PopTodd Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Of course it's unconstitutional. It's an issue of civil rights and government getting involved in what should be a religious issue.http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/02/07/146526143/prop-8?sc=nl&cc=brk-20120207-1304I fully expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, as well. States rights do NOT supercede an individual's civil rights, motherfuckers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Sweet. I can't wait for all this gay marriage opposition to be considered as ridiculous as black and white segregation. Because it is. If your religion says gay marriage is so sinful and wrong, don't do it. But there's just no reason loving gay couples shouldn't be able to get married. I'm a very apathetic person to a lot of "political" things (though this shouldn't be political at all) but I STRONGLY support gay rights. People are people, assholes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Sweet. I can't wait for all this gay marriage opposition to be considered as ridiculous as black and white segregation.Funny you mention that because the basis of today's ruling was a 1948 ruling saying it was unconstitutional to ban mixed marriages in CA. off to the SCOTUS! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Queen Amaranthine Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I'm a very apathetic person to a lot of "political" things (though this shouldn't be political at all) but I STRONGLY support gay rights. People are people, assholes. That expresses my thoughts exactly (with or without the last word there, depending on who I'm addressing, maybe). I live in a state that legalized gay marriage a couple of years ago, and I'm failing to see how it's "destroying society" or whatever the counterarguments are. If there's a need to "protect the institution of family" or however it's put, how about offering more safe houses for domestic violence cases? Or educating the general public on avoiding or getting out of abusive relationships? Or about how to be a good spouse/fiance/boyfriend/girlfriend in general? Or being nice to your own kids? Too many relationships/families are dysfunctional and messed up psychologically and emotionally, but supposedly gay marriage is singlehandedly ruining society? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Agreed all around. I have the proverbial gay uncle, and he and his partner have been together about 30 years. And the reason they can't get married would be...? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Agreed all around. I have the proverbial gay uncle, and he and his partner have been together about 30 years. And the reason they can't get married would be...?Because my marriage would be undermined. What about my right to happiness, asshole? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I always thought it was odd the government was in the business of marriage in the first place. Marriage is a religious function, it should remain that way. If someone wants to enter in a contract with another person that should be the government's responsibility. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SarahC Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 "People should be allowed to marry other people. People, however should not be allowed to marry goats." - my Dad If you love somebody and want to commit to them through marriage, go for it! Why does gender even matter? Hoping government peoples will wise up about this... law should not have the power to override an individual's rights to love one another. In my state it is illegal for a same sex couple to wed, but totally OK for 1st cousins... uh... what? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I think everybody has the right to BE LEFT ALONE. The government and too many asshats feel the need to butt into things that simply aren't their business. So be it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IRememberDBoon Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 If a church wants to marry two people isnt it an infringment on their religious liperty to not allow that by state law? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PopTodd Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 "What people do with their private parts is their private business."-Paul Newman Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I always thought it was odd the government was in the business of marriage in the first place. Marriage is a religious function, it should remain that way. If someone wants to enter in a contract with another person that should be the government's responsibility. But, a marriage is a contract. My marriage is recognized by both the church and state. This affects many things- amongst them, how I'm taxed, my insurance rates, insurance coverage, survivor benefits. It's those kinds of things that are being denied to those who aren't allowed to legally marry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 But, a marriage is a contract. My marriage is recognized by both the church and state. This affects many things- amongst them, how I'm taxed, my insurance rates, insurance coverage, survivor benefits. It's those kinds of things that are being denied to those who aren't allowed to legally marry. Kinda my point. The state should be able to issue contracts between two consenting adults, giving them insurance coverage, survivor benefits, and whatnot. These adults could be man/woman, man/man, woman/woman. Take love/sex completely out of the equation. In my world two roommates could enter in to this contract. Marriage on the other hand would have no legal standing. It is a profession of love and commitment, between two people, a church or whatever has the right to perform their ceremony to whomever they choose. Marriage is essentially a religious function the states should not be allowed to marry anyone. States should not recognize marriages either, they should only recognize legally binding contracts between two adults. But I know that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Kinda my point. The state should be able to issue contracts between two consenting adults, giving them insurance coverage, survivor benefits, and whatnot. These adults could be man/woman, man/man, woman/woman. Take love/sex completely out of the equation. In my world two roommates could enter in to this contract. Marriage on the other hand would have no legal standing. It is a profession of love and commitment, between two people, a church or whatever has the right to perform their ceremony to whomever they choose. Marriage is essentially a religious function the states should not be allowed to marry anyone. States should not recognize marriages either, they should only recognize legally binding contracts between two adults. But I know that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. But why isn't marriage a legally binding contract? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 But why isn't marriage a legally binding contract? maybe I am not explaining myself properly. My idea is hypothetical in nature. I am not talking about the current state of affairs. I am talking about my future utopia, in which the government is completely out of marriage, and the church is completely out of a couples legal standing with the government. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PopTodd Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 So then the government should not BAN gay marriage, either.Period.Get out altogether. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 http://www.youtube.c...d&v=CbmbdWK6338This is really good. It's really sad that there are people who actually believe that an absent dad is better for a child than a gay dad, or that gay marriage and bestiality are on the same level. But it's mostly just really sad that this is a debate at all. Like I said before, flip the context of all this and instead of gay marriage it's mixed race marriage, and it's beyond absurd. It's the exact same bigotry. The other day I told my really conservative friend that I'm apathetic to most politics, but a strong gay rights supporter, and his response was "well what's your stake in the gay rights debate though?" And that's exactly it, I have none. I'm not gay, so it doesn't affect me at all if gay marriage is illegal. At all. And the same goes for everyone else out there. So why oppose it? It's a fucked up world already, and I'm all for happiness wherever it comes from. If a man finds that in a committed bond to another man, or a woman to another woman, good for them. That's a beautiful thing. I have a few close gay friends that I would absolutely love to see get married. It hurts to know that that's not a given right, and may not be for their lifetime. There's absolutely no logical argument for why they shouldn't be allowed to marry and enjoy the same legal benefits that straight couples get. Period. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.