Gay marriage.

[kalipygian]

Gay marriage has been legal here in Canada for a few years and despite the ravings of some religious zealots, the sun still comes up everyday and the world continues to turn on its axis. If two people are committed to each other they should have the right to get married and their rights should be protected by law.

There are still some states in the US that do not have laws against discrimination based on sexual orientation. You can be fired from your job for being gay.

Twenty states have some protection against discrimination, thirty have none. And it is not even much under discussion.

Our neighbors both to the north and the south are more progressive.

 

[DC_DEEP]

You can see why gay men and women are making "such a big deal" out of it, right? Since same-gender "marriages" aren't afforded the same rights as opposite-sex marriages, that's reason enough to cause a stink.

I think you misunderstood his post. He was saying "who the hell do these fundamentalists think they are," not "who the hell do these gay activists think they are." I understood his post to mean "the anti-gay folks think it's their business, when it is not."

Twenty states have some protection against discrimination, thirty have none. And it is not even much under discussion.

Our neighbors both to the north and the south are more progressive.

And the federal government has not one single piece of protection based on orientation, but has over a thousand legal protections for heterosexual married persons. Believe it or not, yes indeed, it is legal in the US federal government to discriminate against someone based upon their sexual orientation.

 

[invisibleman]

I have a hard time gay dating. I have had a LTR for six years that ended soooo bad. I was REALLY let down by a guy that I loved.

I don't EVER want to feel like that again.

 

[billy_1139]

I will get married in november with my own hunk.
In the Netherlands thats no problem what so ever.

 

[BBB2.5]

I'm for what ever it needs to called..Gay Marriage Or Civil Unions. Just as long it allows us to be recognized legally...across the Nation.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I'm for what ever it needs to called..Gay Marriage Or Civil Unions. Just as long it allows us to be recognized legally...across the Nation.

Or even Gay Flibbettyjibbetts. Equal protections under the law is the issue, for me.

 

[Oilslickcowboy]

Exactly the point I made if you read the rest of my post. My argument is that the word "marriage" scares fundamentalists and unfairly turns a civil rights issue (which is completly fair and right) into a smoke screen of a religious debate (which only clouds the issue and jepordizes the rights that all people should have regardless of sexual or gender orientation).

DCDEEP now you see why I said that last line of my original post was only half joking.

Fine then. As long as we have separation of church and state, continue practicing whatever holier-than-thou religion you ascribe to-- which is your right -- but then GET THE HELL OUT OF THIER WAY as they go the local courthouse exercise their right to get married if they choose to do so.

​

 

[fortiesfun]

I have a hard time gay dating. I have had a LTR for six years that ended soooo bad. I was REALLY let down by a guy that I loved.

I don't EVER want to feel like that again.

That, I'm afraid, is the cost of all human relationships, not just gay ones.

But I am always fond of this quote:" Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is as perennial as the grass." - Max Erhmann

 

[DC_DEEP]

DCDEEP now you see why I said that last line of my original post was only half joking.

:biggrin1: Oh, I saw it alright! Venus apparently did not read your post as carefully as I did.

 

[BurningVenus]

Exactly the point I made if you read the rest of my post. My argument is that the word "marriage" scares fundamentalists and unfairly turns a civil rights issue (which is completly fair and right) into a smoke screen of a religious debate (which only clouds the issue and jepordizes the rights that all people should have regardless of sexual or gender orientation).

DCDEEP now you see why I said that last line of my original post was only half joking.

Parder, you can put your boots in the oven, but that don't make em biscuits. <faked accent off>

When you say:

Originally Posted by Oilslickcowboy [URL]http://www.lpsg.org/images36/buttons/viewpost.gif[/URL]
I am against gay marriage, because in my view marriage is a religious union.

You are essentially saying that that their love is offensive to you and to your God. That you'll allow them to get 'hitched but not churched.'

That doesn't say much for your religion or your God. And it reveals a core of basic beliefs that rejects gay love as being less moral than straight love.

Sure, you get some points on the civil side for accepting that our nation must inevitably end this unconsttutional violation of their civil rights by granting civil unions. But if you think that makes you accepting of gay folks, I'm not buying it, at all.

 

[Oilslickcowboy]

see below

 

[Oilslickcowboy]

Venus, I had originally tried to post a detailed response to your latest reply, but due to a minor malfuction it was erased so I will simply say this, please read the first line of my original post and then read the last line of the same post.

 

[frizzle]

Sorry, a touch of ambiguity made my point confusing. I can understand perfectly why Catholics (or whatever) can prevent me from marrying in THEIR church, but right now they prevent me from doings so (legally) in ANY church. MY LORD thinks it is just fine for gay people to marry, but marriages performed in MY church still aren't recognized in the US. Why should their definition of God carry the day, even in my church?

Well if you want talk factually, based in the US, the general population is more conservative then the rest of the world, and being as the majority of the population of America is Christian, I would say that the main reason for it not being legal is, that many are against gay marriages.

