This won't keep people from being gay. If anything, it'll make them more committed and monogamous since they have a real marriage. Don't let your prejudices blind you.The#1Spot wrote:
Well I dont want it to pass. If this passes then all states will soon follow (except Alabama). We need a leader to scare the gays back into the closet again. Disease might go back up again.
I don't have a beef with terminology, I have a beef with religion and state mixing. Marriage is a religious institution. This is why the Religious Right gets in a tizzy everytime this issue comes up. As I said, I don't really care that much and would prefer the state leave people alone, but it would appear that the only way that's going to happen is for the religious part to be removed from government. Then, the Religious Right has no leg to stand on, because gay civil unions are clearly a civil rights issue.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So the main beef you guys have is the fact that the word "marriage" is used? What about all the other colloquial uses for that word? As far as the state is concerned, "marriage" and "civil union" are the same, except for "gay marriage" because for some weird reason people are afraid of combining the two.Turquoise wrote:
Yeah, pretty much. I personally don't give much of a shit about the gay marriage issue because I'm neither gay nor religious, but... we might as well further the separation of church and state in order to resolve this. That's where the problem started anyway.DesertFox- wrote:
I'd support that. I am against the idea of a "gay marriage" because I believe it is the man and woman idea. However, if you make the governmental recognition all civil unions when joining hetero's and homo's, it allows for the m-word to be saved for use in the religious context.
A consensual act between two adults is no business of the state except for tax purposes.
Fascist much?The#1Spot wrote:
Well I dont want it to pass. If this passes then all states will soon follow (except Alabama). We need a leader to scare the gays back into the closet again. Disease might go back up again.
yeah, those damn gays and blacks are gonna give us all AIDS!!!The#1Spot wrote:
Well I dont want it to pass. If this passes then all states will soon follow (except Alabama). We need a leader to scare the gays back into the closet again. Disease might go back up again.
Only if you have sex with them or use the same toilet.HurricaИe wrote:
yeah, those damn gays and blacks are gonna give us all AIDS!!!The#1Spot wrote:
Well I dont want it to pass. If this passes then all states will soon follow (except Alabama). We need a leader to scare the gays back into the closet again. Disease might go back up again.
dude, i walk into the bathrooms at school, or in san francisco, and i can smell disease in the airAjax_the_Great1 wrote:
Only if you have sex with them or use the same toilet.HurricaИe wrote:
yeah, those damn gays and blacks are gonna give us all AIDS!!!The#1Spot wrote:
Well I dont want it to pass. If this passes then all states will soon follow (except Alabama). We need a leader to scare the gays back into the closet again. Disease might go back up again.
Have to make sure i dont' stay in too long or it will land on any open wounds and begin propogating
I think the point I tried to make, is that, despite the different opinions on what marriage is and isn't, how can you justify someone conforming to your opinion on how things should be? It is that totalitarian? If someone is not limiting your ability to live as a free person how can you justify using force against them?DesertFox- wrote:
I'd support that. I am against the idea of a "gay marriage" because I believe it is the man and woman idea. However, if you make the governmental recognition all civil unions when joining hetero's and homo's, it allows for the m-word to be saved for use in the religious context.Turquoise wrote:
Separate marriage from the state, replace all legal recognitions of marital union with the secular institution of civil unions (and allow gay civil unions), and let churches bicker over gay marriage ceremonies.
It's that simple. Separation of church and state FTW
An if you, Blehm98, really can smell diseases, you should go for a career as diagnostician.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Only if you have unprotected sex with them.
But what you smell in a toilet would rather give you legionnaires or maybe a hepatitis and even that very rarely - and if you stick your fingers in it to have taste...
And how fracking long will it take for people to quit thinking STDs only matter to those not having heterosexual missionary intercourse?