Mass. Court Clears Way for Gay Marriages

[James]

[color=#707875]I just see a lot of similarity between anti-gay arguments and racist arguments of 100 years ago. During that period, people of other races (not just in America, but all over the world) were seen as inferior, subordinate and in many cases, "unnatural".

You know, I've read quite a lot about studies of human sexuality. I even watched a documentary about studies on transgendered people.

And while I don't claim to understand human sexuality, I also wouldn't be prepared to say that "unusual" sexuality is "unnatural". Not only is that a statement that really [i]doesn't[/i] have a lot of factual weight...but there's a bigger issue.

The bigger issue is that the debate over homosexuality on a scientific level is often used to degrade homosexuals. And homosexuals -- whether you understand their sexuality or not -- are the same as everyone else. They aren't perverts, or sexual deviants, or child molestors. Just as you can fall in love with someone from the opposite sex (and just as that love is [i]far[/i] more than sex alone), a homosexual person can do this with someone of the same sex.

Yes, it's obviously confusing for those who aren't homosexual. And nobody's asking you to necessarily understand that point of view yourself. Obviously you won't ever entirely understand it, just as a homosexual person won't understand a heterosexual person's orientation.

Regardless, we know that human sexuality is a very personal and very complicated issue. It's not a simple question of saying "you're sick, get cured". It doesn't work that way. And even if it [i]did[/i] work that way, there's still absolutely no reason to discriminate. Why discriminate? Because it's "unnatural" or because you don't understand it? That makes little sense.

I would also say that apart from the raw issues of intolerance -- and you can talk about religion or you can talk about "science" or whatever you like, but that's what it comes down to -- there's also the question of pluralism in society. And there's the question of equality for all human beings.

I have heard people say that gay marriage (or even civil unions) would equate to Government "accepting this lifestyle". My question is simply "so?" Government, unlike you or I, has a responsibility to protect the equal civil rights of everyone.

You might be Christian and you may not be Muslim for instance. Under your own beliefs, you may simply not recognize a lot of Muslim practices, or practices of any other religion. But at the same time, there has to be a give and take -- those people must be given the same rights as you (to practice their own customs), so that there is a sense of equality. You don't have to agree and you don't have to teach your children to be Muslims. But nobody is imposing that religion on you; they're simply giving others a choice to follow it if they want.

This is one of the things that annoys me about the gay marriage debate.

People talk about gay marriage being "imposed" on society. I think that is an incredibly hollow -- and incredibly naive comment.

It's especially hollow when you consider that so many marriages end in divorce...and that so many marriages are a matter of convenience and not love. And so on. There are many things in society that "corrupt the sanctity of marriage".

But even from a religious point of view, one must accept that marriage has gone beyond a personal religious ceremony. Marriage is also a question of legality -- and the provision of equal rights to both partners in the relationship.

This is why I feel that nobody can object to civil unions. Civil unions don't pretend to be religious ceremonies; they are secular ceremonies that are simply there to provide the same legal rights to gay couples as to heterosexual couples. How can someone -- even someone who is deeply religious -- be opposed to this? In this case, something is being done to adjust and correct inequalities in society...and it's being done without "intruding" on religion or religious principles.

More importantly still, there are many practices in society that are legal, which the church may oppose. Your religion might strongly oppose birth control -- but since when has it been acceptable (or legal) for society to block access to birth control for those who want it? Do you see what I'm getting at here? Just as there [i]should[/i] be freedom for people to practice their religion, there also should be freedom for people to pursue their civil rights.

While someone may say to me that I should not impose civil rights on society, I would simply answer by asking that person not to impose their religious views on society at large. If you think about it, the latter has been the reality for such a long time. And it's simply unfair. So that should change. If you disagree, that's okay -- you are allowed to disagree and you are allowed to disregard what you may not agree with. But don't use [i]your[/i] views to create an imposition on the lives of others.

Remember, a civil union isn't imposing anything on people of strong faith. Nobody is coming to you and denying you your civil rights. But in the case of gay relationships, there [i]is[/i] a physical barrier, which relates directly to the beliefs of one part of society. And therefore, there is a very stark inequality there. It's one that should not exist.[/color]

[Baron Samedi]

I would just like to add another little bit of something to stew on in this vicious argument.

Animals may not be homosexual, but then again animals do not have thinking capacities equal to ours. They do not have emotional powers.

Humans can discern possible mates, humans have feelings and urges which are greater and deeper than the primal ones found in other animals.

And [i]that[/i] is the reason that humans have the capacity for the want of homosexual relationships. Because we look beyond propogation. Does it really matter if homosexuality is 'unnatural'. If you are objecting from anything that is not a religious point, you have no case.

If you are objecting from a religious standpoint, I disagree with your case. But it is your beliefs.

Four little words to think about.

'Live and let live.'

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

ARRRGH!!!

Ok, just to set the record straight, MARRIAGE IS A SOCIAL INSTITUTION!!! Any "sanctity" it may hold stems purely from peoples' religious views, and they freaking differ. Some people think marriage is such a powerful and holy union that divorce is not allowed. Others don't think so. Is polygamy "unnatural"? (Anyone who says it is a freaking idiot; it's meant to be a rhetorical question.) Monogamy (in people; not, say, swans or dolphins) arose as a marriage structure for social reasons and sometimes for religious reasons, but never for natural reasons. My point is if people see marriage as first and foremost a religious institution they should not even partake in this discussion because they don't know what they're talking about.

