I think I love this - a new approach to the question of gay marriage

New Posts

D

Details

Former Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Messages
4,530
Reaction score
19
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003323496_gays26.html

See - this is I think what may be what most can agree on, and what the core issue is. A gay couple in a committed relationship should have the same legal rights as a heterosexual one - the unquestioned right to be there in the hospital at their partner's bedside (when no one but family is allowed); the ability to share health insurance, retirement benefits; some protection in a breakup so they both recieve a fair share of assets mutually earned; the ability, if they adopt a child, for both of them to be legal parents - etc.

What it's called, how we make sure it's not some second class version of marriage that extremists have fun watering down - those are all questions of how - but this Jersy court just answered the 'what' rather than the 'how'. It didn't say gay marriage must be legal, it just said that gays do deserve the same rights as heterosexual marriages.
 
You know, after many court challenges, a "liberal" government passed legislation "giving all the rights to same sex couples, as hetro couples.

Do do otherwise, would voiolate our "Charter of Rights" which is the law of the land, in a clause that everyone is equal before the law regardless of their sex and they are "not to be treated differently" due to their sexual orientation.

Well guess what......

The "liberal" government was "unelected" out of office, the "current government is "Bush lite" who does not mind getting into bed with him.

Well, with all of the "die hard" Conseratives, religious, people, think of all of the "gay basher" in the GWB Government they will have a "free vote"(a vote in which they can vote according not to the party, but their own "beliefs".

The reason....they don't want same sex people to have the same rights are hetrosexual couple. As far as they are concerned, Leave it to Beaver should be the way "everyone in Canada lives".

Even though the "top court" of our Country has ruled that any "leglisation" to takes away "rights" of same sex couple's will and cannot be upheld.

Bu the "Bush lite" P< we have, intends to "evoke" a clause that only the PM can to "overturn" the courts decision.

The religious zealots will be happy, the "Bush Lites" will be happy and it will tear apart and serve as "a deciding point" in Us Vs. Them mentality of the "Bush lite" Government.
 
Now, what shall we call it? Hmmm... (cue Jeopardy music)

OH! Hey! I know!

How about marriage?
 
I'd tend to agree - but I'd be willing to be, oh, let's say, "committed" by the gov't, and only married by the church (religious only meaning) if it'd help.
 
Details said:
I'd tend to agree - but I'd be willing to be, oh, let's say, "committed" by the gov't, and only married by the church (religious only meaning) if it'd help.
Click to expand...
I've been married twice- both times at the courthouse. I wasn't "committed" (though I should have been, but that's a whole 'nother story), I was married.

I had the respect that the word "married" bestowed, had the fact that I was married recognized in any other state or country I visited, used it on my taxes to get a break...

I would never say that any church has to marry a gay couple- wouldn't support a law saying that. But getting married at the courthouse is still a marriage.

And two consenting adults ought to be able to be married. In my strongest opinion.
 
IrishMist said:
I've been married twice- both times at the courthouse. I wasn't "committed" (though I should have been, but that's a whole 'nother story), I was married.

I had the respect of the word married bestowed, had the fact that I was married recognized in any other state or country I visited, used it on my taxes to get a break...

I would never say that any church has to marry a gay couple- wouldn't support a law saying that. But getting married at the courthouse is still a marriage.

And two consenting adults ought to be able to be married. In my strongest opinion.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this, IrishMist. In some situations, compromise is a wise path. For me, this isn't one of those situations.

Tolerance (a RIDICULOUS word when it's bandied about when discussing basic human rights for all people) isn't acceptance. Of course two consenting adults should be able to marry.
 
Thanks, SCM. It's an issue that for the life of me, I just can not understand the opposing point of view.
 
IrishMist said:
Thanks, SCM. It's an issue that for the life of me, I just can not understand the opposing point of view.
Click to expand...
Me neither...my wicked suspicion is that we Americans are highly oversexed and it seems the most prurient among our ranks spend lots of time concerning themselves with what people might be doing in bed...I think there might be some jealousy that "they" are having more fun...LOL...of course, there's nothing new under the sun so we're all doing the same things in bed!;)

If we'd all just concentrate on our own bedrooms and let people be, everyone would be much happier.
 
