Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Do you support gay marriage?

Page 4 of 6 [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Do you support gay marriage?
Yes, I support gay marriage. 77%  77%  [ 86 ]
No, I don't believe in gay marriage. 12%  12%  [ 13 ]
I'm not sure. 3%  3%  [ 3 ]
I don't support marriage PERIOD. 8%  8%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 111

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

01 Dec 2008, 10:34 am

If I had it right, I don't think I'd be a breeder.



flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

01 Dec 2008, 1:03 pm

slowmutant wrote:
If I had it right, I don't think I'd be a breeder.


It's possible to have a working knowledge of the mechanics of something you're not a part of.

I have a better understanding of the Catholic faith then most Catholics, but yet I'm agnostic.

It's ok to ask questions SM, but repeatedly asking the same one shows a willful desire to ignore the answer.

Since you can usually put a sentence together in a coherent manner, this apparent willful ignorance comes across as trolling.

I don't know if that's your intended effect, but your actions make it appear that that is indeed your game plan.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

01 Dec 2008, 3:41 pm

flutter wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
If I had it right, I don't think I'd be a breeder.


It's possible to have a working knowledge of the mechanics of something you're not a part of.

I have a better understanding of the Catholic faith then most Catholics, but yet I'm agnostic.

It's ok to ask questions SM, but repeatedly asking the same one shows a willful desire to ignore the answer.

Since you can usually put a sentence together in a coherent manner, this apparent willful ignorance comes across as trolling.

I don't know if that's your intended effect, but your actions make it appear that that is indeed your game plan.


Eloquently put, nearly as poetic as my response :lol:


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

01 Dec 2008, 4:07 pm

Marriage itself is an antiquated institution which not many heterosexual couples engage in or are able to maintain. Not to mention that but this religious connotation has no place in a secular society. They're simply defining marriage as if Christians invented it. If two homosexuals who are also atheists wish to marry, what right is it of the non-secular religious right to tell them they can't? They don't share the belief at all so it should have no relevance.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

02 Dec 2008, 5:53 am

Vigilans wrote:
Marriage itself is an antiquated institution which not many heterosexual couples engage in or are able to maintain. Not to mention that but this religious connotation has no place in a secular society. They're simply defining marriage as if Christians invented it. If two homosexuals who are also atheists wish to marry, what right is it of the non-secular religious right to tell them they can't? They don't share the belief at all so it should have no relevance.


If that's true, why hav so many same-sex couples exchanged rings, exchanged vows, had ceremonies? I don't quite understand how marriage is totally shat-upon by some LGBT as worthless, antiquated, outdated, etc., and yet the right to marry your partner in church with friends & family present, like Ellen & Portia, is the golden fleece of all gays & lesbians everywhere.

What is that you really want, LGBT? Marriage or Civil Union?

Both?
Neither?

If you all crap on marriage, then you naturally don't get any. How's that?

Or better yet, same-sex marriage should be made MANDATORY for all same-sex couples. If you are in a commited homosexual relationship, you are automatically considered terrorists if you are gay & single.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

02 Dec 2008, 5:54 am

Vigilans wrote:
Marriage itself is an antiquated institution which not many heterosexual couples engage in or are able to maintain. Not to mention that but this religious connotation has no place in a secular society. They're simply defining marriage as if Christians invented it. If two homosexuals who are also atheists wish to marry, what right is it of the non-secular religious right to tell them they can't? They don't share the belief at all so it should have no relevance.


If that's true, why hav so many same-sex couples exchanged rings, exchanged vows, had ceremonies? I don't quite understand how marriage is totally shat-upon by some LGBT as worthless, antiquated, outdated, etc., and yet the right to marry your partner in church with friends & family present, like Ellen & Portia, is the golden fleece of all gays & lesbians everywhere.

What is that you really want, LGBT? Marriage or Civil Union?

Both?
Neither?

If you all crap on marriage, then you naturally don't get any. How's that?

Or better yet, same-sex marriage should be made MANDATORY for all same-sex couples. If you are in a commited homosexual relationship, you are automatically considered terrorists if you are gay & single.



flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

02 Dec 2008, 10:05 am

slowmutant wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Marriage itself is an antiquated institution which not many heterosexual couples engage in or are able to maintain. Not to mention that but this religious connotation has no place in a secular society. They're simply defining marriage as if Christians invented it. If two homosexuals who are also atheists wish to marry, what right is it of the non-secular religious right to tell them they can't? They don't share the belief at all so it should have no relevance.


If that's true, why hav so many same-sex couples exchanged rings, exchanged vows, had ceremonies? I don't quite understand how marriage is totally shat-upon by some LGBT as worthless, antiquated, outdated, etc., and yet the right to marry your partner in church with friends & family present, like Ellen & Portia, is the golden fleece of all gays & lesbians everywhere.

What is that you really want, LGBT? Marriage or Civil Union?

Both?
Neither?

If you all crap on marriage, then you naturally don't get any. How's that?