Which brings me to my opinion on the "gay marriage" matter. First off, do I think being homosexual is "natural"? Well, it's a natural occurrence, so in that sense it is. But it doesn't fit in with our social structure, so if society is considered to be naturally formed (which of course it isn't, at least not entirely), then I guess you can call it "unnatural." If "natural" refers to the way nature works (which doesn't take into account brainpower and reasoning ability, for those of you who assign different "natural law" to man than to other animals), then homosexuality is not unnatural because there ARE a lot of animals that are gay. As gay as human gays. And not out of necessity for raising offspring or anything. There are a lot of gay giraffes, for example. Ah hell, why do I bother? It's just plain ignorant to say homosexuality is unnatural.

Anyway, since marriage is, in essense, a social institution, and we try to support (or should, anyway) separation of church and state, we should not let marriage be guided by one religion or another (or even a mix). I think marriage should be treated as a social right of anyone, not to just "natural" people. Heck, midgets, retarded people, and people born missing certain body parts are at least as "unnatural" as homosexuals, since in a "natural" setting (where natural selection would guide the species more) they would be equally detrimental to humans' perpetuation as a species.

I'm gonna go right out and say that people who oppose gay marriage are idiots ********. Yes, that's right. I DON'T respect your opinions.

[size=1][color=red]EDIT: ScirosDarkblade, I appreciate that you are passionate about this subject, but please...do not insult people who hold a different belief. The point of this thread is to hold a discussion. I don't want it to degenerate into a mud-slinging match. Those who can't be respectful of others will be dealt with severely - that goes for everyone, no matter what side of the debate they're on.

- James[/size][/color]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]
Animals may not be homosexual, but then again animals do not have thinking capacities equal to ours. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=#707875]Well, we have already established that homosexuality occurs in animals too. And in various types of animals, for that matter.

I personally suspect that homosexuality is just nature's way of controlling population...which is why only a certain percentage of a particular species would be homosexual. But who knows, that's just an open theory.

It may also interest you to know that not only is homosexuality apparent in various species, but so is gender-changing. There are many species that do not even have defined genders, or when they [i]do[/i] have defined genders, they are able to change their gender based on their environment.

But human beings put a lot of weight into gender as well. Everything we do in society has some gender basis to it. Even the way you relate to men or women is largely based on gender. That's why issues of sexuality are so alien and so difficult for many people to grapple with...because it may disturb one's comfort zone. But of course, lots of things disturb our comfort zone -- people of different ethnic, religious or social backgrounds. Of course, as developed species...and as a developed society, we have to put our fear or misunderstanding aside and attempt to be fair.

However, I do think that the second part of your comment is very important to consider.

Humans aren't basing their lives purely on sex. Men and women do not base their lives purely on procreation -- men and woman fall in love, they have relationships that go far beyond the simple concept of making babies. If we were focusing entirely on that, then I'm sure nobody would care about a man having a million wives and billions of children. Afterall, it's successful procreation.

So we [i]know[/i] that loving relationships are far more than sex and child birth. And we know that sex itself is an expression of intimacy...as much or moreso than the raw desire to have children.

In any case, it's true that we're getting away from the core point here. We are definitely talking about marriage rather than the biological aspects of sexuality, or at least, that's how the thread started.

I think it would definitely be interesting to talk about the whole gender issue as well. Women are still often paid less than men, despite doing the same jobs...and despite the women's liberation movement. I point this out because there are [i]still[/i] serious issues of inequality and "gender bias" out there. If women themselves can't always get a fair shot...what hope to homosexual men and women have? Or men and women of any other minority group? If there is one aspect of human society that I wish I could change...it'd definitely be this.[/color]

[Dagger]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875]I just see a lot of similarity between anti-gay arguments and racist arguments of 100 years ago. During that period, people of other races (not just in America, but all over the world) were seen as inferior, subordinate and in many cases, "unnatural".[/color][/b][/quote]

Thanks for bringing this up, James. ^_^

There was a period in history--not too long ago--when the United States government frowned on and sometimes even outlawed interracial marriage. Just as a heterosexual person cannot determine the ethnic background of who he or she is attracted to, a homosexual person cannot determine the gender of who he or she falls in love with. Love (between consenting adults) is love, in all its shapes and forms.

[i]I[/i] am biracial--half-Asian, half-Caucasian--and though our past leaders tended to focus more on the controversy created by white/black marriages, I can identify with those who suffered because their love was considered taboo and possibly even illegal.

Gay couples deserve the same rights as straight couples, and that includes the right to introduce someone as his husband or her wife. It's as simple as that. While civil unions are definitely a step forward, in my eyes they just aren't good enough.

~Dagger~

[Guest cloricus]

[quote]Could you do me a favor and name a single one of Bush's policies that is anti-gay?[/quote]I don't know any but I know he didn't sound happy when they had a sound bite (on the radio) of his vow to fight it legally because of how unmoral it is. Though he?s strongly religious so you can?t blame him as he was brought up with these ?morals.?

I also think rulings like this should be conservative in how they are implemented and followed. Though mainly I see no problems with it apart from the religious side of people affected.

Also TN; what is the difference between you saying "YOU?RE A BIGOT!!!" and a highly religious person saying "IT'S JUST UNNATURAL!!!" since they were brought up with this belief and you have acquired your opinion. Think about that, it?s your opinion which is in your head verus another person who has a moral value which is in their head. What and who says you are right? (I would like to know your answer too that. Could be enlightening.)

