Politics and Religion

I agree robert... I don't care, and honestly MOST people could care less one way or the otherred_smile
mrnogood 226 reads
posted

This is just some way to make an election issue gay marriage instead of wars, and the economy.. It's a distraction.. MOST of us don't care what goes on in peoples bedrooms..


Although I would like to take this moment to point out hypocrisy of the right, who does believe in limited government, unless it's an issue they feel the government should be involved in.. and gay marriage is one of those issues where the rights hypocrisy shines like the sun..


Here's the real question why should ANYONE have to ask the state permission  to be married? Why does the government have ANY business in ANYONES (gay or straight) marriage? I do see it as odd that gays would want to even ask government permission  for a license to marry..

WHY does the government have any business in ANYONE'S marriage? I think that's the real question

Snowman391517 reads

I have a strong opinion on this (don't guess, you will probably be wrong).

Curious to know what everyone believes the problem is and/or a solution.

I will post my own beliefs shortly...

I don't know what the problem is? Could it be religious? Maybe it's financial and having to do with properties and benefits, medical and otherwise.
Let them get married. What happens if they do?

My own question:
Why do they want to get married anyway?
Why do heterosexual people get married? I still don't get this part.

Of the married gay couples, what % has filed for divorce if any?

mrnogood227 reads

This is just some way to make an election issue gay marriage instead of wars, and the economy.. It's a distraction.. MOST of us don't care what goes on in peoples bedrooms..


Although I would like to take this moment to point out hypocrisy of the right, who does believe in limited government, unless it's an issue they feel the government should be involved in.. and gay marriage is one of those issues where the rights hypocrisy shines like the sun..


Here's the real question why should ANYONE have to ask the state permission  to be married? Why does the government have ANY business in ANYONES (gay or straight) marriage? I do see it as odd that gays would want to even ask government permission  for a license to marry..

WHY does the government have any business in ANYONE'S marriage? I think that's the real question

..synonymous with 'civil unions' when they're really separate entities.

Hetero and gay relationships should be recognized equally by government as civil unions.  If religious denominations are against gay marriages, then the couples won't be married by their church, but they'll still be legally married where it really counts.

Maybe it's just semantics, but it's  a simple solution.  The hard part is convincing people that when they go down to City Hall, they're not getting a marriage license -- they're getting a civil union license.

...is to be on the "cutting edge" of political beliefs in this country. Sorry, I don't mean for that to sound arrogant, I just don't know how else to put it.

I'll give you an example of what I mean: Back in 1998-1999, as a kid just out of high school, some friends and I would debate controversal issues. We'd get together, eat some food, drink some booze, smoke some herb, and debate politics and talk social constructs.

Some of the people involved in these groups were activists, some were conservative, it was a pretty mixed bag of people. To give you an idea of just how diverse this group was, one person was a corn-fed Iowa boy serving in the Marines, and one would go on to become a member of the Black Panthers. It was all a fun mental exercise, and I think all of learned as much from each other as we learned about ourselves.

We'd talk about things like free trade, corporate personhood, the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, public education, feminism, capitalism, race relations, communism, etc. You name the issue, we talked about it for hours on end.

I remember distinctly talking to quite a few conservatives about the ideas I had, and many of the conclusions I came to were met with derision and ridicule, that these ideas were just loony.

Some of those loony notions aren't loony anymore. It took conservatives 9 years to understand that free trade will lead to the deindustrialization of the United States, and no one would have a job anymore.

Another loony notion was that corporate personhood is a real problem, and it would result in a corporate dictatorship and monopolization of rights. When the Supreme Court said that imminent domain could be used to cease private property for corporate gain, conservatives began ending corporate personhood may not be such a loony idea after all.

Us loonies protested the Iraq War even before it began, 9 years later, conservatives will (mostly) agree that it was a mistake, or at the very least, that we ought not be there now.

I can't help but wonder, if those conservatives had listened to us loonies 15 years ago, what this country would look like today.

Ah, the sweet taste of progress.

I mention all this because the notion of gay marriage isn't controversial to me. I decided some 14 years ago that gays should have the right to openly serve in the military and to be able to marry. By now, I find the subject quite boring.

The reality is that marriage isn't a religious institution, legally speaking. A church has no right to marry anyone unless the state approves them that privilege. You'll notice it's not the other way around, the court doesn't have to go to a church to get approval to marry someone in a courthouse.

While I realize people have private religious notions that they attach to the institution, in a legal sense, marriage is a legal contract made between two people.

It might also be quite illuminating to research the history of the institution of marriage, going all the way back to the British monarchy. I won't go into it. All I will say is that it's worth looking into yourself.

Some people think we ought to just let them have "civil unions" instead. That's a cop out. There's no reason, moral or otherwise, why one group of people should be forced to 2nd class citizenship status.

The reality is that under the law, marriage is codified into law. It's used to transfer property between two or more individuals. It enables people to have different rights under tax law. It defines under what circumstances child custody is given. It allows people under that contract to make medical decisions for the other if necessary. There are a multitude of things that are all attached to the legal institution of marriage.

