For or Against Gay Marriage

The question in the poll was about gay unions being recognized "nationally" as marriages,... not whether we are for or against "gay marriage."

My answers was "no" for the poll (I don't believe gay marriage should be recognized federally),... but I'm indifferent towarRAB gay unions, be they called marriages by some or not.

Article Eight, Section One of the United States Constitution gives congress the right to define and write immigration, naturalization laws. One of the ways to become a United States Citizen is by way of marriage. It is within the Constitutional powers of the congress to define "marriage" as it sees fit to make imigration and naturalization laws.

That being the case, I believe the "federal government" should adhere to the same definition for everything else that they do for naturalization.

" Section 8: The Congress shall have power To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; ...To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States; "-- U.S. Constitution

And I don't believe most citizens consider the impact on imigration, naturalization and the general welfare of the country when they push for things like "gay marriage."

If anyone is interested, here's a recent debate we had on the subject on another site.
 
So what does the fact that they have a familial relationship have to do with anything? :confused:
If you're talking about benefits, a sister can't collect survivor benefits bypass inheritance taxes, etc. , but if you marry her, she could.
 
And I am telling you that people have done it. You will either get a call or more likely a letter stating that the government does not recognize same-sex marriages, and that you have to file jointly.
 
Because the fact that they molested young boys does not prove they were gay. Being gay has nothing to do with being attracted to, or molesting young boys.

Imagine a 30 year old guy tells everyone his is gay, and has a long time male partner of the same age. He has never been involved with a woman. One day, this gay guy, molests a little girl. Using your logic, that only considers the sex of the child victim, this guy, this criminal, is straight. But that's not true of course.

Now imagine a guy who identifies as straight, has only been involved with women. One day this straight guy molests a little boy. This does not make him gay.

Being gay or straight is not about being an adult who is attracted to, or who molests, children. Therefore, one cannot look at these criminal acts of adults with children, to determine whether someone is gay or straight.
 
Since we're quoting Romans, how about
Romans 1:26-27:
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions: for their women exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature. And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural use of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."

Next time you quote the Bible, make sure that you quote the applicable passages. :rolleyes:
 
Tabula rasa means "blank slate". Your position would then be, just that, "tabula rasa", that we are born without a sexual orientation one way or the other. That is what I was understanding.

I don't see how tabula rasa ITO sexual orientation is possible because we are biologically *wired* to reproduce as a species, and generally speaking, biologically wired to do so through our sexual orientation to the opposite gender.

But every so often, someone is born who is wired differently.
 
Who determines what are rights? Why unelected, unaccountable liberal judges, that's who. It seems like our society is heading into the pits as a result, too.
:mad: :rolleyes:
I Agree we should let the system work. :xagree:
 
Seems unlikely. Not only have the pro-amendment folks lost at least 3 seats in the house, there are several representatives who are now having reservations about voting for the amedment again. Including the fact that the new House speaker is pro gay marriage, the constitutional amendment has been pushed back to 2006 (so it cannot come up for a vote until 2008), and public opinion in Massachusetts is now in favor of gay marriage (56% for), it aint going nowhere here. Even the pro-amendment forces are considering taking on a different strategy.
 
Yup, I do.




Yeah, but that is not Jims position. He argues that gays allready have access to all of these benefits in the US. That it is only a matter of wording...
 
Just like knives, eh? I find these plural things much more confusing than two wives being married to eachother.



that was a bit tounge in cheek. But anyway.

An aunt is someone who is either married to your uncle or is your mother/fathers sister, right? An uncle is someone who is either married to your aunt or is your mother/fathers brother, right? Would it be any more confusing if an aunt could be someone who was married to your aunt?

Tonybrown also pointed out something quite interesting as well. As far as I know, uncle is originally "onkel", a germanic word for "grown man" (and later turned into married to mother/fathers brother). Apparantly the word has changed meaning... Oh my god!... will someone please think of the children?!?!.. hehe... sorry `bout that :)



I don`t consider it a mass problem. How many statisticians do you think will be affected?



they apparantly consider it a big deal.



Then that is their choice. However, why would you object top gay people signing "marriage" when they fill out their marital status?
 
Well you fail to answer how all of these forums are dominated by liberals, why they are able to protest against the military in the middle of the week if they have jobs...

The irony is even with all this liberal participation the liberal movement is dying in this country as proven by more and more victories at the polls by conservatives as brought out by controlling the presidency, both houses of congress and making steady gains in every election......

The silent majority in this country are moderate and conservative and don't buy the liberal mantra "If it feels good do it."
 
I am a lot of things but I don't believe I am your friend my bleeding heart left wing liberal John Kerry lover........... :)

Damn, I thought you had me on ignore...... :confused:



Jitobear, I believe you admitted that 4,000,000 women made the wrong decision when they aborted their baby...... :confused:
 
Voice Of Reason said:
Sadly, that is not the situation with many children. Some come with health problems, or behavioral problems,or mixed race, and there are many African-American children, and a married couple walks by them, without a second look backwarRAB.
Click to expand...
 
LOL

I live in an area where a number of employees happen to have to hold " High Security Clearances." The frienRAB I speak of work at Northrup-Grumman, Lockheed-Martin-Marietta, General Dynamics, The Pentagon, on Cap Hill, etc.

Your point ? :wow:
 
Back
Top