Fence in the queers

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CaptainObvious, May 22, 2012.

  1. too bad your God isn't universally accepted as real. even further, within christianity and judaism, there are large debates on how to interpret the words of your God anyway. also, the marriage that gay people want are state sanctioned, so your God sanctioned union is pretty meaningless to them.
     
    #31     May 22, 2012
  2. I honestly think the system we have should be left alone and or marriage be explicitly defined as between 1 man and 1 woman.

    If you are a guy and you want to marry a man have a sex change, same for females.

    With that being said I do think civil unions will eventually be available in every state of the union.
    I think that is only going to open up a can of worms and unintended consequences. How to define what it is that constitutes a civil union IOW just like above (for marriage) it must be defined by the courts beforehand not made up willy nilly by the partners.
    Why be limited to just 2 persons, why can't a whole group of people get married and pay the married filing as separate rate etc etc.

    The other thing I object to is thinking that when it comes to adoption a heterosexual couple and homosexual couple must be treated as equals. All else being equal heterosexual couples should have preference. Heterosexuality is the normal state of sexual preference and the normal state of the family. Homosexuality, single parent homes no matter how popular it makes us feel to accept them as normal , are not the norm.
     
    #32     May 22, 2012
  3. Quite frankly it's all about the benefits from the govt and imposed on others by the govt.

    and that's why I oppose homosexual marriage.

    To many people suckling the gubbermint teats as it is.
     
    #33     May 22, 2012
  4. pspr

    pspr

    Not really. But government does need to get out of religion.
     
    #34     May 22, 2012
  5. Totally agree on this one.
     
    #35     May 22, 2012

  6. But religion does need to get out of government.
     
    #36     May 23, 2012
  7. Not really what? You're usually not inane enough to make vague posts.

    can you explain further? i don't see coherency in your post.
     
    #37     May 23, 2012
  8. Obviously your lack of perceived coherency in my opinion on the subject is directly linked to your personal attachment to the outcome of the issue.
    It's a govt subsidy of behavior and new found rights
    I'm against the growth of the liberal welfare/nanny state (in any form) and the associated forced obligations of the private sector by gubbermint dictate REGARDLESS of the reason.
     
    #38     May 23, 2012
  9. pspr

    pspr

    Not really accurate.
     
    #39     May 23, 2012
  10. stu

    stu

    What is the norm changes, thank goodness. Religion just isn't a good enough reason for owning any particular word, or for dictating what must represent normal.
    Marriage can be quite straightforwardly and explicitly defined in law as the status in contract by which two people can and are willing to freely and mutually promise to live together in relationship for life, or until the legal termination of the same.
     
    #40     May 23, 2012