Though personally I?d be more on the side of gay rights I just don?t like it when some one blindly believes they are right because they (and a few others) say it. You really never know there might be a God who really does hate fags and doesn?t want them to have the same rights. (I?d keep going on that line of thought but I?m laughing too much at that assumption? Sorry Dan.)

[quote]Homosexual behaviour, in any species, is unnatural.[/quote]Incorrect Boba; I watched an interested doco series (by that famous BBC guy) last year exploring if same-sex coupling was restricted to humans. It went over voluntary homosexual actions (eg dolphins), survival based (eg female lions) and a large variety of animals and why they resorted too this alternative, it?s out come was rather obvious that this sort of behaviour is in fact rather common in the animal world. That argument of unnatural in the animals is null as information to the contrary is very easy too access using your local library or an internet search engine.

But still being me I don?t like the use of the word ?marriage? in non same sex couples. (I have explained my reason behind this before.)

[Boba Fett]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Blah blah blah, marriage is an institution between man and woman, blah blah blah. Grow up losers.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]If you?re truly interested in supporting an idea, you?d do well to stop insulting people first.

This not something I?d expect to hear from a moderator.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Anyone who opposed gay marriage is a BIGOT.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Neither is this.

Some people who oppose gay marriage are bigots, there?s nothing you can do about that. Others do so for religious reasons. Can you honestly tell me you?d go call a devout Catholic a bigot because he or she follows the doctrine set down by the Pope?[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Your argument is useless and worthless. You mise well just come out and say you don't like gay people and say you're a bigot cause thats what you really are. No use in hiding behind some poorly thought out ridiculous ideas, [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Your logic here escapes me. Transtic, besides your well thought out body paragraphs of your post, the rest of your statements are extreme generalizations and serious accusations.

I personally don?t approve of gay marriage; it?s something I don?t feel is right. However, I am not going to attempt and impose these views on other people, because I realize that under the US legal system there is no way to justify banning gay marriages.

Call me a loser and a bigot all you like. I?m neither.[/color]

[center]--- --- --- --- ---[/center]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i]
[B]Incorrect Boba; I watched an interested doco series (by that famous BBC guy) last year exploring if same-sex coupling was restricted to humans. It went over voluntary homosexual actions (eg dolphins), survival based (eg female lions) and a large variety of animals and why they resorted too this alternative, it?s out come was rather obvious that this sort of behaviour is in fact rather common in the animal world. That argument of unnatural in the animals is null as information to the contrary is very easy too access using your local library or an internet search engine.
[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]I stand corrected.[/color]

[Guest lavalamp]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i]
[B]Though he?s strongly religious so you can?t blame him as he was brought up with these ?morals.? [/B][/QUOTE]

Why can't one blame him? Since when did an upbringing restrict personal exploration and discovery in the way of morality? It doesn't, and people are so quick to put blame on such for strong beliefs. In my opinion, making a reference to your upbringing when sharing your opinions on topics like this is such a huge, and incredibly transparent scapegoat.

Being homosexual, I'm obviously rather biased about whether or not homosexual couples should be given rights regarding marriage and the recognition of this. Personally, I see both sides of the argument, and realize there is going to be a struggle on all grounds: be they political, moral, or cultural when dealing with this issue.

It's so difficult, because you can't use facts to argue with the religious aspect of it. By the same token, you can't criticize religious people or religion itself if you are in fact a supporter of homosexuality and the rights people under the label are seeking. People citing religion as a basis for their disapproval are not bigots; calling people bigots out of a distaste for the basis is [b]bigoted[/b].

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i]
[B]Also TN; what is the difference between you saying "YOU?RE A BIGOT!!!" and a highly religious person saying "IT'S JUST UNNATURAL!!!" since they were brought up with this belief and you have acquired your opinion. Think about that, it?s your opinion which is in your head verus another person who has a moral value which is in their head. What and who says you are right? (I would like to know your answer too that. Could be enlightening.)[/B][/QUOTE]

I didn't bring up religion for a reason, and I'd rather stay away from it. I understand the opposition via religion that exists, however some of the opposition in this thread was not for religious meaning, it was because of the "deffiniton" of the word marriage. Which is ridiculous.

A bigot is a set word. It has a meaning, a set meaning. Anyone who is intolerant of those who differ is a bigot. It says it right there in dictionary. Unnatural... well the word exists in the dictionary but none of the deffinitions describe myself as a gay man. It is not against my nature to be gay. It is not against natural law for me to be gay. By saying it's unnatural, that would insinuate, that either I had to work against a natural feeling (which I assume is toward women) to be attracted to men... which simply never happened to me. I was never attracted to women that way, always to men since I can remember. Unnatural is a word that can be used based on your view of someone or something when dealing with non-set subjects like homosexuality. Because straight people don't know what its like to be gay, they cannot honestly say it's unnatural cause they don't know what it feels like to be gay or to feel any different than "natural"... it's like if I said being straight was unnatural... you would think I was the most moronic person in the world if i said that.... I don't understand what it's like to be straight so how can I honestly say it's unnatural to be straight? I can't, and neither can any straight person about any gay person.

[quote][b]This not something I?d expect to hear from a moderator.[/b][/quote]

Think I care? When it come to STUPID ideas, there's nothing more I can do but completely insult your lack of intelligence.

