rushmc 18 #226 November 13, 2008 QuoteMarc, the problem lies not in your belief that they should have the same rights. fine. The problem is a PRACTICAL one. That's it. I'm boiling it down, here. yes, there's the higher issues of discrimination, etc, but so many conservatives hold practicality above many other concerns that i'll lay it out like that. there are several (i've heard the number 20 bandied about, but i haven't had time to research them all myself) laws on the california books that contain the term "marriage" or "married" when referring to legal rights for couples. They do NOT say "civil union", "legal union", "domestic partner" or anything else. they say "married". What is GOING to happen (all hail the almighty dollar) is that some insurance firm is going to attempt to deny a gay partner coverage based on the fact that they aren't "married" in the eyes of the laws that cover non-discrimination for those types of companies and policies. And you know what? under current CA law, and proposition 8, they would be allowed to do that. How many lawsuits are won and lost on the basis of semantics alone? Now tell me, for PRACTICAL reasons, which is less costly, time consuming, and downright easier: Changing, repealing, or rewriting 20 laws, or changing one? All religion and "morality" aside, in a very practical sense, until every single law that uses the term "marriage" is rewritten or repealed, taking away the right of gays to "marry" IS taking away their legal rights to many of the privileges that being "married" affords people. I'd fall over dead the day i see the Mormon church spending $75million to get all those laws changed. Never happen. Because at the core of their support and the support of many of the people who funded prop 8 is the fact that they think gay people are wrong, bad, or unnatural and don't deserve the rights and happiness that "normal" people (meaning, people just ike them) have. I understand where you are coming from. We will however continue to disagree on this one. I think, in the end, the word, the instutuion and the application thereof, is important"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #227 November 13, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe term “marriage” is found throughout Judeo-Christian writings going back for many years. Primarily it is found in the Bible. The term, as it is seen in the Bible is defined as a holy union between one man and one woman. It is a contract put in place under “God”. For some reason the state has recognized this term for that and has given it legal standing. Were people getting "married" before the Jewish or Christian Bible? Hindus marry. Buddhists marry. Taoists marry. Zoroastrians marry... In each case the word is used to describe heterosexual partnerships. What's the Wiccan view on same-sex marriage? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #228 November 13, 2008 QuoteI think, in the end, the word, the instutuion and the application thereof, is important And that is what it boils down to. The thing is, gays are entitled to feel the same way that you do, that the word and institution are important. In my opinion, they shouldn't be able to tell you whether you can, must, or may not marry and vice versa. I see no good reason why the majority should be allowed to deprive the minority of a right they themselves enjoy. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #229 November 13, 2008 how can you say you disagree, yet say you think they should have equal rights? If they are to have equal rights under the law, then the PRACTICAL application of that is to allow them to "marry". look, be idealisticv about "preserving marriage" all you want, but the cold harsh reality is some comapny or lawyer WILL exploit the change in language in the laws to prohibit gays who are "civil unioned" from sharing the same rights as married couples. It will happen. Now that we know it will happen, it's time to move on to practicalities. So disagree all you want, but it's like disagreeing with gravity. Now it's time to deal with it. You want them to have the same rights? then tell us HOW to accomplish that, with many laws on the books only applying to "married" couples. HOW.Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Conundrum 1 #230 November 13, 2008 QuoteWhy are gay couples not considered equal in religion? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #231 November 13, 2008 Quote The term “marriage” is found throughout Judeo-Christian writings going back for many years. Primarily it is found in the Bible. The term, as it is seen in the Bible is defined as a holy union between one man and one woman. It is a contract put in place under “God”. For some reason the state has recognized this term for that and has given it legal standing. Marriage has nothing to do with Christian religion. It existed long before, and in nearly every society in history. For many practical health reasons, as well as emotional tendencies, humans pair up. And in the world before medicine, those who slept around got nasty consequences, so societal norms evolved to discourage it. Quote Another example raised was that of two atheists being married. Well, you may want to say whether or not the term marriage should apply by, they fall under the definition and I feel it is they that are lying to themselves or their God. (By the way, Atheism is a religion too. It is the atheists that attack the Judeo-Christian church’s more regularly than the other way around). good luck supporting this claim. there are far more examples of the Church having atheists (or other-eists) killed, then vice versa, and most of those cases are of the Communist governments not wanting to share power with the Church. