Marraiges

[Golyadkin]

I personally am for them, I mean, we are all people, right? Why should people be denied freedoms just because they have different sexual orientations?

[Mogwai]

It all comes down to whether or not you believe homosexuality is moral or not.  I believe it is immoral and therefore makes a mockery of marriage.  

Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman and is where families begin and develop (reproduce, etc.).  Just my opinion and my belief...

Gay humans can still live together (no one is stopping them) and call it something else but I believe they are invading the bounds of marriage when they demand the 'same rights' of a male and female marriage - but marriage is NOT designed for same sex couples (in my opinion).

[Golyadkin]

I respect your opinion, but don't agree with it. It may be that I am kinda bias because I'm from San Francisco, but I think that same-sex couples deserve the same rights. There are plenty of documented cases of same-sex couples raising children, and raising them well. While the couples may not be able to reproduce together, they can still adopt. And I'm adopted and I think that it is a perfectly normal way of raising a child.
But that is just my opinion

Disclaimer: I am very strong in my beliefs. I can go on forever on topics like political parties, gay marriages, religion, etc. Just thought I'd let you know.

[Alyosha]

I think that this issue was just made up to support Bush. So please don't bring it up!

There are so many things in the world that are more important!

[Mogwai]

I think that this issue was just made up to support Bush. So please don't bring it up!

There are so many things in the world that are more important!

Do you mean a) brought up on this message forum or b) brought up in national news in general?

Because the only reason why it's been in the news for the last year is because certain cities in N. America have started allowing it - same-sex marriages have been granted and recognized which is a first for N. Americans.  Bush didn't bring these couples together!

And, on this board, the thread/poll was started by someone (Golyadkin) who firmly believes in same-sex marriages.  So, I'm not sure where it 'supports' Bush by bringing it up.

Also, this thread IS in the Off-topic board - so anything goes (Dostoevsky related or not).  

[Golyadkin]

Thank you Fyodor.
But one correction:
You said that certian cities have been allowing it, while this is true, the entire state of Vermont, thanks to Howard Dean, allows same-sex marriage.

[Mogwai]

But one correction:
You said that certian cities have been allowing it, while this is true, the entire state of Vermont, thanks to Howard Dean, allows same-sex marriage.

You are correct.  I forgot about Howard Dean.  God help us all.  

[Golyadkin]

Har har har.

[earth]

I'm all for Gay Marriage but I can agree with the Religious need to keep Marriage as between 1 man + 1 woman.

Sadly, the Gay Marriage issue is not a religious one though it's a political one.  They are being withheld from getting Marriage licenses.

Why can't we just rename them "Civil Union Licenses"?  

Under the law they can have all the rights of a married couple and they won't be called "Married".

The Religious will be happy as will everyone else.

[Golyadkin]

I think it's more the principal of the thing. The same-sex couples want to be "married", not "civil unioned". Keeping them from being able to be "married" would be like saying that they are less important and less valuable people. Also, the Cali Supreme Court said that San Fran can no longer issue marriage licences to same sex couples.

[Mogwai]

Something to chew on....where does it stop?

---------

San Francisco Logic  (A scene at City Hall in San Francisco)
___________________________________________
"Next."

"Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."

"Names?" "Tim and Jim Jones."

"Jones: Are you related? I see a resemblance."

"Yes, we're brothers."

"Brothers: You can't get married."

"Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"

"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"

"Incest?" No, we are not gay."

"Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?"

"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other.
Besides, we don't have any other prospects."

"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."

"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a
woman. I want to marry Jim."

"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us
just because we are not gay?"

"All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."

"Hi. We are here to get married."

"Names?"

"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."

"Who wants to marry whom?"

"We all want to marry each other."

"But there are four of you!"

"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert,
Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."

"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."

"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"

"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that
it's just for couples."

"Since when are you standing on tradition?"

"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."

"Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples.
The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"

"All right, all right. Next."

"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."

"In what names?"

"David Deets."

"And the other man?"

"That's all. I want to marry myself."

"Marry yourself? What do you mean?"

"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to
marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."

"That does it!  You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"

[Golyadkin]

Hey! I'm from San Fran. Don't push it buddy.

[reader]

Way to go Fyodor.

I don't much care what two people do in their bedroom or what they chose to label their relationship but the gay community does seem to be a little dishonest here.

They declare that traditional marriage laws are discriminatory but only as it applies to their situation.  If discrimination is the alleged wrong then why do they care only how it affects them?

It sounds as if they are using a call for justice to cover what is in reality a selfish wish to find a way around the law in order to get what they want  for themselves.

If indeed they did think the law was wrongt shouldn't they have said, "We need to sit down and work out why there need to be, or not be, some limits on marriage and what a proper justification of these could there be"?

[Golyadkin]

Dude, they just want to have equal recognition and rights as male-female couples have.

[Mogwai]

Dude, they just want to have equal recognition and rights as male-female couples have.

Therein lies the problem.  If the government granted every type of 'couple' a marriage license, then we'd have bisexuals getting married, 4somes getting married, people marrying their pets, etc.  

Marriage is defined as a recognized institution and union between a MAN and a WOMAN.  Our constitution defines it and other cultures over the years have defined it.  It's an institution given to us by God to hold sacred.  When we start changing morality, then nothing is black and white anymore.  Truth becomes relative and our morals have no ground to stand on.

This is what conservatives are fighting for (pro-life, marriage only between a man and a woman, the ability to have the 10 commandments in federal institutions) because when liberals muddy the waters of truth, then society implodes in corruption and a failure to recognize good and evil.  Is this what you want?