[quote][b]Some people who oppose gay marriage are bigots, there?s nothing you can do about that. Others do so for religious reasons. Can you honestly tell me you?d go call a devout Catholic a bigot because he or she follows the doctrine set down by the Pope?[/b][/quote]

**** the pope. If the pope told you to jump off a bridge would you do it? Yeah... thats what I thought. Theres a difference between being "against" gay marriage for religious purposes and just being plain against it. By completely ruling out marriages ina whole you're a bigot. If you rule out marriages in a catholic church for religious reasons, well thats something different. Some of you need to grow up and look at the times. Marriage isn't the same as it used to. Over half the people who get married get divorced, thats against religion, so why don't we make divorce illegal then? If you want to use religion to stop gay people from getting married, then you should use religion to stop straight people from getting divorced. Ofcourse that won't happen... why you ask? Because people are bigots.

Look, i can understand the opposition to gay marriage in a traditional religious act. We don't want that anyway, and no church in their right mind, unless it's Unitarian, is gonna marry any of us anyway. We don't want to get married for religious reasons, that not what this fight for marriage is about... it's about having the same RIGHTS and FREEDOMS as straight married couples.... if that means calling it civil unions and giving us the same rights and freedoms, then so be it... if that means calling it marriages and having the same rights and freedoms then so be it... we don't care which one it is as long as we can be treated in the same respect through the law and our government. I just want to be able to propose to my boyfriend, get married or joined or whatever, and call him my husband when the time comes. By denying me that, well, thats bigottry, no matter what way you look at it.

[Gavin]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]I didn't bring up religion for a reason, and I'd rather stay away from it.[/quote][/b]

[size=1]Why not TN? You went off and called me a bigot because I object to this on a religious basis as well as a moral one. I mean just because I follow a set of ideals that's been handed down for 2,000 years that says that the Holy Roman Catholic Church objects to your ideas that makes me a bigot.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i][b]
A bigot is a set word. It has a meaning, a set meaning. Anyone who is intolerant of those who differ is a bigot. It says it right there in dictionary[/b][/quote]

[size=1]But does that not make you also a bigot to object to my religious views as a Roman Catholic.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i][b]
Think I care? When it come to STUPID ideas, there's nothing more I can do but completely insult your lack of intelligence.[/b][/quote]

[size=1]That's both childish and saddening to come from a Moderator. You should care since your meant to act in a proper manner on these boards.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i][b]
**** the Pope. If the Pope asked you to jump off a bridge.[/b][/quote]

[size=1]I would, and I would advise you against insulting the Pope or I think you may find yourself in a lot of hot water. I said that I didn't object to people personal freedom as long as it doesn't conflict with my religious views and I say that again since the core of Catholicism is peace and love for your fellow man.


[b]I have asked James to close this thread to avoid further arguments.[/b][/size]

[Ben]

Straight from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (minus any spelling errors, of course):

[FONT=times new roman]"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross and the difficulty they may encounter from their condition."[/FONT]

The Church specifically says that nothing negative is to be done to gay or lesbian people. Anyone who slanders or insults gays and lesbians while claiming the backing of the Catholic Church is a liar.

I just wanted to point that out

[Boba Fett]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]I didn't bring up religion for a reason, and I'd rather stay away from it. I understand the opposition via religion that exists, however some of the opposition in this thread was not for religious meaning, it was because of the "deffiniton" of the word marriage. Which is ridiculous.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]You claim the definition of the word marriage is ridiculous? According to dictionary.com, the definition is:
[URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=marriage]
1.
a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
b. The state of being married; wedlock.
c. A common-law marriage.
d. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage[/URL]

There are many people out there who are pushing for the passage of a ?Defense of Marriage Act?, who would like to see same-sex marriages outlawed. These people are doing so for a variety of reasons. Not all of them are bigots TN, to think so is ludicrous. Many of these people have valid arguments that explain their views.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]A bigot is a set word. It has a meaning, a set meaning. Anyone who is intolerant of those who differ is a bigot. It says it right there in dictionary. Unnatural... well the word exists in the dictionary but none of the deffinitions describe myself as a gay man. It is not against my nature to be gay. It is not against natural law for me to be gay. By saying it's unnatural, that would insinuate, that either I had to work against a natural feeling (which I assume is toward women) to be attracted to men... which simply never happened to me. I was never attracted to women that way, always to men since I can remember. Unnatural is a word that can be used based on your view of someone or something when dealing with non-set subjects like homosexuality. Because straight people don't know what its like to be gay, they cannot honestly say it's unnatural cause they don't know what it feels like to be gay or to feel any different than "natural"... it's like if I said being straight was unnatural... you would think I was the most moronic person in the world if i said that.... I don't understand what it's like to be straight so how can I honestly say it's unnatural to be straight? I can't, and neither can any straight person about any gay person.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]I?m sure we all know what the word bigot means TN. Unnatural on the other hand, seems to be an entirely different case.

[URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=unnatural]Unnatural:
1. In violation of a natural law.
2. Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom.
3. Deviating from a behavioral or social norm: an unnatural attachment.
4. Contrived or constrained; artificial: smiled in an unnatural manner.
5. In violation of natural feelings; inhuman.[/URL]

Gay people are not of the social norm. The majority decides the social norm, which in this case is heterosexuality. Therefore, the word unnatural does define you and all other gay/lesbian people.

