100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: NY Senate Votes For Marriage Equality | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Baptism and Marriage are not anywhere near the same thing though. In one case, you are choosing to enter a particular group, so of course it wouldn't have a legal status attached. In the other, you're just choosing to share your life with another person. Why should the church have to be involved in that? This proposal breaks traditional marriage down into two steps. 1) Marriage - Religious ceremony with no legal standing. 2) Civil Unions - Legal contact with no Religious status. Those two steps would apply to EVERYONE. Not just gays. You cannot force a Church to marry homosexual couples, it violates their civil rights and their right to Freedom of Religion. You may not know this, but a church has the right to refuse a wedding to a hetero couple, so homosexual couples will be no different. It's not a violation of their civil rights for a priest to refuse to marry them. You might not agree with that decision, but that doesn't mean you have the right to force them to violate their religious beliefs. And the opposite side is that clergy COULD marry a same-sex couple because the law cannot interfere. That means there would be no reason to have both a civil union and a marriage. It would help if you read my posts. I mean actually read every line of them. This proposal would remove ALL LEGAL STANDING from marriage. There would be none. So the clergy could marry people all day and night and it would only count as a religious ceremony. I thought I was clear on that. Was the line "Those two steps would apply to EVERYONE. Not just gays." not clear enough? I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't like people wasting my time in explaining and re-explaining everything. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
animals? yeah, and we still call them MALE AND FEMALE or should I learn to deal with a society slowly deciding to not distinguish even that difference between people? I dont own marriage but neither does anyone else, I dont own any WORD, words define our means of communicating ideas. When there is a difference in an idea, sometimes it means a Different WORD. If you don't own it, quit trying to say only certain people can use it then. That isn't my point, my point is, homosexuality exists in them so it would stand to reason it exists in us too. Male and Female separations is one thing, but this is another matter. I Cant dictate what words people use, Im giving my opinion about what legal terms should be applied. big difference I said I would get behind a movement to make this difference apparent legally by defining one as a marriage and one as a civil union, so long as the 'rights' were the same. I am just as able to stick with 'marriage' and 'homosexual marriage' to indicate the difference, but I just think legally 'civil union' gets more to the 'civil right' issue behind it and opens the door for TRUE equality where any consenting adults can join in such a union, not just straight and homosexual but also relatives , friends, business partners, or whomever wishes to 'bond their lives' in such a (legally recognized)way. Why do you even have to indicate a difference? Precisely, what difference does it make? Why make an issue out of it for? maybe not everyone is for it... I get that, but as I've said, society doesn't revolve around you. don't be a smartass, no one said it did... Well when people try to regulate what others do like that it comes off like they think it does. we all have a right to our own opinions, contrary to what you believe... isn't that what makes up America, the right to have an opinion?... i never said anyone was wrong for believing what they believe, as it is their right, and mine too It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another to discriminate against another based on it. opinions are opinions, regardless That's fine, we have a right to them, but you don't have a right to enforce your morality on everyone else. there you go again... and when did i do that? Don't mean to insuinate you do, but people who are against stuff like this. i'm against it, but that doesn't mean that i think you are wrong... it is just an opinion, opinions have no right or wrongs, they are just opinions... but not everyone thinks that way...but i respect peoples opinions, but not when they start with the name calling and other remarks Can you justify telling them they can't get married just cause you don't like it? Do you feel you can tell them that or dictate it? Yes or no? No, I can't tell you what to believe, you will believe what you want. I may explain why I think you're in error, but I can't tell you you have to believe me. Having said that though, I'm not the one trying or wishing to pass laws discriminating against another person or group of people. Your free to believe as you want, but when you want to step on someone else's rights as people in so doing, you cross a line. marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Sat 06/25/11 09:03 PM
|
|
Baptism and Marriage are not anywhere near the same thing though. In one case, you are choosing to enter a particular group, so of course it wouldn't have a legal status attached. In the other, you're just choosing to share your life with another person. Why should the church have to be involved in that? This proposal breaks traditional marriage down into two steps. 1) Marriage - Religious ceremony with no legal standing. 2) Civil Unions - Legal contact with no Religious status. Those two steps would apply to EVERYONE. Not just gays. You cannot force a Church to marry homosexual couples, it violates their civil rights and their right to Freedom of Religion. You may not know this, but a church has the right to refuse a wedding to a hetero couple, so homosexual couples will be no different. It's not a violation of their civil rights for a priest to refuse to marry them. You might not agree with that decision, but that doesn't mean you have the right to force them to violate their religious beliefs. And the opposite side is that clergy COULD marry a same-sex couple because the law cannot interfere. That means there would be no reason to have both a civil union and a marriage. And another thing. I think it's shocking that you feel your civil rights are being violated, but you feel that you have the right to violate other people's civil rights. I'm sorry, but there is nothing in the Constitution that says that Gays can be married, but there is an Amendment that protects peoples freedom to religion. I hate to break this to you guys, but a lot of Christians oppose gay marriage, because they see it as an attack on their religious freedom and you are proving them right. In fact, if you are saying the law should force Clergy to perform marriages for gays, then you are advocating slavery. You are saying that the law should force the clergy against their will to do work. The more I think about this, the more shocked I am that people take this position. You are making me question my pro-gay stance on this. It seems that many other pro-gay people don't want for gays to be able to marry, they want to destroy religious institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sat 06/25/11 09:03 PM
|
|
this is an idea I can get behind(no pun intended) leave marriage between a man and a woman let the CIVIL side of it be called a CIVIL UNION to reflect as such and allow ANY consenting adults who wish to be so joined (As a matter of contractual right) to do so, it would reflect that they are joining their assets and sharing power of attorney and other CIVIL matters,,,,and relatives, neighbors and friends would also be permitted to sign on to such 'contracts',,,, and CIVIL UNIONS could have the same legal benefits of MARRIAGES THAT , would be hard to argue with,,,as it would have nothing to do with an assumption of a sexual relationship and would ony deal with the CIVIL and LEGAL issues,,,, Nah, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if a couple wants to get married in the LEGAL sense, they have to be joined in a Civil Union. If the couple wants to be married in the RELIGIOUS sense, they go to a church and get married. Marriage would carry nothing but religious meaning and therefore wouldn't carry any legal status. Just like getting Baptized has no legal status. Nothing would stop gays from being married in a church that was willing to perform same sex marriages. Gays would get the protections under the law that they desire and churches would be protected from lawsuits if they refused to marry gays. Thus Gays get the right to enter civil unions and churches maintain their freedom of religion. EDIT: Since the Constitution grants the Federal Government the right to form contracts, Gay Civil Unions would be legal throughout the country. Since Marriage would be purely a religious ceremony, no states would be allowed to legislate who could get married. how is this different than what I said?...lol marriage would be defined one way civil union another and CIVIL UNION would then open up the door for TRUE equality where possibly the only consideration would be whether those involved were consenting adults,,,,, so if Angelina wants to have a civil union with her brother, it would be unjust and discriminatory to deny her,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, No? Didn't the Supreme Court declare marriage is a fundamental right in Loving v. Virginia? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how is this different than what I said?...lol Because in my first post, I clearly stated and I quote: The Government should then quit issuing marriage licenses and marriage solely becomes a religious institution. Any adult could enter into a civil union with one or more adults of either gender. Churches could perform any marriages that they choose to perform. You seem to be under the illusion that I think there should be a two tiered solution with marriage being religious and legal and civil unions which would be solely legal. No, afraid not. If a religion believes in homosexual marriages, then you would be denying them their civil rights (freedom of religion) if you told them they couldn't perform marriages for gays. When I say marriage solely becomes a religious institution I literally mean that it would be solely religious. That way, freedom of religion is protected always. If the Mormon church said "Gays can never get married here", that would be their right as granted by the 1st Amendment. If some non-denominational church said "Gays can be married here", that would also be their right under freedom of religion. I done explaining this. If nobody understand it at this point, it will remain misunderstood. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, I call BS on that. Marriage is a right, if you love someone and they love you back, you should have every right in the world to marry them. So don't even try the status thing, it doesn't work here. Further, the right to be adult thing makes no sense at all. You just are at a certain age. To compare that to marriage is laughable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Sat 06/25/11 09:31 PM
