Gay Guys Make a Good Point About Gay Marriage [Pic

Submitted by: fancylad 7 years ago in

And it"s pointed directly at wacko right-wing fundie parents.
There are 197 comments:
Male 10,855
I don`t quite understand where this slogan comes from either.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Weren`t there gay marriages in an ancient Chinese province?
0
Reply
Male 601
"what do you want - the rights or the word? Right now, it is one or the other. I`ll have the rights. I think they`re more important than a word."

My personal belief is that if there is any discontinuity in equal rights whatsoever, than that is not okay. Even if it is just a word, barring someone from it is discrimination no matter how you look at it. If I were gay, I probably wouldn`t care about the word itself, but rather just knowing that I wasn`t being discriminated against regardless of how small or trivial that discrimination was.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Even if I am wrong about the romans, it certainly doesn`t completely negate my argument about the rest of human society previously mentioned.[/quote]

I was arguing about *marriage* and *ancient Rome*. Nothing else.

[quote]we should be educated enough to treat the LGBT community as equals who deserve all the same rights as everybody else, including marriage. [/quote]

I disagree with some of the assumptions implicit in that statement.

Claiming that anyone who disagrees with you for any reason must be uneducated is unreasonable.

`the LGBT community`....bleh. We`re not all similar enough for there to be a single community. It`s just defining people by one actually rather unimportant aspect of them, and that gets on my tits.

[quote]all the same rights as everybody else, including marriage.[/quote]

what do you want - the rights or the word? Right now, it is one or the other. I`ll have the rights. I think they`re more important than a word.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Ceasar was not mocked for his homosexuality.[/quote]

It`s worth mentioning here that the Romans didn`t even have a word for "homosexual", which shows how different their views were.

Caesar was mocked for his affair with the King of Bythnia. For some while, he was best known for that and for being spectacularly in debt (which he was also mocked for).

Homosexual anal sex was seen quite differently in Rome depending on whether you were giving or receiving. It wasn`t as clear-cut as you think it was.

[quote]BUT same sex marriage happened.[/quote]

Apparently only with two emperors, both of whom were way out of the norm and both of whom were assassinated.

Many Romans were actively bisexual, although they didn`t have a word for that either. It was traditionally considered unsuitably passive for a man past his youth to be penetrated, but Caesar only got seriously mocked for it because of his high profile public image and show of tradtionalism.

*Marriage* is an

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The affair with his mother and the whole horse thing was Caligula. Not Nero.[/quote]

You`re right about the horse, but both were rumoured to have had affairs with their mothers.

[quote]Despite his vilification by the Christians because of this, Nero was quite popular with the general populace of the Roman Empire.[/quote]

Not by that time, he wasn`t. Especially after the Golden House fiasco.

[quote]Whether they are role models or not, they are still examples of what and what was not legal within Rome.[/quote]

Two emperors, both reviled and murdered. They don`t serve as examples of what was legal or normal. Elagabalus married a Vestal virgin! That doesn`t mean it was legal, let alone normal.

[quote]Gay marriage was legal, plain and simple. Otherwise the Christian rulers later on wouldn`t have specifically outlawed it.[/quote]

They outlawed homosexual sex. Which was legal and normal.

0
Reply
Male 477
And for the record, i did not say gay marriage existed within rome since the founding of the empire. all i said was that it existed UNTIL it was outlawed. I do not know when it began. ANd yes the very early romans had strict moral standards, not laws, about sex unil the mid roman period when they relaxed quite a bit. BUT same sex marriage happened. Even if I am wrong about the romans, it certainly doesn`t completely negate my argument about the rest of human society previously mentioned. Even without the Early ROman morality applied, there is still enough of a rich and either neutral or positive history of homosexuality upon the planet that we should be educated enough to treat the LGBT community as equals who deserve all the same rights as everybody else, including marriage.
0
Reply
Male 477
Angilion. again. NO. The affair with his mother and the whole horse thing was Caligula. Not Nero. Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and Suetonios never recorded anything like that about Nero. They all did, however, record him ordering his mother`s murder and attempt to make it look like a suicide. Nero`s greatest scandal was the Fire of Rome for which he made the Christians a scapegoat. Despite his vilification by the Christians because of this, Nero was quite popular with the general populace of the Roman Empire.
Whether they are role models or not, they are still examples of what and what was not legal within Rome. Gay marriage was legal, plain and simple. Otherwise the Christian rulers later on wouldn`t have specifically outlawed it.
Ceasar was not mocked for his homosexuality. Even in his own time, homosexuality was legal and acceptable. He was mocked, however, for a very overbearing sexual appetite all around - "Every man`s wife, and ever woman`s husband."
0
Reply
Female 519
lol Jeessssii I concur :)

0
Reply
Male 12,365
I take it that you think Tacitus and Suetonius were lying about Nero, then, because their descriptions of him are as I described. Admittedly, the affair with his mother was only rumour. There`s much stronger evidence for him murdering her, though.

He`s not a role model I`d look up to.

Elagabalus lasted only 4 years before being murdered, during which time he managed to offend pretty much everyone in the empire. Not for being gay - Romans at the time didn`t much care about that. For sacrilege and excessively bizarre behaviour.

Also not a good role model.

I can`t find any references to homosexual *marriage* by Martial. Lots of homosexual sex, but not *marriage*.

I doubt your image of a society in which homosexual marriage was normal from the beginning of Rome. That would have been far too Greek for the Romans until the very late republic.

Consider, for example, how Julius Caesar was ridiculed for his alleged homosexual affair.

0
Reply
Male 477
Documentation of gay marriage in Rome as early as 27 BCE is recorded by Roman poet Martial. Prior to that, Romans had complicated views on sexuality but did regard homosexuality, or at least bisexuality, as natural. Pederasty was common in Rome, mostly in Greece and was considered a form of marriage. The age difference of participants mirrored regular marriage at the time.
Nero did not have an affair with his mother, nor did he "ennoble" a horse. That was Caligula, Nero`s uncle, and the latter is a debatable rumor, as are most of his "Bizarre acts". You`ve mixed up your emperors. While a bit power hungry and attention craving, there is no evidence that Nero was insane. He was quite popular in his rule and only fell out of favor with the Senate later on.
Roman historian Dio Cassius recorded Nero`s marriage to two men, as well as Elagabalus`s marriage to the athlete Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]There is documentation of same sex marriage within Rome as early as 27 BCE.[/quote]

Please provide a reference. Also, you said it happened right up until the Christian takeover, but Rome was founded in 753 BC *with a very Puritan morality*. That had relaxed hugely by the late Republican period, so I wouldn`t rule out gay marriage in the early Imperial period, but I haven`t seen any evidence of it.

