California legalizes gay marr... ZOMG!!!! MY EYES!!!!! IT BURNS!!!

[Azure]

Originally Posted by LIP MAN

Yes.

I should have re-worded that. I disagree with the gay lifestyle....but I agree with gay marriage.

Does that make me a bigot?

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Azure

I guess my point is that I don't agree with 'being gay'....but I do agree with gay marriage....as screwed up as that sounds.

That I do not understand.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Azure

I should have re-worded that. I disagree with the gay lifestyle....but I agree with gay marriage.

Does that make me a bigot?

what would the 'ist' be of this? An orientationist?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

That I do not understand.

Ah well, most don't.

I just don't think its the government's right to tell people they can't marry each other. While the government still has something to do with marriage of course.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Gozer

One of the good things religion had brought to the world,

Not true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

And I'm sure that racists don't see anything wrong with their beliefs either.

Not talking about racism.

They are trying to show people that for all intrinsic purposes that they are the same in every way except one to everybody else and would like to belong in society as an equal and normal. By having a separate name for their union, they ostracize themselves from their desire to be seen as the same as everybody else.

Under the umbrella of humanity we have humans, and then next come white/black/red/yellow/straight/gay/trans-gendered/catholic/protestant/muslim etc etc etc....

Sorry, but we are not all the same.

I think a big problem is that being "equal" and being "the same" are very different.

Gays are equal to me. Gay unions is not the same as marriage.

Every culture has its own traditions and customs when it comes to things like marriage, and obviously any gay marriage would have things different than a man/woman marriage, does that mean that it is categorically different than the man/woman marriage.

The only argument I have against gays getting married is the specific use of the word "marriage." Technically they would be incredibly similar, yes.

Perhaps we should not recognize marriages from other cultures as marriages because they don't get married in the same fashion as we do.

In the event of polygamy or under-aged marriage, we don't. But again, despite the aesthetics of the marriage, chances are its a heterosexual union.

I hope that our society does not regress by such large amounts in the next 40 years. How dare they. Why would anyone want to be accepted as normal and not as some sort of freak.

Who's calling anyone a freak? I'm arguing that for total mainstream acceptance of homosexuals and their lifestyle (including legally recognized unions entailing equal rights) then perhaps the homosexual community should leave this heterosexual term alone.

Perhaps if people in Alberta were more forward thinking, then gay people in Alberta would not feel ostracized for being who they are.

I wish gay people would understand that the hostility they get in places like Alberta comes from what is perceived to be a blatant attack on something fundamentally important to the majority of the local population. By that I mean this marriage debate, and not the anatomical details of homosexual's sex life.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Homosexual and heterosexual couples are not equal, the societal purpose of marriage is to reproduce. .

Originally Posted by Gozer

Are the marriages less equal?
No

So let me read this straight Heterosexual couples and Homosexual couples are not equal, but marriages (heterosexual or homosexual) aren’t less equal?

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don't see how it effects these people one iota. No one is forcing them to enter gay marriages.

What I was getting at is that "marriages" are not gay.

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by lchoy

my $0.02 + 5% GST
Shows like "the bachelor" or "who wants to marry a millionaire" (or even celebrity shot gun marriages) are a greater threats on the scantity of marriage than 2 people who really love another, but happen to be the same sex.

Q.F.T.!!!


Now.... I'm going to get crapped on for saying this, but here we go anyway.

To the "gays are a-ok just stay away from our sacred word" crowd.

Why can't you people just admit the truth. You don't like gays. You disprove of the lifestyle. Maybe they make you uncomfortable or something. Maybe your neighbour is gay and you smile and say hello to him every day but then you go inside and whisper something under your breath. Maybe you don't even whisper. Maybe it's just a thought in the back of your mind. I don't friggin' know... but don't try to tell me that the real honest-to-god truth is that you think they should use a different word to describe their love.

Please.

It's just a word.

Never, in the history of civilization, have people fought so hard to save the traditional definition of a word. Language changes all the time. If it didn't, we'd have one dictionary that was written when we first all got together and started speaking and we'd only use that one.

I just don't buy it. No one cares this much about a word. You just don't like the idea of a gay honeymoon. You don't like thinking about someone saying "You may now kiss the groom". Maybe you just get a weird feeling when you think of two men kissing in a church.

Fine. But don't try to tell me you're fighting over a word.

Where was this crowd when the various insulting slurs were being invented to hurl in the direction of the nearest homosexual? All those words used to have different meanings. One of them is something you smoke in England. Where are the people telling us to preserve the "sanctity" of the word for a British cigarette?

Exactly.

For those with various religious beliefs for their disagreement with gay marriage, I don't agree with you, but I respect your right to follow your religion. My beef is with the bigots who hide behind the BS argument that they are trying to save a word.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

Not it is not. I personally feel that the term marriage applys to a man and a woman. It is my opinion and because of that opinion I am opposed to the idea of a gay marriage.

