The111 1 #76 September 24, 2003 QuoteBut then you use that argument to support your position that 2 people who love each other shouldn't have the same rights/benefits as 2 other people who love each other. (logical and objective) If it's your opinion (or your religion's) position that marriage is for procreation, has no inherent benefit to society, is a sin, etc. - that's NOT logical or objective. Actually, I stated that my opinion is that our government has way too much involvement in our lives and no couples should receive benefits simply for being a couple. I did, however, throw out a possible idea as to why the social/legal/societal "benefits" which are already offered to heterosexual couples are not offered to homosexual couples. As far as rights and benefits... All citizens of our country [should] have the same rights. That's an opinion. A heterosexual couple has one benefit that a homosexual couple doesn't. They can make a baby. That's a fact. Unless you want to argue whether or not making babies is a benefit or detriment. I'm not quite sure where you're going with the last part of your post. I never advocated less benefits for homosexuals (although by nature they are already short-changed). I actually advocate less "benefits" for everyone (social security, etc). That would mean less taxation. Which would mean more jumping. I think we can all agree that more jumping is a good thing. I hope so. www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #77 September 24, 2003 QuoteAnd if he'd been a woman, I would've still fallen in love with the person he is Merrick ISN'T a woman? Whoa....... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #78 September 24, 2003 QuoteMerrick ISN'T a woman? Whoa....... Not since the operation..... We love ya Merrick! If you posted more, maybe we wouldnt insult you as much! lolRemster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mcrocker 0 #79 September 24, 2003 All though I do support same sex marriages I do not beleive that the lack of said marriages = prpmiscuous gays. In fact, I could care less wether someone is promiscuous or not. Does it really matter if they are gay or straight? I have known straight married people that are promisuous and I know gay unmarried people that are in committed relationships. This poll makes no sense Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,433 #80 September 24, 2003 I think that's one of those polls that define the answers the way you want them. I don't want anyone, gay or straight, to be promiscuous or not. I want _them_ to decide that. I also think there should be a way to form a civil union (civil pair, legal pair, whatever you want to call it) no matter what the sex of the two people is. Society does not have a role in defining what someone's relationship with another should be. That's completely up to the individuals involved. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,433 #81 September 24, 2003 >A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a > family across generations without depending on heterosexual > couples to create babies for them. That will not always be true. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #82 September 24, 2003 Quote>A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a > family across generations without depending on heterosexual > couples to create babies for them. That will not always be true. Are we talking about advances in technology? I was thinking about that too... However it is my belief/opinion that we will be cheating nature when we get to this point. Call it religious (though I'm not) or whatever you want, I'm not even sure I can explain why, but that's the way I feel. Maybe because I think it's neat for sex to be an act of love which creates the new life and ties him to the lovers, rather than have him be a test tube baby. But then again, maybe I'm just a homophobe, because on the opposite end of the spectrum, I eagerly anticipate the day when I can replace any body part I want and be immortal. Hehe, I really think this will happen one day but probably not in my lifetime. And I'm sure a lot of people would call my eagerness to embrace this "cheating nature", and it probably is, but I can't help it, it sounds neat. Though I spend a lot of time thinking about the ramifications it would have on life. Would anything be as precious if we didn't age and always had second chances? Would even SKYDIVING be cool? The quote in my sig wouldn't even apply if we could always bionically renew ourselves... www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #83 September 24, 2003 QuoteQuote>A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a > family across generations without depending on heterosexual > couples to create babies for them. That will not always be true. Are we talking about advances in technology? I was thinking about that too... Like in "Jr." with Arny? I hated that movie! lol My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #84 September 24, 2003 QuoteThis poll makes no sense Of course you're right. It wasn't exactly intended to "make sense" so much as make a point: Society benefits from stable families. Despite some people's opinion that only fertile, childbearing families are important, society benefits from stable childless families as well. And it also benefits from stable adopting families. Overall, stable family groups of all shapes are better for society than rapidly shifting ones. Stable families are good and marriage stabilizes families. Counter-examples abound, but overall it is true. Therefore it is in society's best interest that gay couples should marry. