Gay Marriage is now legal in California.
- Thread starter Rusky
- Start date
Exactly. I've always found it funny that gays are all up in arms about getting "married" when that term implies association with a group that despises them (religion). Pretty damn retarded. Of course, if they were smart, they wouldn't be gay right? Ba-zing!
TENTH AMENDMENT:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Last time I looked the constitution mentions neither gay butt sex or marriage
As long as the gay marriage is a state by state choice, than I could give a fuck. I just don't want the progressives using this one gay judges ruling as a precident to stick it down the throats (no pun intended) of those that wish to keep marriage between a man and women and live in states that believe the same way as well. California and other few progressive states can live with all the gay drama they want and I can live in my state of choice that still believes in traditional values.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Last time I looked the constitution mentions neither gay butt sex or marriage
As long as the gay marriage is a state by state choice, than I could give a fuck. I just don't want the progressives using this one gay judges ruling as a precident to stick it down the throats (no pun intended) of those that wish to keep marriage between a man and women and live in states that believe the same way as well. California and other few progressive states can live with all the gay drama they want and I can live in my state of choice that still believes in traditional values.
Civil Unions are not treated the same way as a marriage. There are several cases of gay couples being treated unfairly because they hold a civil union and not a marriage here in California.
I don't understand why this is such an issue. If you aren't applying a faith based argument there is no reason to deny a group of people a title that means nothing other than equal protection under the law. Instead you force a group of people into this second class citizenship and then wonder why they get angry over it.
Don't forget, there are faiths where gay marriage is acceptable. Where is your religious freedom there? Couldn't that be considered a form of oppression?
"Oh your not a Catholic, Muslim, or Jew so you really don't have a say in this" doesn't make sense.
No one is asking you to change your personal values. Just like with interracial couples. No one cares if you won't marry outside your race. It doesn't give you the right to deny that right to others.
I don't understand why this is such an issue. If you aren't applying a faith based argument there is no reason to deny a group of people a title that means nothing other than equal protection under the law. Instead you force a group of people into this second class citizenship and then wonder why they get angry over it.
Don't forget, there are faiths where gay marriage is acceptable. Where is your religious freedom there? Couldn't that be considered a form of oppression?
"Oh your not a Catholic, Muslim, or Jew so you really don't have a say in this" doesn't make sense.
No one is asking you to change your personal values. Just like with interracial couples. No one cares if you won't marry outside your race. It doesn't give you the right to deny that right to others.
When people say they're married, I'd strongly suggest that they're referring to their co-habitual living status, not some ridiculous sanctity from a supernatural sky-daddy. Modern marriage should be secular. Any additional ritual or ceremony should be called a 'religious partnership' and have no civil or lawful rights attached to it at all. Then you could perhaps argue that the church has a right to refuse to perform these stupid rituals for certain couples.
For those that think the bible provides an galactic, absolute moral code of marriage, explain:
· why the church did not protest about miscegenation laws (which prevented interracial marriage)? It was societal pressure and the courts that decided interracial marriage was acceptable in 1967. Weird how your little book doesn't have any anti-racist parables in it that could have helped interracial couples obtain their marriage rights sooner.
· why the church had no problem marrying thirteen year old girls to older men (sometimes to their cousins and uncles) well into the mid 1960s until, again, societal pressure and law introduced a higher minimum age of consent. Weird how your little book says nothing at all against paedophilia, yet has detailed guidelines on how to go about selling your pre-teen daughter into servitude (which usually implied sexual domination too). Vile.
Lastly, I'd suggest that religionists are more detrimental to modern society than gays, simply because they actually think the universe works in the way described in the bible and blindly support powerful religious organisations. I mean, seriously, what the fuck?
For those that think the bible provides an galactic, absolute moral code of marriage, explain:
· why the church did not protest about miscegenation laws (which prevented interracial marriage)? It was societal pressure and the courts that decided interracial marriage was acceptable in 1967. Weird how your little book doesn't have any anti-racist parables in it that could have helped interracial couples obtain their marriage rights sooner.
· why the church had no problem marrying thirteen year old girls to older men (sometimes to their cousins and uncles) well into the mid 1960s until, again, societal pressure and law introduced a higher minimum age of consent. Weird how your little book says nothing at all against paedophilia, yet has detailed guidelines on how to go about selling your pre-teen daughter into servitude (which usually implied sexual domination too). Vile.
Lastly, I'd suggest that religionists are more detrimental to modern society than gays, simply because they actually think the universe works in the way described in the bible and blindly support powerful religious organisations. I mean, seriously, what the fuck?
Interracial marriage has nothing to do with gay marriage. There are plenty of racists throughout history that may not have liked it but the Bible never had an issue with interracial marriage. One of King David's wives was black and his line was eventually blessed with Jesus right? Obviously "God" never had an issue with Jungle Fever. I just always laugh when gay people try to connect themselves to interracial marriage. There is no comparison.
If a civil union is treated differently than a marriage, then perhaps the way a civil union is treated is the problem. Laws can easily be passed to rectify that. Also, what faiths are permissive of homosexuality? There are no doubt people of faith that are permissive of it, but their holy books are very clear on the subject.
Be happy with a civil union and stop trying to egg on the religious folks. They take that shit seriously so don't expect anything but resistance.
