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.
It forces me to recognize the validity of a relationship that I don't believe is valid. It is the imposition of another persons view of morality on myself. My position is clear: gays can have their relationships - I disagree, but I'm not willing to legislate my view(not quite Taliban-like, is it?) I support civil unions - and defend there enforcement in our courts. I draw the line at marriage - and doing so is not violating any civil rights. It is stating that the word marriage has a definition and that our laws should recognize that definition.
You are imposing your views of morality on me and other gay people...
Noah Webster for one. Do you have issues with all the words in his dictionary - and really question the source of the definition of words such as "book" or "contract" for example? Seems like if you are really interested in the sources of definition - you could do your own research rather then asking a stranger on an internet forum.
Sigh... I do get it. I'm very clear on what the President supports. I understand why and I understand his reasoning. I also know there have been social issues on which the President has voiced his opinion. But not this one. And not until after the vote when the opinion of the Leader of the Free World made not a whit of difference. I'm sorry you can't seem to understand why that would disappoint.
No I can't understand why you feel it would make a difference or why the President should try to influence (whether or not that would work, for another thread). If he wants states to decide, he stood by his words. He can criticize the law, but that is a different issue. May be he was hoping for the better? That is something I would do too, especially after preaching states rights on such issues.
Marriage is a contract - our laws allow contracts to be dissolved with the mutual consent of both parties - that is what divorce is. So - you apparently don't think much about the validity of contracts if you actually are advocating for outlaw of divorce. Typical deflection tactic from the pro gay marriage crowd - and easily identified and dealt with. Nice try though.
You are imposing your views of morality on me and other gay people...
Perhaps so - but that is the current law in N.C. - and laws are voted on either by the people or by their representatives. If you don't like the law - then have it changed. I don't and wouldn't complain if gay marriage were voted as legal in my state(California) - but it hasn't. We have voted to recognize marriage as a union between a man and a woman - twice - and both times our will was overruled by political hack judges. Morality is what shapes laws - morality is the common held values, norms, and expectations of a people. Arguing that morality and law should or are separate is a demonstration of willfull ignorance.
I'll ask again, just WHERE does this definition you allege shouldn't be changed come from? Do you know or are you just blathering?
I will again ask you to do your own research. I will not do so for you. Act like a grownup and stop whining because you can't have a toy.
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.
