fear of harrassment by gays...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Marriage is not a Biblical word... Almost everyone in the world uses it, and not all of the English speakers are Christians either... or are even straight-- some of the English speakers have the concept of "third sex marriage" for transexuals, transgender and or intersexed.


I didn't say it was an exclusively biblical word. By "it is" I mean as the church sees it. Remove the word as a legal definition and alot of people who have issues with Gay Marriage will not have a complaint. Many are just hung up over the word "Marriage". The fight has really started to get petty on both sides.

Oh and by "petty on both sides" I mean in the entire debate.....not just in this forum. Might as well clear that up now. As I have stated a few times already.....I don't have a side in this fight. Merely commenting on what I see and frustrated that this trial is not being aired.
 
Gay marriage has failed every time it has been given to the Voters. Therefore, I doubt there would be widespread support. Prop 8 DID get a ton of media attention, almost all of which was pro gay. That's the only voice I heard.....It still didn't convince the voters.

Not in Mass, it had tried to vote to ban it but failed.

Prop 8 is very closer ever.
 
Marriage is not a Biblical word... Almost everyone in the world uses it, and not all of the English speakers are Christians either... or are even straight-- some of the English speakers have the concept of "third sex marriage" for transexuals, transgender and or intersexed.

I agree with TXgolfer about many religious considered marriage as biblical so I have feeling like way too.
 
I didn't say it was an exclusively biblical word. By "it is" I mean as the church sees it. Remove the word as a legal definition and alot of people who have issues with Gay Marriage will not have a complaint. Many are just hung up over the word "Marriage". The fight has really started to get petty on both sides.

Oh and by "petty on both sides" I mean in the entire debate.....not just in this forum. Might as well clear that up now. As I have stated a few times already.....I don't have a side in this fight. Merely commenting on what I see and frustrated that this trial is not being aired.

Yeah... then you have all the Asians and African immigrants (separate from African-Americans) screaming about it if it ever get changed to civil unions, and marriage being church-sanctioned.

Hard to please anyone. :lol:
 
Marriage was never "biblical" here and that's something you need to recognize. Marriage is a legal contract between two people that forces the government to recognize their relationship and must treat the union as one.

Atheists and Buddhists can marry and they don't do for the Bible but for legal reasons.

Traditional marriage is not even remotely "traditional marriage" as people think. A truly traditional marriage meant arranged marriage and treating women as property but many Americans are falsely conditioned to believe that the marriage we have now is "traditional."
 
Marriage was never "biblical" here and that's something you need to recognize. Marriage is a legal contract between two people that forces the government to recognize their relationship and must treat the union as one.

Atheists and Buddhists can marry and they don't do for the Bible but for legal reasons.

Traditional marriage is not even remotely "traditional marriage" as people think. A truly traditional marriage meant arranged marriage and treating women as property but many Americans are falsely conditioned to believe that the marriage we have now is "traditional."

In certain parts of the world... men are considered as property, especially in pastoral societies. :lol:
 
I want to see them get married and be happy. That is all matters...
 
I'm an attorney. For me, it's a simple matter of fairness. A gay couple must go pay an attorney to get documents to secure the same rights as married couples. More business for attorneys but not fair to the couple who must pay high fees. Marriage is the most efficient way to confer rights and responsibilities. Also note, a spouse has a duty to support another spouse. This would impose responsibilities as well as rights.
Not all heterosexual couples marry. An unmarried straight couple "must go pay an attorney to get documents to secure the same rights as married couples," correct?

So marriage is not the solution to the hospital problem for any unmarried couples.
 
Can't guarantee happiness.

But gays do have the right to marry...why do people wnat to keep them from that pursuit of happiness?
 
But gays do have the right to marry...why do people wnat to keep them from that pursuit of happiness?
If you mean legal right to marry, no they don't have that as a universal or even national right. If they did, there wouldn't be court cases now.
 
If you mean legal right to marry, no they don't have that as a universal or even national right. If they did, there wouldn't be a court cases now.

No, they dont have that right because people who dont believe in gay/lesbain relationships are preventing them from that right. It is really sad because it is really none of their business how they want to live their lives.
 
Can't guarantee happiness.

I agree... can't guarantee misery either. :)

It's about legal issues - marriage is the higest form of legal recognition of their relationship. Civil unions and "in common" have lesser legal recognitions.
 
Wirelessly posted (Sidekick LX: Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

True... Hetersexual marriages can't guarantee a happiness, too.

I remember one story from two mommies that they had to go to Canada. It was only took mommies so long to get a marriage... So they finally got a marriage and have some full rights, I think? Now they enjoy their marriage and one of mommies' kids love their parents.

Keep gay marriage illegal won't make any better. Because homosexual people will have an another way to get one. That is why I believe they should have a right to marry their beloved ones...
 
My mother told me years ago that there is only one reason for marriage.... having kids. Obviously two gays can't have kids together without involving a third party (a surrogate mother). Either they still are stuck on that reason or they are being anti-gay. My feelings is on the latter reason.
 
I agree... can't guarantee misery either. :)

It's about legal issues - marriage is the higest form of legal recognition of their relationship. Civil unions and "in common" have lesser legal recognitions.

Time for you to move to Canada or Mass if you care about gay marriage so much but it will going be very hard to have legal in all states.
 
Not all heterosexual couples marry. An unmarried straight couple "must go pay an attorney to get documents to secure the same rights as married couples," correct?

So marriage is not the solution to the hospital problem for any unmarried couples.

But at least straight couples have the option to get married as the solution.
 
Wirelessly posted (Sidekick LX: Mozilla/5.0 (Danger hiptop 4.6; U; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920)

True... Hetersexual marriages can't guarantee a happiness, too.

I remember one story from two mommies that they had to go to Canada. It was only took mommies so long to get a marriage... So they finally got a marriage and have some full rights, I think? Now they enjoy their marriage and one of mommies' kids love their parents.

Keep gay marriage illegal won't make any better. Because homosexual people will have an another way to get one. That is why I believe they should have a right to marry their beloved ones...

Yup but well, homosexual marriage aren't get any benefit by conservative people.
 
Time for you to move to Canada or Mass if you care about gay marriage so much but it will going be very hard to have legal in all states.

Or Connecticut. :) My wife and I got married in CT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top