User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 11 of 29 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 88 of 231

Thread: Ron Paul 2008 Revolution

  1. #81
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Outsiders71 View Post
    It's a shame the gay community can't walk on their own two legs and instead ride on the coat tails of the African Americans of the 1960's. These two scenarios are NOT the SAME!

    The segregation of two different races into separate schools were not equal. Gay couples who decide to have a civil union and are given the same rights as a married couple is equal. The names are different because the relationships are different. If I said that I'm a gay male and am heterosexual does that make sense? Homosexual and heterosexual are TWO DIFFERENT things and in terms of sexuality are equal.
    Marriage needs to be redefined. That's what we are saying. In order to become a tolerant nation, we have to completely stop treating gays differently. That means not having separate names for their relationships.

    I think it's clear here what the actual issue is. In order for America to become a better place, you need to put your religious and personal reservations behind you. They're people, like you and I. You can choose whether or not to accept their union as godly, but you can't control their lives.

  2. #82
    Outsiders71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,005
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    Hey Outsiders, acceptance is already here. Homosexual couples are legal. There's nothing that anyone can do about it. So this is not about "acceptance".
    Gays won't feel fully accepted until the whole United States calls a civil union between two females or males a "gay marriage".

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    Marriage laws have NOTHING to do with a "man and a woman" as they are exclusively about legal and financial responsibilities - which do not have a gender.
    That's weird, I could have sworn I posted the legal definition of marriage which surprisingly does contain "man and a woman". The definition you describe must be from another country.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    The entire purpose of marriage is to provide incentives to monogamy to provide stability to families, to provide legal protections in the interests of the children, to provide for the division of property after a death, and to facilitate fair taxation, among other things.
    Notice there you mention families and children? Marriages produce families and children. Gay couples can't reproduce, and therefore have to adopt children that aren't there own.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    Nothing in there is exclusive to "a man and a woman", and in fact I challenge you to indicate one aspect of the marriage laws in which the gender of the couple is relevant. I bet you can't.
    I already have and it's in the first sentence of the legal definition of marriage. Let me ask you, are you (yourself) a product of a gay marriage because I do believe gender is relevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    Furthermore, gay marriage is already with us. The following nations have legal gay marriage: Belgium, Canada, South Africa, Spain and the Netherlands.
    If I actually lived in any of those countries this somehow may be relevant...

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    In the USA, gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts and Iowa.
    2/50 or 4% of the United States agrees with "gay marriage", not bad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    The world has not fallen apart. Nothing bad has happened. The sky did not fall.


    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    And yes, gay couples have children.
    Adopt, for the time being.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capslock View Post
    I didn't say they conceived them, but they are the legal parents of kids. And as such, they need and deserve the same legal protections.

    Capslock
    That's fine and they should have the same legal protections, however calling it a "gay marriage" is not necessary.
    James 1:17

    "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

  3. #83
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd argue that there be absolutely no difference in the name. Just "marriage". An umbrella term for the binding of 2 human beings.

    Considering that they live their lives no differently from straight couples, it makes sense.

    Now, your downplaying of adoption is offensive. You seem to think that adoption is less important than having children.

  4. #84
    rattler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    missing, presumed dead
    Posts
    8,554
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    so Outsiders.........................a strait couple, that are married that adopt kids cause they cant have any of their own due to medical reasons arent a family either?
    cervid serial killer
    Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety
    I didn't get stimulated but he kept his promise on change, that's about all I got left!
    http://www.wolfpointherald.com/--http://www.safety-brite.net/

  5. #85
    Outsiders71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,005
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    Marriage needs to be redefined.
    Why?

    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    That's what we are saying. In order to become a tolerant nation, we have to completely stop treating gays differently.
    But from what I understand we are already a tolerant nation.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    That means not having separate names for their relationships.
    Do you give the same name to two different things? Why do we call cats, cats, lets call them all dogs.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrWurm View Post
    I think it's clear here what the actual issue is. In order for America to become a better place, you need to put your religious and personal reservations behind you. They're people, like you and I. You can choose whether or not to accept their union as godly, but you can't control their lives.
    I need to put my religious and personal reservations behind me? Excuse me but I don't even know you and you don't even know me so don't pretend like you do. I have not brought up God in any of this debate because not everyone here believes in God as I do. Marriage, since the first one that ever existed on this Earth was composed of a man and a woman. That was the definition of a marriage then and is the same now. Gays aren't interested in equality under the law as proven by this thread. The whole "gay marriage movement" is all about forcing social acceptance using law, it isn't good enough to have the same rights they want people to buy the lie that their "gay marriage" is the same as a heterosexual marriage. It isn't the same and never will be the same, they are two different things and that is the simple reality check.
    James 1:17

    "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows."

  6. #86
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've said it before and I'll say it again: if a religious church wants to "marry" a gay couple, they should be allowed to do so. If a religious church does not want to "marry" a gay couple, then they don't have to. Just because a building and a congregation call themselves a church does not mean that they all subscribe to the same belief system, and therefore should not be regulated under the same "fundamental" principles. No government should be allowed to say that no church has neither the right nor the responsibility to marry whomever they please. Said another way, if a particular church interprets the bible differently and believes that gay couples should have the opportunity to be blessed together as a couple under god then there is no good reason why that church should not allow be allowed to perform such a "ceremony."

    Weddings suck anyway, but that is neither here nor there.

    Quote Originally Posted by rattler_mt View Post
    so Outsiders.........................a strait couple, that are married that adopt kids cause they cant have any of their own due to medical reasons arent a family either?
    Well, I suppose the husband and wife are a family; but the adopted kids are "in their custody."

    I love how this topic is all over the place; but, for the time being, since it is somewhat related to politics it will remain open and active. But, knowing this crowd and these topics, it will be watched closely. Don't make me close another one, dang it!

    xvart.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

  7. #87
    Californian in DC DrWurm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    1,169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    let's make one thing clear

    GAY LOVE IS STRAIGHT LOVE IS LOVE

    It's the same feeling. It causes the same urge to be together. It deserves the same respect.

  8. #88
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    MMMkay, I think the concern was that with differences is the perception of deficit. Differences do not equal deficit on their own but the fear is it leaves the door open for the perception, something that as human beings are somewhat wired to do. With acknowledged differences, it creates room for 2 entities, one will be, in the mind, “us” and the other will be “them”, and in-group out-group bias takes it from there, with a preference for us over them. One will be “better” for whatever reason. If it is or not is more of a matter of opinion and your beliefs than anything else. And that’s fine.
    that makes no logic

Page 11 of 29 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •