Why Gay Marriage Matters

[Reason]

YouTube - Why Gay Marriage Matters - Kate Kendell (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSk0oBcwACg)

[fisharmor]

Why did you post this? Are you in agreement with her or do you want her arguments handily destroyed?

[tonesforjonesbones]

Gay marriage is a ploy to bring down churches. tones

[Reason]

Why did you post this? Are you in agreement with her or do you want her arguments handily destroyed?

Her arguments can't be "handily destroyed" because they are true...

The only reason the govt has anything to do with marriage is because the religious nutjobs wanted to prevent interracial marriage decades ago.

Now the same arguments are being used against another class of human beings.

The govt shouldn't have anything to do with marriage, however because they do they have a duty to provide it equally.

I would vote for a prop that would take marriage out of the hands of govt.

I would vote for a prop that gives everyone the right to be stupid enough to enter into a contract with the state.

[Reason]

Gay marriage is a ploy to bring down churches. tones

Maybe the churches shouldn't have brought govt into the marriage business?

[Krugerrand]

We have communities and states and whole regions where our relationships are not recognized and they do not matter and are demeaned. That is shaming to young people and it is shaming to our communities.
...
The dignitary harms are enormous. Those will only be solved by the same access to the same institution that everyone else is.

This video clip doesn't sound like the typical "mind your own business" rhetoric we used to hear from the political arm of the gay movement. I don't buy into somebody telling me what I must and must not recognize.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Churches didn't bring government into the marriage business...the government wanted control and another tax. TONES

[Reason]

YouTube - Prop 8 and Interracial Marriage Laws - Scotty McLennan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AyOSKiAXcE)

YouTube - Is America Ready for Gay Marriage? - William Zabel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnMvDU19E0s)

[tonesforjonesbones]

I never read that inter racial marriage laws had anything to do with the churches. I know about those and I know that is why the marriage license came about, but it's doubtful that churches had anything to do with it. What would have been the benefit? tones

[erowe1]

The govt shouldn't have anything to do with marriage, however because they do they have a duty to provide it equally.


That's a non sequitur. The involvement government has in marriage is not to "provide" it to people. People get married all the time in America entirely without any government involvement. This includes both straight couples and same sex couples. The label "same sex marriage ban" as it's commonly used now is a total misnomer. There is no ban on same sex marriage in any state. You can go anywhere you want in the country and find that, however a same sex couple defines this relationship that they wish to call marriage, they are permitted to live in precisely that relationship precisely as they have defined it, including having a wedding in a church that approves of it, without the slightest legal consequence.

What's happening is that the pushers of the gay agenda are trying to get government even more involved in marriage than it already is (and wrongly so, as you correctly point out), by having the state weigh in on what is a purely religious issue in saying on behalf of all of us that homosexuality is fine, and giving these couples a piece of paper attesting to that for them. This is wrong. You're right that the state should not be involved in marriage at all, but cooking up some new definition of marriage for the purpose of these licenses only makes it worse, not better.

[Stary Hickory]

I think government should be out of the marriage business.

[zach]

as long as people aren't viewed as equal humans because of various labels of sexuality, we'll never be able to help each other.

everything is just a label, and what doesn't hurt you, isn't your business.

and no one can say, "if that happens, the country and churches will fall!" because you don't know the future, and you might begin to realize that people who aren't straight can have the same amount of spirituality/faith in a Being or Concept as much as straight people can have. strip off the labels, and we're solely connected by being human beings. anything else is like a piece of clothing that doesn't justly express the reality of our connectedness.

[ItsTime]

Gay marriage is a ploy to bring down churches. tones

The pedophiles and bigots are doing a fine job without the government helping them out.

The left is using your own bigotry of gays to destroy the American family NOT the other way around. I didnt think filling your heart with hate is not a Christian value. but most religious people cant see that.

[Dunedain]

I notice that "Gay Ebony Dating" is advertising on this site. I think our founding fathers would throw up on whoever made that blunder.

What is Gay Ebony Dating anyway? There is a white guy on the front picture....so it's for white guys that have a fetish for being pounded in the rectum by black dudes...they prefer a chocolate penis penetrating their behind than a lilly white one and what is the reason? Perchance they believe black penis' are bigger and that is somehow a positive when you are engaging in butt-busting HIV transmitting anal sex?

and this is the type of thing that keeps the Ron Paul forums financially sound? :confused:

[Sandman33]

I notice that "Gay Ebony Dating" is advertising on this site. I think our founding fathers would throw up on whoever made that blunder.

What is Gay Ebony Dating anyway? There is a white guy on the front picture....so it's for white guys that have a fetish for being pounded in the rectum by black dudes...they prefer a chocolate penis penetrating their behind than a lilly white one and what is the reason? Perchance they believe black penis' are bigger and that is somehow a positive when you are engaging in butt-busting HIV transmitting anal sex?

and this is the type of thing that keeps the Ron Paul forums financially sound? :confused:

Funny how if adultfriendfinder was advertising here you'd find people complaining about it. But not that.

