What is Marriage? Gay Marriage Cant Be a Real Marriage

[FlamingFemme]

So you really want everyone to ignore the fact that gay couples exist, THATS your true agenda. The teacher read a book with a gay couple in it.. thats all. They didn't have a discussion on the positions favored during gay sex.

The teacher didn't even read it to them - It was sent home in a bag full of 'Diversity Materials'. Which means, especially since it was given to a five-year-old, their parents would see it first. On top of that, it was a book entitled, "All Kinds Of Families" (or something like that), and each page showed a different kind of family - A mom and dad, a single mom, a mom and grandma, two grandparents, and somewhere in the middle, a kid with two dads. I don't even see what the problem is. Gay people exist. Gay people have children. Some school-children have gay parents, and are raised by their two moms or two dads. It happens. Just mentioning that they exist is not 'indoctrinating children into homosexuality' it is not 'discussing gay lifestyles' and especially not 'teaching children about gay sex'. Why is it when a kid mentions they have a mom and dad nobody thinks that has anything to do with sex, but your kid's classmate mentions s/he has two moms, and immediately it is thought of as dirty??

 

[cantata]

Should business owners be allowed to discriminate against heterosexual couples?

If you hold that business owners should be allowed to choose to whom they offer products and services in tota, then that's what you should be arguing for. You shouldn't be arguing specifically that same-sex couples shouldn't be able to get married because some business owners won't want to recognise their relationship.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Comonly we hear, the COurts have overturned laws in the past, to prevent discrimination. The laws were created with the intent to discriminate, to make favored people, and lesser people.

An astute observation.

Gay marraige is a new proposal. It changes age old traditional marriage, established not to discriminate, but to set a standard. When the marriage laws were written, sodomy laws and unantural sex acts were illegal, thus it would be criminal to act on homosexual urges. With the changing of times, Homosexuality has changed and attitutdes towards sex have changed. Homosexuality is legal, and should be included in a partnership of love. But forcing society to change by force is not the way to do it.

But that's just it: it has nothing to do with society as a whole. Extending the right to marriage to interracial couples didn't "force society to change by force".

I believe the overwhelming amendments to State constitutions against gay marriage supports my position. The people don't want to be forced to change to the will of a small group of people.

Naturally. But the point is that they won't be changed, since the rights of the heterosexual populace will not be affected.

If approached in proper manner, I believe people would agree to a compromise.
But if pushed, I believe enough people are so afraid of being over run by the activists, they will push for a National Constitutional amendment against gay marriage. I believe this would be a terrible mistake for all concerned.
Tradition has set what marriage is, evalution of marriage shows that people will change. Where love is, people will soften their hearts. But try to force someone to change, and it will become alot harder.

Indeed. And notice, Billnew, that it goes both ways: we homosexuals do not appreciate you heterosexuals interfering with our lives and our rights. Whether or not we marry has absolutely no affect on you whatsoever, just as the existence of interracial or intergenerational marriages have no affect.

It is my belief that the nature of marriage, that what it means to be married, doesn't require it to be between one man and one woman: two men or two women can marry each other, and the only difference would be the gender pairing (a rather arbitrary trait, in my opinion).

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

"Yes Jesus, I did read what you said about caring for the poor and sick but I figured you didn't anticipate the flood of problems being caused by gay people on a continent 6,000 miles away, 2000 years in the future so I took the lyberty and re-organized priorties to make the necessary adjustments. Hope you didn't mind and thanks for dying for me so I could re-write your instructions."

 

[selfinflikted]

We don't want to be accepting of homosexual behavior. And quite frankly, the law should not be used as a club in an attempt to force us to do so.

We don't want to see homosexual "marriage" imposed on the public.

Looks to me like the gays and their sympathizers are the ones trying to say they can get married and to force that belief on society with lawsuits and propaganda in the schools.

This is nonsense. If the government were to recognise same-sex marriages as valid, how would this be "imposing" or "forcing you to believe" anything? As far as I can tell, it doesn't affect you. Even if gay marriage were legal across the board, you would not lose your right to think it's "wrong" or a "sin" or "an abomination." Nothing is imposed at all. It's simple legal recognition, and does not and should not affect you or anyone else's marriage in any way. All you are arguing is empty rhetoric that, when examined, is absolutely meaningless.

 

[RealDealNeverstop]

This is nonsense. If the government were to recognise same-sex marriages as valid, how would this be "imposing" or "forcing you to believe" anything? As far as I can tell, it doesn't affect you. Even if gay marriage were legal across the board, you would not lose your right to think it's "wrong" or a "sin" or "an abomination." Nothing is imposed at all. It's simple legal recognition, and does not and should not affect you or anyone else's marriage in any way. All you are arguing is empty rhetoric that, when examined, is absolutely meaningless.

Didn't you get the memo? I forget the exact wording but it was something like:

"If we can't control others the way we want to then they are forcing their views on us and it ain't fair."

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Didn't you get the memo? I forget the exact wording but it was something like:

"If we can't control others the way we want to then they are forcing their views on us and it ain't fair."

It's worrying that that almost makes sense... could this be the secret to fundy madness?

 

[bexcellent]

Q: Will you support a federal marriage amendment, and what else will you do to protect the institution of marriage?

A: I think the best thing the president can do is set a good example, and I would start with having been married 50 years, and proud of it. I believe, also, that I do not see any need for another constitutional amendment. I think we have fallen into a trap that we have to redefine marriage. We're on the defensive, defining marriage. Why don't you just tell them to look it up in the dictionary, to find out what a marriage says? For federal legal purposes, the Defense of Marriage Act is proper. It takes care of all the problems. If you have to have rules and regulations, put it at the state level, like the Constitution says. But you know, marriage only came about and getting licenses only came about in recent history for health reasons. Marriage is a church function. It's not a state function. I don't think you need a license to get married.



- Ron Paul, Values Voter Presidential Debate

Being an active and faithful member or the LDS church, I was in full support of our leadership for yes on prop 8, however I tend to agree with this statement above. On the other hand, I also have no doubt whatsoever that the agenda of those who are at the core of trying to foment what they are telling us is about allowing gay marriage are about a much more extensive and nefarious agenda than they are portraying, and beating up little grandmas who have a dissenting opinion would likely be small stuff compared to tole they intend to thrust on our society.

 

[Bobfr]

I think the secret of fundie madness is that we can't distinguish them from their caricatures.

 

[selfinflikted]

Didn't you get the memo? I forget the exact wording but it was something like:

"If we can't control others the way we want to then they are forcing their views on us and it ain't fair."

Oh I got that memo, iirc. But I was out of toilet paper that day...