[u][b]This is not a bad thing[/b][/u]. It simply means that in one way you are a minority. I personally have the same respect for someone who is gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered, etc. as I do for someone who is straight.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Think I care? When it come to STUPID ideas, there's nothing more I can do but completely insult your lack of intelligence.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Somehow I doubt that an opinion shared by millions of people doesn?t have some logic to it.

It?s also not very convincing to call someone?s ideas stupid. Sinking to that level during a debate makes you look bad.

So far you?ve called me a bigot, labeled my opinions as stupid, told me I completely lack intelligence and called me a loser. I respect your opinions, how about you respect mine.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]**** the pope. If the pope told you to jump off a bridge would you do it? Yeah... thats what I thought. Theres a difference between being "against" gay marriage for religious purposes and just being plain against it. By completely ruling out marriages ina whole you're a bigot. If you rule out marriages in a catholic church for religious reasons, well thats something different. Some of you need to grow up and look at the times. Marriage isn't the same as it used to. Over half the people who get married get divorced, thats against religion, so why don't we make divorce illegal then? If you want to use religion to stop gay people from getting married, then you should use religion to stop straight people from getting divorced. Ofcourse that won't happen... why you ask? Because people are bigots.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Excuse me? The pope is a world leader who has done countless good thing around the world. Saying F--- the pope is completely inappropriate.

There are Catholics out there who would ?Jump off a bridge? if the pope said to. These are people of principle that are devoted to their beliefs and their religion. You?d be wise not to attack them for their faith.

Legoboy1 (2:47:01 PM): I would jump...
Legoboy1 (2:47:21 PM): ...if the pope said to.

Magnus Immortal (2:48:22 PM): So would I

As for the recent problems with marriages, this is one of the primary reasons not to allow people of abnormal sexual orientation to marry. Marriage is fast becoming a joke and needs to be preserved. Allowing people who live ?alternative lifestyles? to wed would further dilute marriage. If you allow legalization of one alternative lifestyle, you have to legalize them all. What?s next, polygamy?[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Look, i can understand the opposition to gay marriage in a traditional religious act. We don't want that anyway, and no church in their right mind, unless it's Unitarian, is gonna marry any of us anyway. We don't want to get married for religious reasons, that not what this fight for marriage is about... it's about having the same RIGHTS and FREEDOMS as straight married couples.... if that means calling it civil unions and giving us the same rights and freedoms, then so be it... if that means calling it marriages and having the same rights and freedoms then so be it... we don't care which one it is as long as we can be treated in the same respect through the law and our government. I just want to be able to propose to my boyfriend, get married or joined or whatever, and call him my husband when the time comes. By denying me that, well, thats bigottry, no matter what way you look at it. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Gay people can obtain the same rights and freedoms that straight married people have by filling out a few forms.

You already have the same rights and freedoms as straight people, spelled out in the laws of the United States.

I?m not denying you the right to marry TN. I?ve already said that I [I]personally[/I] oppose gay marriage, but think that gay marriage should be legal under US law. Under the laws of the United States, you should be allowed to marry whomever you wish. I?m merely stating my opinions on gay marriage. That?s all.

EDIT: Edited for spelling and spaces.[/color]

[pbfrontmanvdp]

What i just dont understand is why all 3 of you are arguing about this still. If its because of someones religion that doesn't allow for gay marriages, then tuff luck. Everyone is allow to live their own life they way they want to.

Plus not everyone follows the same religion, so that example of why it shouldn't be allowed or why someone may oppose it is useless. I'm sorry Boba but it doesn't outright affect you...having religious beliefs is alright for "YOU", but for other people it has no justification whatsoever. This law isn't forcing you to become gay and to have a gay marriage so why argue that you think this law is worthless.

Transtic i can see why your getting p.o., but just let it go man. Stuff like this happens everyday with people not understanding why certain things happen in the world. Why is the KKK still in existence along with the Neo-Nazis. Most individuals live their lives as what the majority of the population does and when there are changes there are conflicts. Are both of these organizations morally wrong, many people believe they are. Are they allowed in our government, of course they are. Its a freedom of expression, along with gay marriages, so once again i dont know why our government exactly made a law against in the first place. With that in mind what Boba and the other person Lynx are saying is fine. Just let them say what they want and ignore it since your not going to be able to change their minds about the issue.

[Mitch]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dagger IX1 [/i]
[B]Thanks for bringing this up, James. ^_^

There was a period in history--not too long ago--when the United States government frowned on and sometimes even outlawed interracial marriage. Just as a heterosexual person cannot determine the ethnic background of who he or she is attracted to, a homosexual person cannot determine the gender of who he or she falls in love with. Love (between consenting adults) is love, in all its shapes and forms.[/quote]


[/B]

[size=1][color=red] This period was about forty years ago. A little farther back maybe.

Forty years ago. Think about that. Forty years ago (or near there, anyway) segregation of blacks and whites was in full swing, here in the US at least. In full swing.

Blacks were beaten bloody. Killed. Policemen would beat blacks who went on strike, who professed against what was happening to them.

It is a lot like what we have here.

Here's what it comes down to--we're no better than Hitler on a smaller level if we're going to not allow all groups, races, and sexualities of humans to do whatever they want--within the reason of society's laws, of course.

To say that gays cannot marry, and that they are inferior, is pure ignorance.

