Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Croup

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

For.

Homosexual couples should not be treated differently from the rest of the people in the United States.
 

Arokthis

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

For. Misery and tax/medical benefits should be should be equaly available.
 

garublador

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

I'm for 'em! There's no logical reason for them not to be legal.
 

Tanooki

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Against. Because I'm a heartless, "red state" bastard who believes his in an invisible friend. (In conservative speak, that means I'm a Midwest Christian who believes in the sanctity of marriage.)

Also the US is following Europe with maybe a 10 year lag, when it comes to the breakdown of marriage. I think we should stop taking our cues from them.
 

Merick

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Against. Because I'm a heartless, "red state" bastard who believes his in an invisible friend. (In conservative speak, that means I'm a Midwest Christian who believes in the sanctity of marriage.)

Also the US is following Europe with maybe a 10 year lag, when it comes to the breakdown of marriage. I think we should stop taking our cues from them.
I am genuinely interested in what you mean by sanctity. Is it ok for Hindu heterosexual couples to get married even if they don't practice Christian values? Atheists? Convicted murderers or other unrepentant sinners? Christians with agnostics? Doesn't the Bible say something about not marrying non-Christians?

I assume you interpret the Bible as saying being *** is wrong (I am not making statement about my beliefs here) but many *** couples interpret it differently. Should people not be allowed to interpret the Bible any way they see it, and live their lives accordingly? This is how many of the different branches of Christianity came about, why should the "*** is ok" interpreters not be accepted, but others are free to interpret things differently than your views?



 

Yaboosh

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

I am against. I would rather marry a woman. Who somebody else wants to marry is none of my business.


Edit: Just to be clear, I was being a smart *** and simply suggesting that I am not going to marry a man, but if George wants to marry Steve, it ain't gonna affect me. I don't want to be lumped in with the less than stellar arguments to follow.
 
Last edited:

krischan

Europe Trade Moderator
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Let them do it. It's not my business. I'm not homosexual, but I have no problem with others being like that.

Against. Because I'm a heartless, "red state" bastard who believes his in an invisible friend. (In conservative speak, that means I'm a Midwest Christian who believes in the sanctity of marriage.)

Also the US is following Europe with maybe a 10 year lag, when it comes to the breakdown of marriage. I think we should stop taking our cues from them.
What have signing a contract, tax benefits or constitutional rights to do with god's blessing, sanctity or any religious issue ? If there's just just a problem with the name, then call it pink partnership for same sex relations and blue bondage for opposite sex issues or whatever and the church can call it marriage, as they always did.

If you want the blessing of the church (which is not to be confused with the blessing of god), but they don't want to give it, it's pointless to insist on it anyway. They can marry or not marry whomever they want, but they are not to be allowed to enforce their will on everybody else.



 
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Yep. I just don't care. Let it go, and if there's a price to pay in the afterlife for the sin so many people believe it to be, then so be it.
 

LunarSolaris

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

I'm for. I just don't see any logical reason to ban it. "Sanctity" of marriage is a myth (as Merick pointed out).
 

Vespar

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

I'm against it.

Personally, I could careless if someone is a homosexual as it has no bearing on me.

However, I do feel that the concept of marriage has been firmly established for thousands of years as a bond between a man and a woman.

I feel that ammending a concept that has such a strongly established foundation for yet another minority is the wrong avenue of progression.

I'm fine with a domestic partnership that would allow equal benefits, but that doesn't seem to be good enough for the homesexual community.

The demands to change the concept of marriage as the majority of society defines it isn't any less oppressive than those wishing to maintain the concept of marriage as it is.

There's far too many facets to this discussion to even begin to iron out right and wrong. As far as I'm concerned society has been catering to minorities for far too long. If the majority of the world's society wants *** marriages...fine....if the majority doesn't.....listen to them.
 

SQUATMAN

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

I am against it. It's just not right. Don't see the attraction.
 

