robbclark1 says - Marriage Protection Amendment - talk to your senators!!!!!!!!
Political DiscussionA place to hold political debates and general discussion. Please remember to always respect the opinions of other members and above all else, be civil.
maybe i am totally wrong, but the issue isn't if they are allowed a ceremony in the church, the issue is wether or not they are constitutionally allowed to recieve the same benefits that a straight couple would. plain and simple they are being denied rights.
it isn't a right to be married in the church (i don't think) im not a very religous person, but im pretty sure you're not allowed to be married in the church if you haven't gone through 1st communion or confirmation or one of those. so therefore, not just gays aren't allowed to go through the church ceremony.
the issue is wether or not they can recieve benefits from their significant other's medical insurance or be able to make decisions for the one they love in time of death or other times where a husband/wife usually makes the dicisions.
this "marriage protection" is the same thing as when black people were discriminated against. they could have had a "diner protection" amendment so they could protect the sanctity of diners from black people eating in them. or they could have had a "water fountain protection" amendment to protect the sanctity of "white water fountains."
"protect the sanctity of marriage" hahahah protect it from what?!?!are they worried the gays wont be able to procreate and therefore destroy humankind? are they worried that if they let gays get married everybody wll turn gay and once the worlds population dies there will be no more people? i know..it sounds stupid, eh? so does protecting marriage! STOP TRYING TO PASS ON YOUR WAY OF LIFE ON TO OTHERS. (not directed at anybody, "your" as in generally...everybody")
-----------------
edit: i don't wanna start an "e-fight" either. im glad we can discuss this in a mature manner! it would be hypocritical of me to strees my "live and let live" way of life and then get mad at you for your views lol.
Last edited by manthatguysfast : 06-07-2006 at 06:32 PM.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
But marriage is defined by the church as a man and a woman, so I completly understand why people don't want to allow gay marriage. Its something that goes against the beliefs of many religions.
Ahh, but the Islamic religion believes that marriage is between a man and up to four women, and since church and state should be separate to ensure the freedom of religion, multiple wives should be happily allowed!
In fact, in traditional Asia, polygamy was very much practised by those that could afford it. And why not? Makes no sense to me. So why should the laws be made based on some religious bias? That's unfair, because that means Christians get to follow their teachings, but Muslims and others cannot pursue their ideals.
But more importantly, if the republicans want to ban same-sex marriage, they should put their money where the mouth is, and ban divorce, to *really* protect the sanctity of marriage. "til death do we part"
I just got one thing to say .... God made Adam and Eve NOT Adam and Steve.
LOL, can you say "sheep?" I mean, how many times do I have to hear people say this before it stops being both funny and ignorant?
First of all, there is no proof that God made anything so if we start on that part of your statement then we've already proven it false. Secondly, we're talking about marriage, not if the first two homo sapiens on Earth were a man and a woman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diskreet
But marriage is basically a man and a woman, as defined by churches. Marriage was not originally concieved by the state, but by the church, so I think that if a law says it should be a man and a woman, then this is fine.
Did you read my second post? Marriage is basically nothing but bearing a child; as defined by churches is strictly Christian since no other religions have churches. Did the forefathers not agree to keep religion out of politics?
Also, where did you get the idea that marriage was originated by the church? The "church," as in Christianity, has only been around since the fourth century (officially) or, at the very most, for 2000 years. Do you mean to tell me that marriage did not exist prior to the birth of Jesus Christ?
I have a quote for posterity: "Religion, the suspension of rational thought in exchange for the feeling of comfort." I just made that up but it is 100% accurate. People will toss common sense out the window just to go with their religious teachings. I mean, come on, marriage invented by the church?
Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract (at least in America it is) and you may not enter such contract without permission of the state. Why should views of a particular religion be protected in our Constitution and not the views of other religions. If we ban same-sex marriage (for the Christians) we need to accept polygamy for the Mormons and Muslims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpan_home
But more importantly, if the republicans want to ban same-sex marriage, they should put their money where the mouth is, and ban divorce, to *really* protect the sanctity of marriage. "til death do we part"
That deserves rep but I need to spread it around first. Protect the sanctity of marriage on the front end but not the back end, lol.
