Reply With Quote
I do not care
are you in favor of gay marriages? why or why not?
I do not care
It's stupid for gay marriage not to be legal. And I really don't understand why so many people are against it. Just because me, or you, or somebody else isn't gay doesn't mean that we should go around telling gays that they can or can't do things.
Or as my lesbian sister says, "Gay is the new black."
your sister sounds funny fellow longhorn is she single
is violent kitten a drag queen somebody told me that
Gay marriages should most definitely be legal. I don't think the church should be obligated to perform those marriages if they don't want to, but I think they should definitely be able to have a legal marriage.
thank you for input
@ Gay is the new black....that's very true! I personally could care less if they make it legal or not. I don't see how legalizing gay marriages is going to hurt the non-gay population in any way. Marriage is a way for 2 people to express their love for one another. How is the government going to be allowed to tell you who you can and cannot love?
Well, they seem to think they can tell you who to hate.
Civil Unions with legally defined joint rights, YES. Marriages, NO.
Why do they need to be defined differently? Seperate but equal? Thats illegal my friend.
I think I will stay out of this thread.
Is that becuase you think marriage is a holy bind between a man and a woman? I'm just curious.
Also, what's the stance on this subject in Europe? South America? Australia?
Europe has the only 3 countries in the world to allow them on a national level. Spain (as of today), Belgium, and the Netherlands.
South America is largely Catholic, what do you think?
Canda is also going to pass it, if I understand correctly.
it's a free country.
doesn't affect me.
so whatever works.
puting aside my personal htoughts about sexuality.
I believe it's wrong for a secualr government to us religious reasoning to disallow the rights of a segment of the population. There is no reason why gay marriage should not be legal. I have gay neighbors, who've apparently been a couple since the world was made (they are freakin old) - and I'd like to report that they have in no way been detrimental to my own marriage or made my marriage have any less meaning.
See?? Spain is super duper Catholic and they allow it. We need to step up.
I thought Spain had one of the highest Catholic population %'ages in the world.
South America is supposed to be very gay friendly for travel, particularly larger cities like Buenos Aires and Rio. Maybe because people there are smart enough to stay out of other's private business.
I really don't have a strong opinion on this one way or the other. It doesn't affect me, and I don't think how other people choose to live their lives is any of my business.
No Manny, it is not.
I think gay couples should be able to:
Own property together and get a mortgage together just like married couples can. They currently have to form a business partnership.
I think that gay couples should be able to leave property to the other partner in a will just like a husband/wife without "family" being able to challenge it...
I think gay couples should have right to make the other partner in their civil union their representative in health care decisions if they become incapacitated just like in a normal marriage.
I think that gay couples should have every right that normal married couples have that don't interfere with the rights or beliefs of others.
That being said I will give you a SPECIFIC case on why I believe gay couples should be able to have have civil unions for certain specified rights and not the "full" rights of marriage. Marriage legally defines a union as a "family". In my case as an employer, I voluntarily choose to pay 100% of medical insurance for employees AND familys. No law requires me to do so. I don't personally believe in same sex unions but I am tolerant and accepting of the rights of others to have them. If gay marriages were legalized, I and every other employer in the country that offers any kind of family benefits would be put in the position of not only tolerating gay marriage but actually personally subsidizing gay marriage. I would be forced into a position that if I wanted to pay health insurance for my employees in conventional marriages I would be BREAKING THE LAW if I did not provide health insurance for the gay "spouses" EVEN THOUGH I AM NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR ANYONE.
that.
It's just not right.
Gay civil unions are legal in Buenos Aires (the city is a whole district of its own).
I dont live in Buenos Aires, but i think that was legalized 5+ years ago. Maybe some "porteño" can confirm this.
moving this thread to the political forum certainly guaranteed it a quick death...
Oh, you mean the way gay business owners are forced to tolerate and subsidize regular marrige, right? Yeah, I can see why that would be a problem.
And Seperate but Equal is illegal. There are court rullings left and right.
I understand the premise, that you don't want to be forced to acknowledge something you don't agree with, but stop and think how the laws that are on the books already do that. I'm a believer that government has no place in marriage to begin with, but do you honestly think there is any chance in that government is going to take a step back and stop making marriage in issue in every legal way it shows up? Of course not. So then the next step is to provide equality across the board.
A racist business owner is forced to acknowledge interracial marriage.
A Christian business owner if forced to acknowledge Islamic marriage.
A gay business owner is forced to acknowledge marriage, although he's not allowed to marry who he chooses.
So, your arguement that you don't want things forced on you is really poor when you're forcing things on others.
(CNN) -- Underscoring its original ruling last November, Massachusetts' highest court said Wednesday that only full marriage rights for gay couples, not civil unions, would conform to the state's cons ution.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/04/gay.marriage/
Thats only the state consitution, but it woudl definetly stand for the US cons ution as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
