pre Christianity.....heterosexual marriage. You act like Christianity came along and changed marriage. It did not. :|

.......We are talking about it as it pertains to the United States Government. I never said Christanity had marriage before this.. Will CIVIL UNION make you feel better?

No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Taegukki

oh, where be the logic?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] I am for gay marriage, firstly marriage under the government has nothing to do with Christianity.. Its a legal binding in our secular government that gives certain benefits to the couple.sSubZerOo

Just to be historically accurate....marriage existed pre Christianity.....heterosexual marriage. You act like Christianity came along and changed marriage. It did not. :|

.......We are talking about it as it pertains to the United States Government. I never said Christanity had marriage before this.. Will CIVIL UNION make you feel better?

No you were blaming Christianity for long established tradition in every culture. FYI...in the real world more people than Christians are against this....and not all Christians are. I dislike generalizations as they are never true.

As for this issue.....as I said earlier...I'm against marriage period...for anyone.

[QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionRing_of_fire

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

It was originally, and it is universally an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Since America was founded on Christianity (like half the world was), I doubt it will ever be legal there. Especially since most Presidents or all of them are Christian.

and in America, there's a seperation of church and state. Making that totally irrelevant.

Technically, there is no legal seperation of church and state. That is why teachers are aloud to teach about the different religions out there in the world. However public school teachers cannot express their religous opinions because that is interpretated as a possible influence over children and thus a violation of the first amendment. The seperation of church and state was expressed by Jefferson as an ideal in a letter he wrote and was later published and the country has clung to the idea. I think I actually have a copy of said letter around here somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.

[QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"]

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]No, I do not. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been for thousands of years. If they want to be 'married', then they should call it something else. Here in NZ they call it a 'civil union'.Taegukki

Marriage has also been white and white, black and black etc for a long time, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

Sure, before people discovered the rest of the world and intermarried. FYI, that was a long time ago. Marriage is universally between a man and a woman, no matter what their race is.

and it stayed that way in America till the late 60s. A long time after the discovery of the rest of the world, don't ya think?

The whole world isnt America, and slavery/racial segregation made it a little hard to marry an African American.

It was not a little hard, it was pretty much impossible in most states, the law forbid it.

And you're right, the whole world is not America, but most developed nations allow some sort of marriage between homosexuals.

Also, the exact meaning of words are subject to change. Marriage in Christianity is a holy union between a Christian man and a Christian woman, so does that mean everone who is not a Christian is a bastard? According to most goverments, no.

A man and another man will marry. It will happen, it will happen more commonly, it will be accepted, and lastly, the word marriage will evolve to fit people like them in.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] I am for gay marriage, firstly marriage under the government has nothing to do with Christianity.. Its a legal binding in our secular government that gives certain benefits to the couple.LJS9502_basic

Just to be historically accurate....marriage existed pre Christianity.....heterosexual marriage. You act like Christianity came along and changed marriage. It did not. :|

.......We are talking about it as it pertains to the United States Government. I never said Christanity had marriage before this.. Will CIVIL UNION make you feel better?

No you were blaming Christianity for long established tradition in every culture. FYI...in the real world more people than Christians are against this....and not all Christians are. I dislike generalizations as they are never true.

As for this issue.....as I said earlier...I'm against marriage period...for anyone.

The majority of the marriage institution is religious point.. Most of the people against it are devout Christians which are the majority demographic in the United States.. They say its a SACRED institution.. Most if not all times sacred is synomnous with some sort of religion.

I could care less what its called I could care less if they can't marry and be accepted by the church.. But I think it mighty prejudice to denie a couple certain things marriages give such as tax breaks as well as other things.

It was not a little hard, it was pretty much impossible in most states, the law forbid it.

And you're right, the whole world is not America, but most developed nations allow some sort of marriage between homosexuals.

Also, the exact meaning of words are subject to change. Marriage in Christianity is a holy union between a Christian man and a Christian woman, so does that mean everone who is not a Christian is a bastard? According to most goverments, no.

A man and another man will marry. It will happen, it will happen more commonly, it will be accepted, and lastly, the word marriage will evolve to fit people like them in.

The_Ish

Churches recognize legal marriages.....Just for your information.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionTaegukki

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

[QUOTE="Sonick54"]

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]not really because marriage is a holy institutionmig_killer2

News flash: Not everyone believes in god.

News flash: Opinions can be wrong, and yours is. Marriage is not universally a holy institution.

It was originally, and it is universally an institution between a MAN and a WOMAN. Since America was founded on Christianity (like half the world was), I doubt it will ever be legal there. Especially since most Presidents or all of them are Christian.

Nope. Wrong. Marriage is defined by progressive nations as a union between two people.

The majority of the marriage institution is religious point.. Most of the people against it are devout Christians which are the majority demographic in the United States.. They say its a SACRED institution.. Most if not all times sacred is synomnous with some sort of religion.

I could care less what its called I could care less if they can't marry and be accepted by the church.. But I think it mighty prejudice to denie a couple certain things marriages give such as tax breaks as well as other things.

sSubZerOo

Proof? Because I know many non religious people that are quite anti homosexual.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

The majority of the marriage institution is religious point.. Most of the people against it are devout Christians which are the majority demographic in the United States.. They say its a SACRED institution.. Most if not all times sacred is synomnous with some sort of religion.

I could care less what its called I could care less if they can't marry and be accepted by the church.. But I think it mighty prejudice to denie a couple certain things marriages give such as tax breaks as well as other things.

LJS9502_basic

Proof? Because I know many non religious people that are quite anti homosexual.