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflybella 0 #85 September 24, 2003 Quoteour government has way too much involvement in our lives I wholeheartedly agree here. As far as marriage is concerned, it's in the government's best interest if we get married and have children. We're perceived as more stable, more apt to settle down - buy a house - go to work everyday and drive the economy. As far as the Govt interest, really, it's about money. I'm not sure what the religious aspect of it is - I don't follow a particular religion. Marriage has become a symbol and public acknowledgment of love and lifelong commitment - as well as a civil right/legal issue - in and out of the religious parameters. There is no requirement of religious affinity or affiliation to get married. Nor is there any scientific/biological test to determine whether a hetero couple is suitable for marriage. Why would there be one for gays? Fear and ignorance. We're afraid that if gays can marry or if it is even publicly accepted then more people will 'turn' gay. That it will 'tarnish' the institution of marriage (as if adultery and divorce haven't already done that!) That homosexuality is a sin or a biological/societal perversion. Among many other examples of fear and ignorance. If marriage were truly about love and commitment in the eyes of the law - it would be legal. QuoteA heterosexual couple has one benefit that a homosexual couple doesn't. They can make a baby. A homosexual couple is not going to produce any unplanned births. I'd say it's a complementary fit. QuoteAll citizens of our country [should] have the same rights. That's an opinion. Are we actually saying that our constitution, our teachings from pre-school and beyond, our politicians, our religious leaders, etc. are really wrong!? And that all citizens of our tolerant, free country don't have equal rights? Scandalous. As a general thought: for all the things hateful in our country and world, it's such a shame that we actually fear love because of where it originates. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,433 #86 September 24, 2003 >However it is my belief/opinion that we will be cheating nature when > we get to this point. Call it religious (though I'm not) or whatever > you want, I'm not even sure I can explain why, but that's the way I > feel. Maybe because I think it's neat for sex to be an act of love > which creates the new life and ties him to the lovers, rather than > have him be a test tube baby. There are a _lot_ of test tube babies around nowadays, including Brooke, daughter of Paul and Liza, two instructors at my old DZ. They are generally loved as much as (if not more than) any other child. I would suspect that often a couple that spends tens of thousands on having a child would tend to cherish that child more than a couple who has an unwanted pregnancy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #87 September 24, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteA couple in a "gay marriage" could never have such a lifestyle. Ever heard of adoption? I will elaborate. A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a family across generations without depending on heterosexual couples to create babies for them. Well, then are you saying that since I am heterosexual and choose not to have children I shouldn't be able to get married. What about all the heterosexuals that CANNOT have children do to medical reason or other physical disabilty. Aren't we taught to just love one another, not just the straight people. JudyBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #88 September 24, 2003 QuoteQuoteI will elaborate. A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a family across generations without depending on heterosexual couples to create babies for them. Well, then are you saying that since I am heterosexual and choose not to have children I shouldn't be able to get married. What about all the heterosexuals that CANNOT have children do to medical reason or other physical disabilty. Aren't we taught to just love on another, not just the straight people. Judy I did not say that anyone should/shouldn't be able to get married. I simply pointed out the fundamental difference between gay and straight couples. There are some straight couples who cannot procreate on their own, but there are no gay ones who can. I haven't expressed love or hate toward anyone in this thread.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #89 September 24, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteI will elaborate. A couple in a "gay marriage" could never create and maintain a family across generations without depending on heterosexual couples to create babies for them. Well, then are you saying that since I am heterosexual and choose not to have children I shouldn't be able to get married. What about all the heterosexuals that CANNOT have children do to medical reason or other physical disabilty. Aren't we taught to just love on another, not just the straight people. Judy I did not say that anyone should/shouldn't be able to get married. I simply pointed out the fundamental difference between gay and straight couples. There are some straight couples who cannot procreate on their own, but there are no gay ones who can. I haven't expressed love or hate toward anyone in this thread. The love comment was not directed at you, just a general statement. IMO, by stating gay people should not marry, is, IMO, stating that gay people should not love anyone other than someone of the opposite sex. And that's just wrong. What I got out of your "procreation" statement is, if you can't breed you can't get married. My husband and I got married because our accountant told us we would be better off. Prior to us getting married he was covered under my insurance as a domestic partner, and we were quite happy with that.Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #90 September 24, 2003 Since we are on the subject. If you know any lesbian couples that would like to get pregnant.....I can help them with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mcrocker 0 #91 September 24, 2003 QuoteQuoteThis poll makes no sense Of course you're right. It wasn't exactly intended to "make sense" so much as make a point: Society benefits from stable families. Despite some people's opinion that only fertile, childbearing families are important, society benefits from stable childless families as well. And it also benefits from stable adopting families. Overall, stable family groups of all shapes are better for society than rapidly shifting ones. Right... But... marriage != monogomy != stable family != safe society promisuous != unstable family != unsafe society QuoteTherefore it is in society's best interest that gay couples should marry. I agree that same sex marriages are a good thing but your logic is broken and your validation of gay marriage is broken because of it. It is like saying 'guns kill people, so, remove guns and we will have no more murders' or 'promiscuous behavior kills society, so, let everyone marry and we will have a great society' Same sex marriages should be legal because the Government shouldn't have a right to tell people who they can spend their life with. The Government should be concerned with people, wether they are male, female, white, black, purple it doesn't matter and as such should not govern marriages with an arbitrary ruling of male + female = marriage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #92 September 24, 2003 I for one am strongly opposed to gay marriage. I am also strongly opposed to polygamist marriages and human to animal marriages as well. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyminxx 0 #93 September 24, 2003 ***What a bunch of bull. Don't believe a word of it. Arlo dreams of the day she can have a single-wide w/ a dirt porch and 11 little tykes running/crawling around while she chain smokes and knits beer can hats in her housedress. *** You mean she doesnt already? Darn it girl, I though thats why you were moving house? to make room for more babies?? Sorry about the Big change of subj here.....but please find below a subliminal message...... *come to chester......come to chester for Halooweeeeeen* hugs at ya chica... You are led through your lifetime by the inner learning creature, the playful spiritual being that is your real self.-Richard Bach Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #94 September 24, 2003 Quote am also strongly opposed to polygamist marriages and human to animal marriages as well. Good for you. I'm opposed to Aliens abductions myslef. Especially the probing kind. But like your 2 exemples above, its got nothing to do with gay marriages.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #95 September 24, 2003 What are you talking about???? There was a poll and an ensueing debate. I was simly stating my views... Is that so wrong???? Who said the others had anything had to do with gay marriage? Oh wait.. i guess you did. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cornholio 0 #96 September 24, 2003 IBTL Oh Look - SHINY THINGS!!! Butthead: Whoa! Burritos for breakfast! Beavis: Yeah! Yeah! Cool! bellyflier on the dz.com hybrid record jump Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #97 September 24, 2003 QuoteWho said the others had anything had to do with gay marriage? Oh wait.. i guess you did. Really.... you must be imagining things...... I said it has nothing to do with it. Strange reaction.....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,433 #98 September 24, 2003 > I was simly stating my views... Is that so wrong???? Who said the >others had anything had to do with gay marriage? No one; you posted three things you were against as if they had some connection, in a thread about gay marriage. But if they had nothing to do with anything anyone is talking about, that's fine - just confusing to people reading your posts. Personally, I am against bigots, coal power plants and really sweet teryaki sauce. I hate really sweet teryaki sauce. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #99 September 24, 2003 Quoteand human to animal marriages as well. Why is there so much bigotry in the world. Wouldn't it be better if I just settled down with one special sheep. Instead of being promiscuous with the whole flock. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #100 September 24, 2003 Quotewhole flock see... definalty more K2 then Denali....Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