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #232 November 13, 2008 Quote Why are gay couples not considered equal in religion? Because god hates fags shrimp. http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #233 November 13, 2008 QuoteQuoteI think, in the end, the word, the instutuion and the application thereof, is important And that is what it boils down to. The thing is, gays are entitled to feel the same way that you do, that the word and institution are important. In my opinion, they shouldn't be able to tell you whether you can, must, or may not marry and vice versa. I see no good reason why the majority should be allowed to deprive the minority of a right they themselves enjoy. Blues, Dave 'Of course you are right except for the fact that if they can enjoy the same what would they be deprived of?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #234 November 13, 2008 Quotehow can you say you disagree, yet say you think they should have equal rights? If they are to have equal rights under the law, then the PRACTICAL application of that is to allow them to "marry". look, be idealisticv about "preserving marriage" all you want, but the cold harsh reality is some comapny or lawyer WILL exploit the change in language in the laws to prohibit gays who are "civil unioned" from sharing the same rights as married couples. It will happen. Now that we know it will happen, it's time to move on to practicalities. So disagree all you want, but it's like disagreeing with gravity. Now it's time to deal with it. You want them to have the same rights? then tell us HOW to accomplish that, with many laws on the books only applying to "married" couples. HOW. Sorry, but cold harsh reality works both ways doent it. I guess you will have to deal with that huh?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Conundrum 1 #235 November 13, 2008 Quote 'Of course you are right except for the fact that if they can enjoy the same what would they be deprived of? Being able to say they're "married". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #236 November 13, 2008 >Of course you are right except for the fact that if they can enjoy the >same what would they be deprived of? Are you claiming that since they have a different option open to them (civil union) they have the same rights you do? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #237 November 13, 2008 Quote>Of course you are right except for the fact that if they can enjoy the >same what would they be deprived of? Are you claiming that since they have a different option open to them (civil union) they have the same rights you do? I dont know billvon, what the hell am I claiming????????? If I try and answer yet another of your questions you will just screw it around to make some other claim. Go do it to somebody else. Oh, and so I dont get the "oh, you cant answer bull shit" That currently do not is what I think. I think that is something that should change but, not by allowing "marriages" for gays."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #238 November 13, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think, in the end, the word, the instutuion and the application thereof, is important And that is what it boils down to. The thing is, gays are entitled to feel the same way that you do, that the word and institution are important. In my opinion, they shouldn't be able to tell you whether you can, must, or may not marry and vice versa. I see no good reason why the majority should be allowed to deprive the minority of a right they themselves enjoy. Blues, Dave 'Of course you are right except for the fact that if they can enjoy the same what would they be deprived of? Marriage...you know, that institution you and they both think is important. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #239 November 13, 2008 >I dont know billvon, what the hell am I claiming? I am asking you. >If I try and answer yet another of your questions you will just screw it >around to make some other claim. I don't think you can answer them, because you won't like the answer you will give. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #240 November 13, 2008 Quote >I dont know billvon, what the hell am I claiming? I am asking you. >If I try and answer yet another of your questions you will just screw it >around to make some other claim. I don't think you can answer them, because you won't like the answer you will give. Nice clip and cut. Want to post the rest of my reply? doubt itBut since I did answer it your reply is another lie isnt it"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #241 November 13, 2008 QuoteWhy are gay couples not considered equal in religion? Silly question to ask an atheist.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Conundrum 1 #242 November 13, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhy are gay couples not considered equal in religion? Silly question to ask an atheist. I'm asking anyone who votes YES on prop 8 because of religious reasons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #243 November 13, 2008 Quotehow can you say you disagree, yet say you think they should have equal rights? If they are to have equal rights under the law, then the PRACTICAL application of that is to allow them to "marry". look, be idealisticv about "preserving marriage" all you want, but the cold harsh reality is some comapny or lawyer WILL exploit the change in language in the laws to prohibit gays who are "civil unioned" from sharing the same rights as married couples. It will happen. Now that we know it will happen, it's time to move on to practicalities. So disagree all you want, but it's like disagreeing with gravity. Now it's time to deal with it. You want them to have the same rights? then tell us HOW to accomplish that, with many laws on the books only applying to "married" couples. HOW. No need to change dozens of laws. Just a constitutional amendment that states that in California all rights, privileges and obligations assigned to married couples will also apply to couples in a legal civil union.