|
Re: gay marrige
|
| gay marriage... i have heard this subject for a long time... but i haven't actually see it or nobody around me is gay... so i don't really have an idea about it... from the words, is a marriage between two men... as simple as that... sometimes i wonder, why a lot of people like to against gay marriage? they are just a human being like us, the only different is they fell in love with the same sex human, that's all... undeniable, for me, marriage is just a form of agreement to live together forever, because they are gay and a lot of people against them, so they need the ritual to consolidate their relationship, they need this than any normal couple... we are not god, we don't have the right to stop them, so why don't we just leave them alone, let them make their own choice. no matter what the consequence is, this is their choice, it got nothing to do with us... we cannot do anything to help them, but at least... treat them as a normal human being, they are human just like us, they have feeling, they know how to cry and laugh like us... is just a matter of gender... no big deal. |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
Red button this topic certainly is... but that aside. Homosexuality is against the course of nature to start with. enough said. And I would like to clarify the crusade against Christians here. We love the sinner but we hate the sin. Enough said.
Veni, Vidi, Vici.
|
|
Re: gay marrige
|
Well said, miyamoto! That's exactly how I feel! And the fact that homosexuals want to rewrite the entire defintion of marriage to suit their own ends really makes me angry.  |
|
Re: gay marrige
Link |
by
on 2005-09-14 17:26:32 (edited 2005-09-14 17:28:01)
|
 First of all let me say I am surprized at what I have just read. So much said, that so few of you understand. Gendou, There is a post you obviously failed to read and understand. "Can you believe this crap" which clearly states the principials of church and state in the US in addition to explaining the First Amendment. If you awant to know about the constitution ask ranger, h'es a constitutionilist(sp). Gendou said, "...ANYTHING to do with the national law of the United States of America? Church principal MUST be separate from State Law. That is one of the FOUNDING PRINCIPALS of our country. It is not and there is nothing in American law that says anything about the separation of church and state. The law as written by the American founding fathers prohibits and forbids the government from establishing a state religion. This keeps a state run church from gaining power over the people as it did during the middle ages and expressly states that everyone shall have the right to worship as they choose with out fear of infringment. Next, and I am a little more than miffed, at the amount of musunderstansing most people have about this same sex marriage issue. I am against same sex marriage. To me marriage is a union between a man and woman, sacred. However I am not against the civil union of a same sex couple. The issue here is not one of same sex marriage. That's what it has been blown into. What is at issue here are the right of a same sex union to have the same rights and benefits as a hetrosexual couple; such as health care, company spousal benifits, inheritance and shared property rights and much, much more. It has nothing to do with sex or being gay or anything like that. If any of you had in my classroom today talking about the gay marriage issue most of you would have been handed a long homework assignment on how to do research. Most of you would have also gotten low marks today for not knowing the subject as well. I repeat myself. This is not about same sex marriages, it is about civil rights and nothing more. My last comment on this subject is; why is it that I know more about the Constitution that you seem to? I'm not even an American citizen and shall probably never become one, the reason has to do with English law, not a lack of desire on my part. Now... tonights homework.  Explain why you should know a subject before blindly stumbling in and posting an opinion. I would like 500 pages from each of you on my desk in the morning.   |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
well Rin the topic does mention marriage in particular. so... =/
Veni, Vidi, Vici.
|
|
Re: gay marrige
Link |
by
on 2005-09-14 21:02:29 |
|
You are absolutely correct it does. However gay marriage should not be the issue. either here or before the courts and legislatures. This all started as a question of the rights accorded to a significant other. It was blown out of proportion when the church got ahold of it saying that the marriage of a gay or lesbian couple was a sin and an affront against god. The gay community in a move that hurt themselves more than they could have possibly imagined took the wrong step in pushung for same sex marriage. It's as if nobody even thought that the church would say something. Had they approached this from the viewpoint of a civil union then I thnk they would be much further along that they are today. The problem they ran into was one of the religious right. If they had stuck to the issue at hand, how to gain equal rights as opposed to gay marriage I truly believe this would have been resolved a couple of years ago. |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| I still don't get how in some states gay marriage is legal and illegal in others states...so much for the 'rule of the land' |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
IIRC, though I'm not American by any chance, it's always: Local -> State -> Federal
Veni, Vidi, Vici.
|
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| I think they should have the option of getting married, they should have the benefits from it...however I still don't think that child adoption should be available to them yet...that is another thing. |
|
Re: gay marrige
Link |
by
on 2005-09-15 05:26:15 (edited 2005-09-15 05:28:59)
|
|
Miyamoto is right. Local, state and federal laws in order of precedence. Another good example is medical marijuana. It's legal in California but not at the federal level, the state of California has said they shall not enforce the federal laws regarding medical marijuana. I think that fortunate because a few people I know use, medical cannabis. One person I know has a serious illness and does not eat so he smokes cannabis to stimulate his appetite. I think it's ridicolous that the US government has banned all use of cannabis including medical use and medical research. What does this mean please? IIRC |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
If I Remember Correctly :p
Veni, Vidi, Vici.