[Reason]

Let's keep the thread about marriage and not about the forum advertising lol

[fisharmor]

What's happening is that the pushers of the gay agenda are trying to get government even more involved in marriage than it already is (and wrongly so, as you correctly point out), by having the state weigh in on what is a purely religious issue in saying on behalf of all of us that homosexuality is fine, and giving these couples a piece of paper attesting to that for them. This is wrong. You're right that the state should not be involved in marriage at all, but cooking up some new definition of marriage for the purpose of these licenses only makes it worse, not better.
QFT


Her arguments can't be "handily destroyed" because they are true...

No, they absolutely can be handily destroyed.
This is not about equality. If it was about equality then the government would be at least colluding in persecution of gays, and they can't claim that this is what is happening.

Refusing to reward them for filing legal paperwork in the same manner that straight couples are rewarded is not the same as persecution.

If gays want the legal benefits conferred by marriage, they are totally free to get married in any state in the union - to someone of the opposite sex.

I'll actually up the ante by putting this out there: If this is about equality, then I really don't see any reason why I shouldn't be able to "marry" my brother, or my mother, or my best friend. What possible reason could there be for not allowing non-sexual relationships access to the "short form" for inheritance, hospital visitation, power of attorney, and tax breaks?

But it's not about equality - it's about forcing me to acknowledge homosexual relationships as valid.

It ain't gonna happen. You're not going to get the state to force me to be ok with it, you're not going to get the state to keep me from teaching that to my kids, and you're not going to take my kids off to reeducation camps without a hot lead injection along with them.

I actually do believe that we need to get the state out of the marriage business. I actually do believe that we need to eliminate most of the benefits and abstract the other ones into a short-form accessible to anyone. But by telling me we have to use the state to force me to accept their lifestyle, you make enemies.

[Spot the Fed]

gay marriage is not important.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

QFT
If gays want the legal benefits conferred by marriage, they are totally free to get married in any state in the union - to someone of the opposite sex.


What do legal benefits have to do with a religious definition?

The natural law of human behavior is that people are free to pick their partners. What justification does government have for defining unions between certain groups of people and conferring legal benefits?

[fisharmor]

What do legal benefits have to do with a religious definition?

The natural law of human behavior is that people are free to pick their partners. What justification does government have for defining unions between certain groups of people and conferring legal benefits?

Yeah, I don't think you read the entirety of what I wrote.
The answers are nothing, and none.

Two wrongs do not make a right. The interracial marriage laws that everyone moans about are simply another wrong that could not be and were not made right with more legislation - in that case legislation was repealed. That is what needs to happen to make this situation right.

Legislating gay marriage, no matter how, is not making anything right: it's just making the legal situation with marriage more wrong. And as I pointed out, it's only a matter of time before the legal definition of marriage is further extended into other relationships, like mothers and sons, that have nothing to do with anyone's current definition of marriage.

Get gay marriage pushed through, and it's only a matter of time before I get to set up my business of polygamously "marrying" illegal immigrants for profit.

[jmdrake]

Her arguments can't be "handily destroyed" because they are true...

The only reason the govt has anything to do with marriage is because the religious nutjobs wanted to prevent interracial marriage decades ago.

Now the same arguments are being used against another class of human beings.

The govt shouldn't have anything to do with marriage, however because they do they have a duty to provide it equally.

I would vote for a prop that would take marriage out of the hands of govt.

I would vote for a prop that gives everyone the right to be stupid enough to enter into a contract with the state.

Total nonsense. You need to go and read Bob Jones University vs U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Jones_University_v._United_States

If you take that case, substitute "gay rights" for "segregation" and you'll come to the clear conclusion that if current trends continue this debate can end up with religious institutions being forced to chose between their beliefs on homosexuality and their tax exempt status.

Now maybe you don't think that should matter because their shouldn't be a tax. Fine. But that's not the world we currently live in.

Maybe you don't think the government should have anything to say about marriage at all. Fine. But that's not the world we currently live in.

Change the world we currently live in and then come back and talk about gay marriage.

Something else that ticks me off. Your position is in direct opposition to Ron Paul! On the one hand I don't care. You can think for yourself. On the other hand we've had a full two years of people bashing "9/11 truthers" for pushing something Ron Paul does not support because it is "controversial" and could "hurt the movement". Well I NEVER ran into anyone who said they wouldn't vote for Ron Paul because they thought he supported 9/11 truth. I did run into people who said they wouldn't vote for Ron Paul for other misconceptions like they thought he supported gay marriage. Ron Paul gave a speech in support of the defense of marriage act and said that he would support a similar law at the state level if he was in the Texas legislature and some state judge was trying to write gay marriage into the law.

See: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html

And the problem isn't just "people stupid enough to enter into a contract with the state". The problem is that marriage is a contract that is entered into with the public at large.

Regards,

John M. Drake

[armstrong]

gay marriage is unimportant !!!!!!Government wants its tax, government should not be in marriage business or the state for that matter....since the world we live in looks at marriage for the most part as a union between a man and woman lets leave it alone ....gays and lesbians should have the same rights as married couples in their union but should call it a different name. most religions feel it is blasphemy so why try to ruffle feathers !!!!! just my thoughts on this