[quote]Several emperors actually married men as well as women.[/quote]

The rules for emperors were different, if they had enough power. You cite only two. More on that below.

[quote]Nero married two different men in public ceremonies.[/quote]

Nero was insane. He had an affair with his mother. He ennobled his favouite horse. And those were among his least offensive and bizarre actions.

[quote]Emperor Elababalus married an athlete in a public ceremony. [/quote]

When? I couldn`t find any references to it.

0
Reply
Female 34
Is it really necessary for everyone to pick this apart?
Just laugh at it and move on.
0
Reply
Male 712
From a legal standpoint, the states don`t know what they`re doing.

Look it`s really simple math here. First, I`ve been through a divorce and it cost me through the nose. I`m paid up and good now. Took me a little bit but I`m good. Legally speaking, what makes gays and lesbians exempt from our legal system in that respect? If I have to pay out to the state and part with some of my stuff that I worked for, guess what...when they get a divorce...so do they.

0
Reply
Male 477
@ Angilion
Several emperors actually married men as well as women. There is documentation of same sex marriage within Rome as early as 27 BCE. Emperor Nero married two different men in public ceremonies. Emperor Elababalus married an athlete in a public ceremony.
First law within Rome to outlaw gay marriage was passed in 342 CE by Constantine`s heirs to the throne. 390, homosexual sex is outlawed and punished by public burning.
0
Reply
Female 4,197
He looks like a nice, handsome young man. No, I don`t think I would mind if he dated my daughter (after she was old enough... somewhere in her 80s I think)
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Same sex marriages were being performed in Rome right up to the time it was specifically outlawed by the increasingly christian controlled government.[/quote]

Can you provide any references to that?

Homosexual sex was normal in ancient Rome, but that`s not marriage. The further back you go in Rome, the more restrictive marriage laws were. I would be very surprised if formally recognised homosexual marriages ever existed in ancient Rome.

0
Reply
Male 477
And while we`re on religious lunacy, What about all those religions, all those Christian sects, all those churches who WELCOME same sex marriage? Who WANT to be able to bless such unions? By making it illegal, aren`t you encroaching on their religious freedom?
You know what will happen if gays can get married? GAYS WILL GET MARRIED. That`s about it. It will not effect anyone else in any way shape or form. You have a moral objection to homosexuality or gay marriage? Learn some history. Read something other than a goddamn bible. Develop a sense of Empathy. It`s astonishing how many people spout the same crap regarding marriage and actually have NO clue what the hell they are talking about.
Ok...rant over. Pardon the Out-rage.
0
Reply
Male 477
Modern marriage is, and has always been about property rights. Your religion, whoever deity it is performed under, does not give your union ANY kind of benefits. So you`re imaginary sky father saw you said "I do" and it was good. That`s about it. As a legal institution, it gives thousands of rights, responsibilities and benefits to that couple. We already KNOW gay marriage is not the downfall of civilization. It existed for thousands of years before Christianity. We`ve had it in Mass for 5 years now, and the divorce rate actually DROPPED to pre-WWII levels. Canada hasn`t been swallowed by the earth, nor has England, or Spain. This country, thanks to it`s hidden obsession with other peoples sexual activity, and it`s ridiculous obsession with religion, is falling behind. Marriage is not a religious institution. That thing you have at the church? It`s a wedding ceremony. That`s IT. It has no effect on your relationship ever again.
0
Reply
Male 477
deplore Divorce. Early christian leaders who went into Rome have been documented as blessing same sex unions among roman citizens who wished to convert. Same sex marriage became illegal under christian rule in Rome only in the late 3rd century. Shorly afterwords, ALL homosexual activity was banned and those convicted were burned alive for public amusement. The government continued to collect taxes from male prostitutes for another hundred or so years. With the spread of Christianity through the Roman world, leading to its eventual downfall, the middle ages had a very different idea of marriage than in years prior. Here marriage among the people was generally dictated by the local Feudal lord, coupling peasants to produce a work force. Or it was among the lords to combine and share property and ensure the power of the family for years to come. This notion of marriage as we have in modern times is very, VERY new.
0
Reply
Male 477
Other than pedastric relationships, ancient cultures did have gay marriage. Same age, same sex unions have been recorded throughout Greece, Rome, the Norse peoples, as well as ancient Chinese and Japanese. Same sex marriages were being performed in Rome right up to the time it was specifically outlawed by the increasingly christian controlled government. Prior to this, marriage in Judea (biblical times) was not about a religious institution. It was about property. A woman was property. You paid her father to marry her. You could have as many wives as you wanted, as long as you had them all at the same time. Polygamy was the norm, and the number of wives you had was a symbol of accomplishment and influence. You`re wives bore you daughters to be sold off for marriage, or sons who would carry on your legacy and your property rights.
Christ came (supposedly) and was not a fan of marriage. He said it was not for everyone and some men are born "eunichs." He did, however, deplor
0
Reply
Male 477
The species known as man has had an appreciation of homoeroticism since 12000BCE (twelve thousand, no extra zeros). Anthropologists suggest that ancient man treated homosexuality the same way that more modern 3rd world tribes did, often making them leaders of a tribe or shamans and priests. Prior to the establishment of Ancient Judea, homosexuality was commonplace and seen as natural, often deified and given high standing. Pedastry among the ancient cultures of greeks, and the asias were looked upon as a form of marriage. Other than the Hebrews, no one had a problem with the gays. The Hebrews were a small tribe of people who were constantly invaded, enslaved, or slaughtered. This lead them to develop morality and laws to set them apart from their neighbors and encourage procreation for strength in numbers. So the homophobia of the Jews, from which all homophobia in the world has stemmed, was developed out of xenophobia.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
God I love the smell of facepalm in the morning.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
vv Opie, I feel your pain. Please hold me while I weep for the species.
0
Reply
Female 15,763
"YES id rather you marry my daughter
better than for me to find out my son is gay and youre marrying him! that would suck a lot more..."

0
Reply
Male 18
"Gay guys are gross because anal sex is gross.
And that means girl in girl is still ok.

Unless they pull out a cup."

yeah girl in girl is totally ok, because we dont mid the fact that one girl will make a coat out of the other

0
Reply
Male 7
Anal sex is awesome RepostPolice.
0
Reply
Male 274
YES id rather you marry my daughter

better than for me to find out my son is gay and youre marrying him! that would suck a lot more...

0
Reply
Female 519
That is the best point ever. :D
0
Reply
Female 2,289
RepostPolice.

Your face is gross.

---------------------------

God forbid the word "Equal" ever actually happen.