|
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| Wow, gay marriages, it seems everywhere I turn this issue turns up. I like Rin's statement. If two men or women want to get married that's fine. It should not be a marriage though. A civil union is the best way to solve the matter. Marriage is a religious bond between a man and a woman. Now I really don't mind if the have the civil unions(quite frankly I don't mind about marriages either, but that's a hard fight to win). Rin also brought about the benefits from marriage. Thank you so much, I have heard so many ignorant responses in my life about how, "If they love each other why do they need a piece of paper!", or "They can just be happy living together!" With marriage, comes benefits, it's not just a simple piece of paper that says I love you. Now I read somewhere down there that their is no love between two members of the same sex. That was kind of funny to read because they also said that a love between a man and woman had a point and that was reproduction. Yes because we need to reproduce. This world is not overpopulated enough. Let us make more and more children until this planet bursts. |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| Don't know about what shiriu said...I believe that they should be allowed to adopt children if they are allowed to be a couple. There are so many orphans out there, if people that can't have children (like gay couples) wants to adopt a child and properly raise them, it's cool by me. |
|
Re: gay marrige
Link |
by
on 2005-09-15 23:06:41 |
|
I tnever was about love or marriage, it has always beem about the legal aspecs of a union. the problem here is you say 'marriage' and everybody get swept up in an emotional uproar over the marriage issue c=mpletely forgetting about the real issues. Should either one of us die the other has the right of survivorship and inheritance because we are a hetrosexual couple. If we were gay then ther is no right of survivorship and inheritance |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
i dun really have any comment on this issue, what i heard from other people who are totally conservative is that they thought marriage is defined as between a man & a woman. they felt offended when there's gay marriage where both are actually, well same gendered. what i mean is, they think marriage is so sacred that gays dun deserve the rights to marry their partners. personally, i look at this issue from health perspective, not morally, to be fair. the relationship is dysfunctional physically & not to mention the STDs that such relationship might spread! but, however stastistics had showed that actually, there's no problem in gay marriage where they adopt children. the children grow like other ordinary kids & got no problems with their 'parents''s sexual orientation, so what's the fuss with other nosy people?  |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
For some people, homosexuality is considered a disease. So it is unnatural. For others, homosexuality is considered a human right. So they fight for it. My view is, homosexuality is a human right. So i don't disagree with gay or lesbian marriage. But i'm afraid that this will somewhat influence their children's mental growth (they would not have both father and mother in the same time, either they have a female father, or a male mother). I think conservatives will oppose homosexuality.
God's in his heaven. All's right with the world.
|
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| Ouch, that was a low-blow for Americans and our lack of knowledge of the Constitution, Lady Rin. I'll give it to you, some of us have missed the target about gay marriage right and actual oppositions behind the topic, but in all fairness, for all the intelligent remarks and witty querks you've put to this site; It's a site for anime. A proper soap box is needed if you want to hit hard at a nation and it's people. |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
| my thoughts on gay marriage and yeah i didn't read the posts. Lazy =P. Marriage is a union between man and woman. Gays and lesbians want a union then call it something else like man-merging or lesbo-linkup but just. Just call it something different and that should satisfy some fanatics. As far as having a religious wedding, that is pretty much up to the religious dogma. It shouldn't be a government matter. They should still have the same right to get half their crap taken in a divorce. It is constitutional and no they can't pass a law to get in banned because the supreme court can basically rule that law unconstitutional in judicial review. So everyone against same sex marriages in the government is fighting a losing battle that has no legs to stand on. the fight will move on and the terms will be made so all its gonna be is a time issue. |
|
Re: gay marrige
Link |
by Ravensender
on 2005-10-10 18:42:37
|
|
Don't gays realize that by entering a LEGAL marriage that the same rules apply, including messy divorce procedures. That might be a reason to consider a civil union. Also, to bring up another topic, the only reason I think people worry about gay people, especially when they are around children is because they think homosexuality is contagious, which why everyone freaks when they learn Bobby has two moms.
The end of the weekend is something that's inevitable... Like a test. Or the Apocalypse.
  |
|
Re: gay marrige
|
|
This entire topic is fascinating. In some southern counties it is still illegal for me to be married to my wife due to matters of written local law that go back to the 1960s. I know it's not the same thing but if you were to go back 50 years or so it would have been excactly the same. People were coming up with BS excuses ranging from health concerns to societal breakdowns for it back then too. The problem now is that there are places in America where laws are specifically being written to exclude people on the basis of their sexual preference and that is wrong because it denies a singled out group of people rights that everyone else enjoy freely. I'm not going to fall back on the separation of church and state argument because our government, whether we like it or not, is run by the clergy. I don't mean to sound like the Question but everything we have in America from the radio programs we listen to, the television shows we watch, and the CDs we buy are all monitored, rated, and approved before the public gets to see them. Though human rights issues regarding marriage are not specifically mentioned in the constitution it surprises me that a nation that is so dedicated to the preservation all types of human rights elsewhere can not find a place of agreement here on the issues of homosexual rights. These people have a right to whatever type of union they want and the benefits that accompany the union. If they want to call it marriage, how is it our right to stop them? Show me where it is our right to deny them the ability to call it marriage or to deny them the legal benefits that straight couples have.  Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun. - Ash, Army of Darkness |