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, Marriage is not a right. Rights never infringe on the rights of others. If a service is made into a right, then it's actually slavery. If marriage is made a right, that means it must be done for free under any circumstances. You have a right to marry (or would if the amendment I proposed were passed) just about anyone you choose (pursuit of happiness), but you don't have the right to "marriage". You can choose your mate (or would if the amendment I proposed were passed), but you can't force anyone to do the ceremony. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, No? Didn't the Supreme Court declare marriage is a fundamental right in Loving v. Virginia? yes, in the context of continuing our EXISTENCE ( male female bonding) the decision began.. 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....' certainly not applicable to homosexual bonding,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. then i don't understand what you are saying... did you read the post i was replying to? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. then i don't understand what you are saying... did you read the post i was replying to? He wasn't telling you that you can't believe something. He was giving his opinion (just as you've done previously) on what you believed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, No? Didn't the Supreme Court declare marriage is a fundamental right in Loving v. Virginia? yes, in the context of continuing our EXISTENCE ( male female bonding) the decision began.. 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....' certainly not applicable to homosexual bonding,,, Ah, so you believe it's only a right for those who are going to have children? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, I call BS on that. Marriage is a right, if you love someone and they love you back, you should have every right in the world to marry them. So don't even try the status thing, it doesn't work here. Further, the right to be adult thing makes no sense at all. You just are at a certain age. To compare that to marriage is laughable. SIGH really, so why do siblings not have the right when they 'love' each other why do teens not have the right when they 'love' each other the 'right' of marriage (if we insist on calling it that) is not based on whether someone feels 'love' for another it only has to do with whether one wants to share their life with each other,,, its a legal status that has nothing to do with legislating what people FEEL about each other,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marriage is not a 'right', it is a status , like 'adult' we dont have the 'right' to be adults, we are either defined as such by law or we arent,, No? Didn't the Supreme Court declare marriage is a fundamental right in Loving v. Virginia? yes, in the context of continuing our EXISTENCE ( male female bonding) the decision began.. 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....' certainly not applicable to homosexual bonding,,, Ah, so you believe it's only a right for those who are going to have children? I Believe that was the context of how the decision was written, for those who can CONTINUE OUR EXISTENCE,,, but I know where this is going, I dont believe the government can infringe upon reproductive rights, as is obvious with abortion being legal, so it would be irrelevant if a specific man and woman were capable of child bearing, its only relevant that they be man and woman for ANY child bearing to be possible,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. then i don't understand what you are saying... did you read the post i was replying to? He wasn't telling you that you can't believe something. He was giving his opinion (just as you've done previously) on what you believed. see, your wrong again... he asked a question, and i answered it... Do you feel you can tell them that they can't marry cause you don't like it? Yes or no? ... when did i ever say gays could not marry because i dont like it? i have always said it is against the law, so they can't marry... i feel the law is fine the way it is, i don't think it needs to be changed... but if it is, so what? nothing i can do about it either way... i am not the one who made the laws, i just happen to agree with the laws
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. then i don't understand what you are saying... did you read the post i was replying to? He wasn't telling you that you can't believe something. He was giving his opinion (just as you've done previously) on what you believed. see, your wrong again... he asked a question, and i answered it... Do you feel you can tell them that they can't marry cause you don't like it? Yes or no? ... when did i ever say gays could not marry because i dont like it? i have always said it is against the law, so they can't marry... i feel the law is fine the way it is, i don't think it needs to be changed... but if it is, so what? nothing i can do about it either way... i am not the one who made the laws, i just happen to agree with the laws
He asked a question based on everything you've said here. I wondered the same thing. I still don't see where he was telling you what you can or can't believe, though. He was questioning what you believed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can vote like everyone else...on the flip side, can you justify telling me what to believe or not to believe? you have the the right to tell me what i can believe? Didn't you just get through saying we all have opinions? From what I've seen, he's giving his opinion on what you believe. Just as you're doing the same. haha.. nice try try on twisting words around...lol No twisting words here. Just going by what you previously said. then i don't understand what you are saying... did you read the post i was replying to? He wasn't telling you that you can't believe something. He was giving his opinion (just as you've done previously) on what you believed. see, your wrong again... he asked a question, and i answered it... Do you feel you can tell them that they can't marry cause you don't like it? Yes or no? ... when did i ever say gays could not marry because i dont like it? i have always said it is against the law, so they can't marry... i feel the law is fine the way it is, i don't think it needs to be changed... but if it is, so what? nothing i can do about it either way... i am not the one who made the laws, i just happen to agree with the laws
He asked a question based on everything you've said here. I wondered the same thing. I still don't see where he was telling you what you can or can't believe, though. He was questioning what you believed. and why would my beliefs be in question? |
|
|
|
|
