**** Marriage Debate, for or against?

[QUOTE="Tazzmission187"][QUOTE="mayforcebeyou"] yeah it does theres many other words thst do that. Like gun, and shotgun.mayforcebeyou

Gay marriage always seemed a little pointless to me. As far as I'm concerned, marriage has little meaning aside from in a religious or traditional context. The only one I can think of is connected to security for children, which is covered by child support laws regardless of marital status. Having said that, I can't see anything wrong with civil unions being recognised across state lines. Unless it involves a twisting of theUS constitution.jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="mayforcebeyou"][QUOTE="Tazzmission187"] your an idiot. look everyone its rod blagoivch *points at force' do yourself a favor bite the barrel of a shotgun and pull the trigger on yourself. freaking religious people are starting to be like a cockroach youget one you get thousandsTazzmission187

I support. . . the State.

It would be nice if the State would say "yes," though.

I support. . . the State.

It would be nice if the State would say "yes," though.

Theokhoth

What? Why would you support the state if you disagreed with it? Would you support the state if it engaged in genocide?

I know homosexuals not having equal rights isn't tantamount to genocide, but why would you defer to it if you disagreed with it. Tryanny of the majority is always a legitimate concern.

Outside of the fact that gays just want to recognized as being equal, as they are guaranteed the right by being a citizen of this country, there are several benefits to being legally married, such as for insurance purposes...Cloud_Insurance

[QUOTE="Cloud_Insurance"] Outside of the fact that gays just want to recognized as being equal, as they are guaranteed the right by being a citizen of this country, there are several benefits to being legally married, such as for insurance purposes...mysterylobster

Honestly, what do you have against gay marriage? How does it affect you if two guys marry?

It doesn't, so stop complaining.

How does it affect you if two guys marry you?chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]How does it affect you if two guys marry you?mysterylobster

Whoa sorry typo :o. I meant, "How does it affect you if two guys marry?" :lol:

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]How does it affect you if two guys marry you?mysterylobster

[QUOTE="mysterylobster"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]How does it affect you if two guys marry you?Jandurin

Really? I thought they did. This forum teaches me so many things about guys. I seriously didn't know guys plucked their eyebrows until a few months ago when someone made a topic about it. mysterylobster

For. There's no reason why not.Funky_Llama

What? Why would you support the state if you disagreed with it?

xXBuffJeffXx

Because as much as I care about gay people getting married, I care much, much more about the federal government not getting involved in marriage. Benjamin Franklin once said that if we want a functional nation, we need to put up with some **** for the greater good (he himself opposed the original Constitution).

So if an individual state says no to marriage, I'm fine with it. The fact that the State got involved with marriage is bad enough, anyway; if it hadn't, this wouldn't even be an issue.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]For. There's no reason why not.Solid_Snake325

The only halfway-decent argument I've seen is from Mysterylobster (referring to his post about the family unit being necessary to survival), while the rest have tended to be along the lines of "we must preserve the sanctity of marriage" or "the Bible forbids it." However, I tend to disagree with Mysterylobster's argument, as I do not believe that gay marriage would adversely affect society significantly; besides that, what is the point of society, if we cannot offer everyone in that society equal rights (I'm sorry, the argument that a gay man still has the right to marry a woman is bogus)?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]For. There's no reason why not.Solid_Snake325

[QUOTE="Solid_Snake325"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]For. There's no reason why not.Funky_Llama

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Solid_Snake325"] Yes there is, try reading the other arguments in this thread. Why do you people even have these arguments? No one ever changes their mind.Teenaged

:lol: well played, sir :lol:

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]:roll: Okay, give me an argument you find convincing and then we'll all shoot it in the face, run it over and jump up and down in its corpse.chessmaster1989

:lol: well played, sir :lol:

And here is the proof by someone else. Watch!

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]For. There's no reason why not.Solid_Snake325

This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.Qooroo

Marriage isn't a right.

