Gay marriage.

[DC_DEEP]

hotmilf, I may just have to temporarily suspend my "0%" and give you a "gratitude licking."

 

[Knockernail]

I can't understand why people limits the meaning of the word marriage to the religious concept. Marriage is union and this is existing before christianism does.

I don't know how is the stuff in the USA, but in Spain the civil union is called marriage aswell. So why should we name it different if the couple is in the same sex?

Anyway, why do people want to get married? Lots of flowers in the field :tongue: :tongue:

 

[DC_DEEP]

So why should we name it different if the couple is in the same sex?

Good question.

Anyway, why do people want to get married? Lots of flowers in the field

I can't speak for anyone else, but if it were not for the legal protections that it gives straight married couples, I wouldn't really be all that interested. But my partner and I are in a long-term relationship, and it would be nice to be able to file our taxes jointly, and to have the legal protections if one of us should die.

 

[Drifterwood]

and to have the legal protections if one of us should die.

I don't know how to break this to you DC, but you will both die

 

[kalipygian]

I can't understand why people limits the meaning of the word marriage to the religious concept. Marriage is union and this is existing before christianism does.

I don't know how is the stuff in the USA, but in Spain the civil union is called marriage aswell. So why should we name it different if the couple is in the same sex?

Anyway, why do people want to get married? Lots of flowers in the field :tongue: :tongue:

Good to see you again!

Most societies have not had formal legal definitions. And no one in a position of authority who could prohibit anyone. Roman men sometimes married each other. It was later prohibited by christian Byzantine emperors.

Within catholicism, for over three quarters of it's history, it was not formally defined as a sacrament(1563)

 

[DC_DEEP]

I don't know how to break this to you DC, but you will both die

Drifterwood, I'm going to hope you were being facetious. Yes, of course, obviously we will both die. The statement was elliptical. Do you mind taking it in context? "I want the legal protections if one of us should die before the other, and understanding that at this point in time, we do not have those legal protections, so I would hope that we are able to achieve those protections BEFORE one or the other dies."

 

[gjorg]

DC interesting that you bring up this point. In my original post I almost included the line "marriage is a religious institution that the government got into to make money" but decided to reword it and left out this position. I am all for equal rights for gay couples but merely suggest that a change in terminology not functionality may make opposers feel less combative. The final line of my post was made half jokingly based on the uneducated replies one sees on the net so often. Up to this point in the thread I think that the conversation has been respectful and enlighted.
Now where are the "check this thread here" people.

Now, without twisting your words and attacking, let me propose this: I'm absolutely fine with the concept of reserving the term "marriage" for heterosexual couples, and "union" for homosexual couples - but ONLY if the government completely pulls out of the marriage business. No joint income tax filing, no "spouse as dependent" status, no spousal privilege in trials, nothing. No government recognition of marriage at all. If marriage is to be retained only as a religious designation, that's fine. The government should not support that creation of a "privilege class", and in fact, has no legal basis for doing so.​

..........​

originally men were married in the church because they were in love where as str8 couples were married in the church garden because they were more of a civil union. The parents of the groom and the church made money.

 

[frizzle]

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.

I don't see how the two are linked. If you are assuming I'm gay, then you are wrong.

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

Because again, you would be getting married in the house of the Lord of who opposes it.

Also, I'd like to state I'm playing devil's advocate, I'm not christian, and I don't care that much about gay marriage. Not for it, not against it.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Because again, you would be getting married in the house of the Lord of who opposes it.

Also, I'd like to state I'm playing devil's advocate, I'm not christian, and I don't care that much about gay marriage. Not for it, not against it.

Please, continue playing devil's advocate.

Explain to me exactly what is meant by "getting married in the house of the lord."

 

[nudeyorker]

DC...you and I want the same things, however until the world catches up, what you can do alot to lay a more secure foundation for your self and your partner. ie; wills. deeds, trusts, healthcare proxy and reigstered domestic partnership. No you can't file your taxs together and many of the things that many married couples take for granted. But you can do a great deal.
Maybe the laws will change...but I'm not holding my breath. One of the things I hate most about being a lawyer are laws that are not equal for all.
I was not going to put my 2 cents worth in about the church and state thing...but until everyone who votes takes the time to take their constutuency(s) to task on the subject, nothing is going to change. I know I am oversimplefying this but it has to start from the ground up as long as so much money is funding our elections from religious organizations.

Drifterwood, I'm going to hope you were being facetious. Yes, of course, obviously we will both die. The statement was elliptical. Do you mind taking it in context? "I want the legal protections if one of us should die before the other, and understanding that at this point in time, we do not have those legal protections, so I would hope that we are able to achieve those protections BEFORE one or the other dies."

​

 

[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.

I don't see how the two are linked. If you are assuming I'm gay, then you are wrong.

Oh, it's okay to post pictures of your cock to gay men who might masturbate looking at you, as long as none of them asks for your hand in marriage -- because that would be a sin.