A person's sexuality determines nothing of the person but on a discreet, small level--a level that is personal and won't be exploited by said person but on that level.

Homosexuals shouldn't even be labeled homesexuals. They should be called humans which have a different sexuality than that which is said to be "the norm."

Again--I bring up my point I brought up in the last thread I heavily discussed in--the only reason people are saying gays are inferior, that they don't deserve what they deserve, is because it's a viewpoint they've been given. And also, many people are just doing it because everyone else does it.

I don't care what your Christian God says. I don't care if he says sex before marriage is a bad thing, that gays are bad people. Because he's wrong. So don't even bring that in here--it has no bearing. Put aside the stupid Christian views on things. Become your own person and think about it.

Think about it. Homosexuals, gays, whatever the world you want to call them--they're people. Their the same as all of us.

What does it say [i]directly[/i] in the constitution, near the first line. It says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.."

And you're going to tell me that constitutionally this is wrong? That on a humane level it's wrong to be gay? That on a scientific level it's "unnatural"?

This is just as bad--if not so--as saying blacks are inferior.

We're all people. Having our own sexuality--our own personal stand on things--is never wrong.

If you are going to say it's wrong for gays to be who they are, then you should stop and put yourself in their shoes. Open up your mind. Read between the lines.

If you can honestly think that it's wrong to be gay, then I think you should stop and think for a second.

Politics aside, science aside, religion aside. Put it all aside. And think honestly with yourself--is something as scant as sexuality, as small as sexuality, a wrong thing to believe in?

People will do what they want. People will. And they'll do it rather it's governmentally "correct" or not.

I don't see the issue here. I never have.

A person can be what they want. If you're going to step in and say they can't, then you shouldn't even be what you want to be.

I'm happy this has passed. But I also see it as quite sad. Quite sad that we're still the same place we have been for so long. Inequality.

People still can't do what they want to do. They're still interdicted, still held back by others.

I second everything James said. And more.[/size][/color]

[JC Goodwin]

One of my best friends is gay and he is the nicest guy i know. I think people should just stop being so bigots about things like this and get over it. I mean if it dont effect you its not a problem. And if your reliogon or your beliefs have somrthing to do with it then just drop it and leave people alone.

[Nut]

Before, I used to think really bad about gays, and my family and I are christian, so I did oppose gay marriage...but it turned out that my brother was gay :) We obviously did not reject him for who he is, and my brother once told me he would like to live just like any straight couple. Now that I do know both sides, I think no one should really oppose gay marriage...cuz its not really any of there business if two women or two men want to get married.

[Dan L]

Marriage in religious context was made for man and woman, and that's the end of that.

As for the unreligious context- it pretty much comes from the religious marriage, but seeing as God is not really brought into it I don't know if I even consider it a proper unity, the way God intended. Which, if you're not religious, means nothing to you anyway. My point is that if it has nothing to do with God anyway, then it can take whatever form you want, rather than the specific form that he wants.

And TN, I consider the passages about divorce with equal seriousness as the ones about homosexuality. I [i]do[/i] believe that you shouldn't divorce the one you marry, or that if you do, you shouldn't re-marry because you've already committed yourself.

Still, I accept your point that the majority of homosexuality-opposing people don't follow that teaching anywhere near as rigorously.

TN, one final point. I don't believe that homosexual relations are sinful for my own benefit, so that I have someone to look down on- my own life is far too sinful to try to exalt myself above anyone.

Nor do I do it necessarily for "your benefit", ie. I don't actually believe you will somehow recieve what I say and begin to believe it for yourself.

I believe this because of God. If you've never believed something for that reason, then trust me, you do [i]not[/i] understand why I believe it. The nature of my faith in God is something I can not explain, because you think it's just a set of beliefs and practices which I attend to, whereas actually it's more than that- but I'll save the expanation because you simply can't understand until you experience it.

My God says that he made men to be with women and women to be with men, in sexual unity- thus any other sexual relationship is sin against him. Sin isn't a measure of good or bad, it's a measure of being for or against the will of God- and if you don't believe in the will of God as I do, then the word "Sin" should mean nothing to you.

It isn't a moral high ground or a determination to convert you by which I feel complelled to give these arguments- but because this is what is said by the God I have faith in, and am in covenant with. I am no greater than you, and I am no better than you- I simply believe what I believe and try to be open about it.

[DeadSeraphim]

These is really starting to annoy me this thread. I have nothing against homo-sexuals. Homo-sexuals, in general, are nice people and someone you wouldn't mind having a beer with. But all this opposition of their right to marry annoys me no end. It is not their fault that they fall in love with people of their gender, but when they do they are every bit as loving to that person as a man to his wife or vice versa. To deny them the right of marriage is to deny them the chance to make their love complete.

And please, do not spout some religious mumbo-jumbo back at me. I am a fierce anti-Christian, and always will be. That does not mean I do not respect your religious beliefs by the way. Your beliefs are yours, and can be changed by noone. But if your God really saw it as a sin to love another man, why does his 'Great Life Plan' involve this? Supposedly God tailors your life to the tiniest moment, so that it is all 'God's Plan'. Why would God's plan involve an outright sin for the greater majority of that person's life? A lot of the posts here of 'Christian' theme seem to be of a conservative nature, yet people at the Boards are mostly teens and young adults, the supposed 'open-Minded' Generation. The major problem is, most Christians are following a set of moral standards two thousand years old. Come on people, forget the Bible for once and feel free to use your own mind to form an opinion on this matter.

