Pope: Saving world from homosexuality like saving rainforests

[Garyzenuf]

Marriage is one of the foundations of our society.

We would be better off just signing 1, 5, 10 year co-habitation agreements.

There would be a shift in society and the way they view family and marriage if we are to change the core definition of it.

It's legal in Canada. Sorry, no shift.

It would be ingrained on my future (possibly) kids as an acceptable way of life.

If you believe otherwise, teach them.

It would be more prominently displayed and accepted.

Neither is happening here. Actually, accepted maybe.

There's no need to change it, in my opinion, so if I were to vote on it I would vote against gay marriage.

Then thats what you should do.

*

 

[b&wpac4]

I "tolerate" gayness or gay acts or whatever, just like I "tolerate" alcoholics or I "tolerate" whatever else. Marriage is overstepping the boundaries of what I can tolerate. In other words, if you do it in your own privacy I don't care, but if you want me to recognize it as acceptable or whatever, I can't.

The marriage part of being gay is what makes the gay part go from tolerate to accept.

If I get married tomorrow, even as a straight man to a woman, why are you required to recognize it as acceptable at all? The Catholic church wouldn't recognize it if I got married to my girlfriend, because I'm not Catholic and she's Jewish. I don't really care if they do. I don't understand your point of view.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Marriage is one of the foundations of our society.

Marriage has never meant just one thing and has changed to fit the needs of society.

There would be a shift in society and the way they view family and marriage if we are to change the core definition of it.

Who is this "they" of which you speak? The only people that should have any view or opinion of any given marriage are those people in the marriage.

It would be ingrained on my future (possibly) kids as an acceptable way of life.

It already is considered an acceptable way of life in those area that are educated. And so what you are afraid that if one of your kids ends up being gay they may actually feel ok with acknowledging who they are instead of hiding it and being miserable.

It would be more prominently displayed and accepted. There's no need to change it, in my opinion, so if I were to vote on it I would vote against gay marriage.

Opinions are not what we use to deny others their rights.

 

[Aianna]

I "tolerate" gayness or gay acts or whatever, just like I "tolerate" alcoholics or I "tolerate" whatever else. Marriage is overstepping the boundaries of what I can tolerate. In other words, if you do it in your own privacy I don't care, but if you want me to recognize it as acceptable or whatever, I can't.

I don't think you're "tolerating" gay people if you think they have to keep their sexuality hidden and don't deserve the same legal benefits to which you're entitled.

Nobody's asking your church to recognize them, but as far as marriage as a legal status goes purely religious arguments are completely invalid in any country that isn't a theocracy.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

I "tolerate" gayness or gay acts or whatever, just like I "tolerate" alcoholics or I "tolerate" whatever else. Marriage is overstepping the boundaries of what I can tolerate. In other words, if you do it in your own privacy I don't care, but if you want me to recognize it as acceptable or whatever, I can't.

The marriage part of being gay is what makes the gay part go from tolerate to accept.

But you are ok with telling others how they can or cannot choose to express their love to those they care about.

 

[angellica]

Look at how society has changed their (society's) views on gays in the past 10 years or so. Gay marriage will further this change, and I do not believe it is a healthy change. People can express their love however they want, I don't care. I just don't want to change the definition of marriage. I don't want to change what marriage is and what it means. I don't see any reason.

 

[Nihilismus]

It's "not healthy" because it contradicts the Bible?

 

[b&wpac4]

Look at how society has changed their (society's) views on gays in the past 10 years or so. Gay marriage will further this change, and I do not believe it is a healthy change. People can express their love however they want, I don't care. I just don't want to change the definition of marriage. I don't want to change what marriage is and what it means. I don't see any reason.

Change gays to blacks and change the decade to the 1960s. Now do you see how wrong you are?

 

[angellica]

I don't think you're "tolerating" gay people if you think they have to keep their sexuality hidden and don't deserve the same legal benefits to which you're entitled.

Nobody's asking your church to recognize them, but as far as marriage as a legal status goes purely religious arguments are completely invalid in any country that isn't a theocracy.

I think sex lives should be "hidden" or private. I don't want to hear about it.

 

[Aianna]

I don't want to change what marriage is and what it means. I don't see any reason.

To provide the same legal benefits to individuals who are currently being discriminated against for no reason other than the religious convictions of others in a secular nation. Homosexuals are denied things as simple as bereavement leave and simple property rights. These laws effectively state that their love is invalid and relegates them to second-class citizens with no justification.

Marriage has changed before. 100 years ago people of different races could not marry in our country and going back farther it was generally little more than a property arrangement.

 

[angellica]

Change gays to blacks and change the decade to the 1960s. Now do you see how wrong you are?

