Do you support Dixie's solution?

Do you support Dixie's solution to the Gay Marriage issue?

  • YES! I support Dixie's solution.

    Votes: 21 75.0%

  • NO! I do not support Dixie's solution.

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • Total voters
    28
Dixie said:
Not asking anyone to "give up" or "swap out" anything. All legal relationships would remain the same. The state just wouldn't issue "marriage" licenses anymore, and in the place of that, would issue CU contracts. Courts would recognize an old "marriage license" as the same contract as a CU, for the sake of jurisprudence, that's all.

I'm not asking society to 'buy into' anything here, just offering a viable solution to resolve an issue, and give all sides what they claim to want. Traditional marriage and religious sanctity of marriage is protected, gay couples get the benefits of traditional couples, there is no issue of government being involved in sanctioning a religious custom and tradition, or establishing a law based on sexual behavior. It completely settles the issue once and for all, and gives everyone what they desire. It's fair, it's amicable, and it would probably be widely accepted by most Americans.
Click to expand...

And to all the folks planning to marry?

I think that you're trying to find a solution to a non-existent problem.
 
Dixie said:
Not asking anyone to "give up" or "swap out" anything. All legal relationships would remain the same. The state just wouldn't issue "marriage" licenses anymore, and in the place of that, would issue CU contracts. Courts would recognize an old "marriage license" as the same contract as a CU, for the sake of jurisprudence, that's all.

I'm not asking society to 'buy into' anything here, just offering a viable solution to resolve an issue, and give all sides what they claim to want. Traditional marriage and religious sanctity of marriage is protected, gay couples get the benefits of traditional couples, there is no issue of government being involved in sanctioning a religious custom and tradition, or establishing a law based on sexual behavior. It completely settles the issue once and for all, and gives everyone what they desire. It's fair, it's amicable, and it would probably be widely accepted by most Americans.
Click to expand...
Wow Dixie is being infinitely more reasonable than SM, although that doesn't surprise me. SM is one of the most knee jerk reactionary narrow minded bigoted dumb asses on the board.
 
Southern Man said:
And to all the folks planning to marry?

I think that you're trying to find a solution to a non-existent problem.
Click to expand...

And to all the folks planning to marry, they can still get married, I haven't advocated banning marriage. Churches can still do as they please, people can still have wedding ceremonies, everything is still the same, we wake up tomorrow and the sun still rises.

There certainly IS a problem, evidenced by the monumental number of posts on this topic. From my perspective, the problem is two sided and we are at an impasse. My solution addresses both sides complaints and concerns, and allows us to move on. Some people obviously don't want to move on or find a solution to the problem, short of getting 100% of what they want and denying the other side anything at all. To me, that is textbook Bigotry. We should work toward reasonable solutions to our problems, and if a way can be found (as I have) to resolve an issue to everyone's reasonable satisfaction, that is what we should do.

I don't support Gay Marriage, I never will, because same-sex unions are simply NOT marriage, in my opinion. But I do realize and understand there are many people living in same-sex relationships, which function just as a traditional marriage, and they shouldn't be denied the benefits of marriage because they can't 'marry' each other. I also respect the religious sanctity of traditional marriage and what that means to the church and religion. The government really shouldn't be involved in sanctioning a religious tradition and custom, and I understand that aspect as well. My proposal solves all these issues, all sides to this issue, and takes it off the table forever. The problem is solved, the debates are over, we never have to argue back and forth about it again, it's settled! What is wrong with that?
 
T&A said:
Dixie, I have been advocating this for years. How do you come off saying its "your" solution?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but all I ever see from you are short little quips only you believe are funny, anti-god rants, and off-topic Grindspeak. I guess you must have been 'advocating' this on another board. But thanks for concurring with me anyway!
 
Dixie said:
And to all the folks planning to marry, they can still get married, I haven't advocated banning marriage. Churches can still do as they please, people can still have wedding ceremonies, everything is still the same, we wake up tomorrow and the sun still rises.

There certainly IS a problem, evidenced by the monumental number of posts on this topic. From my perspective, the problem is two sided and we are at an impasse. My solution addresses both sides complaints and concerns, and allows us to move on. Some people obviously don't want to move on or find a solution to the problem, short of getting 100% of what they want and denying the other side anything at all. To me, that is textbook Bigotry. We should work toward reasonable solutions to our problems, and if a way can be found (as I have) to resolve an issue to everyone's reasonable satisfaction, that is what we should do.

