A Reasonable Solution To The Gay Marriage Debate

[BDBoop]

Gays CAN already legally marry in every state in the union. The gay activists are trying to redefine the word marriage to include same-sex couples. This is absurd. However, I have no objection to unions between same sex couples under a different name. Garriage for example. This way the institution of marriage does not need to be altered to accommodate gays.

Two people of the same sex are not allowed to Civilly Marry in most states.

The structure of that logic "gays can marry, just not each other" was tried during the Loving v. Virginia case "coloreds can marry, just not white people" - it failed.



>>>>

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

 

[Buford]

Two people of the same sex are not allowed to Civilly Marry in most states.

The structure of that logic "gays can marry, just not each other" was tried during the Loving v. Virginia case "coloreds can marry, just not white people" - it failed.



>>>>

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

 

[koshergrl]

We don't have a *right* to marry anyone we wish. Sorry. Nobody has that right.

 

[koshergrl]

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

How come I don't have the right to marry Mel Gibson????

 

[garyganu]

Two people of the same sex are not allowed to Civilly Marry in most states.

The structure of that logic "gays can marry, just not each other" was tried during the Loving v. Virginia case "coloreds can marry, just not white people" - it failed.



>>>>

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

Gays can not wed without legally changing the definition of the institution of marriage.

Most people do not want to change the definition of the institution of marriage.

A good compromise would be to leave the institution of marriage alone and create a new institution for same sex couples. I propose that we call it garriage.

We already have separate words for husband and wife, man and woman, bride groom, etc. Why should we eliminate these words from traditional marriage licences. Why not issue "same-sex' licences that can used phrases like wife and wife, husband and husband, life-partner, life-mate, etc.

Different names for different types of unions makes perfect sense.

 

[BDBoop]

This is true. Likewise, heteros cannot marry a person of the same sex.

They have the exact same rights as we do already.

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

If you want to marry the quarterback, and he loves you too, then yes.

 

[BDBoop]

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

How come I don't have the right to marry Mel Gibson????

You two would be PERFECT together.

Except you'd have to drop the handle. He feels about Jews like you feel about women.

 

[garyganu]

And since my sister wants to marry her partner of 20 years, and their best friends are men who have been together even longer, - and they cannot wed?

No. They DON'T 'have the same rights.' They cannot marry the person who is free to marry them, simply because they are "the wrong gender."

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

If you want to marry the quarterback, and he loves you too, then yes.

Legally speaking, marriage has nothing to do with love. Marriage is a legal agreement.

 

[BDBoop]

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

If you want to marry the quarterback, and he loves you too, then yes.

Legally speaking, marriage has nothing to do with love. Marriage is a legal agreement.

That only people in love engage in. Nice try moving the goalposts, especially since we WERE talking about the quarterback you love.

 

[koshergrl]

How come I don't have the "right" to be the quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings? They refused to even give me a tryout. My rights were violated. Right?

How come I don't have the right to marry Mel Gibson????

You two would be PERFECT together.

Except you'd have to drop the handle. He feels about Jews like you feel about women.

How I feel about women?

 

[BDBoop]

How come I don't have the right to marry Mel Gibson????

You two would be PERFECT together.

Except you'd have to drop the handle. He feels about Jews like you feel about women.

How I feel about women?

I can see it comes as a surprise to you that you hate them.

Glad I could help.

 

[koshergrl]

If you want to marry the quarterback, and he loves you too, then yes.

Legally speaking, marriage has nothing to do with love. Marriage is a legal agreement.

That only people in love engage in. Nice try moving the goalposts, especially since we WERE talking about the quarterback you love.

There is no constitutionally supported *right* to marry the person you love.

Your sister has the exact same rights as everybody else. Sometimes, people fall in love with people they can't marry. You don't get to change the law to accomodate them. They have the same rights. They want something different. That's great..but it's different and we don't have to pretend it's the same. They can pretend anything they want. And when/if they decide to participate in the union we call marriage, they're free to do so.

 

[garyganu]

How come I don't have the right to marry Mel Gibson????

You two would be PERFECT together.

Except you'd have to drop the handle. He feels about Jews like you feel about women.

