7 States And Counting

[Bishka]

We can both marry one unrelated person of the opposite sex. She can't marry a woman just like I can't marry a man. Yep, sounds equal.

Yet, like Jensa said. You get all sorts of breaks for being married to a woman. They get none, is that fair? Is that equal? Hardly.

 

[standing_alone]

We can both marry one unrelated person of the opposite sex. She can't marry a woman just like I can't marry a man. Yep, sounds equal.

Accept for the whole fact you're allowed to marry an unrelated person of the sex you are attracted to and Amy isn't. Therefore it's not equal.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

I'm still curious, FerventGodSeeker: What, if anything, does banning gay marriages have to do with "upholding traditional marriages"? How are those two things related?

"Traditional" marriage is a marriage between a man and a woman...banning gay marriage upholds that definition...I thought that it was rather obvious, am I missing the point of your questions?

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Accept for the whole fact you're allowed to marry an unrelated person of the sex you are attracted to and Amy isn't. Therefore it's not equal.

Wrong again. I have been and still am sometimes attracted to other men. Nope, still can't marry em.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Yet, like Jensa said. You get all sorts of breaks for being married to a woman. They get none, is that fair? Is that equal? Hardly.

And she gets all sorts of breaks for marrying a man...yep, still equal.

 

[Green Gaia]

I didn't know you did. If you don't want to continue commenting on this thread...don't.

I never said I didn't want to comment on this thread. I simply questioned the reason you started it and then said you didn't want to discuss it.

 

[Green Gaia]

And she gets all sorts of breaks for marrying a man...yep, still equal.

What about marrying the person you LOVE? Isn't that what marriage is supposed to be about? Love and commitment? Or does just the right parts all that matters?

 

[Bastet]

We can both marry one unrelated person of the opposite sex. She can't marry a woman just like I can't marry a man. Yep, sounds equal.

Right...so you're up for marrying someone of the opposite sex that you have absolutely no attraction to and have no desire to spend the rest of your life in a relationship with then are you? All things being equal and all... Or, perhaps, do you expect a little thing called 'love' to enter into the equation somewhere, hmm?

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

I never said I didn't want to comment on this thread. I simply questioned the reason you started it and then said you didn't want to discuss it.

I'm happy to discuss it ("it" being the passage of these bills). I don't care to debate the same things we've debated about a million times since I've been on RF.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

What about marrying the person you LOVE? Isn't that what marriage is supposed to be about? Love and commitment? Or does just the right parts all that matters?

I'd say they both matter.

 

[Bastet]

"Traditional" marriage is a marriage between a man and a woman...banning gay marriage upholds that definition...I thought that it was rather obvious, am I missing the point of your questions?

Repeatedly and deliberately, I rather suspect.

 

[Jaymes]

We can both marry one unrelated person of the opposite sex. She can't marry a woman just like I can't marry a man. Yep, sounds equal.

Sounds like the view of someone who can marry who they love.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Right...so you're up for marrying someone of the opposite sex that you have absolutely no attraction to and have no desire to spend the rest of your life in a relationship with then are you?

Nope, nor did I ever suggest that.

All things being equal and all... Or, perhaps, do you expect a little thing called 'love' to enter into the equation somewhere, hmm?

Yes, I do.

 

[Sunstone]

"Traditional" marriage is a marriage between a man and a woman...banning gay marriage upholds that definition...I thought that it was rather obvious, am I missing the point of your questions?

Thank you for responding, FGS! What I don't understand is how a homosexual marriage would have any effect whatsoever on a heterosexual marriage. If Ted Haggard and Mike Jones marry each other, how is that going to have any effect on Steve and Sue's marriage? It seems to me that it would have no conceivable effect at all on Steve and Sue's heterosexual marriage.

It seems to me that these marriage amendments will do nothing for traditional marriage. They won't reduce the divorce rate, they won't reduce the abuse rate, they won't strengthen traditional marriages, and they won't make spouses fall in love with each other all over again. So, what do they actually do to uphold traditional marriage?

 

[Green Gaia]

I'm happy to discuss it ("it" being the passage of these bills).

Well that's easy: it's all about discrimination and the forcing of religious laws onto everyone. What religious law are we all going to be forced to follow next? Maybe the government should pass a law forcing everyone to eat kosher, since that's what the Jews do. Or maybe we should all be required by the government to give alms to the poor, like the Muslim law states. How do you feel about that?

 

[Jaymes]

Nope, nor did I ever suggest that.

That's what you're saying gay people have the right to do: Enter a loveless, sexless marriage.

 

[Bastet]

Nope, nor did I ever suggest that.

Well you suggested that Maize should be happy to do just that. Why would you ask her to be happy with something you would not do yourself?

Yes, I do.

And yet you arrogantly assume the right to disallow others to marry the ones they love and want to spend the rest of their lives with? Nice double standard you've got going there.

 

[Green Gaia]

I'd say they both matter.

Of course you do, you're straight and the law favors you. What I don't understand is why you think it's OK to hurt people who are different than you.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Thank you for responding, FGS! What I don't understand is how a homosexual marriage would have any effect whatsoever on a heterosexual marriage. If Ted Haggard and Mike Jones marry each other, how is that going to have any effect on Steve and Sue's marriage? It seems to me that it would have no conceivable effect at all on Steve and Sue's heterosexual marriage.

It seems to me that these marriage amendments will do nothing for traditional marriage. They won't reduce the divorce rate, they won't reduce the abuse rate, they won't strengthen traditional marriages, and they won't make spouses fall in love with each other all over again. So, what do they actually do to uphold traditional marriage?

By "uphold" I simply mean "maintain the definition of." Ted and Mike's marriage don't directly effect Steve and Sue's, particuarly if they never meet, obviously; but then again, we take political positions on things that don't directly affect us all the time. I was simply referring to the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman as being "upheld." Does that make it more clear?

 

[standing_alone]

Wrong again. I have been and still am sometimes attracted to other men. Nope, still can't marry em.

Wow, you completely missed my point. My point was that heterosexuals primary attraction is the opposite sex, so therefore, they are most likely going to be able to marry the one they fall in romantic love with. Homosexuals primary attraction is to the same sex, therefore, they are not likely to be able to marry the one they fall in romantic love with.