For or Against Gay Marriage
- Thread starter Speedy Boarder
- Start date
Wyatts mama
New member
You've told us about these gays you know, who believe gays bring physical bashing on themselves, removing responsibility from the offender, so that doesn't surprise me. I'm amazed they even told you they are gay. Isn't that being "out"? Why did they risk being bashed, when they say people who are open and honest about being gay, deserve to be bashed?
ChitT0wn Maniac
New member
I guess the same reason's that Mothers can't marry their sons nor Father's their daughters nor brothers their sisters.
Borat Sagdiyev
New member
I'm not saying I'm completely for gay marriage, but I believe that if two people love each other, they have the right to marry.
It used to be that whites couldn't marry blacks, royals couldn't marry peasants, and one race couldn't marry into another. This is just another example of that.
It used to be that whites couldn't marry blacks, royals couldn't marry peasants, and one race couldn't marry into another. This is just another example of that.
.:Icecream:.
New member
Aside from USAtoday not being the best newspaper....my mom only taught(teachs) in Virginia. I don't know if that means anything though.
Not real "evidence" one way or the other...but dang, give me break, just giving my moms personal experience with the issue. A teacher sees those kiRAB a lot and they might provide good insight. People have told me to look outside of what "mommy" has told me. Well, why don't you guys (general sense) look at what others have to say instead of being closed minded as you claim I am. If someone doesn't argee with you then this doesn't mean they are closed minded. Gee.
Not real "evidence" one way or the other...but dang, give me break, just giving my moms personal experience with the issue. A teacher sees those kiRAB a lot and they might provide good insight. People have told me to look outside of what "mommy" has told me. Well, why don't you guys (general sense) look at what others have to say instead of being closed minded as you claim I am. If someone doesn't argee with you then this doesn't mean they are closed minded. Gee.
Mrs. Taylor Lautner
New member
You give a group fewer rights, without a logical rational reason, and that group is oppressed. Yes, that applies also if the group is gay, even if you don't personally like gays.
Why is that?
If a group has fewer rights, they are victims. They may need money to fight for their cause, because that is the kind of society we live in.
But if there is no logical reason why I can't be called a diplomat, I should be called a diplomat.
Human constructed, changed by humans, as I said. The same argument was tried against inter-racial couples, that they could marry someone from their own race, and didn't meet the current definition. This is just a way to stop all debate.
No, it is not. Extremely few animal species even attempt monogamy.
Why do you say that? Is it because they are not heterosexual? Non-heterosexual activity does take place among species in nature, and also among humans, which are also a part of nature. How we recognize, is a human construct, whether it is gay or straight.
Why is that?
If a group has fewer rights, they are victims. They may need money to fight for their cause, because that is the kind of society we live in.
But if there is no logical reason why I can't be called a diplomat, I should be called a diplomat.
Human constructed, changed by humans, as I said. The same argument was tried against inter-racial couples, that they could marry someone from their own race, and didn't meet the current definition. This is just a way to stop all debate.
No, it is not. Extremely few animal species even attempt monogamy.
Why do you say that? Is it because they are not heterosexual? Non-heterosexual activity does take place among species in nature, and also among humans, which are also a part of nature. How we recognize, is a human construct, whether it is gay or straight.
Bryan W Gaint
New member
Voice Of Reason said:
softballgurl319
New member
I understand you completely but this is not how it was presented. The problem is that a heterosexually dominated society seems to demand bearRAB. So we need more children in the world? What of the gay couples who will still have children? Would gay marriage all of a sudden make men steril? There is such a thing of finding a lesbian couple and having children with them.
TwilightLuvrKT<3
New member
This question was asked about six years ago. Stop trying to milk
this dead cow or if you prefer, stop beating this dead horse.
this dead cow or if you prefer, stop beating this dead horse.
If marriage is a fundamental right, why is a license required in most cases? If marriage is a fundamental right, why can't a man marry his sister?
It is not required to follow the lead of misguided state and national governments.