But if you want talk personally, I believe that as it is against the word of the Lord (in my opinion, interpret the bible in whatever way you want), then it would be a sin for two homosexuals to get married.

Again, I believe that if gay people wish to get married, let them do it. It's no skin of my nose, I just think it would be more appropriate in a civil union then acutal marriage.

 

[fortiesfun]

Well if you want talk factually, based in the US, the general population is more conservative then the rest of the world, and being as the majority of the population of America is Christian, I would say that the main reason for it not being legal is, that many are against gay marriages.

But if you want talk personally, I believe that as it is against the word of the Lord (in my opinion, interpret the bible in whatever way you want), then it would be a sin for two homosexuals to get married.

Again, I believe that if gay people wish to get married, let them do it. It's no skin of my nose, I just think it would be more appropriate in a civil union then acutal marriage.

I appreciate your straightforward owning that you think the majority should rule, without any protection for minority rights. In this case, we can simply agree to disagree. I know that I will never be able to convince you otherwise, but it is courageous of you to simply avow what many would deny, though it be pure sophistry.

For what it is worth, I disagree that the Bible condemns homosexuality at all, or that it is any more sinful than countless actions taken by the majority everyday including (using the same standard and appealing to the same authority, namely Paul) heterosexual marriage. I also fundamentally disagree that human rights are subject to vote, majority or otherwise. It is the ideal of US democracy, (seldom practiced, of course) that all humankind is created equally, and endowed by their creator with inalienable human rights.

Many have staked out the basic position here which I hold: I don't care if the basic right is for civil unions or marriage as long as the same standard applies to all. "Separate but equal" systems were long ago shown to be inherently unequal, however, and I can't agree with any proposal that thinks otherwise.

I, of course, think canon law should honor that principle the same as civil law, but God knows the church statutes in His name have long discriminated against women and minorities even while His scripture says they are beloved in His eyes. That will not be repaired in our lifetimes.

 

[BurningVenus]

Venus, I had originally tried to post a detailed response to your latest reply, but due to a minor malfuction it was erased so I will simply say this, please read the first line of my original post and then read the last line of the same post.

I read both. Just read them again. It is the second line that I find so revealing. It's a shame that the detailed response to my last post was lost because it seems that you might have another look at it. I stand by what I said.

Originally Posted by Oilslickcowboy [URL]http://www.lpsg.org/images36/buttons/viewpost.gif[/URL]
I am against gay marriage, because in my view marriage is a religious union.

 

[Drifterwood]

Apologies if this has been raised already, but if the only objection to gay marriage is the religious one, does that mean that we don't really live in secular democracies but theocracies?

 

[BurningVenus]

But if you want talk personally, I believe that as it is against the word of the Lord (in my opinion, interpret the bible in whatever way you want), then it would be a sin for two homosexuals to get married.

If these are your beliefs, then what the hell are you doing posting cock pics on a predominately male site? I cannot wait for your explanation.

 

[BurningVenus]

Apologies if this has been raised already, but if the only objection to gay marriage is the religious one, does that mean that we don't really live in secular democracies but theocracies?

Yes, I'm also just realizing that apparently we do. I guess we weren't paying attention when "they" decided which church was gonna be in charge. I hope it's not one where people play with rattlesnakes to prove how much they love God.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Apologies if this has been raised already, but if the only objection to gay marriage is the religious one, does that mean that we don't really live in secular democracies but theocracies?

Well, well, I think you may have something there. The USA, by its very definition, is forbidden from establishing a state religion. The fundies fail to acknowledge, though, that legislating discrimination against a particular group based solely on religious beliefs, does just that.

Well if you want talk factually, based in the US, the general population is more conservative then the rest of the world, and being as the majority of the population of America is Christian, I would say that the main reason for it not being legal is, that many are against gay marriages.

But the problem is, making laws based solely upon a religious viewpoint is illegal in this country.

But if you want talk personally, I believe that as it is against the word of the Lord (in my opinion, interpret the bible in whatever way you want), then it would be a sin for two homosexuals to get married.

And you are entitled to that belief, and if you believe it is wrong, then you should not do it. However, I don't believe in your god. Why do you think I should be held accountable to the rules of a god I don't believe in? Why should any other person have a vote as to whether or not I am allowed to marry the consenting adult of my choice?

 

[Not_Punny]

As I mentioned in an earlier post, mankind has been trying to "wipe out" homosexuality under one pretext or another for more that two thousand years.

Denial of gay marriage is just another symptom of this social injustice, and I believe this all goes WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY deeper than religion.

I believe the suppression of homosexuality was originally a "survival" urge that was subsequently cloaked in religion. Homosexuality used to be considered a survival threat due to the (then) inability to procreate and a higher incidence of (then) incurable STDs in that segment of society.

And, sadly, old habits die hard especially when lodged DEEP in the crevices of "righteousness."

In any case, I can't think of a single human rights issue in history that was "won" without a battle against the status quo.

So IMO we are going to have to step it up a notch to correct this social injustice, and I'm sure we'll be hearing more about it in the years to come.