0
Reply
Male 189
Gay guys are gross because anal sex is gross.

And that means girl in girl is still ok.

Unless they pull out a cup.

0
Reply
Male 1,196
what does "gay" mean?
0
Reply
Male 1,918
hmmm the alternative is? You marrying someones son? I`m not against gay`s but seriously think about it
0
Reply
Female 1,578
silly humans. just let everyone do what they want.
0
Reply
Male 601
I like when people use the "homosexuality isn`t natural" argument. They pretend like anal sex between two men is so absurd and sinful, yet many hetero couples engage in anal sex (and not always as foreplay, but as a contraception technique). There is nothing that homosexual couples do that many hetero couples don`t do on a frequent basis, yet nobody seems to care when a hetero couple has sex that is "unnatural".
0
Reply
Male 9
lol i like the flame wars too
0
Reply
Male 72
The way I see it, God has much bigger things to worry about than people`s sexual preferences.
0
Reply
Female 160
I have a few gay friends. They`re all awesome.
0
Reply
Male 138
I never understood the Religious aspect of the argument over their right to marry. How does the right to freedom of religion not crush that topic out of hand? If your church opposes homosexual marriages, then by all means, the church should retain the right to not marry them, but that shouldn`t prevent a legally binding marriage.
0
Reply
Female 9
i dont get wats the big deal if they wanna get married. if its "not what God intended" why would God make gays? cant say the devil did it. then God wouldnt be all powerful cuz theres so many gays.
enh im straight and i still dont care. ive never even met a gay mostly because my town is filled with weirdo white republicans. ha ive been cursed out for being spanish XD
0
Reply
Male 515
i love these flame wars
0
Reply
Male 1,190
@Air
"hey guy below me. agreed. if he can have the same legal rights as a straight guy i can own anything i want. wer talking tanks rpgs fullauto glocks, the works. i got the money i can buy it. and if the government does something i don`t like, or the people don`t like. it gets overthrown. like the wacko right wing fundamentalists intended (our founding fathers)"

I do not know how you make the leap from Civil Rights to gun ownership and then link it to the Founding Fathers (who by definition were Left-wing). You might want to actually READ the Constitution again, your so called gun rights are concomitant with a state militia, not meant to be an individual right at all.
That aside, if you want to have all that military equipment and have some place to play with it, not harm anyone or the environment I dont care.
I do not have the time to try to control other people`s lives.

0
Reply
Male 737
lol... I know that guy
0
Reply
Female 1,283
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
1563 Posts Saturday, December 5, 2009 9:16:04 AM
"Every morning, 2 pints in the left ear, add a splash of washing up liquid, headbang for a minute, water out the right ear.

What, doesn`t everyone?"
That made me laugh.

0
Reply
Male 156
"You people all know you`ve been brainwashed, right?"

Of course we have, how else would we have an opinion on anything? The only difference is who you`ve been brainwashed by...

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You people all know you`ve been brainwashed, right?[/quote]

Every morning, 2 pints in the left ear, add a splash of washing up liquid, headbang for a minute, water out the right ear.

What, doesn`t everyone?

0
Reply
Female 15,763
"You people all know you`ve been brainwashed, right?"

You could stand to be a bit more specific...

0
Reply
Male 975
yayforme these posts actually have a point to them..most of the weed posts are quoting the ridiculous things u should never say to anyone trying to give u weed
0
Reply
Male 1,265
Religious and non-religious alike, just so nobody tries being clever.
0
Reply
Male 1,265
You people all know you`ve been brainwashed, right?
0
Reply
Male 814
"You seem like a nice fella` hows about we go back to my place and watch Will & Grace while we drink wine?"

*punches you in the face*

0
Reply
Male 156
The smoking pot thread still has more posts....
And wow I hadn`t realized this site is most active at four in the morning XD
0
Reply
Male 964
" But I can tell ya that if a queer hits on me...it`s black eye for gay guy!!!"

You seem like a nice fella` hows about we go back to my place and watch Will & Grace while we drink wine?

0
Reply
Female 4,376
lol actually he is kinda cute. ALL THE SEXY ONES ARE GAY.
0
Reply
Male 324
Who gives a damn about gay marriage? They`re not hurting anything. But I can tell ya that if a queer hits on me...it`s black eye for gay guy!!!
0
Reply
Female 385
Shut up anumilo no one loves you
0
Reply
Male 1,204
that smile looks sorta like a pedosmile... maddox? eh anybody eh? get the reference?
it is lost amongst you poor poor men. D:
0
Reply
Male 11
In answer to his question, yes. He looks like a swell chap who has a good sense of fashion, is well groomed, and has an infectious smile. I approve.
0
Reply
Male 240
Stop f*cking discussing the future of our society. You`re thoughts are all for naught.
0
Reply
Female 4,028
Oh, also when the site refuses to let you change your avatar. For f-ck`s sake, errors!
0
Reply
Female 4,028
Then I apologize. But I am bound to be a bit cranky when it`s almost five in the morning, I haven`t slept and stuff has been going on. Not an excuse, I`m just saying that I`m in a Crankypants mood.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Sure, it was "condescending," but no more offensive than all those people equating homosexuality with incest, paedophilia and bestiality. [/quote]

True, but don`t you see yourself as being better than that?

"I`m no worse than them" isn`t a good course of action if you want the moral high ground.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Think about it in depth and its impact long term because it will change society forever.[/quote]

Not if it`s done as equality rather than gay rights. If the prevailing force is gay rights, it will cause prejudice and discrimination against heterosexuals and the more power gay rights has, the more prejudice and discrimination it will cause. That is inevitable with group rights, because it`s what group rights is for. Oh, there would be some gay rights advocates saying "That`s not what we meant!", but they wouldn`t be running the show.

If it`s done as equality instead, it won`t really change society. What would change, really change, if genuinely no distinction was made between homo- and heterosexuality?

0
Reply
Female 4,028
Civil partnerships, I`m sorry.
Sure, it was "condescending," but no more offensive than all those people equating homosexuality with incest, paedophilia and bestiality.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I say just do what the United Kingdom has done. Gave all marriage rights to same-sex couples, but called it a "civil union" to keep the conservatives from blubbering.[/quote]

It`s called civil partnership in the UK, not civil union. Just in case anyone wants to check the legal status of it. It is identical to marriage, but people should check things for themselves. The only difference is one custom - marriage vows are spoken, partnership vows are signed. Either is legally binding in both cases, so it`s solely a matter of custom reflecting the change in levels of literacy over history.

But I disagree about condescendingly dismissing the legitimate concerns as "conservatives blubbering".

