Wait for the poll. I'm curious where everyone stands.
Gay people and marriage - do you really care?
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
This_person
Well-Known Member
Need more options
I'm a Republican (well, a conservative, anyway) who does not think gays are an abomination, who couldn't care less if they marry based on their standards, but who doesn't think they should be issued a marriage certificate/license.
Now how come? If you couldn't care less if they marry based on their standards, why would it bother you if they have an actual license saying they're legal?
This_person
Well-Known Member
Freedom. They're certainly free to have a "marriage" ceremony, to share in a mortgage, to share their lives and celebrate in any way they choose. This has been a mantra of mine for some time on this issue - that there are no "rights" lost by not being allowed to marry someone of the same gender.
However, a marriage license/certificate does carry with it some modest amount of perks, benefits, eases in the legal status of life. It does this because of the gain society gets out of stable, opposite gender married couples. Long before Christianity had a hold on Rome, the Romans stopped recognizing homosexual relationships as acceptable. Even when they were acceptable, it was only acceptable from the point of view of the rich male citizen being the aggressor (so to speak), and slaves, women, and young boys being the receiver. It was NOT acceptable, even then, for a male citizen to be the more passive person in a male homosexual relationship - HE would be shunned. For thousands of years, marriage has been acceptable and recognized as a stabilizing force when between one man and one woman. Our laws simply reward that stabilizing factor on society.
Because, truely, what would then stop an equal rights concept for polygamy? For consenting age incest? I won't get into cross-species, because even I think that takes it too far. But, there is no justifiable reason to stop polygamy if you accept same gendered relationships as having an equal positive influence on society as opposite gendered relationships. Can't have healthy kids through incest? Well, you can't through homosexuality, either.
The definition of marriage as being anything but between a man and a woman didn't change until about 30 or so years ago. For centuries before that, there was but one standard. The statistically accurate amount of homosexuals in society is around 2% (about 3% male, about 1-2% female) from credible studies (not Kinsey, who was horribly skewed in his subject pool). A study done by a lesbian to prove the opposite of what I'm about to say found out that only about 26% of homosexuals believe monogamy is important in a relationship. So, 26% of 2% is about 0.5% of the population has any vested interest in changing the definition of a word and getting tax benefits from something that has been a non-stabilizing factor in society for centuries. It just makes no sense at all from any angle (and note, "God said dem fags are bad" and all that crap has nothing, absolutely NOTHING to do with my feelings or argument)
awpitt
Main Streeter
* I am a Democrat and I couldn't care less about gay people - let 'em marry. Who cares?
Cowgirl
Well-Known Member
I don't care who is allowed to marry. I have yet to hear a good argument for why gays should not be allowed to marry. If someone can get drunk in Vegas and marry a stranger, then two gay people in love should be allowed to marry. If two people who are not in love can enter a marriage as a business agreement, then certainly two gay people in love should be allowed. There are so many examples of heterosexual couples getting married for all the "wrong" reasons, it's ridiculous for our society to say two people who are in love can't get married because they are the same gender.
Well, yeah. The idea was to find out if Republicans are really all that jacked up about gay marriage, or if it's just some dumb thing the elected people came up with to use as a campaign platform.
I already know what most of you think, based on numerous threads on the topic. Now I'm curious about the political aspect of it.
Chasey_Lane
Salt Life
Let 'em marry! 
ylexot
Super Genius
It's not too late to get it out of the tax code. Switch to a flat tax or sales tax and it goes away.
So far the vast majority of voters do not care about gay people and their marital inclinations. Even among the Republicans, the voters who say let 'em marry WAY outnumber the ones who object.
This is pretty much what I suspected.
So why is this even remotely a campaign issue with the GOP? Do they just like being out of touch with their constituents? Run around yapping about crap nobody cares about?
This is pretty much what I suspected.
So why is this even remotely a campaign issue with the GOP? Do they just like being out of touch with their constituents? Run around yapping about crap nobody cares about?
Marriage is DEFINED as the union between a man and a woman. That definition came from the bible. Nothing any one of us can influence.
So we just need something that defines the union between man-man or woman-woman. That definitation needs to come from man.
Gay folks are OK, just like any other folks I suppose, and should be afforded all the benifits enjoyed by married people ... but it's tought to redifine something defined in the bible.
So we just need something that defines the union between man-man or woman-woman. That definitation needs to come from man.
Gay folks are OK, just like any other folks I suppose, and should be afforded all the benifits enjoyed by married people ... but it's tought to redifine something defined in the bible.
jetmonkey
New Member
lol