I don't support Gay Marriage, I never will, because same-sex unions are simply NOT marriage, in my opinion. But I do realize and understand there are many people living in same-sex relationships, which function just as a traditional marriage, and they shouldn't be denied the benefits of marriage because they can't 'marry' each other. I also respect the religious sanctity of traditional marriage and what that means to the church and religion. The government really shouldn't be involved in sanctioning a religious tradition and custom, and I understand that aspect as well. My proposal solves all these issues, all sides to this issue, and takes it off the table forever. The problem is solved, the debates are over, we never have to argue back and forth about it again, it's settled! What is wrong with that?
Click to expand...

But you've based your opinion, on your narrow minded bigot and the fact that you're scared.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
How do the votes of 24 people, on an obscure message board, make me fail and there was no reason to sign your post with the fact that you're a bigot. :cof1:
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
But you've based your opinion, on your narrow minded bigot and the fact that you're scared.
Click to expand...

Well let's take a look at what I have actually articulated, shall we? I have stated that I don't believe in "Gay Marriage" and that I do not feel it is marriage. I have stated that I believe marriage to be sacrosanct to the church and fundamental to their beliefs and foundations for family. I have also stated that I feel homosexual behavior is abnormal or 'deviant' from the norm, and that we shouldn't establish laws based on a person's sexual behavior. YET... I have proposed a solution to the issue of gay couples living in a monogamous relationship with one another, to address their specific concerns and desires. IF I were a bigot, I wouldn't have any compulsion to express such a solution, I simply wouldn't care about what gay people wanted, and I would be totally indifferent to a solution. I have been very open-minded regarding a way to solve all sides of the issue, respecting both the needs and wants of the homosexual community, as well as the sanctity of marriage concerns of the religious community.

For my efforts, I am being called a bigot and told I am "scared" of something. (what? I don't know!) I am being called these names and castigated by a person who refuses to answer as to why they can't accept my proposal, or why my proposal is an unacceptable solution, even after repeatedly being asked. This same person continues to lobby for something that 75% of America rejects, and will likely always reject, and is unwilling to accept any compromise on their position whatsoever. Instead of attempting to be open-minded enough to work toward a real solution, this person continues to argue and belittle, as they cling to their stubborn beliefs and refuse to acknowledge any other viewpoint. In my estimation, you have proven yourself to be the scared bigot, and you have resoundingly failed to prove that charge against me.
 
Dixie said:
Well let's take a look at what I have actually articulated, shall we? I have stated that I don't believe in "Gay Marriage" and that I do not feel it is marriage. I have stated that I believe marriage to be sacrosanct to the church and fundamental to their beliefs and foundations for family. I have also stated that I feel homosexual behavior is abnormal or 'deviant' from the norm, and that we shouldn't establish laws based on a person's sexual behavior. YET... I have proposed a solution to the issue of gay couples living in a monogamous relationship with one another, to address their specific concerns and desires. IF I were a bigot, I wouldn't have any compulsion to express such a solution, I simply wouldn't care about what gay people wanted, and I would be totally indifferent to a solution. I have been very open-minded regarding a way to solve all sides of the issue, respecting both the needs and wants of the homosexual community, as well as the sanctity of marriage concerns of the religious community.

For my efforts, I am being called a bigot and told I am "scared" of something. (what? I don't know!) I am being called these names and castigated by a person who refuses to answer as to why they can't accept my proposal, or why my proposal is an unacceptable solution, even after repeatedly being asked. This same person continues to lobby for something that 75% of America rejects, and will likely always reject, and is unwilling to accept any compromise on their position whatsoever. Instead of attempting to be open-minded enough to work toward a real solution, this person continues to argue and belittle, as they cling to their stubborn beliefs and refuse to acknowledge any other viewpoint. In my estimation, you have proven yourself to be the scared bigot, and you have resoundingly failed to prove that charge against me.
Click to expand...

As I've said, you're a bigot because you have shown that it scares you to have same sex marriages; but you might want to start getting used to it, because it's going to happen.

The increase in the length of your responses also prove that this subject scares you; because everytime you find that you've talked yourself into a corner, your posts become longer and just more repetetive.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
As I've said, you're a bigot because you have shown that it scares you to have same sex marriages; but you might want to start getting used to it, because it's going to happen.

The increase in the length of your responses also prove that this subject scares you; because everytime you find that you've talked yourself into a corner, your posts become longer and just more repetetive.
Click to expand...

The length of my responses is more evidence I am not bigoted. I am passionate. I've not talked myself into a corner, I am still demanding an answer from you on a question you refuse to even consider. I am not scared of something that doesn't exist and will never exist, that would be sort of stupid.

What you might want to get used to is a Constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage, because that is exactly what your activism and stubborn bigoted viewpoint will ultimately produce. Don't believe me? Fine, we'll see what the future holds, I am not the least bit worried or scared.