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]In every state where the issue has came to a public vote, Gay marriage has gone down to defeat. If it`s not stopped here, Then polygamy and child marriage (Pedos marring their victims) will be next. [/quote]

I have a spanner to throw in your "slippery slope" argument:

Do you argue that the same is true of "inter-racial" marriage? After all, that used to be illegal in the USA too, and not all that long ago. Do you think that making "inter-racial" marriage legal inevitably leads to paedophiles marrying their victims? If you don`t believe that, why don`t you? It the same slippery slope argument that you`re making.

0
Reply
Female 4,028
I say just do what the United Kingdom has done. Gave all marriage rights to same-sex couples, but called it a "civil union" to keep the conservatives from blubbering.

And those telling United States same-sex couples to "just get a civil union," well... civil unions in most U.S. states are lacking 1,138 rights. That`s totally fair, right?

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]really? govt was around before religion?[/quote]
Good point - we don`t know, because it`s almost certain that religion, government and marriage all predate recorded history.

[quote]it`s a contract now because the govt made it their business.[/quote]

We do know that prior to government involvement marriage was a personal thing, not necessarily a religious thing. That`s why the essence of a wedding is still the vows (which is what `wedding` means).

So I argue that the origin of marriage is neither religion nor government.

[quote]i think the problem is the definition of marriage itself as still a great many ppl, when they talk about marriage, they refer to it as a religious institution.[/quote]

I agree, which is why I think fighting about just the word `marriage` is counter-productive except for people who really do want to force religions to submit and obey them.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Also, nobody is suggesting that the government force churches to marry gay couples.[/quote]

A few people are already suggesting exactly that on the basis that if gay marriage is not allowed and straight marriage is, that`s anti-gay discrimination. It *is* discrimination against gays. Which is what so many people are objecting to, isn`t it?

If gay marriage is legalised in the USA, there will be more people making that argument. Probably not enough people with enough influence to force it through. Probably.

It is a legitimate concern for theists of religions that disapprove of homosexuality.

There`s more - even the scantiest knowledge of the subject shows that people who passionately support group politics, advocating more for a single group of people only, are rarely content with their favoured group only having the same rights as everyone else, and even more so if they advocate group pride. Ever seen any gay pride stuff? Bet you have.

0
Reply
Male 2,332
I wonder if he`s a lumberjack. And is he okay?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
npdarren: The definition of marriage is (and always has been) "The state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" First and foremost.

If gays want the same legal status they can get civil unions in many states. In every state where the issue has came to a public vote, Gay marriage has gone down to defeat. If it`s not stopped here, Then polygamy and child marriage (Pedos marring their victims) will be next.

0
Reply
Male 703
no, id rather you not marry anyone and live your life very unhappily
0
Reply
Male 2,220
"The book was called The Physics Way, or something like that, and it had a short chapter about theoretical physics "

The Crowd: Tell us more!

0
Reply
Male 601
=\
Baalthazag, I acknowledged already that I wasn`t trying to pass any definition as credible, I was just trying to prove a point. I don`t know why you keep dwelling on it. As for the person who quoted me, I hadn`t anticipated that. But that alone should go to show that someone viewed that definition as credible, which only reinforces the point I was trying to make (God, I feel like I`m repeating myself) that all definitions are subject to scrutiny and may have bias from whomever created the definition.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
Can I just say, if you`re going to criticize me for bringing a dictionary (I actually looked in 4, wiki for the hell of it, and googled around too for definitions), perhaps you should first have criticized the guys who:

1) Made up his own definition, which has changed twice so far.
2) The guy who quoted an internet post as his source for the meaning of a word.
3) The people cheering them on like they just presented an argument Socrates himself couldn`t have ever aspired to creating.

Yes. I opened a dictionary. I did this because someone else said "The meaning of this word is X", and I couldn`t find (via any tool available to me, online or off), anything to back it up.

I figured a dictionary is a good place to start.

Mainly because it is.
It`s a book with the meanings of words.
People were talking about the meaning of a word.
It`s a thing created for this purpose.

This is not rocket science.

0
Reply
Male 601
Also, nobody is suggesting that the government force churches to marry gay couples. Because of the religious freedom that the government enforces, they could never require that. The issue here is just if they should be allowed to get married at all. If they are, they will probably get married in court or by some other means.
0
Reply
Male 601
I don`t know why you`d complain about how government handles religion anyways. It seems to me like the government does its best to allow religious freedom. I mean, a good example is how our government still allows Native Americans to smoke Payote (sp?) during religious ceremonies, even though it is illegal for everyone else. If it weren`t for government protection, I`m sure there would be constant conflicts between the several minority religions in this country with the majority which is Christianity.
0
Reply
Male 601
polglowa

You forget that the US was founded with the principles of separation of church and state. The government is not only allowed to impose its laws, but it is expected to. The same cannot be said for churches; laws are not their jurisdiction.

0
Reply
Female 4,028
Well, the government isn`t telling the religions to do anything. It seems to be the other way around.
0
Reply
Male 43
nmcam...`because marriage is a religious institution.`
"No its not. Its a legally binding contract." really? govt was around before religion? it`s a contract now because the govt made it their business. i don`t have a problem with what people do with their lives. i really don`t, so no need to call me a bigot or a right wing nut job. i think the problem is the definition of marriage itself as still a great many ppl, when they talk about marriage, they refer to it as a religious institution. in a church/temple/whatever, you make your vows before god. it`s a persons own choice to decide where they want to get married. don`t you dare tell me that im "imposing my religion upon a govt institution" because the same can be said of your govt imposing it`s laws on my religious insitution.
0
Reply
Male 420
i support homosexual men, as that leaves more women for us non homosexuals. However, I am a strong opponent of female homosexuality. Its wrong, horribly wrong.
0
Reply
Female 4,028
Oh, I love when people desperately grasp at straws and compare a simple marriage right to something completely different.
0
Reply
Female 956
hehe.

homos.

....hehehe.

0
Reply
Male 2,700
Pure and simple,
Im a very str8 guy, but I oppose NOT to marriage amongst gays. If they love one another, if they care and damnit if they are willing to die for one another, then the recognition of homosexualtiy shold be ccepted. The practices of homosexuality are as old as marriage itself. Let them let the world RECOGNIZE their love. Pure and simple.... let it be...or let the bigots that oppose gay marriage remarry 3-4-5 times to....well you know, preserve the sactitiy of marriage
0
Reply
Male 660
I don`t have a problem with gays at all. It`s just that have this tendency to try to seduce you at nightclubs with their cool,dark good looks. THEN they take you somewhere quiet to bite you and drain every drop of your precious blood!............. WOOPS sorry! that`s vampires...I was talking about vampires again!.....gays are OK by me :)
0
Reply
Female 439
That`s so true.
0
Reply
Male 2,486
I`m gonna keep this short:

If you oppose it for any reason involving the bible or religion, please, just kill yourself, your choice of deity will be much happier to have you with them than we will here.