[wrist cutter]

The sanctity of marriage was beaten to death a long time ago. Even from a religious standpoint I can't understand how letting gays getting married would be any worse than what we already have now. People get married in a big drunken stupor and then they get divorced the next day - you're telling me this is any better than two men/women getting married?

[Baron Samedi]

[quote][i]Posted by James[/i]

Well, we have already established that homosexuality occurs in animals too. And in various types of animals, for that matter.
[/quote]

I think you might have missed my point. I already know about animal 'homosexuality'. Sometimes female monkeys will fight the males for mating rights with another female. There are various other examples too. However, I was referring to the below comment: [quote][i]Posted by AzureWolf[/i]

If I remember correctly (which I probably don't), there are a lot of animals that have a certain period where a strong sexual drive consumes them. They'll basically do it with anything - even a rock. O_o I don't think it's homosexuality that's making them so. Now, if they were ONLY doing it to the same gender and not anything that they tried to do it to, then I'd be surprised.[/quote]

My point was, whether or not animals are truly homosexual doesn't matter. Humans have intellectual and emotional capacities greater than other animals, which is perhaps why we are capable of homosexuality. How can you say that homosexuality is 'unnatural'. Animals do it, but even if they didn't you could not draw a fair comparison. Humans are vastly different from other animals, and so we do different things.

As for the sanctity of marriage.. sadly a lot of it has gone down the drain. Too often people get married without thinking things through. Why shouldn't gays get married? They have as much chance of success as the rest of us. And the right to it.

[Boba Fett]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James Goodwin [/i]
[B]One of my best friends is gay and he is the nicest guy i know.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]I?m sure he is. However, we?re not discussing whether or not gays are nice people. This debate concerns the legalization of Gay Marriage.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James Goodwin [/i]
[B]I think people should just stop being so bigots about things like this and get over it. [/B][/QUOTE]

[URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bigot]Bigot - One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.[/URL]

[color=green]While I agree that those out there who are intolerant of people of different sexual orientations should try to overcome their biases. As for those, including myself, who have opposed the idea of Gay Marriage on this thread, all of us have clearly stated why with logical arguments.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James Goodwin [/i]
[B]I mean if it dont effect you its not a problem.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]This generalization is untrue. By legalizing gay marriage, a dangerous precedent has been set. If you allow marriage for people who practice one alternative lifestyle, you are going to end up legalizing marriage for all practitioners of alternative lifestyles. What about polygamy? If you legalize gay marriage, which is an alternative lifestyle, who?s to say you cant legalize another alternative lifestyle, such as polygamy?

These laws will affect me. They will affect all Americans.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James Goodwin [/i]
[B]And if your reliogon or your beliefs have somrthing to do with it then just drop it and leave people alone. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Drop what, religion? I?m not sure what you meant my this?[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1][color=red] To say that gays cannot marry, and that they are inferior, is pure ignorance.[/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]These two phrases do not go hand in hand.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1][color=red]Homosexuals shouldn't even be labeled homesexuals. They should be called humans which have a different sexuality than that which is said to be "the norm." [/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]No, homosexuals should be labeled as such because they are. It?s as simple as that. If that label is used to discriminate against them, that is wrong. Anyone who doesn?t recognize a homosexual person as exactly that, a person, is clearly wrong.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1][color=red] Again--I bring up my point I brought up in the last thread I heavily discussed in--the only reason people are saying gays are inferior, that they don't deserve what they deserve, is because it's a viewpoint they've been given. And also, many people are just doing it because everyone else does it.[/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Nobody here has said gays are inferior. In fact, I don?t recall anyone saying that in general.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1][color=red] I don't care what your Christian God says. I don't care if he says sex before marriage is a bad thing, that gays are bad people. Because he's wrong. So don't even bring that in here--it has no bearing. Put aside the stupid Christian views on things. Become your own person and think about it.[/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Mitch? read what Ben had to say about the Catholic Church. That opinion is echoed by all but the most radical Christians.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mitch [/i]
[B][size=1][color=red] Think about it. Homosexuals, gays, whatever the world you want to call them--they're people. Their the same as all of us.

What does it say [i]directly[/i] in the constitution, near the first line. It says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.."

And you're going to tell me that constitutionally this is wrong? That on a humane level it's wrong to be gay? That on a scientific level it's "unnatural"?[/size][/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]No, I?m not. I?m going to tell you that I personally oppose gay marriage because I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I feel that gay marriage will open the door for other alternative lifestyles. I feel that this is dilution of marriage?s meaning will further the declining morals of our society.