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #244 November 14, 2008 Quote Quote how can you say you disagree, yet say you think they should have equal rights? If they are to have equal rights under the law, then the PRACTICAL application of that is to allow them to "marry". look, be idealisticv about "preserving marriage" all you want, but the cold harsh reality is some comapny or lawyer WILL exploit the change in language in the laws to prohibit gays who are "civil unioned" from sharing the same rights as married couples. It will happen. Now that we know it will happen, it's time to move on to practicalities. So disagree all you want, but it's like disagreeing with gravity. Now it's time to deal with it. You want them to have the same rights? then tell us HOW to accomplish that, with many laws on the books only applying to "married" couples. HOW. Sorry, but cold harsh reality works both ways doent it. I guess you will have to deal with that huh? That's not really an answer at all. I asked how to do it. Prof. Kallend offered one way. You could have made a helpful suggestion, proposed solutions, but instead you respond with yet another glib one-liner that has nothing to do with the point. You are a slippery fish, aren't ya? That's not a PA, that's a comment on how you always dodge questions. Are you running for office somewhere? Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #245 November 14, 2008 Quote Quote Quote how can you say you disagree, yet say you think they should have equal rights? If they are to have equal rights under the law, then the PRACTICAL application of that is to allow them to "marry". look, be idealisticv about "preserving marriage" all you want, but the cold harsh reality is some comapny or lawyer WILL exploit the change in language in the laws to prohibit gays who are "civil unioned" from sharing the same rights as married couples. It will happen. Now that we know it will happen, it's time to move on to practicalities. So disagree all you want, but it's like disagreeing with gravity. Now it's time to deal with it. You want them to have the same rights? then tell us HOW to accomplish that, with many laws on the books only applying to "married" couples. HOW. Sorry, but cold harsh reality works both ways doent it. I guess you will have to deal with that huh? That's not really an answer at all. I asked how to do it. Prof. Kallend offered one way. You could have made a helpful suggestion, proposed solutions, but instead you respond with yet another glib one-liner that has nothing to do with the point. You are a slippery fish, aren't ya? That's not a PA, that's a comment on how you always dodge questions. Are you running for office somewhere? I read kallends reply too. I decided not to repsond to him because I always suspect his motives. I have not meant to be a slippery fish however. I feel I have answered your question as best I know how. But the devil is always in the detail as I am sure you well know. The outcome will be what it will be. Some will be happy with it, some will not but, in the end I hope those same sex partners get the legal standing I feel they should have. I just hope it is not a marriage, but that is just me"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LOSTandCRAZY 0 #246 November 14, 2008 Grown adults? Marry who you want when you want. The non taxpayers? STFU. We've heard enough of you. As soon as you pay taxes, as do the rest of us, you may THEN begin to voice your opinions as Americans. WE support this country. Ministers, Preachers, scabs, welfare recipients, assholes, and anyone ELSE that doesn't pay taxes?? (Including Wesley "punk-ass" Snipes, and the guy that funded all of the "Disney" kids, Lou Pearlman) THAT MEANS YOU! The rest of you? Continue. You've earned the right to voice your opinion, unless it's influenced by a church. Churchies? Save it for church. They don't pay taxes, there, so they are as worthless as your VOTE."Get these balls!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #247 November 14, 2008 oh. my. goodness. perfect example right there. no, you never DID say how you would go about fixing the issue i brought up. because it IS an issue. I think the professor's suggestion is actually a valid one. now where's yours? instead all I see is hedging.Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Conundrum 1 #248 November 14, 2008 Can you please answer this question? Why are gay couples not considered equal (or "ok) in religion? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #249 November 14, 2008 Quoteoh. my. goodness. perfect example right there. no, you never DID say how you would go about fixing the issue i brought up. because it IS an issue. I think the professor's suggestion is actually a valid one. now where's yours? instead all I see is hedging. The law should be that same sex partners have the same legal standing as a married man and woman. Are you looking for more than that or what? I dont know the laws by state and I am sure some would be the same and some would take different aproaches. If you know the specifics of a state law that needs to be addressed please post it and we can discuss. Otherwise, being just subjective is a waste of both our time"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #250 November 14, 2008 QuoteCan you please answer this question? Why are gay couples not considered equal (or "ok) in religion? Gay couples are not "recognizes" as couples in the religions I know of. As to what equality is that you refer to I dont know. So, I do not feel the question you asked I can answer directly but I hope this helps you understand my position"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