0
Reply
Male 563
holy crap he`s kinda really hot!
0
Reply
Female 53
I love it!
0
Reply
Male 1,089
hey guy below me. agreed. if he can have the same legal rights as a straight guy i can own anything i want. wer talking tanks rpgs fullauto glocks, the works. i got the money i can buy it. and if the government does something i don`t like, or the people don`t like. it gets overthrown. like the wacko right wing fundamentalists intended (our founding fathers)
0
Reply
Male 1,190
I look forward to the day when people do not petition govt to try to stop others from doing what they want.

I also think this guy is not only bright but hot as well. How can anyone not recognize the brilliance of this statement and the consciousness raising it leads people to.

0
Reply
Female 15,763
"And the state`s involvement in marriage is NOT based on religion, it is based on PROPERTY RIGHTS."

...And hospital visitation rights, and tax rights, and federal rights, and and and...

Just thought I`d add that. C:

0
Reply
Female 49
lol xD that is a good point. If I was a homophobic father I`d rather have my daughter with a straight man and have their own lives away from the gay guys. Legalize gay marriage and love your family. Win-win xD
0
Reply
Female 91
I just want to point out that it`s not just religious bigots who are against homosexuality.
Even psudo-Christians and some agnostics/atheists are against it because its not in our culture (at this present time) to accept homosexuality and much less gay marriage with open arms.
Nor do most people (religious or not) want their kids to feel encouraged to engage in homosexual practices (whether they are gay/not gay/ or experimenting) in the future as a result of not only tolerating and eventually accepting but also embracing and encouraging homosexuality in society and making it part of our culture.
This issue is more complex then just the marriage or the sharing of benefits. A lot of people are for gay marriage because because as humans we all want to be kind, progressive, and tolerant as possible but... don`t just say yes to this issue because it sounds cool or liberal. Think about it in depth and its impact long term because it will change society forever.
BTW,very funny lad
0
Reply
Male 4,014
In America, groups with histories of majority oppression have ALWAYS prevailed in asserting their rights in the end. It is ONLY A MATTER OF TIME.

And the state`s involvement in marriage is NOT based on religion, it is based on PROPERTY RIGHTS.

Give it time, gays, the march of progress is inexorably forward, and conservatives have ALWAYS resisted granting broader rights, and lost.

0
Reply
Male 1,265
I am angry at religion.
0
Reply
Female 3,828
1. guy IS cute

2. davy you just PWNED this arguement.

3. seems like most people here agree that gay marriage should be legal. why, then, is it not in most states?
i think its the older generation with their old fashioned views. lets just wait for the old people to die off, and continue to vote. its slow, but there is progress.

4. seriously though, i cant even believe that this is such an issue in the states. i love being canadian and having gay marriage legal.

5.DONT LIKE GAY MARRIAGE? THEN SHUT THE F UCK UP AND DONT GET ONE.

0
Reply
Male 3,310
Wait...he wants to marry someone`s daughter?
0
Reply
Female 80
IDK... if he did something with those eyebrows I could pretend to date him
0
Reply
Male 156
I`m secure in my, err, good taste and I say he`s not thaaat cute...
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Also, on a subtler level of counter-insult:

[quote]don`t call it marriage[/quote]

Don`t like your so-called patented, self-professed copyrighted institutions (such as the Holy Sanctimony of Marriage, not my capitalisation) being hijacked? Then don`t call it Christmas, dicks. It wasn`t when the kid was born. It was convenient for being already there as a pagan festival.

Also, sorry, but I have to get this off my chest. What if Mary told a wee white lie that she had been dicked by an angel, impregnating her with the seed of God blah blah blah, when in fact she just had a quick roll in the hay with the stable boy? And she had to make up something fast, being up the duff as she was, while betrothed to her husband Joseph, whom she hadn`t yet dicked?

Just saying, cause it`s important. Whole religions have been based on this kind of sh*t.

0
Reply
Male 28
I am not sure if you bothered to read this part:
(2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage
The point of this was to drop the "definition" argument against gay marriage. While I`m at it,enough with the "don`t call it marriage" deal. If two people marry, then the union is a marriage.
finally, MiBelle816, agreed, I just wanted to include that part of a definition I found at Merriam Webster to contradict the "man and woman" fixation.
0
Reply
Female 15,763
I`m secure in my bisexuality and I think he`s cute too!

...Wait a sec...

0
Reply
Male 820
I`m secure in my masculinity and straightnessisity, and I have to agree with Nido, that guy is rather good looking.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
I look forward to the day, many years from now, when we look back as a society in abject shame for how we have denied gay people the same basic rights as the rest of us. Looking back in history:

---

Black people: Denied the same rights as the whites (e.g. same seating on the bus), now seen as abhorrent and shameful in the extreme.

Women: Denied the same rights as the men (e.g. voting), now seen as abhorrent and shameful in the extreme.

Homosexuals: Denied the same rights as the heterosexuals (e.g. full marriage), up until now deemed not acceptable by religious apologists.

---

Hang in there, gay fellows. You`re just the last in line. Your emancipation will come, as soon as we ditch the religious bigots.

0
Reply
Male 156
People come on, you`re falling short. The don`t smoke weed thread has more posts than this one! I want to see more action! :P
0
Reply
Female 4,447
So..you`re coming to Iowa, Opie? Super!
0
Reply
Female 15,763
Where I live and get married and start a family will be entirely dictated by which state(s) do not care of the genitals of my marriage partner.

That seems odd, does it not?

0
Reply
Female 62
Haha

Brilliant.

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"Oh my god I would do him twice in a row and then twice more in a row so that would be four in a row oh my god he`s hot--- *dies from lack of oxygen*"

I agree. ^-^

0
Reply
Male 1,347
mibelle have you read "the mother toungue" by bill bryson?
0
Reply
Male 7,830
screw it, ill give this a go; there are two types of marriage:

legal: as seen through the eyes of the government

religious: as seen over by the church

Now, nobody can do anything about a religion banning any form of marriage from their place of worship. They have that right in their freedom of religion. But, when it comes to legal marriage, there really shouldnt be any couple of consenting adults that are barred from this action. Religion has no say in this act, and to ban anyone from this action is making them less than a citizen. We all live in the same country, and are all supposed to be protected by the same blanket of rights. To deny one man of a right given to another is just wrong, and proves that there is no such thing as a free country.