I agree with almost all of your post Mitch, regarding homosexuals treatment. I think that under US law, they should allowed to be married and continue to be given all rights that they currently enjoy. As far as my own feelings go, I?d rather that Gays didn?t marry and marriage was kept between men and women.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]A lot of the posts here of 'Christian' theme seem to be of a conservative nature, yet people at the Boards are mostly teens and young adults, the supposed 'open-Minded' Generation.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=green]Wait a second. You said, ?A lot of the posts here of 'Christian' theme seem to be of a conservative nature?. Then you say that this generation is supposedly open-minded. As you saying that conservatives are not open-minded? Sometimes conservatives do tend to resist change, but to equate conservatism with close-mindedness is incorrect.[/color]

[DeathBug]

[color=indigo][font=century][size=1]How does this
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]I am a fierce anti-Christian, and always will be.[/B][/QUOTE]
or this
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]The major problem is, most Christians are following a set of moral standards two thousand years old. Come on people, forget the Bible for once and feel free to use your own mind to form an opinion on this matter. [/B][/QUOTE]
mesh with this:
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]That does not mean I do not respect your religious beliefs by the way. [/B][/QUOTE] ?
Just curious....[/color][/size][/font]

[wrist cutter]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]I am a fierce anti-Christian, and always will be. [/B][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by CrH [/i]
[B]people at the Boards are mostly teens and young adults, the supposed 'open-Minded' Generation.[/B][/QUOTE]

A generation which, according to your first quote, you don't seem to be much a part of.

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Lynx [/i]
[B][size=1]But does that not make you also a bigot to object to my religious views as a Roman Catholic.[/size] [/b][/quote]

I don't ever recall objecting to your Roman Catholic belief.

[quote][b][size=1]That's both childish and saddening to come from a Moderator. You should care since your meant to act in a proper manner on these boards.[/size][/quote][/b]

It's also childish and saddening to object to something thats doesn't effect the way you live. Regardless of religious beliefs, think of human rights for once instead of blinding yourself with your so called faith in God. Wrist cutter and I both have faith in God, but I don't let that faith blind me from reality and neither does wrist cutter. (I don't mean to bring you up in themiddle of my argument Jimmy) Maybe you should look at now and not 2,000 years ago...

[quote][b][size=1]I would, and I would advise you against insulting the Pope or I think you may find yourself in a lot of hot water. I said that I didn't object to people personal freedom as long as it doesn't conflict with my religious views and I say that again since the core of Catholicism is peace and love for your fellow man.[/size][/quote][/b]

Thats nice, I hope he tells all of you to jump off a bridge, it'd be interesting to see how many of you actually do it.

You act like he's God.... thats a damn shame.

[quote][b]Gay people can obtain the same rights and freedoms that straight married people have by filling out a few forms.

You already have the same rights and freedoms as straight people, spelled out in the laws of the United States.

I?m not denying you the right to marry TN. I?ve already said that I personally oppose gay marriage, but think that gay marriage should be legal under US law. Under the laws of the United States, you should be allowed to marry whomever you wish. I?m merely stating my opinions on gay marriage. That?s all.[/b][/quote]

No we can't. We have certain rights as straight people, as voting and whatnot, but thats not the argument here. We can't legally marry, therefor we do not have the same rights as you. Filling out a few forms does not give us the same rights as you. In the state of Florida, I as a gay man, cannot adopt a child. Can you believe this BS. Becuase of my sexual orientation, I cannot adopt a child if i felt the need to. THE FREEDOMS ARE UNBEARABLE!

[Gavin]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by CrH [/I]
[B]And please, do not spout some religious mumbo-jumbo back at me. I am a fierce anti-Christian, and always will be. That does not mean I do not respect your religious beliefs by the way.[/b][/QUOTE]

[size=1]Your very statement is faulty, if you are a fierce anti-Christian then you do not respect my beliefs by calling them [I]mumbo-jumbo[/I][/size]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by CrH [/I]
[B]Your beliefs are yours, and can be changed by no one. But if your God really saw it as a sin to love another man, why does his 'Great Life Plan' involve this?[/b][/QUOTE]

[size=1]God gave man choice, my choices are my own. His Great Plan must revolve around man's choices.[/size]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by CrH [/I]
[B]A lot of the posts here of 'Christian' theme seem to be of a conservative nature, yet people at the Boards are mostly teens and young adults, the supposed 'open-minded' Generation. The major problem is, most Christians are following a set of moral standards two thousand years old. Come on people, forget the Bible for once and feel free to use your own mind to form an opinion on this matter.[/B][/QUOTE]

[size=1]Yes and young adults have the right to be conservative if they wish. I am open minded and I do accept new things, but I'm also using my own mind to form these opinions I state.[/size]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/I]
[B]I don't ever recall objecting to your Roman Catholic belief.
[/b][/quote]

[size=1]You said that anyone who didn't conform to you ideals was a bigot, my faith as a Catholic does not conform with your ideals therefore when you called me a bigot you were objecting to my religious beliefs.[/size]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/I]
[B]It's also childish and saddening to object to something that doesn't effect the way you live. Regardless of religious beliefs, think of human rights for once instead of blinding yourself with your so-called faith in God. Maybe you should look at now and not 2,000 years ago...[/b][/quote]

[size=1]Yes it will affect the way that I live because homosexuals in other countries (Ireland included) will begin to ask for similar rights to bastardise marriage to fit an alternate lifestyle. Where exactly am I objecting to Human Rights, I am merely stating my disagreement to this and am in no way looking to have people stripped of rights. I am looking at now because 2,000 years ago homosexuals would have been executed for being the way they were (that's a fact not my fiction).[/size]

[QUOTE][I]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/I]
[B]That's nice, I hope he tells all of you to jump off a bridge, it'd be interesting to see how many of you actually do it.

You act like he's God.... that's a damn shame.[/b][/quote]

[size=1]If he did then I would because it would only prove my devotion to God. The Pope is God's elected representative on Earth beginning from the Apostle Peter and then Paul. He is the closest thing to God on Earth.[/size]