I'm glad we could clear that up.
:headache:

Because again, you would be getting married in the house of the Lord of who opposes it.

Also, I'd like to state I'm playing devil's advocate, I'm not christian, and I don't care that much about gay marriage. Not for it, not against it.

 

[DC_DEEP]

DC...you and I want the same things, however until the world catches up, what you can do alot to lay a more secure foundation for your self and your partner. ie; wills. deeds, trusts, healthcare proxy and reigstered domestic partnership.

Thanks, nude. Unfortunately, you are making some assumptions!:biggrin1: Due to circumstances beyond my control, my partner and I live in Virginia. I'm fortunate that my healthcare is through the Veterans Administration. Other than that, the Commonwealth of Virginia has recently passed legislation that forbids much of what you listed.

This is a quote from a website just before this amendment passed the VA house and senate:

"The amendment would add wording into Virginia’s constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It would also ban the commonwealth from recognizing relationships between unmarried individuals that “intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effects of marriage.”"

 

[nudeyorker]

I'm sorry I did not do my research before I posted. It is my habit here and in real life to just state my feelings! Let me do some research! I'll PM if I come up with anything!

Thanks, nude. Unfortunately, you are making some assumptions!:biggrin1: Due to circumstances beyond my control, my partner and I live in Virginia. I'm fortunate that my healthcare is through the Veterans Administration. Other than that, the Commonwealth of Virginia has recently passed legislation that forbids much of what you listed.

This is a quote from a website just before this amendment passed the VA house and senate:

"The amendment would add wording into Virginia’s constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It would also ban the commonwealth from recognizing relationships between unmarried individuals that “intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effects of marriage.”"

​

 

[DC_DEEP]

I'm sorry I did not do my research before I posted. It is my habit here and in real life to just state my feelings! Let me do some research! I'll PM if I come up with anything!

Not a problem, my friend. Don't worry about researching for me, I'm trying to keep up-to-date, and I've done lots of research already. It's so easy for us to get complacent in our own respective regions, but what we have to remember and be vigilant about is: laws vary greatly from state to state, and on the federal level. Some states give pretty much full protections, some states give token protections, and some states encourage active discrimination. The federal government also falls into that last category.

 

[TitanicJake]

There really is no true seperation between church & state in this country.
I am not a big bible believer.
I think being gay is falling in love with someone of the same gender.
This country can't get past the sex.

Let them marry. Let them be open. Let them live.

Jake

 

[DC_DEEP]

Well, it's sort of a circular discrimination, in some ways like the women's suffrage thing. In order for women to gain the right to vote, they first had to get the laws changed. In order to change the laws, they needed to be able to vote. In order to vote, they needed to get the laws changed.

Simply by definition, the gay population will NEVER be in the majority, so it's difficult to get majority votes on important human rights issues. Majorities tend to find comfort in discriminating against minorities. Homosexuality is one of the last bastions of socially-acceptable discrimination.

I wonder what would happen if every single (honest) less-than-100%-straight person in the United States went on strike...

 

[hyperionic]

Here in holland gay marriage is legal in every respect. But a church or minister can decline.. on bases of religion or personal matter. No problm, get a different minister. I dont feel the need to get married. I think once the struggle for legal and equal rights is over, most dont want to get married. Then again, it;s just love, whats everybody so scared about. Everybody should have the same right. I'm for gay marriage, allthough i dont need it.

 

[Drifterwood]

I'll accept facetious DC, I was just trying to be funny.

Civil disobedience is good. If all gay couples filled in their tax forms as a couple, it might get some attention.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Here in holland gay marriage is legal in every respect. But a church or minister can decline.. on bases of religion or personal matter. No problm, get a different minister. I dont feel the need to get married. I think once the struggle for legal and equal rights is over, most dont want to get married. Then again, it;s just love, whats everybody so scared about. Everybody should have the same right. I'm for gay marriage, allthough i dont need it.

hyper, it's interesting that you decided to post; I just finished reading a quote in one of our local "gay newspapers" regarding attitudes toward homosexuality in Holland. I'm not sure about the numbers, there were no references.

"More than 90% of the people in Holland accept homosexuality. However, 42% of the people resent it when two men are kissing..."
-Frank van Dalen, secretary of the national Dutch GLBT organization

I'll accept facetious DC, I was just trying to be funny.

Civil disobedience is good. If all gay couples filled in their tax forms as a couple, it might get some attention.

Sounds like a good plan, except that the only thing that would happen is the forms would be rejected, and then we would all get penalties for late filing, and most of us would get audited!:biggrin1:

Now, as far as civil disobedience goes, it would be great if we could all refuse to pay income taxes (state and federal) until we get full and equal civil rights. You think that would get the full and undivided attention of The Congress?

 

[nudeyorker]

Now, as far as civil disobedience goes, it would be great if we could all refuse to pay income taxes (state and federal) until we get full and equal civil rights. You think that would get the full and undivided attention of The Congress?[/quote]
Yes...I've thought about this for some time...however we would need full homo participation and a really good lawyer!

​