0
Reply
Female 5,222
lol let`em get married
0
Reply
Male 2
I don`t get why its so complicated either, perhaps you, polglowa, could tell me why it is since you`re the one making it complicated?

(sorry for the long post)

0
Reply
Female 58
also why are people so hung up on the definition of the word marraige, and say that "you cant change the meaning of a word? Many words have changed their meanings over time. Theres even a word for the study of words and how their meanings have changed (Etymology). Heres so

awful- deserving of awe
brave- cowardice (as in bravado)
counterfeit- legitimate copy
cute- bow-legged
guess- take aim
knight- boy
luxury- sinful self indulgence
neck- parcel of land (as in neck of the woods)
notorious- famous
nuisance- injury, harm
quick- alive (as in quicksilver)
sophisticated- corrupted
tell- to count (as in bank teller)
truant- beggar

0
Reply
Male 2
"because marriage is a religious institution."
No its not. Its a legally binding contract. Some religions have ceremonies called the same thing, but the government doesn`t care about them.
"i thought liberals wanted seperation of church and state? christianity does not allow for same sex marriage and the govt has no right to have involved itself ever."
Some sects are fine with and want to allow gay marriage. Your bigotry is restricting this. You are imposing your religion upon a government institution, therefore violating separation of church and state by both controlling the government and forcing the government to restrict other sects.
"if gays want the same rights as a traditional married couple, they can draw up a legal and binding contract. why is this so complicated?"
That`s exactly what they`re trying to do, they`re trying to be allowed to use the same contract straight couples do (Marriage contract). I don`t get why its so complicat
0
Reply
Male 383
polglowa, it is not realy a religious right. The state has the power to give to the church to wed someone. hence when the preacher says "...and now by the power invested in me, i now declare..." the state gives the power to the preacher. And its not just a christian thing to get married. Jewish people get married as well, and so do people in other religions.
0
Reply
Female 58
@Poglowa, are you implying that only christians can get married? If I am an athiest or buddhist or shinto or hindu that my marraige doesnt count. How about all the people married in a courthouse instead of church. You have probably one of the weakest arguments against gay marraige I have ever heard.
0
Reply
Male 714
if gays want to get married then let `em. if they can stay together as a couple whats the big deal, only dont call it `marriage`
0
Reply
Male 182
goddamn wtf is the big deal about gay marriage?
i mean only ppl who care about not having it are stupid conservatives.
infact a major consrvative even was found making love to another man one time
0
Reply
Male 672
Oh my god I would do him twice in a row and then twice more in a row so that would be four in a row oh my god he`s hot--- *dies from lack of oxygen*
0
Reply
Male 301
am i the only one who think his chin is kinda strange?
0
Reply
Male 43
why shouldn`t gay people have that right? because marriage is a religious institution. i thought liberals wanted seperation of church and state? christianity does not allow for same sex marriage and the govt has no right to have involved itself ever. if gays want the same rights as a traditional married couple, they can draw up a legal and binding contract. why is this so complicated?
0
Reply
Male 7,830
@tiger50, thats kind of an odd thing to say about ones own daughter. do we have a joe simpson complex?
0
Reply
Male 41
Good one. Although my daughter might make you straight;-)
0
Reply
Female 1,264
LOLOLOL

I would so let him marry any of my kids.

0
Reply
Male 601
Whether homosexuals are allowed to marry or not will have no influence on how much gay activity there is. Gay people will still be gay even if they aren`t allowed to be married. That`s why it makes no sense to disallow gay marriage for any moral reason. People get married because they love each other (usually, I hope) and to share legal status with each other. Is there some reason why gay people cannot have this?
0
Reply
Female 960
Dear god... why no, I don`t want you to marry my daughter. I want you to marry me!
0
Reply
Male 28
Look at what I`ve found. From Merriam Webster:

Marriage:1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3 : an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross>

0
Reply
Female 385
AHhahahaha. Touche gay guy, touche
0
Reply
Male 3,755
How come we`re supposed to have separation of church and state, but I can`t buy liquor on Sundays?

To answer my own question, it`s because those laws, while based in religion, have become common law by tradition.

0
Reply
Male 975
npdarren "I mean, contrariwise you could say that Christianity overstepped its boundaries centuries ago," This is why I`m not religious. I don`t believe in many of their practices or ethics. Even so religion has affected European culture, and therefore American culture. Religion, whether or not you follow it defines many American customs, creating something new. For example, around 90% of Israeli Jews are secular but they still allow (not forced) the government to maintain a set of religious laws.
I guess what I`m trying to say is that liberal politics aren`t wrong, but too secular, and its having a huge effect on reshaping our culture
0
Reply
Male 3,755
"Worry about your own damn life and what YOU do!"

This could go in circles forever, but...

If I choose to have a negative opinion of a certain group of people then what concern of it is yours? Don`t worry about me. I don`t have anything against gay people, but if I did, and didn`t externalize it in any way, then it`s absolutley no concern of yours and none of your business. So, take your own advice.

Also, if we all followed your advice this website would be dead.

0
Reply
Male 601
"While I`m atheist i still believe the secularism of today has overstepped its boundaries."

That sounds as if you think there are problems that accompany secularism. I personally believe that secularism eliminates many of the problems caused by religion/religious conflict, so why should there be boundaries? I mean, contrariwise you could say that Christianity overstepped its boundaries centuries ago...

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"Worry about your own damn life and what YOU do!"

Thank you.

0
Reply
Male 346
I think government should get out of the whole marriage thing all together. If you want a marriage, go to a drating church. If you want all the economic and legal benefits of a legal union (which marriage includes as of right now) go to court room.
0
Reply
Male 975
there`s plenty of social contracts/cultures that have religion as their roots. Marriage is one of these things, just like how we don`t expect many businesses to be open late Sunday night, in court we swear over the bible etc.
Marriage in my opinion is between a man and a woman. Let homosexuals have the same marriage rights through a different process. While I`m atheist i still believe the secularism of today has overstepped its boundaries.
0
Reply
Male 2,245
An online dictionary is THE authority.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Let me make it simple for you!

If you discriminate against another adult, who has consensual sex with another like minded adult, no matter what their sex, you are a twat! Their personal life is nothing to do with you! If you discrimate against two consenting adults (no matter what their sex) who acctually love each other, your a nazi!

Worry about your own damn life and what YOU do!

0
Reply
Male 601
" I don`t tolerate gays (or anyone for that matter) being discriminated by equal economic opportunity, but, socially, homosexuality provides nothing."

Anal and oral sex provides nothing, yet it seems very tolerated in our society. I`d go so far as to say that by sheer numbers, there are more hetero married couples who practice anal sex and contraception techniques than all gay men put together. If it`s about being productive, then you should have a problem with any sex that isn`t vaginal.

