Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's my argument- the government has no business regulating and restricting marriage. None at all. It's a private matter.
Instead of demanding the right to be micromanaged by the government, gay folks should be leading the charge to get government out of ALL our private lives. Everyone should be free to marry whomever they like- WHY is it the government's business??????
There are a host of LEGAL issues such as inheritance, tax deductions and exemptions. health insurance eligibility, property rights, divorce settlements etc. where a LEGALLY recognized marriage is the basis for settling these issues. Marriage is NOT just a religious construct it is a legal construct. As such the goverment provides the basic framework or it's establishment and how it is terminated.
That's my argument- the government has no business regulating and restricting marriage. None at all. It's a private matter.
Instead of demanding the right to be micromanaged by the government, gay folks should be leading the charge to get government out of ALL our private lives. Everyone should be free to marry whomever they like- WHY is it the government's business??????
And you'd think the right wingers would be stepping all over each other to board this train- but no, they confound themselves again. How do they live with all these irreconcilable internal conflicts?
Legalizing gay marriage is not a panacea that will end infidelity in a gay relationship. That is the flimsiest argument I have yet heard to support gay marriage.
So, in light of the above, I will continue to object to the homosexuals being able to legally marry.
You've linked to a Texan religious website for "facts" about homosexuals?
You may not realise how much websites like this distort and misrepresent the "facts" they quote, unless you do a bit of research...
The main source of that article you linked to was an article by Dr Timothy Dailey from the religious, anti-gay Family Research Council.
"Dr" Dailey only has a PhD in theology, not in any science field. His other claim to fame is writing books about the secrets of the Bible. Hardly an "authority" on homosexuality.
An example of a common tactic used by people like Dailey: He cites a Dutch study- "And a Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner nevertheless had an average of eight sexual partners per year"
However, what they "conveniently" fail to mention is that the study EXCLUDED men over 30, excluded men who were involved in monogamous relationships and excluded men who were involved in long term relationhsips. It was a study from the 1980's which was investigating HIV in young urban gay men under 30 who frequented gay bars and who only had casual relationships.
Do you think this study is representative of ALL gay and lesbians? Do think the claim the author of the article made, was in any way honest?
This study was no more representative of the whole gay and lesbian population as a study of young straight men with STD's who frequented pick up bars and who were only in casual relationships, would be of all straight people.
Another issue with these types of articles is that they (like Timothy Dailey) often cite the discredited "work" of psychologist Paul Cameron who was de-registered in the 80's because of his unethical behaviour and misrepresentation of data.
There's a lot of dishonest shenanigans going on with these types of anti-gay articles and they get away with it because few people reading them bother to dig deeper back to the original studies. Their "agenda" relies on that.
If you really want to read "factual" and undistorted data from studies on homosexuals I would urge you to go to the actual studies themselves published in reputable peer-reviewed journals.
If you think that marriage is good for the health and stability of couples/families/children and society in general, why would you not want this for committed, loving gay couples - especially those who are raising children?
And you'd think the right wingers would be stepping all over each other to board this train- but no, they confound themselves again. How do they live with all these irreconcilable internal conflicts?
Don't look know but it's the left wingers stepping all over themselves to be PC!
They just can't quite seem to grasp the fact that marriage is between a man and a woman.
If you married is not LEGALLY recognized by the government you don't have the same inheritance rights, income deductions and exemptions, health insurance options and various other LEGAL rights and protections that being LEGALLY marriage affords individuals.
you are right when you are talking about rights and privileges conferred by the federal government.
But... what about a brother and a sister who are living in the same house. Why can't they have the same inheritance rights, income deductions and exemptions, health insurance option and other LEGAL rights and protections that being LEGALLY married affords individuals?
Too bad for these brother and sister households, since there is no '...phobe' term that has been invented that would cover them.
You've linked to a Texan religious website for "facts" about homosexuals?
....
The website provided links. Instead of attacking the character of the author, why don't you provide the links to your studies that prove that gay couples are just as monogamous as the heterosexual couples?
No one can force you to change your opinions. You're free to have as many anti-gay thoughts as you want.
not anti gay. Anti gay marriage, that's all. I'm all for gays living their lives as they want to live it in the privacy of their home(s).
by the way, I'm also against straight men marrying multiple women at the same time. Does that make me anti-heterosexual?
Come on, what's the '...phobe' term for the anti-polygamist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
It won't be up to you in the long run. It will be decided by the courts.
And that's a BIG problem. We should have the government of the PEOPLE, not the government of the courts.
And btw, even if the courts ignore public opinion and force this down our throats, don't think it'll be the victory in the long term. A court that ignores public opinion may not have a problem ignoring the gay opinion in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Society is changing, and your homophobic views are being left behind.
Name one state, where the *majority* of the people voted FOR gay marriage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
It must be frustrating to be so anti-gay in a society that is clearly moving toward acceptance of homosexuality.
Again, it depends on what it means to be 'accepting' of homosexuality. I've stated before and I'll say this again. I'm not against homosexuals living together, having inheritance rights, etc.... I'm all for them having equal employment rights, housing, etc...
But, I still consider gay lifestyle an immoral lifestyle (though I'm not saying that I'm holier than gays, don't get me wrong). I consider gay marriage to be unacceptable and in no way equivalent to the heterosexual marriage.
Name one state, where the *majority* of the people voted FOR gay marriage?
I never said there was one. Being anti-same-sex-marriage doesn't necessarily mean that someone is anti-gay.
Quote:
But, I still consider gay lifestyle an immoral lifestyle (though I'm not saying that I'm holier than gays, don't get me wrong). I consider gay marriage to be unacceptable and in no way equivalent to the heterosexual marriage.
Too bad you don't live in New York. Carl Paladino would love to have your vote.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