The difference is that being gay is a choice and is wrong. Being black is genetic and not wrong. Feel free to disagree on gay being a choice/being wrong, but I am simply telling you MY belief. I'm not here to argue whether it's right or wrong, because that's not the topic. The topic is WHY I or the church disagrees with gay marriage more than they disagree with, say, other religions practicing their beliefs.

 

[b&wpac4]

The difference is that being gay is a choice and is wrong. Being black is genetic and not wrong. Feel free to disagree on gay being a choice/being wrong, but I am simply telling you MY belief. I'm not here to argue whether it's right or wrong, because that's not the topic. The topic is WHY I or the church disagrees with gay marriage more than they disagree with, say, other religions practicing their beliefs.

why do you feel your belief trumps others?

 

[angellica]

To provide the same legal benefits to individuals who are currently being discriminated against for no reason other than the religious convictions of others in a secular nation. Homosexuals are denied things as simple as bereavement leave and simple property rights. These laws effectively state that their love is invalid and relegates them to second-class citizens with no justification.

Marriage has changed before. 100 years ago people of different races could not marry in our country and going back farther it was generally little more than a property arrangement.

So is it about their love or about property rights? I'd be fine with making it legal for any 2 adults to be able to own property together.

 

[angellica]

why do you feel your belief trumps others?

We each have a right to our own opinions and if it came to a vote, we'd all have an equal vote. So mine doesn't matter any more than yours. I'm just trying to explain why.

 

[b&wpac4]

We each have a right to our own opinions and if it came to a vote, we'd all have an equal vote. So mine doesn't matter any more than yours. I'm just trying to explain why.

Actually, if you would look up the history of the nation, when it comes to rights, votes don't matter. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and decides on the rights contained within. You could have 10,000 votes to 1, and if the Supreme Court decides it is a right, you lose.

 

[Aianna]

So is it about their love or about property rights? I'd be fine with making it legal for any 2 adults to be able to own property together.

It's about both. It's about getting the same legal benefits other couples get and not being denied over 1,000 rights (in our country) for no non-religious reason. It's also about the denial of this legal stats effectively stating that their love is not as good as heterosexual love. You need a better reason that "I don't like them" to deny these rights and make that claim.

We each have a right to our own opinions and if it came to a vote, we'd all have an equal vote. So mine doesn't matter any more than yours. I'm just trying to explain why.

Yes we do each have an equal vote. The problem being it's one of the jobs of the government to protect the rights of minorities. It is not just for 5 wolves and 3 sheep to vote on what's for dinner.

 

[angellica]

It's about both. It's about getting the same legal benefits other couples get and not being denied over 1,000 rights (in our country) for no non-religious reason. It's also about the denial of this legal stats effectively stating that their love is not as good as heterosexual love. You need a better reason that "I don't like them" to deny these rights and make that claim.



Yes we do each have an equal vote. The problem being it's one of the jobs of the government to protect the rights of minorities. It is not just for 5 wolves and 3 sheep to vote on what's for dinner.

"over 1000 rights" - that must be one of the main talking points on the "gay agenda" .

Seriously though, what are all of these rights?

 

[WatersMoon110]

Look at how society has changed their (society's) views on gays in the past 10 years or so. Gay marriage will further this change, and I do not believe it is a healthy change. People can express their love however they want, I don't care. I just don't want to change the definition of marriage. I don't want to change what marriage is and what it means. I don't see any reason.

How, exactly, does allowing gay marriage change what marriage "is and means"? Why does your (future) marriage suddenly become something else if same sex couples can get married? How does my marriage (done without any mention of any deities - as I believe religion is private) suddenly lose its meaning if my sister could legally marry her girlfriend (if they decide to marry)?

 

[angellica]

Actually, if you would look up the history of the nation, when it comes to rights, votes don't matter. The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and decides on the rights contained within. You could have 10,000 votes to 1, and if the Supreme Court decides it is a right, you lose.

Which still supports what I said - mine doesn't matter any more than yours.

 

[b&wpac4]

"over 1000 rights" - that must be one of the main talking points on the "gay agenda" .

Seriously though, what are all of these rights?

I could not find a comprehensive list quickly, but here is a list I did find:

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]On the order of 1,400 legal rights are conferred upon married couples in the U.S. Typically these are composed of about 400 state benefits and over 1,000 federal benefits. Among them are the rights to: [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint parenting; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint adoption; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents); [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint insurance policies for home, auto and health; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]immigration and residency for partners from other countries; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]inheritance automatically in the absence of a will; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate); [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]joint filing of customs claims when traveling; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]crime victims' recovery benefits; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]loss of consortium tort benefits; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]domestic violence protection orders; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]judicial protections and evidentiary immunity; [/FONT]

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]and more.... [/FONT]