It is dead(at least for a year, the senate voted49-48, 11 short). I dont know how I feel about this but I know I dont want this in the constitution of the Unites States of America.
LOL, can you say "sheep?" I mean, how many times do I have to hear people say this before it stops being both funny and ignorant?
First of all, there is no proof that God made anything so if we start on that part of your statement then we've already proven it false. Secondly, we're talking about marriage, not if the first two homo sapiens on Earth were a man and a woman.
Did you read my second post? Marriage is basically nothing but bearing a child; as defined by churches is strictly Christian since no other religions have churches. Did the forefathers not agree to keep religion out of politics?
Also, where did you get the idea that marriage was originated by the church? The "church," as in Christianity, has only been around since the fourth century (officially) or, at the very most, for 2000 years. Do you mean to tell me that marriage did not exist prior to the birth of Jesus Christ?
I have a quote for posterity: "Religion, the suspension of rational thought in exchange for the feeling of comfort." I just made that up but it is 100% accurate. People will toss common sense out the window just to go with their religious teachings. I mean, come on, marriage invented by the church?
Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract (at least in America it is) and you may not enter such contract without permission of the state. Why should views of a particular religion be protected in our Constitution and not the views of other religions. If we ban same-sex marriage (for the Christians) we need to accept polygamy for the Mormons and Muslims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpan_home
But more importantly, if the republicans want to ban same-sex marriage, they should put their money where the mouth is, and ban divorce, to *really* protect the sanctity of marriage. "til death do we part"
That deserves rep but I need to spread it around first. Protect the sanctity of marriage on the front end but not the back end, lol.
dont worry - i got him!
even though i wouldnt agree with saying no one could get a divorce, this analogy does make perfect sense to me -
Last edited by Fiji_Blue_EM2 : 06-08-2006 at 07:01 AM.
marriage is nothing but the union of 2 people with vows to remain faithful and to be together. anyone has a right to take these vows, and marriage is obviously not exclusive to any one religion: satanists get married! the only restriction i see is to keep marriage between humans, and beyond that who the hell has the right to say who can get married and who can't? i suppose they aren't saying they can't get married, but they will not recognize the marriage, so there is hardly a difference. meh that's my 3 minutes of thought put into that, because i have given up on political issues in this country.
i suppose they aren't saying they can't get married, but they will not recognize the marriage, so there is hardly a difference. meh that's my 3 minutes of thought put into that, because i have given up on political issues in this country.
Actually, they're saying they want to put an amendment in the Constitution to say that two people of the same sex cannot be "married." Of course, you can always get around it by calling it a "civil union" or whatever other euphamism you want, but the fact remains that this would be a discriminatory action.
Bush (and other conservatives) say that "activist" judges are making decisions that the poeple do not agree with or support. Funny, this comes from a President that lost the popular election, lost the state of Florida, and had the Supreme Court pronounce that he had won, even though he had lost. Where were the claims of activist judges then? You have to love the irony.
yeah im done posting here now. This is why I hate these threads, people take it completly personally and don't open their minds to other people's views.
I dunno, I thought I was pretty open-minded... I mean, how close-minded can I really be if I believe polygamy is the way to go yet I follow monogamy rules?
And if polygamy was not recognized at all, the word concubine would not exist! It'd just be an affair...
protect it from what?!?!are they worried the gays wont be able to procreate and therefore destroy humankind? are they worried that if they let gays get married everybody wll turn gay and once the worlds population dies there will be no more people? i know..it sounds stupid, eh? so does protecting marriage! STOP TRYING TO PASS ON YOUR WAY OF LIFE ON TO OTHERS. (not directed at anybody, "your" as in generally...everybody")
- um - i mean working really hard 