Or better yet, same-sex marriage should be made MANDATORY for all same-sex couples. If you are in a commited homosexual relationship, you are automatically considered terrorists if you are gay & single.



You went a little far on this one SM. ;)

The answer is gonna be different for each person.

My answer, I'm more concerned with the civil rights associated with marriage currently then the actual word marriage. I believe it's discriminatory to give one long term committed couple financial benefits from the US government and deny those same benefits to another long term committed couple simply based on the gender (or lack thereof) of the participants. It's not the job of our government to make private sphere moral decisions. Public sphere - like drunk driving, murder, rape..... yes...... but they don't belong in the bedroom between consenting adults.

What does that mean? I support gay marriage because it's simpler to include gay couples in the existing structure then it is to rework the entire structure. I'd prefer to see the government only recognize civil unions and leave marriage to the churches, but that requires rewriting a lot of laws.

I'll be happy with whatever solution provides legal equality with no differentiation. (i.e. I am opposed to civil unions and marriages both being recognized as separate distinct contracts by the government)



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

02 Dec 2008, 10:11 am

Yay marriage!

The institution itself is not to be blamed for anything. It's the individuals who make or break it. Since I myself am the product of a successful 34 year marriage, I will naturally defend it against all detractors.



flutter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 575

02 Dec 2008, 10:21 am

slowmutant wrote:
Yay marriage!

The institution itself is not to be blamed for anything. It's the individuals who make or break it. Since I myself am the product of a successful 34 year marriage, I will naturally defend it against all detractors.


And my parents were married 33 years, till my father's passing.

My three half-siblings are the result of a 3 year marriage when my father was 18 because they both desperately wanted to escape their parents.

My current partner has been married twice, and has 6 children, 3 from each. and neither of them worked, but of the 4 I've met, they all seem like pretty well adjusted good kids. (Funnily, her oldest daughter is a diagnosed aspie, which probably explains why she understands me so well)

Anyways.... I've lost track of my point.

So.... I'm just gonna hit submit and if it comes back to me I'll post again. ;)



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

02 Dec 2008, 3:19 pm

slowmutant wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Marriage itself is an antiquated institution which not many heterosexual couples engage in or are able to maintain. Not to mention that but this religious connotation has no place in a secular society. They're simply defining marriage as if Christians invented it. If two homosexuals who are also atheists wish to marry, what right is it of the non-secular religious right to tell them they can't? They don't share the belief at all so it should have no relevance.


If that's true, why hav so many same-sex couples exchanged rings, exchanged vows, had ceremonies? I don't quite understand how marriage is totally shat-upon by some LGBT as worthless, antiquated, outdated, etc., and yet the right to marry your partner in church with friends & family present, like Ellen & Portia, is the golden fleece of all gays & lesbians everywhere.

What is that you really want, LGBT? Marriage or Civil Union?

Both?
Neither?

If you all crap on marriage, then you naturally don't get any. How's that?

Or better yet, same-sex marriage should be made MANDATORY for all same-sex couples. If you are in a commited homosexual relationship, you are automatically considered terrorists if you are gay & single.


I don't understand why you quoted what I said your not really answering my post in any way. I don't understand what your trying to say with your last couple of sentences, I don't see how its relevant. Obviously this is a contentious issue to you, so I can only suggest you step back for a second and re-explain what your point is without throwing in radicalization.



NocturnalQuilter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 937

02 Dec 2008, 7:36 pm

If you really want to SAVE MARRIAGE..........

... make divorce illegal



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

03 Dec 2008, 4:39 am

NocturnalQuilter wrote:
If you really want to SAVE MARRIAGE..........

... make divorce illegal


That's as unfair as preventing same-sex couples from marrying. How many people would be trapped in loveless and abusive marriages if divorce were illegal?



Fidget
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 919
Location: Illinois, US

03 Dec 2008, 5:12 am

slowmutant wrote:
NocturnalQuilter wrote:
If you really want to SAVE MARRIAGE..........

... make divorce illegal


That's as unfair as preventing same-sex couples from marrying. How many people would be trapped in loveless and abusive marriages if divorce were illegal?


Should've thought of that before they got married. ;]

haha, I'm just kidding.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

03 Dec 2008, 7:50 pm

A fun little musical number on the issue.


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


Fidget
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 919
Location: Illinois, US

03 Dec 2008, 9:51 pm

skafather84 wrote:
A fun little musical number on the issue.


Oh, that's awesome! One of my favorite comedians, Margarat Cho was in that (she's bisexual) and I believe the guy in white who closed the number was Neil Patrick Harris (he's gay)



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

03 Dec 2008, 11:50 pm

Fidget wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
NocturnalQuilter wrote:
If you really want to SAVE MARRIAGE..........

... make divorce illegal


That's as unfair as preventing same-sex couples from marrying. How many people would be trapped in loveless and abusive marriages if divorce were illegal?


Should've thought of that before they got married. ;]

Yes, it's a very good idea to make divorce ilegal, once they make that choice they stay with it for the rest of their lives, only death should separate what God has united.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?