243 replies to this topic

[feisty]

Given that the importance of marriage is more symbolic and emotional than anything, I thought it was apt. The (significant) difference between civil unions and marriage is hard to quantify legally, I think, it's a battle that has to be fought on emotive terms.

[Guy]

he raised some good points about how denying homosexuals the right to get married is denying happiness to others

i'm not sure it's a point that holds up. you could say the same thing about polygamy, etc.

The difference is that no one currently has the right to polygamy, but us heterosexuals do currently have the right to marry.

[M_Rots]

i like olbermann, but does the guy really think his shameless emoting is going to win anybody over?

Oh, well, if the point is only to win people over, then sure, let's tell him to shut up. Who the fuck cares whether he wins people over? Some of us in the choir like being preached to.

[Tony]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

[M_Rots]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Like the US did in 1967?

[Tony]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Like the US did in 1967?

If you're talking about throwing out restrictions on interracial marriage that didn't affect the definition itself which has never involved race. There have been interracial marriages throughout human history.

[M_Rots]

You're probably right. Even if you're not, you're still probably right.

[feisty]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Change the legal definition of marriage in the United States, to catch up with reality as well as the sanctions of religious organizations who perform gay marriages.

[Tony]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Change the legal definition of marriage in the United States, to catch up with reality as well as the sanctions of religious organizations who perform gay marriages.

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

[elcorazon]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Change the legal definition of marriage in the United States, to catch up with reality as well as the sanctions of religious organizations who perform gay marriages.

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

FUCK YOU TONY, YOU MUSICAL LOVING MOTHERFUCKER!!!!!!!!! GO PUT ON SOME CLASSICAL MUSIC AND THINK ABOUT THE OLD DAYS WHEN GAYS WERE STUCK IN THE CLOSET!!!!!!!! NOW YOU CAN BE YOURSELF, TONY - GO AHEAD, GET MARRIED.... TO A GUY!!!!!!!!1

[velocity]

So, gay couples who are raising children should have the benefits of legal marriage.

I'm curious, do civil unions allow the partners property rights and jurisdiction in health care issues, etc.?

[Duff.]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Seriously?

Feisty otm.

[M_Rots]

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Change the legal definition of marriage in the United States, to catch up with reality as well as the sanctions of religious organizations who perform gay marriages.

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

I have no idea where you live, but in a country which promises the same rights to all, which is the country where I reside, yes, it's exactly that simple. We believe, in America, that extending equal protection under the law to all our citizens is in the best interests of society.

[Guy]

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

Why is it in society's best interests to have heterosexual couples get married if that couple does not want to have children?
The basis of your argument is flawed.

[Tony]

So, gay couples who are raising children should have the benefits of legal marriage.

I'm curious, do civil unions allow the partners property rights and jurisdiction in health care issues, etc.?

I believe you can contract all those issues.

Marriage. Full and equal rights in every way. Period.

I've thought about this and it seems that gay people already have the right to get married. Any gay man can marry any gay woman. The issue is whether or not to change the definition of marriage.

Change the legal definition of marriage in the United States, to catch up with reality as well as the sanctions of religious organizations who perform gay marriages.

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

I have no idea where you live, but in a country which promises the same rights to all, which is the country where I reside, yes, it's exactly that simple. We believe, in America, that extending equal protection under the law to all our citizens is in the best interests of society.

I live in Chicago. As I mentioned gays have the same right to get married that anyone else has. It just has to fall under the legal definition of marriage.

The legal definition of marriage is what it is because it's been found to be in the best interests of society to give a legallly sanctioned benefit to a couple who are raising children. It's not the simple 'euqal rights' its being painted as. I

Why is it in society's best interests to have heterosexual couples get married if that couple does not want to have children?
The basis of your argument is flawed.

They could do so anytime they wanted to. Centuries of human history have shown that the single man+woman marital unit is the studiest possible building block upon which to build a stable society.

[Duff.]

So the sterile should have marriage rights revoked. And adoptive parents.

[Tony]

So the sterile should have marriage rights revoked.

And adoptive parents.

Believe it or not the Catholic Chuch will not sanction a marriage if the man cannot have sex for some medical reason. Marriage has to be procreative and/or unitive. If it can't be either they won't sign on.

I'm not in that boat but still believe that it isn't worth revoking a centuries old custom for show. That's all it really is since everything available to a married couple if also available to a a gay couple through contract.

[Pavement Ist Rad]

I read through this whole thread last week. Very few threads have managed to just all-out disgust me more than this one, with the exception of the "No Country For Old Men" thread and final two thirds or so of "SOMB Simpsons Characters."

[Duff.]

Not interested in how religious bodies treat marriage, just the state. The thing about traditional marriage is it doesn't exist anymore. There's very little difference between a heterosexual relationship and a gay one these days, and sooner or later the government's gonna catch up. It just doesn't make sense to deprive this of gay couples anymore.

[Ogawa]

I read through this whole thread last week.

Very few threads have managed to just all-out disgust me more than this one, with the exception of the "No Country For Old Men" thread and final two thirds or so of "SOMB Simpsons Characters."

What was the deal with the No Country thread? I wasn't around then and I'm terrible with the search function.