How I feel about women?

BDBoop, I believe you are projecting your own feelings onto koshergrl.

Liberals despise all women who disagree with the feminist agenda. They are a very intolerant bunch. Their hatred for Sarah Palin is a prime example.

 

[BDBoop]

Legally speaking, marriage has nothing to do with love. Marriage is a legal agreement.

That only people in love engage in. Nice try moving the goalposts, especially since we WERE talking about the quarterback you love.

There is no constitutionally supported *right* to marry the person you love.

Your sister has the exact same rights as everybody else. Sometimes, people fall in love with people they can't marry. You don't get to change the law to accomodate them. They have the same rights. They want something different. That's great..but it's different and we don't have to pretend it's the same. They can pretend anything they want. And when/if they decide to participate in the union we call marriage, they're free to do so.

You can make the goalposts horizontal if you like, paint them red, white & blue and march a band around them. Gays STILL are being denied the right to contract with their chosen, free-to-contract significant other.

 

[BDBoop]

You two would be PERFECT together.

Except you'd have to drop the handle. He feels about Jews like you feel about women.

How I feel about women?

BDBoop, I believe you are projecting your own feelings onto koshergrl.

Liberals despise all women who disagree with the feminist agenda. They are a very intolerant bunch. Their hatred for Sarah Palin is a prime example.

No, I'm really not. But thanks for trying to run interference for the poor old sod.

 

[koshergrl]

I haven't moved the goal posts, that's your M.O.

And they are. Unless you are stating that a person who is an admitted homosexual can't marry a person of the opposite sex, just like I can?

 

[koshergrl]

How I feel about women?

BDBoop, I believe you are projecting your own feelings onto koshergrl.

Liberals despise all women who disagree with the feminist agenda. They are a very intolerant bunch. Their hatred for Sarah Palin is a prime example.

No, I'm really not. But thanks for trying to run interference for the poor old sod.

If one objects to abortion, according to the left wing extremist whackos, one is anti-female.

Pro-female must be pro-abortion, pro-uterine scraping, anti-marriage, anti-male, anti-child.

 

[BDBoop]

I haven't moved the goal posts, that's your M.O.

And they are. Unless you are stating that a person who is an admitted homosexual can't marry a person of the opposite sex, just like I can?

Well, we've already established that you're just that stupid so I won't act out my whiskey-tango-foxtrot, how the FUCK does she find the keyboard every day.

They cannot make a contract with the person who wants to make a contract with them. They want to make this contract because they love each other. Now, you may very well be one of those women who think any fuck is a good fuck, but that is not the case for them. They want to have a marriage contract with their actual life partner.

And it's not up to your skanky ass to tell them they are second class citizens by virtue of being born gay.

 

[garyganu]

That only people in love engage in. Nice try moving the goalposts, especially since we WERE talking about the quarterback you love.

There is no constitutionally supported *right* to marry the person you love.

Your sister has the exact same rights as everybody else. Sometimes, people fall in love with people they can't marry. You don't get to change the law to accomodate them. They have the same rights. They want something different. That's great..but it's different and we don't have to pretend it's the same. They can pretend anything they want. And when/if they decide to participate in the union we call marriage, they're free to do so.

You can make the goalposts horizontal if you like, paint them red, white & blue and march a band around them. Gays STILL are being denied the right to contract with their chosen, free-to-contract significant other.

Not true. Gays are free to contract with other gays for inheritance rights, beneficiary rights, shared property rights, etc.

 

[BDBoop]

There is no constitutionally supported *right* to marry the person you love.

Your sister has the exact same rights as everybody else. Sometimes, people fall in love with people they can't marry. You don't get to change the law to accomodate them. They have the same rights. They want something different. That's great..but it's different and we don't have to pretend it's the same. They can pretend anything they want. And when/if they decide to participate in the union we call marriage, they're free to do so.

You can make the goalposts horizontal if you like, paint them red, white & blue and march a band around them. Gays STILL are being denied the right to contract with their chosen, free-to-contract significant other.

Not true. Gays are free to contract with other gays for inheritance rights, beneficiary rights, shared property rights, etc.

See the post above yours.