Do You Support The Right Of Any Two People, Regardless Of Gender...

[thereisnospoon]

if we left things up to state blacks would still have not equal rights.

Oy vey!

 

[Darkwind]

Yes.

I understood the question and poll to reflect consenting adults.

I do take exception to the word 'rights'.

Rights do not enter into things like contract law. Everyone of legal age can enter into contract. I would not classify it as a right, however.

 

[Peach]

Standing in the middle of the room and repeatedly screaming your point of view does not make it a stronger one.
Once is enough.
Now, if there's nothing else you have to add, bugger off!

No, too many in the past have done so with tragic results.

Look, we understand your position. You're not running for office and you're certainly not trying going ot convince everyone into agreeing with you. So again, once is enough.
We get it.

There is a block feature on this board, try to figure out how to use it.

 

[Peach]

How can any sane American object to two adult humans marrying?

Because there is a point at which an open mind starts spilling all over the place. It is not a pretty sight.
<blinking and blinking>

Uh, "freedom", try this for size:

"Marriage is an institution called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape.”

 

[Oldstyle]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership…?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

I voted no, Bill and I support same sex marriage. My explanation for that is there are some instances where I would not support a marriage between two people. Those would include incestuous relationships, a marriage involving a minor or a marriage that would constitute bigamy.

As with so many polls...there is no black and white answer...but shades of gray as well depending on the circumstances. Because you gave me only two choices and worded your poll as you did...you forced me into choosing something that doesn't represent my feelings on the subject well at all.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership…?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

Does that include Incestuous relationships between consenting adults? I mean you did say ANY two.

 

[MikeK]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership…?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

It's perfectly fine with me if someone wishes to marry a farm animal. The only requirement being the animal must not be visibly unhappy with the arrangement.

Why should anyone be concerned about who (or what) other people wish to marry? As long as no harm is being done it's nobody's business.

 

[asterism]

How can any sane American object to two adult humans marrying?

Because there is a point at which an open mind starts spilling all over the place. It is not a pretty sight.
<blinking and blinking>

Uh, "freedom", try this for size:

"Marriage is an institution called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape.”

That's bad form, and a terrible example of one who supports gay marriage.

 

[California Girl]

How can any sane American object to two adult humans marrying?

The word itself has deep religious meaning to many and that meaning includes the understanding that it involves one man and one woman.

I would hope that any law with the intent of equality for those currently excluded from this legal condition holds this sensibility and uses a different term to award the legal advantages of this arrangement to the communities who desire it.

Are you against gay sex. Allow them to marry and the sex will end.

Yes, it does have a religious meaning. I'm totally comfortable with civil unions for everyone... marriage is a sacred commitment that has jack shit to do with the state and everything to do with making a commitment before God.

 

[SniperFire]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership…?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

It's perfectly fine with me if someone wishes to marry a farm animal. The only requirement being the animal must not be visibly unhappy with the arrangement.

Why should anyone be concerned about who (or what) other people wish to marry? As long as no harm is being done it's nobody's business.

Indeed.

What is the hangup with limiting this redefinition to 'human' or just one man/ woman?

And who shall deny Bob his 'right' to marry his mother and 6 sisters?

 

[Peach]

Because there is a point at which an open mind starts spilling all over the place. It is not a pretty sight.
<blinking and blinking>

Uh, "freedom", try this for size:

"Marriage is an institution called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape.”

That's bad form, and a terrible example of one who supports gay marriage.

Quote from the Third Reich.

 

[asterism]

Uh, "freedom", try this for size:

"Marriage is an institution called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape.”

That's bad form, and a terrible example of one who supports gay marriage.

Quote from the Third Reich.

Not relevant in the debate today though. It's just playing the Hitler card.

 

[Peach]

That's bad form, and a terrible example of one who supports gay marriage.

Quote from the Third Reich.

Not relevant in the debate today though. It's just playing the Hitler card.

The rage against gay marriage brought the Nuremberg laws to mind.

 

[Flopper]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership…?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

It's perfectly fine with me if someone wishes to marry a farm animal. The only requirement being the animal must not be visibly unhappy with the arrangement.

Why should anyone be concerned about who (or what) other people wish to marry? As long as no harm is being done it's nobody's business.

That should be the criteria for denying any freedom of choice; will it do harm to society? We should not deny freedom of choice based on what we believe, but rather what we know. Incest leads to a high probability of congenital birth defects. Bestiality is non-consensual sex and is considered inhumane treatment of animals. But to deny a freedom of choice, because religious beliefs, fears, or hatred is just plain wrong.

 

[JWBooth]

So long as both parties have reached the age of consent. Yes

 

[bayoubill]

There is no &#8216;substitute&#8217; for marriage, either one is married or he is not. If the state contrives some contractual entity with the exact-same provisions as marriage, then it is marriage, whatever the state might call it.

But the state may not play a semantic shell game, and attempt to appease same-sex couples with a cheap imitation of marriage law, a &#8216;separate but equal&#8217; approach is as illegal as the denial of access to marriage law itself.

I agree with your first statement... but I'm not sure what you're talking about in the second statement...

a government-sanctioned marriage (i.e., the kind you get when you go to the county courthouse and pick up a marriage license from the Clerk of Court) is, by definition, a "legally-recognized domestic partnership"...

but since "marriage" is a hot-button word defined differently by different people, I prefer to use the term "legally-recognized domestic partnership" to make it clear exactly what I am talking about...

and if a couple has a "legally-recognized domestic partnership", then they are, by definition, indeed "married"...

 

[Mr Natural]

How can any sane American object to two adult humans marrying?

Well, the Big Book of Myths and Fairytales says it's bad so it must be bad.

 

[JWBooth]

How can any sane American object to two adult humans marrying?

Well, the Big Book of Myths and Fairytales says it's bad so it must be bad.

While I object to your reference to the Bible, it is true that it says engaging in homosexual acts is a sin. It also says that it is for God to judge sin and not man. There is also something there about removing the log from your own eye before pointing out the sliver in the eye of another. He who is without sin casting the first stone and all that.

 

[bayoubill]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership&#8230;?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

It's perfectly fine with me if someone wishes to marry a farm animal. The only requirement being the animal must not be visibly unhappy with the arrangement.

Why should anyone be concerned about who (or what) other people wish to marry? As long as no harm is being done it's nobody's business.

a legally-binding contract (marriage or otherwise) between two parties that is filed with the Clerk of Court can be entered into only by persons (i.e., human beings) who have reached the age of majority... so, no... you can't marry a non-human animal...

and while we're on the subject of legally-binding contracts: in order to be legally binding, a contract must be entered into voluntarily with the full knowledge and consent of both parties... contracts that are found to have been entered into by fraudulent or coercive means by either party face nullification, and charges may be brought against the offending party...

also, persons who have be adjudicated to be mentally unfit to handle their own affairs may not enter into a contract...

 

[bayoubill]

to form a legally-recognized domestic partnership&#8230;?

simple poll... yeah or nay...

comments welcomed...

I voted no, Bill and I support same sex marriage. My explanation for that is there are some instances where I would not support a marriage between two people. Those would include incestuous relationships, a marriage involving a minor or a marriage that would constitute bigamy.

As with so many polls...there is no black and white answer...but shades of gray as well depending on the circumstances. Because you gave me only two choices and worded your poll as you did...you forced me into choosing something that doesn't represent my feelings on the subject well at all.

my apologies, OS...

I now recognize that my wording was perhaps a bit too open-ended...