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
If we'd all just concentrate on our own bedrooms and let people be, everyone would be much happier.[/QUOTE]
 
Somehow I think that our country has so many things to be concerned about such as health care, jobs, education, immigration (illegal), etc. etc. etc. that what someone else does in the way of finding love in this world (as long as they are consenting adults) should be way down the list. Just my 2 cents.
 
southcitymom said:
Me neither...my wicked suspicion is that we Americans are highly oversexed and it seems the most prurient among our ranks spend lots of time concerning themselves with what people might be doing in bed...I think there might be some jealousy that "they" are having more fun...LOL...of course, there's nothing new under the sun so we're all doing the same things in bed!;)

If we'd all just concentrate on our own bedrooms and let people be, everyone would be much happier.
Click to expand...

I agree with your entire post! Good job. :)

I think my thoughtful, caring, and loving gay brother would agree with it too! :)
 
southcitymom said:
Me neither...my wicked suspicion is that we Americans are highly oversexed and it seems the most prurient among our ranks spend lots of time concerning themselves with what people might be doing in bed...I think there might be some jealousy that "they" are having more fun...LOL...of course, there's nothing new under the sun so we're all doing the same things in bed!;)

If we'd all just concentrate on our own bedrooms and let people be, everyone would be much happier.
Click to expand...
Along with the bathrooms over the sink, shower, kitchen table, lawn chair, balcony, couch, rug, beach, car, garage, hotel rooms, ladies room, hehe ooops, I went too far.. hehe :blowkiss:
 
I appreciate the heart you all express.

Imagine what it's like to live this life. Inexpressible suffering.
 
PaperDoll said:
Along with the bathrooms over the sink, shower, kitchen table, lawn chair, balcony, couch, rug, beach, car, garage, hotel rooms, ladies room, hehe ooops, I went too far.. hehe :blowkiss:
Click to expand...

Your posts just crack me up!! You are so upfront and in your face--in a very good way, PD. :p I like reading everything you have to say--doesn't matter what the subject is.
 
I don't get it either - but - it's one of those issues people get nuts about. Myself - I've sold plenty of wedding rings to gay couples in my time, and I don't see any reason why the courthouse shouldn't finish the job - or any church that believes they should.
 
The thing I don't get about the people who claim to be against gay marriage because it's against the bible is that it's the same old tired story that was used to keep interacial marriages. It's just that instead of saying "God doesn't approve of mixing the races" it's "God doesn't approve of men marrying men and women marrying women."

It's no longer socially acceptable outside of a KKK meeting to say that White people should only marry white people so why is it ok to say that people can only marry the opposite gender?
 
PaperDoll said:
Along with the bathrooms over the sink, shower, kitchen table, lawn chair, balcony, couch, rug, beach, car, garage, hotel rooms, ladies room, hehe ooops, I went too far.. hehe :blowkiss:
Click to expand...

Jean said:
Your posts just crack me up!! You are so upfront and in your face--in a very good way, PD. :p I like reading everything you have to say--doesn't matter what the subject is.
Click to expand...
Hi Jean, I couldn't agree with you more. You rock, PD. :dance:
 
IrishMist said:
I've been married twice- both times at the courthouse. I wasn't "committed" (though I should have been, but that's a whole 'nother story), I was married.

I had the respect that the word "married" bestowed, had the fact that I was married recognized in any other state or country I visited, used it on my taxes to get a break...

I would never say that any church has to marry a gay couple- wouldn't support a law saying that. But getting married at the courthouse is still a marriage.

And two consenting adults ought to be able to be married. In my strongest opinion.
Click to expand...

LOL I like that! (The part I bolded)
 
I am all for anyone in love having the right to a legal marriage. I forgot to post that in my above post.

My brother has been with his partner for years!!! I can't even remember how many years and I wish they could legalize it. They love each other as much as my husband and I love each other--and that is a whole lot! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 191 more.
Total: 4,127 (members: 192, guests: 3,935)

Online statistics

Members online
192
Guests online
3,935
Total visitors
4,127
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,527
Messages
17,953,785
Members
228,521
Latest member
sanayarford
Back
Top