Why do they need marriage?

DamnYankee said:
This is a logical fallacy, that since it doesn't affect me directly it should be OK.

You could make that same argument for bestiality.
Click to expand...

Animals do not have the same civil rights that people do. Talk about a logical fallacy.

DamnYankee said:
You're "separate but equal" argument only works for civil rights. Civil marriage is a licensing issue; a privilege.
Click to expand...

Marriage is an outgrowth of the church. Government's original role was to record the marriage and award legal rights. Over time, government took more of those rights from the religious ceremony and incorporated it into what government could do. Then government began denying those rights based on race. Whites and any other race could not marry, etc. The same discriminatory policy is in place about two people of the same gender. If they get married NO OTHER MARRIAGE IS THREATENED OR DEMEANED unless you want your own to be.

Who knows, it just might be the reason that long suffering women who are tired of being married to religious bigots might use to get out of marriages they have been suffering in for years. More power to them.
 
To clarify how these States allowed Gay Marriages:

9 States and DC now allow Gay marriages

1. Massachusetts - November 18, 2003 - Massachusetts Supreme Court Ruling
2. Connecticut - October 10, 2008 - Connecticut Supreme Court Ruling
3. Iowa - April 3, 2009 - Iowa Supreme Court Ruling
4. Vermont - April 7, 2009 - approved by the state legislature
5. District of Columbia - December 18, 2009 - passed by an overwhelming majority of City Council - signed by Mayor
6. New York - June 24, 2011 - approved by the state legislature
7. New Hampshire - March 21, 2012 - approved by the state legislature
8. Maine - November 6, 2012 - majority of Maine voters voted for Question 1
9. Maryland - November 6, 2012 - majority of Marylanders voted for Question 6
10. Washington - November 6, 2012 - voters approved Referendum 74
 
I am SO proud of Maine and I am proud that I could cast my absentee ballot that helped bring gay marriage to my home state. I only wish that it had happened while I was still pastoring so that I might have united the several gay couples in my congregation in HOLY matrimony. It is good to know that my successor already has done so.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
To clarify how these States allowed Gay Marriages:

9 States and DC now allow Gay marriages

1. Massachusetts - November 18, 2003 - Massachusetts Supreme Court Ruling
2. Connecticut - October 10, 2008 - Connecticut Supreme Court Ruling
3. Iowa - April 3, 2009 - Iowa Supreme Court Ruling
4. Vermont - April 7, 2009 - approved by the state legislature
5. District of Columbia - December 18, 2009 - passed by an overwhelming majority of City Council - signed by Mayor
6. New York - June 24, 2011 - approved by the state legislature
7. New Hampshire - March 21, 2012 - approved by the state legislature
8. Maine - November 6, 2012 - majority of Maine voters voted for Question 1
9. Maryland - November 6, 2012 - majority of Marylanders voted for Question 6
10. Washington - November 6, 2012 - voters approved Referendum 74
Click to expand...

So only 3 of the 9 were by "judicial fiat"? That is only 1/3. So this post rips DY & Dixie in one shot. Well done!
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
I guess, you could go with more than two, but that would be an uncommon usage. Use it in a sentence, if you can. I already used marriage in a way that is quite common describing the union of two things that don't possess gender as a trait.

I can't believe you are supporting this extremely idiotic notion that the state should be in the business of defending/defining words. The issue here is not the definition of marriage but the legal construct of marriage.
Click to expand...

Is the legal construct of something not a definition?
 
Threedee said:
Is the legal construct of something not a definition?
Click to expand...

It is a concept formed or "defined" by the law. There is no need to change the concept of marriage (i.e., the rights and responsibilities of the parties) in order to accommodate same sex marriage since none of those things have anything to do with gender. It won't truly change the legal definition anymore than interracial marriages did.
 
Gay pride:
maineman said:
I am SO proud of Maine and I am proud that I could cast my absentee ballot that helped bring gay marriage to my home state. I only wish that it had happened while I was still pastoring so that I might have united the several gay couples in my congregation in HOLY matrimony. It is good to know that my successor already has done so.
Click to expand...
 
I used to be a homophobe, as many here will recall. Then, I actually started meeting gay people (primarily at work) and I realized they are not monsters hellbent on destroying society. DY, believe me, life becomes a LOT simpler when you accept that the gay community isn't out to get you personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top