You, on the other hand, are too fucking scared to answer a simple little question, probably because you are afraid of what people will think of you if you answered honestly. So instead of answering, you want to 'turn the tables' and claim I am all these horrible things that I've demonstrated I am not. I am the one proposing the solution, I am the one concerned with getting gay couples the rights and benefits they desire, you are the one defiantly and stubbornly refusing to accept my solution and continuing to hurl names and insults. That tells us a lot about you, no further response is needed.
 
Dixie said:
The length of my responses is more evidence I am not bigoted. I am passionate. I've not talked myself into a corner, I am still demanding an answer from you on a question you refuse to even consider. I am not scared of something that doesn't exist and will never exist, that would be sort of stupid.

What you might want to get used to is a Constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage, because that is exactly what your activism and stubborn bigoted viewpoint will ultimately produce. Don't believe me? Fine, we'll see what the future holds, I am not the least bit worried or scared.

You, on the other hand, are too fucking scared to answer a simple little question, probably because you are afraid of what people will think of you if you answered honestly. So instead of answering, you want to 'turn the tables' and claim I am all these horrible things that I've demonstrated I am not. I am the one proposing the solution, I am the one concerned with getting gay couples the rights and benefits they desire, you are the one defiantly and stubbornly refusing to accept my solution and continuing to hurl names and insults. That tells us a lot about you, no further response is needed.
Click to expand...

You've been told that your proposals were read and then rejected; because there is no need for the Constitution to be amended, except for it to explain that your ideology is outdated and needs to be brought into the future.

The increased length of your posts just proves that you're scared and are a passionate bigot.

Stop being such a coward and accept that fact that gays will be allowed to have same sex marriages, within your lifetime. :good4u:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You've been told that your proposals were read and then rejected; because there is no need for the Constitution to be amended, except for it to explain that your ideology is outdated and needs to be brought into the future.

The increased length of your posts just proves that you're scared and are a passionate bigot.

Stop being such a coward and accept that fact that gays will be allowed to have same sex marriages, within your lifetime. :good4u:
Click to expand...

Then you better get busy, because as it stands, you need about TWICE the number of people supporting your idiocy for it to become the law of the land, and I just don't think you are going to get there in your lifetime. Meanwhile, I guess gay couples will have to live out their lives never realizing the benefits they could have, if you weren't such an intolerant bigot.
 
Dixie said:
Then you better get busy, because as it stands, you need about TWICE the number of people supporting your idiocy for it to become the law of the land, and I just don't think you are going to get there in your lifetime. Meanwhile, I guess gay couples will have to live out their lives never realizing the benefits they could have, if you weren't such an intolerant bigot.
Click to expand...

OH, I forgot about your imaginary 75%!! LOL

I still don't understand why you're so against same sex marriages, especially since you went to such great lengths to say how some of your best friends are gay. :good4u:

That's OK; because once the Supreme Court rules that same sex marriages are legal, you can then seek help for your bigotry and being scared.
 
You've been told that your proposals were read and then rejected...
Click to expand...

Okay, let's review what you have rejected (without any explanation):

1. Governments no longer issue "Marriage" licenses. <--You reject this, no reason given!

2. They are replaced with a Civil Union contract. <--Rejected, no reason given!

3. Churches can continue to "marry" whoever they please. <--Rejected, without reason!

4. CU contracts would be between two consenting adults regardless of their relationship. <---Nope, you don't want this either... Rejected!

5. Tax breaks, insurance, and other benefits associated with "married" couples, would then apply to any couple with a CU contract. <---Rejected without reason!

6. Old "Marriage Licenses" would be recognized as a CU contract. <--Rejected with no reason!

And you claim I am the closed-minded bigot here???? LMFAO!
 
Dixie said:
Okay, let's review what you have rejected (without any explanation):

1. Governments no longer issue "Marriage" licenses. <--You reject this, no reason given!

2. They are replaced with a Civil Union contract. <--Rejected, no reason given!

3. Churches can continue to "marry" whoever they please. <--Rejected, without reason!

4. CU contracts would be between two consenting adults regardless of their relationship. <---Nope, you don't want this either... Rejected!

5. Tax breaks, insurance, and other benefits associated with "married" couples, would then apply to any couple with a CU contract. <---Rejected without reason!

6. Old "Marriage Licenses" would be recognized as a CU contract. <--Rejected with no reason!

And you claim I am the closed-minded bigot here???? LMFAO!
Click to expand...

Your reading comprehension and your retentive abilities are sorely in need of some help; because I told you that the reason your offerings were rejected, is because they are unnecessary. :good4u:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top