Your opinion (which you are completely entitled to) is that people of the same sex shouldn't qualify to use the word "marriage".

Correct me if I am wrong on that.

You are of the opinion that a certain group that is otherwise indistinguishable from everyone else is not entitled to the same thing you (and everyone else) is because of their sexual orientation.

That is discrimination because they are gay.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

Not it is not. I personally feel that the term marriage applys to a man and a woman. It is my opinion and because of that opinion I am opposed to the idea of a gay marriage. It's not like I am going down to Detour, roping myself a fruit and dragging 'em behind my pickup with my clan buddies.

Religious groups always claim ownership of the term marriage as its their creation and as by their defined rules cannot be anything other than man and woman.

Certainly marriage has been around long before modern religions, and has many different meanings to many different people.

What the problem is in the US for example is that Christians want their definition of marriage to be the rule of law, over the differing views of many others who feel gays should have the same rights of union in marriage as any others in their country.

Separation of Church/State should be an overriding principle in this matter, since its at its base a debate about the rights of humans. It can be argued and turned into a much more complex debate, but ultimately for me its a matter of equal rights.

Taking religion out of the equation its a matter of equality, but obviously that won't happen and religious groups will continue to claim ownership of a word to fight against something they believe strongly against.

[GrrlGoalie33]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I wish gay people would understand that the hostility they get in places like Alberta comes from what is perceived to be a blatant attack on something fundamentally important to the majority of the local population. By that I mean this marriage debate, and not the anatomical details of homosexual's sex life.

This is incredibly not true. Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual and Transgendered (GLBT) people have been ridiculed and the subject of hate and hate crimes for longer than the marriage "issue" has been around.

In fact, with the recent hate crimes statistics that came out, the percentage of violent hate crimes against any group was highest in the GLBT community...I highly doubt that has to do with the marriage debate and more to do with bigotry and homophobia.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by J pold

So let me read this straight Heterosexual couples and Homosexual couples are not equal, but marriages (heterosexual or homosexual) aren’t less equal?

You butchered my comments by quoting them out of context.
The second quote is regarding two hetro couples, one infertile.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I disagree with that. Homosexual and heterosexual couples are not equal, the societal purpose of marriage is to reproduce. Homosexual couples are not able to reproduce. Sure it's possible, but in the same sense its possible for an individual to reproduce - it doesn't have the same value IMHO.

That's a fun post. If you don't have kids your marriage isn't worth as much. I know lots of adoptive parents who would disagree with you. Hell, I know lots of people who don't want kids who would disagree. That's before we even get to homosexuals, or what the "societal purpose" of marriage is.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think you are way off base on this one.

[Boblobla]

If they get 'Marriage' can we have 'Gay' and 'Queer' back to use in every day conversation?

[troutman]

The History Of Human Marriage, Vol. 1

http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=10659043

[J pold]

Originally Posted by Gozer

You butchered my comments by quoting them out of context.
The second quote is regarding two hetro couples, one infertile.

So than what is the difference between a heterosexual couple that are unable to have children getting married and a homosexual couple getting married? They both can’t reproduce which seems to be the main reason in your opinion

Are there marriages equally worthless?

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I wish gay people would understand that the hostility they get in places like Alberta comes from what is perceived to be a blatant attack on something fundamentally important to the majority of the local population. By that I mean this marriage debate, and not the anatomical details of homosexual's sex life.

And if a battered wife would just close her mouth and be quiet around her husband, she probably wouldn't get beat up so much.

That's a pretty extreme analogy, but it sounds to me like you are saying that gays should stop protesting, and maybe they wouldn't get picked on so much in Alberta.

My point being - The gays expressing their right to free speech isn't the problem. The Alberta reaction is.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by J pold

So than what is the difference between a heterosexual couple that are unable to have children getting married and a homosexual couple getting married? They both can’t reproduce which seems to be the main reason in your opinion

Are there marriages equally worthless?

I think what he was trying to get at is that all homosexual couples will never be able to reproduce in the 'normal' sense. Sure there are some exceptions for for hetero couples but that is the way that our species natural propagates.

This is not my reasoning, just trying to decipher the post...

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

Why can't you people just admit the truth. You don't like gays.

That is not true, and only escalates tension in a civil debate.

I think gays are perfectly fine human beings, but same sex marriages are not perfectly fine marriages. TO ME, marriage is a celebration of the union of a man and a woman under god (with an implied duty of expanding the community, but that is not a prerequisite which would preclude the unwilling/unable).

Boy-boy marriage doesn't fit MY definition, THAT DOESN'T MEAN I THINK THEY'RE EVIL!

Why is gay community so obsessed with conforming with the hetro community? I think that independent of the animosity that had been directed at 'you' in the past, 'you' wouldn't be so against with coming up with your own title.

'you' = homosexual community