0
Reply
Male 601
Baalthazag:

My point was that you cannot simply say something is fact because that is what it is defined as. Just as you showed by linking to a different definition than mine for existence, there are many different definitions for every word. It just depends on how the creator of the dictionary decides to interpret the word as. True, definitions can be applied to situations as you said, but that doesn`t erase the fact that definitions are subjective in nature.

0
Reply
Male 4,546
However still:
Marriage is defined thusly.

As long as one definition fits the description, you can happily apply the word to the situation.

You could argue that 2 and 5 could be those definitions, however, it isn`t any more definitive than the ability to call Atheism a religion based on Religion`s entry.

Definition wise.

0
Reply
Female 248
If america would just grow up and let gays marry, theres their f*cking recession buster right there
0
Reply
Male 82
You guys can talk semantics all you want, whether "dictionary definition" or "legal definition", marraige was and is meant for raising a family together, not "playing house". And for gay couples who want children, those couples need to think of the future repercussions of their child/children in the social manner. I don`t tolerate gays (or anyone for that matter) being discriminated by equal economic opportunity, but, socially, homosexuality provides nothing. I respect in absolution LionHart2`s comment
0
Reply
Male 376
In what way does this man`s sign make sense? Get serious if you want to be taken seriously...
0
Reply
Male 4,546
NPDarren.
You`ve used the quote before however, and it has changed since. I addressed it previously here.

I could not find anything to back up your definition.

It also makes several assumptions.
Either: This demonstrates that God cannot be proven.
However, when applied to any level of Nihilism, the same argument could be made that you cannot mathematically or via indirect reasoning demonstrate a table exists. You can infer, via Occham`s, but not prove. Prove is a very strong word.

Or: Definitions are tricksy things.
However, again, you should be using official definitions, especially when discussing language and common usage.

So in the long run, does your definition matter? No. Only if you want it to, or if you want to tell self serving stories about teachers to your friends on the internet.

0
Reply
Male 601
Baalthazag:

I took my definition of existence from a Physics textbook. I`d give you the information for the book but I returned it a while back. I`m not going to say it`s the best definition for existence, but it drove my point across: Just because that`s how someone put it in a dictionary, doesn`t mean it`s absolute fact.

0
Reply
Male 1,815
I HATE CENSORSHIP ON MY POSTS! GAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW
0
Reply
Female 195
Christ, you people are pretentious. I can`t believe we still have to protest this crap. What`s so hard about having equal rights for EVERYONE? Liberty and justice for all, my ass. Anyways, this is still my favorite comment here, by DeSheaaaaa: "
H`s going to put it in her butt. lol"
0
Reply
Male 601
How many times do I have to repeat myself on this site: Marriage is a legal institution that has existed since long before Christianity. Because marriage is a legal institution in the U.S, it is (or at least should be) protected by the 15th amendment of equal protection of the laws. Even if a civil union is equal on legal grounds (just like racial segregation was equal on legal grounds), because it is different it will be treated as such by the public, and therefore is inherently unequal to marriage. I see the fight for gay rights as much the same as women`s rights and civil rights. The only difference is that gay people do not have any outstanding public figures to influence the masses.
0
Reply
Male 7,830
non-nice=a$$hole, i learn something new everyday. :)
0
Reply
Male 7,830
i love the topical links on here. its always fun to read the arguments that transpire between idiots on both sides who usually only have the smallest idea of what they are talking about. most of the reasons given on both sides seem inadequate, or stupid to the people on the other. you can fight it out all day on this forum, but you will never change a mind. people are hard headed, and dont change because some non-nice individual on the internet tells them they are wrong. thank you for your time, and sorry for my little rant. i love you all.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
Lets get more technical:
This is the definition of existence. (Quoted from a dictionary).

There is no criteria for evidence in common usage or official usage of the term, let alone proof.

Take your ball and go home.

0
Reply
Male 1,468
"I`m just fed up with all people who think that they fall into a "group" demanding so called rights."

If they`re human, and haven`t done anything atrocious or unforgivable, let them have rights. What`s the big deal with people being gay? So what, a dude likes a dude.

0
Reply
Male 367
[INSERT INTELLIGENT DEBATE.]

Haha just kidding! :D

0
Reply
Female 2,672
he looks like a stereotype, and also, lol, good for him
0
Reply
Male 12,365
A touch of brilliance there, JTheGreat. The ball you`ve served is definitely an ace.
0
Reply
Female 285
[quote]You can`t call a spade a fork, words mean what they mean. "Marriage" is the oath sworn before God between a man and a woman to live and act as one.[/quote]

Let`s get a little technical here. The definition of "existence" is that it can be proven to be in a state of being either by direct observation or indirect reasoning by scientific or mathematic fact (quoted from npdarren). So if we follow your standards, God doesn`t actually exist.

Ball`s in your court, Lionhart.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]not sure how it works in Aussie land, but in the states, there is a thing called "common law marriage", which says after a certain period of time (average is about 7 years i think) your basicly married.[/quote]

Are you sure about that? I`m not, because it`s a very common misconception here in England - almost everyone thinks it exists and it doesn`t. USA common law was mostly English common law, so perhaps the same misconception exists.

But the original meaning of marriage (i.e. the Roman meaning) definitely did have marriage of that form. usus marriage - live together, state that you`re married and do not spend more than three consecutive nights apart in a year.

0
Reply
Male 131
I find it strange how a lot of things to do with gays are bought up here. I may be on their side but that does not mean I can`t be hypocritical but I think gay people are trying to use I-A-B to promote their own kind and lower religion x.x
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Gah, the fake 1000 character limit!

Various gods could be referenced as well. Hercules, the guardian. Juno, for marriage itself. Venus, for love. Fortunata, perhaps, for luck. There were many gods.

But the key point was the statements of the spouses, as the key point was always the intent of the spouses. If people stated they were married, they were married. Ceremonies would be added on top most of the time, but the guts of marriage was simply the repeated consent to marry by both spouses.

If you want formal oaths for the real meaning of the word marriage, here they are in English:

Where and when you are Gaius, I am Gaia.

Where and when you are Gaia, I am Gaius.

In summary, your argument is wrong.

0
Reply
Male 49
"GET A LIFE!"
that was good durdikkimeng
i dont think there is a point in picking a side just to argue with the opposition. its not going to change anything
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You can`t call a spade a fork, words mean what they mean. "Marriage" is the oath sworn before God between a man and a woman to live and act as one.[/quote]

You`ve picked a losing argument there. The word `marriage` is an Anglo-French version of a Latin word. It predates the Christian takeover of Rome by centuries, so if you`re really dead set on the real meaning of the word you can`t possibly connect it to Christianity at all in any way.