[QUOTE="Qooroo"]This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.Theokhoth

Marriage isn't a right.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Qooroo"]This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.Jandurin

Marriage isn't a right.

A non-federal issue.

A non-federal issue.

Theokhoth

[QUOTE="Qooroo"]This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.Theokhoth

Marriage isn't a right.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Marriage isn't a right.

Theokhoth

A non-federal issue.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

A non-federal issue.

Jandurin

No, or at least they shouldn't: marriage was and still is an issue decided by each individual state.

However, and I don't know if it passed, there was a Constitutional amendment that allowed one state that does not permit gay marriage to not honor a gay marriage permitted by another state: basically, if two men got married in a state that allows gays to marry and moved to a state that doesn't, the state that doesn't allow it wouldn't have to honor the other state's sovereignty; and this caused a wholel new wave of controversy.

When the federal government gets involved in state issues, the issues escalate.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Jandurin"] What is marriage, anyway?Lockedge

A non-federal issue.

The federal government can't recognise marriages; or they would have to recognise gay marriages in any of the states that allow them.

A non-federal issue.

No, or at least they shouldn't: marriage was and still is an issue decided by each individual state.

However, and I don't know if it passed, there was a Constitutional amendment that allowed one state that does not permit gay marriage to not honor a gay marriage permitted by another state: basically, if two men got married in a state that allows gays to marry and moved to a state that doesn't, the state that doesn't allow it wouldn't have to honor the other state's sovereignty; and this caused a wholel new wave of controversy.

When the federal government gets involved in state issues, the issues escalate.

I guess only one anti-GayMarriage person wants to come out and claim they oppose Divorce on the same grounds.LosDaddie

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Jandurin"] Feds have nothing to do with marriage?Jandurin

No, or at least they shouldn't: marriage was and still is an issue decided by each individual state.

However, and I don't know if it passed, there was a Constitutional amendment that allowed one state that does not permit gay marriage to not honor a gay marriage permitted by another state: basically, if two men got married in a state that allows gays to marry and moved to a state that doesn't, the state that doesn't allow it wouldn't have to honor the other state's sovereignty; and this caused a wholel new wave of controversy.

When the federal government gets involved in state issues, the issues escalate.

I don't think it should be a state issue, either, but it is, and I wholly oppose a federal government having the power to mess with marriage.

[QUOTE="Qooroo"]This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.Theokhoth

Marriage isn't a right.

I don't think it should be a state issue, either, but it is, and I wholly oppose a federal government having the power to mess with marriage.

Theokhoth

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"]I guess only one anti-GayMarriage person wants to come out and claim they oppose Divorce on the same grounds.Lockedge

What religious community are you talking about?>_>

The idea in the religious community is to not rush into a marriage with someone you *think* you know, then just get divorced when you find out that, hey, he's a jackass.

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

A non-federal issue.

Theokhoth

The federal government can't recognise marriages; or they would have to recognise gay marriages in any of the states that allow them.

Federal government agencies do recognize marriages between men and women. That's how they roll currently, due to DOMA laws.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Qooroo"]This isn't a debate. It's a clear-cut civil rights issue.btaylor2404

Marriage isn't a right.

States don't treat marriages as a right. If the state of Arkansas were to decide right now to ban straight marriage, they could and would and would be right in doing so; there is no constitutional amendment or federal ruling declaring marriage a right (like there is for guns). In fact, there are several declaring the opposite. Nobody has the right to get married.

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"]I guess only one anti-GayMarriage person wants to come out and claim they oppose Divorce on the same grounds.Lockedge

You didn't hear? It's okay to pick and choose bits and pieces of Gods word, now. :shock: No divorce would be very unfortunate for the people in the like fifty or so percent of marriages that fail.

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="LosDaddie"]I guess only one anti-GayMarriage person wants to come out and claim they oppose Divorce on the same grounds.Theokhoth

What religious community are you talking about?>_>

The idea in the religious community is to not rush into a marriage with someone you *think* you know, then just get divorced when you find out that, hey, he's a jackass.