Johnny

Banned
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

majority doesn't.....listen to them.
So if the majority want's to ban long hair on men and women from showing their faces then we should?

If the majority get's to decide the fate if the minority then we would still have slaves and women would not be able to vote.

Ofcourse people of the same gender should be able to marry. It's none of our business to be voting agaisnt their rights to begin with.



 

Tanooki

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Born with, grew into, just decided to - because 'what the hey?' I'm not interested in the reason why, just as I'm not that interested in why some people become kleptomaniacs, why some people become alcoholics, why some people become fat why some people become attracted to their pets, or any of the other "deviations from 'normal'".

My objection comes in when I have to not only tolerate deviation (in whatever form) but am practically required to praise it.

As for "civil unions", I say why not? Why not have two words for it? Marriage can mean being joined by a religious leader in the eyes of their chosen diety, and everyone else can do civil unions: *** people, groups, people who want to make a point of joining only in a legal sense. I have no objection to that. But don't call it "marriage".
 

Tanooki

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Did you suggest that women gained their suffrage with a clear minority? Women were already 50% of the population. All they needed was 1% of the men to agree and there's a majority right there.
 

Johnny

Banned
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Nobody is asking you to bless it. Just to keep your white trash-flat-earth-socity-butt away from the wedding.

The fact that is pisses off all these religious nuts make it an even more beautiful thing because they need to learn to get with the times. You don't get to define what counts as mirrage. People have been doing it all over the world for thousands of years before your dead carpenter came and proclaimed that all people who are'nt the majority should be put to shame/death.

At best a priest in a church get's to choose not to wed them but then they can just go to another more open minded priest. Who are you decide who get's to wed and marry who?
 

Vespar

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

So if the majority want's to ban long hair on men and women from showing their faces then we should?

If the majority get's to decide the fate if the minority then we would still have slaves and women would not be able to vote.

Ofcourse people of the same gender should be able to marry. It's none of our business to be voting agaisnt their rights to begin with.
Unfortunately you don't hear any debate about long hair or women covering their face. ((That debate may be carried out in Islamic nations, but again that is another instance of right vs. tradition and certainly not the focus of this issue))

The comparison is outlandish...and good job at addressing a single sentence from an entire statement.

And I think you're wrong about each point you made. If you're talking about slavery in the US...the confederacy was the minority.

Women voting in the U.S. also didn't blatantly disregard thousands of years of tradition. Women voting was as fair as homosexuals wanting equal rights...and again I'm all for that. Domestic partnerships that allow the same and equal rights of a married couple is fine.

But for what reason should it have to change the concept of marriage?

Why must a homosexual couple have to be married before a catholic priest when the Catholic religion clearly states that it is immoral?

I think that demanding that these religion change their traditions to which they have kept to for thousands of years is an act of oppression.

So rather than just have equal rights....the homosexual community demands to take away the traditions of others to suit their own needs.

Certainly sounds fair.


 

Johnny

Banned
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

Why must a homosexual couple have to be married before a catholic priest when the Catholic religion clearly states that it is immoral?
They don't. The catholic church does not have a monopoly on marriage. Marriage has existed long before the catholic church and even in the Catholic church. if a Catholic priest wants to wed them then who are you to stop him?

You two seem to have fooled yourself into thinking that the christian church somehow invented marriage when at best all they did is rip it off from some older tradition.

Nobody can force a priest to marry a couple he does'nt want to marry but you also can't force him to *not* marry a homosexual couple.



 

buttershug

Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Same Sex Marriage...for or against?

For it.
I can't see how you can be ok with adultery and divorce being legal but against *** marriage.
But I would have liked it if the Canadian government had issued a statement saying that it's definition of marriage was legal purposes only and not to be used for any moral purposes.

edit:
My objection comes in when I have to not only tolerate deviation (in whatever form) but am practically required to praise it.
Video games havn't been around forever, and at one time they were a deviation.
And what about non-procreational sex?



 
Top