For this reason, anything short of marriage denies one group of people a large number of legal rights.

Just for comparison purposes, imagine if it were still the 60's, and someone suggested that blacks shouldn't have the same right to vote as whites: that instead of passing the Voting Rights Act, we should instead give blacks the right to a provisional ballot that we may or may not count. Would that be justice? Would that be right?

I realize that some people have religious concerns. My opinions on the church isn't a secret around here. Religious rights should not extend to the right to discriminate against people that your faith dictates that you must hate.

However, there's no requirement, to the best of my knowledge, that forces churches to marry couples whom they don't want to marry. For instance, as far as I know, a Catholic church can turn away a Muslim couple, or a Baptist church can turn away an atheist couple. I have no problem with them retaining the right to turn away a gay couple based on religious grounds.

But there's no reason why anyone should be denied the same rights as everyone else.

Sorry to be long winded. I just figured it was worth putting these thoughts out there.

Snowman39706 reads

The real mistake first came when someone decided to mix a religious union with government regulations and privileges.

Should gays be allowed to marry? This should be up to the church they attend since it is a RELIGIOUS joining!! Why the hell we ever turned it into a State or Federal institution is beyond me.

If it is to be a State or Federal union which effects rights and privileges, then you can not discriminate.
Personally, I believe people who are gay are born this way. The fact I am attracted to women is not something that was an acquired taste like some food or alcohol. It is inherent in me. I believe this to be the same for gays and lesbians, I do not believe it is some type of "choice".

Therefore, time to fix the problem. Either do away with government being n the business of marriages (which is not going to happen), or come up with a means of assuring that EVERYONE has access to the same rights and protections those who are married have access to. Legalized Unions would fix this I believe, but my personal preference would be for the government to get out of the marriage business.

It's quite well known now that homosexuality is something you're born with. We even know that it's passed on down from the mother, and can be passed down even if the mother isn't gay.

Without getting too complicated, we can look at brain scans of people and see what parts of the brain is working when we see someone we find attractive. The interesting thing is that different parts of the male brain will fire when we see somone attractive, and entirely different parts of the female brain will fire when they see someone attractive. So sexual attraction works slightly differently depending upon our sex.

However, a study I read some years ago tested this with straights and gays and they found something remarkable. A gay man's brain will fire like a female's brain when he sees someone he finds attractive, and a gay female brain will fire like a male brain when she see someone attractive.

Pretty neat, eh?

Yes, we are born straight or gay. It's not something that can be learned, and it's not something that can be changed.

The best argument that the supporters of banning gay marriage can come up with is that the Bible says it's wrong.  Maybe I'm crazy to think this but isn't there a little something called separation of church and state?  We bash middle eastern countries for implementing religious doctrine into the law but we want to spit out bible quotes when it comes to gay marriage?  I don't think it's right for states to have a vote on whether gay marriage is allowed because the minority obviously has no voice.  Majority of US citizens are christian therefore majority of US citizens will vote against gay marriage.  It isn't just about the right to marry, it's about protecting the rights of a gay person's spouse.  If a gay couple adopted a child and one of them died who would the child go to?  If someone became sick and needed to go to the hospital would the SO be able to visit or would it just be family?  There are many examples as to why gay marriage should be legal, more so than why it shouldn't.

on a ballot and decided by voters.

This is a private and legal issue, not a political one.

...but it does say in the book of Leviticus that homosexuals should be stoned to death. Of course, in the book of Leviticus it also says to do THIS to get rid of mildew in your house.

LET THE GAY PERSON HAVE CIVIL UNIONS AND allow the civil unions to have the same benefits as a marriage

Posted By: breannabreeze
The best argument that the supporters of banning gay marriage can come up with is that the Bible says it's wrong.  Maybe I'm crazy to think this but isn't there a little something called separation of church and state?  We bash middle eastern countries for implementing religious doctrine into the law but we want to spit out bible quotes when it comes to gay marriage?  I don't think it's right for states to have a vote on whether gay marriage is allowed because the minority obviously has no voice.  Majority of US citizens are christian therefore majority of US citizens will vote against gay marriage.  It isn't just about the right to marry, it's about protecting the rights of a gay person's spouse.  If a gay couple adopted a child and one of them died who would the child go to?  If someone became sick and needed to go to the hospital would the SO be able to visit or would it just be family?  There are many examples as to why gay marriage should be legal, more so than why it shouldn't.

nobody should ever get married.
I know for girls it's supposed to be the happiest day of their life and stuff but it's becoming absolete.

about this issue.  Only people who are uncomfortable with people who are different from them, and people who think they have a right to control other people's behavior, and a lot of folks who want to create a political issue where none really exists, pay any attention to this 'issue.'  
I personally do not care a whit what people do in their private lives, and don't believe the government at any level should either.

Register Now!