I already covered that - there were no rules against interracial marriage because interracial marriage has always been ok from a religious perspective. Just because some racists didn't like it doesn't change what the bible actually says. Like I said before, see King David and his black wife in Song Of Soloman. As far as the marrying of 13 year old girls, that's not pedophilia (that would be babies, not pubescent girls), although it is fucked up. It was allowed because once a girl was of child bearing age, they assumed god wanted her to have children. Fucking lulz that I'm defending the bible, but since I'm apparently one of the only people that has actually read it.
It is not acceptable to deny a group a basic right because of ones faith. There is supposed to be a separation of Church and State.
So your bible says homosexuality is wrong. It also says that looking at a chick when she's on her period is wrong, or that you can own slaves, and lets not forget stoning people.
If you want to live by your book that's fine, but don't ask the rest of us to.
So your bible says homosexuality is wrong. It also says that looking at a chick when she's on her period is wrong, or that you can own slaves, and lets not forget stoning people.
If you want to live by your book that's fine, but don't ask the rest of us to.
> Just because some racists didn't like it doesn't change what the bible actually says
It 'actually says' nothing though. Those racists, who were almost definitely also christian, didn't get any guidance from the doctrine at all. And the church just stood by and let them take people's rights away. Likewise, the church was blissfully complacent when marrying young girls into unequal relationships.
So, being on the wrong side of those two rather large issues, and providing no moral compass whatsoever to the people of the time, it doesn't make sense for us to accept anything the church has to say now about gays falling in love and wanting to make a commitment to each other.
> Isn't that the whole point of having a civil union?
Times have changed. Marriage is a civil and lawful matter of cohabitation.
You can have an additional 'religious partnership' if you want.
It 'actually says' nothing though. Those racists, who were almost definitely also christian, didn't get any guidance from the doctrine at all. And the church just stood by and let them take people's rights away. Likewise, the church was blissfully complacent when marrying young girls into unequal relationships.
So, being on the wrong side of those two rather large issues, and providing no moral compass whatsoever to the people of the time, it doesn't make sense for us to accept anything the church has to say now about gays falling in love and wanting to make a commitment to each other.
> Isn't that the whole point of having a civil union?
Times have changed. Marriage is a civil and lawful matter of cohabitation.
You can have an additional 'religious partnership' if you want.
As a Pastafarian I find the whole thing really Christian Bible regulating our legal system thing really insulting.
Just pointing out the absurdity of the argument that the bible should be used to make laws. Thought that was kind of obvious.
It actually does say very clearly that it's ok to marry interracially. If you would read Song of Solomon you would see that. Their relationship was considered good in the eyes of "the lord". People misinterpret or ignore Holy books all the time, what does that have to do with anything?
Uhm...I've lost track. Why is it a problem for Gay people to get married again? I'm not seeing anything apocalyptic happening here. There may be an increase in your $$ on wedding crap if you're running any.
Uhm...I've lost track. Why is it a problem for Gay people to get married again? I'm not seeing anything apocalyptic happening here. There may be an increase in your $$ on wedding crap if you're running any.
If 100% of males were gay how would humanity survive?
Gay = unnatural = wrong
> It actually does say very clearly that it's ok to marry interracially
Yeah, could you actually quote the bit that says that, because all I see is cryptic, semi-erotic love poetry that requires a huge amount of interpretation to make any sense of it. Nothing useful about marriage guidelines at all. The wiki page doesn't mention marriage either. This is the real problem with religionists - they claim to have objective answers, when really they are the most fucking clueless.
Here's an interesting thing about Solomon and foreign women
And the rest of Solomon's character including lots of genocide and violence.
I did read an interesting part of Solomon's song though:
> 8:8 We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts: what shall we do
> for our sister in the day when she shall be spoken for?
Older sisters worried about not being able to protect their pre-pubescent sister from whoever buys her, and not a word the bible against it. The christian doctrine is fucking disgraceful. It has no place in a modern society, and you should be ashamed of yourself for defending it.
Yeah, could you actually quote the bit that says that, because all I see is cryptic, semi-erotic love poetry that requires a huge amount of interpretation to make any sense of it. Nothing useful about marriage guidelines at all. The wiki page doesn't mention marriage either. This is the real problem with religionists - they claim to have objective answers, when really they are the most fucking clueless.
Here's an interesting thing about Solomon and foreign women
And the rest of Solomon's character including lots of genocide and violence.
I did read an interesting part of Solomon's song though:
> 8:8 We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts: what shall we do
> for our sister in the day when she shall be spoken for?
Older sisters worried about not being able to protect their pre-pubescent sister from whoever buys her, and not a word the bible against it. The christian doctrine is fucking disgraceful. It has no place in a modern society, and you should be ashamed of yourself for defending it.
this is fucked up.
you should be able to marry whom ever you want..
I plan on marrying at least 3 women.
You aren't BALLER status till you got your own harem.
This whole prop 8 deal brings us one step closer.
you should be able to marry whom ever you want..
I plan on marrying at least 3 women.
You aren't BALLER status till you got your own harem.
This whole prop 8 deal brings us one step closer.
Heterosexuals want to feel special in a group. They don't want gays to be equal to them in any way.
They are afraid that people that aren't even gay, will consider gay marriage as an alternative lifestyle. Because there is no separation or difference between the legal treatment that you get.
So to protect the exclusive perks of heterosexual marriage, they want to ban gay marriage.
They are afraid that people that aren't even gay, will consider gay marriage as an alternative lifestyle. Because there is no separation or difference between the legal treatment that you get.
So to protect the exclusive perks of heterosexual marriage, they want to ban gay marriage.