Jump to content

Recommended Posts

But civil unions grant these rights. The only difference between a civil union and marriage is the word marriage, and the government saying that gay couples can have one and not the other is the same as the government controlling the use of the word marriage. It's like the government saying, "You can have full rights, but you technically can't call yourself married because that could somehow offend straight couples who are married by somehow linking them to you, or saying what they have is the equivalent of what you have." So, saying they can have equal rights but it must be separately labeled in inherently being prejudiced.
Well, in no state that has civil unions are they legally equivalent to marriage. For one, they are not portable (they don't have to be recognized by other states). Second, since they are not federally sanctioned they don't have the same federal income tax implications, or any of the other federal perks (e.g. you can't get citizenship from a civil union). So it's definitely a different legal status. (I'm not arguing for whether it should be that way or not, just that the difference is not only semantic). If people are suggesting a federal level civil union law that is identical to marriage except by name, I agree that is silly, but I don't think I've seen anyone suggest that.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Objection. Please don't speculate on Mr. Shabadoo's mental state. Now then, will you clarify your statement as to your knowledge of the meaning and proper use of the phrase in question. We have evide

I let my attorney do the heavy lifting.

so many fallen brothers.

Well, in no state that has civil unions are they legally equivalent to marriage. For one, they are not portable (they don't have to be recognized by other states). Second, since they are not federally sanctioned they don't have the same federal income tax implications, or any of the other federal perks (e.g. you can't get citizenship from a civil union). So it's definitely a different legal status. (I'm not arguing for whether it should be that way or not, just that the difference is not only semantic). If people are suggesting a federal level civil union law that is identical to marriage except by name, I agree that is silly, but I don't think I've seen anyone suggest that.
Well, then it's flat out prejudice instead of a more sneaky form of semantic prejudice. My earlier points were in regards to your discussion about the word "marriage."
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, then it's flat out prejudice instead of a more sneaky form of semantic prejudice. My earlier points were in regards to your discussion about the word "marriage."
Labeling it prejudice is begging the question. Is it "prejudice" that 14 year olds can't get married?For the record, I'm undecided on this issue. I think I can see both sides of it, so I'm just presenting the other side for the sake of the discussion.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, but you used begging the question incorrectly. :)What I meant was that his use of the word prejudice already presumes an answer to the question about whether gay relationships should have the same status as straight ones.
1. There is a reason I barely passed my logic course and hated it.2. I will beg any question in any matter I see fit. Which begs the question....How's it going?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it "prejudice" that 14 year olds can't get married?
No. If they're not allowed to be married, it's because the government doesn't believe that people younger than a certain age are responsible and capable of entering into binding contracts (a position I agree with). This is not inconsistent with a belief that two consensual adults should be allowed to be married.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What about making civil unions the only government recognized contract, be it between a heterosexual or homosexual couple and all rights under that contract being equal within the government framework? Then those who consider marriage to be a religious rite can still be married if they want to be. I don't know if I'm explaining this well. Hope you all understand what I'm trying to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I will say that I believe that even the most conservative would not be opposed to gays having more security in their lives in a legal sense, and be completely fine with legal Civil Unions. Just don't call it 'marriage'. That word means just something else, period.If they don't like the term 'Civil Union' then come up with a new word!But don't try to call it marriage. It just pisses people off.
Awesome point. I think this would save a lot of debate if they didn't use the word marriage. "Marriage" has a lot of connotations with religion which is its own 'club' and can make whatever rules it wants. The state though is a club of everyone and should allow people to do what they want if it doesn't affect anyone else.
Link to post
Share on other sites