That doesn't matter lol, even if all the non religious people int eh United States were given against homosexuals, thats roughly 10-15% of the entire population.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

It was not a little hard, it was pretty much impossible in most states, the law forbid it.

And you're right, the whole world is not America, but most developed nations allow some sort of marriage between homosexuals.

Also, the exact meaning of words are subject to change. Marriage in Christianity is a holy union between a Christian man and a Christian woman, so does that mean everone who is not a Christian is a bastard? According to most goverments, no.

A man and another man will marry. It will happen, it will happen more commonly, it will be accepted, and lastly, the word marriage will evolve to fit people like them in.

LJS9502_basic

Churches recognize legal marriages.....Just for your information.

Yeah I know, I should have explained what I meant when I said "in Christianity".

Nope. Wrong. Marriage is defined by progressive nations as a union between two people.

The_Ish

Well...the reason marriage has been important in history is to promote population and ensure the family was taken care of....roles were clearly defined for the sexes...and for children. Theoretically, a progressive nation would no longer recognize marriage at all.

That doesn't matter lol, even if all the non religious people int eh United States were given against homosexuals, thats roughly 10-15% of the entire population.

sSubZerOo

Ok....now what percentage of the population is gay?

I'm only accepting your percentage for the sake of argument.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

That doesn't matter lol, even if all the non religious people int eh United States were given against homosexuals, thats roughly 10-15% of the entire population.

LJS9502_basic

Ok....now what percentage of the population is gay?

I'm only accepting your percentage for the sake of argument.

Look it up I am sure there is a census demographic of it some where. They are of course a minority.. My point I am making is a large amount of Christians are against it.. This far outwieghs anything else because Christians are the primary demographic in the United States.

The main argument for these is the fact that marriage is sacred.. All other ideas such as it will effect the child if they have same sex parents which has been proven false through numerous studies.. Yeah I could care less if they get married or not..

My basic understanind of marriage imo is through legal of the benefits you get through the couple by the government.. I could care less if its sacred or not.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

Nope. Wrong. Marriage is defined by progressive nations as a union between two people.

LJS9502_basic

Well...the reason marriage has been important in history is to promote population and ensure the family was taken care of....roles were clearly defined for the sexes...and for children. Theoretically, a progressive nation would no longer recognize marriage at all.

We're not there it yet, but I agree.

Do you think that if gay marriage remains illegal that it would still promote a family and new beings being born? No. Gays will still live together, and not procreate. Whether gay marriage is illegal, or illegal. And, once gay marriage is legalized (because it will be in the near future... I'm sure... 10 yrs max... democratic president is fixing to be ellected), we can adopt children. I think it would be great to save these children from an orphanage.... Gays can give them a strong, supportive, and loving family. Those children will have someone... someone to call father or mother. They won't be alone anymore.

And for those of you who say that children need both a mother and a father--tell that to all of those single mothers and single fathers taking care of their children today. The divorce rate is so high.... so many single parents.. what would be wrong with a mom.... but an extra mom as well? Absolutely nothing

Look it up I am sure there is a census demographic of it some where. They are of course a minority.. My point I am making is a large amount of Christians are against it.. This far outwieghs anything else because Christians are the primary demographic in the United States.

The main argument for these is the fact that marriage is sacred.. All other ideas such as it will effect the child if they have same sex parents which has been proven false through numerous studies.. Yeah I could care less if they get married or not..

My basic understanind of marriage imo is through legal of the benefits you get through the couple by the government.. I could care less if its sacred or not.

sSubZerOo

It's a very small percentage. The fact of the matter is....the issue just isn't important to those that aren't gay The majority of the country is not interested in changing the status quo....and blaming religion is too simplistic. By the way...Christianity isn't the only religion opposed either. And as I said...not all Christians are opposed.

Legal benefits? Some legal benefits have already been given to same sex couples. In fact, in an ironic twist you can be gay....live together and have health benefits for your partner. You can't if you're straight.

Hospital visits? I believe they are taken care of as well.

Taxes? Actually, not that big of a difference in filing....somewhat of a difference...but the cost of divorce more than makes up for any benefit associated. And divorce is common now in this throw away lifestyle.

Children? What does that have to do with anything? You get to claim them whether you are married or not.

Dividing marriage between homosexuals and heterosexuals between civil unions and marriage is purposeless except solely to maintain inequity between the two. It's a needless addition except for the sensitivities of others, and such sensitivities themselves are unfounded.

Since we're talking about the US in particular here, its needed to mention that the US is not based on the tyranny of the majority. It was founded against such a concept and for all the law abiding as enshrined in its charters. Since the very word 'marriage' and its customs are not attached to any specific culture or peoples, it is a word that can be further universalized to encapsulate the relationship between two consenting adults regardless of their sex.

No, I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman.Right-Wing_Tool

*looks at post*

*looks at poster's name*

*lol*

Dividing marriage between homosexuals and heterosexuals between civil unions and marriage is purposeless except solely to maintain inequity between the two. It's a needless addition except for the sensitivities of others, and such sensitivities themselves are unfounded.

Since we're talking about the US in particular here, its needed to mention that the US is not based on the tyranny of the majority. It was founded against such a concept and for all the law abiding as enshrined in its charters. Since the very word 'marriage' and its customs are not attached to any specific culture or peoples, it is a word that can be further universalized to encapsulate the relationship between two consenting adults regardless of their sex.

Atrus

It's a government for the people, by the people, of the people. Just to help you out. Representative government...so until such time as they are willing to change...it is what it is.