It has not until recently, in any country, meant same sex unions.
Evidently, you see no difference between rights and privileges. A privilege is something that is granted by the authority which has the power to control access to that privilege. Your father let's you have the family car for the weekend...he can take it away just as easily as he gave it to you. That's a privilege. You get driving privileges on state roaRAB by applying for and receiving a driver's license which can be revoked, taking away your privilege. You apply for a marriage license and it may be denied, because marriage is not a right...it is a privilege granted by the state.
They are reversed when they are considered wrong. Sometimes it takes a change in the political leanings of the court to have it vote it the opposite direction.
Our courts are infested with liberal judges who manage to inflict the will of other whining liberals who constantly beg for concessions to the rules. Our judicial system is likely among the best in the world, but it does have that flaw.
The definition of marriage has not changed. There's a difference between claiming a new definition and having it accepted by the masses.
Check post #344
Don't put worRAB in my argument. I know the definition of biological mother and biological father. There is no issue here.
This must be why Cain and Able took wives and had families...and it's not irrelevant since you claimed marriage was only defined as male/female in the 1970's. (Jesus!)
They don't need government recognition at the expense of real married couples. They need government benefits. This can be arranged without redefining existing terms.
Improper conclusion on your part. I am correct and the court is wrong.
It is not required to follow the lead of misguided state and national governments.
It has not until recently, in any country, meant same sex unions.
Evidently, you see no difference between rights and privileges. A privilege is something that is granted by the authority which has the power to control access to that privilege. Your father let's you have the family car for the weekend...he can take it away just as easily as he gave it to you. That's a privilege. You get driving privileges on state roaRAB by applying for and receiving a driver's license which can be revoked, taking away your privilege. You apply for a marriage license and it may be denied, because marriage is not a right...it is a privilege granted by the state.
They are reversed when they are considered wrong. Sometimes it takes a change in the political leanings of the court to have it vote it the opposite direction.
Our courts are infested with liberal judges who manage to inflict the will of other whining liberals who constantly beg for concessions to the rules. Our judicial system is likely among the best in the world, but it does have that flaw.
The definition of marriage has not changed. There's a difference between claiming a new definition and having it accepted by the masses.
Check post #344
Don't put worRAB in my argument. I know the definition of biological mother and biological father. There is no issue here.
This must be why Cain and Able took wives and had families...and it's not irrelevant since you claimed marriage was only defined as male/female in the 1970's. (Jesus!)
They don't need government recognition at the expense of real married couples. They need government benefits. This can be arranged without redefining existing terms.
Improper conclusion on your part. I am correct and the court is wrong.
Karrie Shmarrie <3
New member
Our church has done a good job of not making anyone from the GLBT Community feel welcome.
Do yourself a favor, and Google LaPlata Tornado. As I was trained as an Emergency Preparedness Specialist, so were many of the members of our church were also trained as such. In fact, they were the members of Dignity
and we lost a Catholic k-6th grade school.
They worked side by side with me to set up tempoary phone lines, contact animal control, and see to the neeRAB of those who lost in that tornado. In fact, when Cardinal Theodore McCarrick came down from Washington, he saw the Dignity sign, and it didn't seem to bother him at all.
You call me what you wish; but we have laws in this land, and as our church neeRAB to be listened to, our laws also need to be obeyed.
Do yourself a favor, and Google LaPlata Tornado. As I was trained as an Emergency Preparedness Specialist, so were many of the members of our church were also trained as such. In fact, they were the members of Dignity
and we lost a Catholic k-6th grade school.
They worked side by side with me to set up tempoary phone lines, contact animal control, and see to the neeRAB of those who lost in that tornado. In fact, when Cardinal Theodore McCarrick came down from Washington, he saw the Dignity sign, and it didn't seem to bother him at all.
You call me what you wish; but we have laws in this land, and as our church neeRAB to be listened to, our laws also need to be obeyed.
Hammerheart
New member
I think God will be quite pleased with me; I don't need your condemnation.