IT DOES NOT MATTER IF SOMEONE IS GAY OR NOT, regardless of context or situation. If you think that it does matter, you are prejudice. I'm not saying that prejudice makes you a bad person. We all have traits that are good and traits that are unhealthy. Please just be honest with yourself, about yourself, before waging into debates regarding morality. Never let your ego get in the way of looking at something from another perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I honestly believe it is a simple semantics issue, the word MARRIAGE. For millions and millions of people that word has forever been associated as that meaning a union between man and woman. It is biblical, it is not something folks want to give up. Applying it to gays is just wrong. That is not what the traditional meaning of the word is and people are offended. Why can't the gays respect that in those that don't like it?It's just wrong to change the meaning of a word just because some would like it that way. Words mean things, a canoe is not a rowboat, etc. The word marriage is tradition, it is always the "way it has been". Change is never easy and most folks don't want their boats rocked , especially over something this sacred as this (to many many people). This might not make sense, and may not seem fair, and may seem stupid and retarded, but this is just the way it is...for now anyway.I think we have come a very long way from where we were even just 10 years ago. The mainstream acceptance of what has always been called alternative cultures and lifestyles. It is better than it has ever been for folks who fit into this description. But the openness of gay lifestyles will never be something everyone will be able to swallow (lol) And lest anyone think I am in anyway 'phobic', my wife and I have been in the hair industry for over 20 years. Many of our friends are gay. I have plenty of Palin tolerance running through me, so I am pretty much non judgmental about gays. I'll never shy away from a great gay joke (or any joke for that matter). It's all good in our hood. And Lois made a great point...it's not for me to judge, that's between them and God.I will say that I believe that even the most conservative would not be opposed to gays having more security in their lives in a legal sense, and be completely fine with legal Civil Unions. Just don't call it 'marriage'. That word means just something else, period.If they don't like the term 'Civil Union' then come up with a new word!But don't try to call it marriage. It just pisses people off. How about demanding some tolerance on this issue going the other way for once?
You've highlighted the objections but missed the fact that it is an invalid objection.Hindhus get marriedMuslims get marriedBhudists get marriedAthiests get marriedTribal communities have marriages.Marriage is not a wholly (pun) Christian institution. The sooner Christians stop thinking it is the better
Link to post
Share on other sites
This is just an issue that puzzles me. This isn't necessarily a Dem or Repub thing because as we found out in the VP debate, both are against it.Basically, if you're against it, why? How does it affect you if two dudes or two gals you've never met get married? Does it cost you money? Do they get benefits you don't? What's the deal? Now, I'd rather not read that it's morally wrong, or not a traditional marriage, because that's simply applying your belief system to other people, which I think is wrong, and a lot of what's wrong with this country.So basically, how are you actually affected by two gay people being dumb enough to want to get married? How does it hurt you?
Speedz doesn't believe in it, so yeah it sucks. You available Ron?
Link to post
Share on other sites
You've highlighted the objections but missed the fact that it is an invalid objection.Hindhus get marriedMuslims get marriedBhudists get marriedAthiests get marriedTribal communities have marriages.Marriage is not a wholly (pun) Christian institution. The sooner Christians stop thinking it is the better
Do any of them marry gays? What? No? Then we are back to where we started. The sooner you start thinking that if it's Christian it must be wildly different, the better. Look in all religions- the vast majority are agains the homo gay and a good portion of that majority believe they should be killed. All we are saying is, damnit, leave us this. It's been between a man and a woman since forever, it's our dichotomy. ****ing get your own.
Link to post
Share on other sites
All we are saying is, damnit, leave us this. It's been between a man and a woman since forever, it's our dichotomy. ****ing get your own.
Says the guy with pink hair. It's Us vs. Them, huh? What could They get? BFF Certificates? As soon as They did, I bet all of Us would want them, too.
Link to post
Share on other sites
People overidentify gays with pedophiles, but the statistics are overwhelming: the vast majority of pedophiles are straight dudes hitting on little girls. Disgusting, but true.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I feel like this is an important point. People (and when I say people I mean homophobes) tend to see homosexuality as a deviant compulsion, and equate that idea of deviancy with other, actually deviant sex practices like pedophilia. Of course, homosexuality and pedophilia are completely unrelated. And also, like you said, most pedophiles attack girls.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Having "Civil Unions" but not letting them call it marriage is ridiculous.Let's have a separate category for gay people. It'll be completely equal to marriage in every way, but it won't be marriage, it'll be separate. Equal, but separate. Separate but equal. Remind anyone of anything?
You left out another huge fallacy, which is that by this reasoning, people married in a non-religious ceremony should not call it marriage. I know many many couples who were married in a non-religious ceremony (by a judge or at city hall). Since they are also not engaging in a traditional Christian (or Jewish) wedding before God, why should we call their union a marriage?? Under God they are not married. We should call that a civil union, if gay marriage is a civil union. Nutz and others who agree with you - the idea that you are against gay marriage simply because of the word 'marriage' is confusing to me. You think gay people should be allowed to 'marry' with a civil union, have all the same benefits that married couples have, be entirely the same as a married couple, but what offends you is the idea of calling it a marriage? So if gay people were allowed to unite in what became termed merriages, would that be acceptable? What about a manniage for gays and a womanniage for lesbos? Personally I think they should be allowed to get married like normal people but all gays should have a large G tattooed on their forehead so we all know they're different.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No. If they're not allowed to be married, it's because the government doesn't believe that people younger than a certain age are responsible and capable of entering into binding contracts (a position I agree with). This is not inconsistent with a belief that two consensual adults should be allowed to be married.
OK, how about a brother and a sister? Consensual adults, should they be allowed to get married? ( or how about a father and adult daughter? )
Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, how about a brother and a sister? Consensual adults, should they be allowed to get married? ( or how about a father and adult daughter? )
Meh, beyond the fact that it is just wrong, there's the fact that offspring from such couples have ridiculously high risk of birth defects. I'm pretty sure this is the reason it's illegal, and also the reason you still need a blood test in many places to prove your future spouse isn't your cousin.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Meh, beyond the fact that it is just wrong, there's the fact that offspring from such couples have ridiculously high risk of birth defects. I'm pretty sure this is the reason it's illegal, and also the reason you still need a blood test in many places to prove your future spouse isn't your cousin.
Well, that's the way that some people feel about homosexuality. The marriage blood test was for syphilis, not for this.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that's the way that some people feel about homosexuality. The marriage blood test was for syphilis, not for this.
Regarding the 'it's just wrong,' I obviously knew that that was a logical fallacy (as it's backed by nothing but my opinion), but damn! You also owned me on the blood tests :club:.Seriously though, a surprising amount of historical figures married very close relatives (first cousins). It's pretty bizarre.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont see the relevance.
Not all pairs of consenting adults are allowed to marry. The law distinguishes based on the type of relationship they have. Some types of relationships the culture chooses not to legally sanction. They are free to make this decision about homosexuality.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...