You could formally connect it to a single god, but that god would be Jupiter.

On top of that, it would only really apply to the nobility and was archaic more than two millenia ago. The c&#333;nfarre&#257;ti&#333; form of marriage was for the patrician class only and even amongst that class had become almost unheard of by the late Republican period.

In almost all Roman marriages (i.e. the "real" meaning of the word), what mattered was what the two spouses said to each other and to other people. Variou

0
Reply
Female 226
LandoGriffin: Not to mention that he might also have other `heathen` qualities that would anger fundamentalists such as questioning religion, having liberal beliefs, etc.
0
Reply
Female 1
Who cares!!! My boyfriend thinks the same with me. He is eight years older than me, lol. We met online at ##Agelessmatch.com## a nice and free place for Younger Women and Older Men, or Older Women and Younger Men, to interact with each other. Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.
0
Reply
Male 759
I`m just fed up with all people who think that they fall into a "group" demanding so called rights.
So, gay whales against the lesbian bomb black marriage jewish referendum disability save the planet climate change zombies have feelings too,
as we say in England,GET A LIFE! It was all here before you were born, it`ll all still be here when you`re dead. There`s nothing new under the sun,you just think you invented it. (i feel better now)
0
Reply
Male 3,842
Windrider15
Male, 13-17, Western US
605 Posts Friday, December 04, 2009 2:00:06 PM
Ummm...
I fail to see his point here.

I am pretty sure most Anti-Gay people would rather you screw their daughter then their son...

Or is this all completely going over my head?


On behalf of all the people who don`t get it: Marrying a woman would not make him straight, he would still be gay, but he would be living a lie, and an innocent woman would be stuck in a loveless, sexless marriage to someone who prefers dudes.

He would not screw anyone`s daughter. He is gay. But he would have to marry a woman in order to live a lie, if the law does not allow him to be with a man. The woman might not like that her husband is into dudes.

0
Reply
Male 334
Lionhart2:
marriage IS a oath taken before god, but it can also be taken in front of a JOP, having NOTHING to do with church or religion, and still be a legal, binding marriage.
the term "marriage" is not just for use by a church.
not sure how it works in Aussie land, but in the states, there is a thing called "common law marriage", which says after a certain period of time (average is about 7 years i think) your basicly married.
0
Reply
Male 3,842
Damn, I got cut off!

I don`t think the law should recognize a "real" hetero church marriage any differently than they recognize an atheist hetero marriage (legal but not recognized by the church) or a gay "civil union" (also not recognized by the church). They should all be the same in the eyes of the law, even though only the first one is a "real" marriage according to the church.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
Not my quote, someone said it in a previous thread. But it`s so good it deserves repeating:

"Religious types, don`t like gay marriage? Then shut the f*ck up and don`t get one"

0
Reply
Male 377
"You can`t call a spade a fork, words mean what they mean. "Marriage" is the oath sworn before God between a man and a woman to live and act as one. I`m not saying gays can`t live together or whatever, but its not "marriage", just as a hetero man and woman living together isn`t "marriage"."

That`s the religious interpretation of marriage, ask google to define the word and you`ll find many interpretations from around the globe that don`t include the religious dogma.

0
Reply
Male 3,842

Lionhart2
Male, 40-49, Australia
5479 Posts Friday, December 4, 2009 2:02:01 PM
You can`t call a spade a fork, words mean what they mean. "Marriage" is the oath sworn before God between a man and a woman to live and act as one. I`m not saying gays can`t live together or whatever, but its not "marriage", just as a hetero man and woman living together isn`t "marriage".


Lion: first of all, where does it say that it has to be between a man and a woman? Secondly, anything having to do with "God" is not a valid legal definition because laws may not establish an official religion in the United States. A church can use any definition of "marriage" they wish, and in fact, your definition is probably the best one for a church to use, but that cannot be a legal definition in the United States because it establishes an official religious belief. I don`t think the law should recognize a "real" hetero church marr

0
Reply
Male 7,830
"and then f*ck your son...mmmmmmm hmm!"
0
Reply
Male 3
ParasyT - You would rather a gay man who is neither attracted to nor in love with your daughter marry her than if that same male was in a mutual loving relationship with your son get married? That doesn`t sound right to me.
0
Reply
Male 3,431
Can he cook, clean, and do yard work? If so then sure. Beat`s the hell out of some of the cretins in the world.
0
Reply
Female 186
H`s going to put it in her butt. lol
0
Reply
Male 625
what parasyt said
0
Reply
Male 8,300
You can`t call a spade a fork, words mean what they mean. "Marriage" is the oath sworn before God between a man and a woman to live and act as one. I`m not saying gays can`t live together or whatever, but its not "marriage", just as a hetero man and woman living together isn`t "marriage".
0
Reply
Male 656
Ummm...

I fail to see his point here.

I am pretty sure most Anti-Gay people would rather you screw their daughter then their son...

Or is this all completely going over my head?o.O

0
Reply
Female 372
He has a point. xD
0
Reply
Female 4,225
nice one there
0
Reply
Male 533
I would rather you marry my daughter than my son.
0
Reply
Male 719
"is...is that....is that his penis?"

The pencil-shaped thing in his left pocket?

0
Reply
Female 1,890
is...is that....is that his penis?
0
Reply
Male 7,123
Why not? He looks like a nice bloke and she`s gay, so it could work out.
0
Reply
Male 975
yes im pretty sure an anti-homosexual protester would rather that man (if he is respectable) to marry their daughter rather than engage in gay sex..is that even a question?
0
Reply
Male 203
yes i would :) hes a fairly good looking guy, nice genetic material XD
0
Reply
Female 1,190
WIN
0
Reply
Male 534
LOL nice
0
Reply
Male 1,646
haha love it
0
Reply
Male 25,416
True true!
0
Reply
Male 215
Wow, hitting them right in the logic. Ouch.
0
Reply
Male 2,034
I think that`s kinda the point... The problem those right-wingers have is that gays are, well, gay. Not gay = not a problem. So to answer this man`s question on behalf of right-wingers: Yes.
0
Reply
Female 1,682
lol, nice xD I love it.
0
Reply
Female 155
ha ha, perhaps the "and f*ck HER" was a bit too far?
0
Reply
Male 107
Is that a pencil in his pocket or is he just happpy to see me?
0
Reply
Male 20,908
Link: Gay Guys Make a Good Point About Gay Marriage [Pic [Rate Link] - And it`s pointed directly at wacko right-wing fundie parents.
0
Reply