Prop 8, Gay Marriage, the whole shabang...

[karling07]

Tell me, how many states recognize gay marriage? How many countries?

Ask me the same question of slavery a hundred years ago. If you're okay with waiting for this to work its course with the rest of the world and states while millions of people suffer from inequality and mistreatment, then I guess there's no more to discuss here.

Now you're putting words into my mouth.

Dictionary.com defines marriage as the following:



I'll leave it at that.

NOBODY is arguing that marriage isn't the bonding of a man and a woman. What I am saying is that it is absurd to have marriage be legally recognized by the government when it totally excludes a huge percentage of American citizens, every bit as good as you and me. Civil unions are not the same, and if someone told you you had to get a civil union instead of a marriage (while marriage still exists, and the majority of people have them), I don't know how happy you'd be about that.

 

[01001010]

Civil unions are not the same, and if someone told you you had to get a civil union instead of a marriage, I don't know how happy you'd be about that.

If you truly loved a person, you could care less what the government called your relationship. As long as you received the same benefits as a married couple did, you wouldn't be complaining.

 

[JogaBonito1502]

Gays can't get married. It's impossible! By that definition, if gays were to be married, then it wouldn't be marriage.

 

[karling07]

If you truly loved a person, you could care less what the government called your relationship. As long as you received the same benefits as a married couple did, you wouldn't be complaining.

So you agree, end marriage as a legal benefit altogether, thereby designating all legal bindings as equal with only civil unions. Since you couldn't care less what the government calls your relationship

Gays can't get married. It's impossible! By that definition, if gays were to be married, then it wouldn't be marriage.

You don't understand my point at all. I am not saying marriage is between two guys or two girls; we all know the definition of marriage. I'm saying, until the government takes religion/marriage out of the picture in terms of LEGAL BENEFITS, then every single gay couple should be able to have a marriage. Either that, or all people should have a civil union - your own government labeling your love as something different than others is wrong.

 

[01001010]

So you agree, end marriage as a legal benefit altogether, thereby designating all legal bindings as equal. Since you couldn't care less what the government calls your relationship

I never said I would end any legal benefits of marriage. Read my post again.

 

[Atomic Rooster]

Ask me the same question of slavery a hundred years ago.

Now you're getting desperate. It's not even in the same league. You fail. I'm done.

 

[karling07]

I never said I would end any legal benefits of marriage. Read my post again.

What I'm saying is that if you don't care what the government labels your legal love, then why not just let all couples have the SAME title, since there is no reason to differ between the two. That way it takes religion out of the picture completely. You should have no objection to this considering you just said if two people really love each other then it doesn't matter how the government recognizes that love

 

[01001010]

Either that, or all people should have a civil union - your own government labeling your love as something different than others is wrong.

You admitted that marriage is the legal binding between a man and a women. You can't just change what a word means.

 

[karling07]

Now you're getting desperate. It's not even in the same league. You fail. I'm done.

Nobody said it was in the same league... But check out some of the kids who get beaten to death or shot or stabbed for being gay, something they cannot help or change; if the government were to recognize a legal love between all people the same, it would force people beyond this perception that homosexuals are different and wrong and deserve to be hurt. By the way, telling someone they fail and that you're done is not really the most mature way of debating. Everyone else here is making perfectly legitimate points

You admitted that marriage is the legal binding between a man and a women. You can't just change what a word means.

Right, I'm saying if the government is going to use marriage as their way of legally recognizing and binding two people, then they either must change the definition of marriage (which to me makes no sense, but it makes more sense than adopting a religious idea that excludes a huge group of people), or totally switch to the method of a nonreligious way of doing this, civil unions. But nowhere in between. And until then, the only fair and fast way to guarantee the security of civil rights and equality is to change marriage. I don't think it makes sense, but it's certainly better than waiting for civil unions to become to only way to legally bond

 

[01001010]

... it would force people beyond this perception that homosexuals are different and wrong and deserve to be hurt.

It's not wrong to be homosexual, but it does defy the definition of marriage.