Opposition to Gay Marriage - Any Basis Other Than Intolerance and Bigotry?

[The Rabbi]

they dont. Consenting adults should be allowed to enter whatever contract they see fit.

But hen who actually gives a shit besides you? I dont care if 4 people want to hook up. That has no affect on my life. More to the point:

Buddy: So you have some interesting Neighbors.
Me: yup i think they are all married together.
Buddy: No shit
Me Yup
Buddy: So hows work...


Same goes for a gay couple. Unless you actually found out that they are gay, how would you even know? Why would you even care? Live your life and be happy.

Marriage is more than a mere contract. I would be fine if there were a "domestic partnership" contract that addressed issues.
BUt gays don't want that.
btw, what rights are gays being denied?

No marriage is nothing more than a word, and a contract. You dont have to marry for love. You can marry for Power, Money, Land, Title etc.
Marriage to YOU might be more than a contract, but thats just your opinion. the reality once again is much different.

I guess there is about 1500 rights they are denied. feel free to google it.

a marriage is a sacred bond. That is the traditional view in Western Culture. Marriage is different fundamentally from other relationships.
Gays aren't denied any rights whatsoever. Whoever told you they were?

 

[The Rabbi]

I'll say it again....if that's your thing and the state cannot come up with a compelling reason to restrict it....I'm happy for all of you. Doesn't affect my marriage to my wife in the least.

There is an idea of the collective good of society. Gay marriage does not further that good. In fact it impinges on it.
Gays wuld have to show where their rights are being infringed on. They cannot because they are not.
You want to be "married" to another woman? Go right ahead. But dont expect the state to bless such a thing.

snicker....Your opinion does not further society in a positive way. Lets ban you.

People snicker at what they dont understand. Your ignorance is revealing. Frankly, since you were pwned the last time this came up I am surprised you are stupid enough to venture into this agian.

 

[SW2SILVER]

In response to post #160 (Wry Catcher wrote: What good does divorce do (and in particular, what good does it do for children when the parents split)? You might make sense Rabbi if you put your biased opinions to rest and actually thought? Have you ever tried? )
Nice try, allowing married Heterosexuals to divorce may not be desirable, neither is Gay marriage. Divorce is avoidable, and Gay marriage is unnecessary. Don’t hedge your bets here. And, lets please drop the crap about bias. WE ALL have a bias here, SO? Your bias is better somehow?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What purpose does gay marriage serve, other than the obvious, which is to be able to say "I support gay marriage" and therefore look great in the eyes of the vapid left wing fringe?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Simply put its disgusting. And the mere fact that you label me intolerant because my "opinion" differs from yours shows where the real intolerance is.

No one is saying they can't dip their sticks in each others fecal matter. Were just saying it can't be defined as marriage. There is nothing wrong with the appropriate title of civil unions.

 

[Zona]

The gay lifestyle is disgusting. I do not like being around buttfvckers. They are just as vile as a pedophile is to me, but there is no law against their perversion because it does not hurt another human.

To be consistent in my views on FREEDOM for all. The faggots need to be able to get married.

The faggots do not need to impose their beliefs on me or my children. If they continue to campaign gay lifestyles be taught to our children in schools, I must insist, we also teach all children about Sodom and Gomorrah and how risky, unhealthy and filthy anal sex is.

So if your "girlfriend" asks for anal sex, you are leaving. YOu are gone! Righty..?

Who the hell is trying to teach gay sex to children? Who? How in the fuck can giving gays rights going to affect you in any way?

Come out come out.......(the ones who make the most noise ALWAYS have things in their closets...always.)

 

[Zona]

Simply put its disgusting. And the mere fact that you label me intolerant because my "opinion" differs from yours shows where the real intolerance is.

No one is saying they can't dip their sticks in each others fecal matter. Were just saying it can't be defined as marriage. There is nothing wrong with the appropriate title of civil unions.

But sticking you dick in a vagina without being married is fine with you righty? Divorce is fine, infidelity is fine, but gay "marriage" is wrong because the sanctity of "marriage" is so important to you righty?

Fuck you...you fucking hypocrite. Oh and god bless.

 

[The Rabbi]

No marriage is nothing more than a word, and a contract. You dont have to marry for love. You can marry for Power, Money, Land, Title etc.
Marriage to YOU might be more than a contract, but thats just your opinion. the reality once again is much different.

I guess there is about 1500 rights they are denied. feel free to google it.

a marriage is a sacred bond. That is the traditional view in Western Culture. Marriage is different fundamentally from other relationships.
Gays aren't denied any rights whatsoever. Whoever told you they were?

Wow sacred bond you say, and yet the divorce rate is over 50% in this nation. You would think something so sacred would have a lower % number.
Once again this is all in your head.

Sexual orientation and human rights

The rights to social security, assistance and benefits, and from here - the standard of living - are affected, for example when they have to disclose the identity of their spouse.

What does the divorce rate have to do with the traditional idea of a sacred bond? Another non sequitur.
Gays have the same rights as straight people. Go check it out. Surely you've been schooled on this enough times we dont have to go through it yet again.

 

[WillowTree]

I just glanced through quickly. Seems GC is determined that it be bigotry.. well,, then he made bigoted statements about religion. Ah yes,, religion.. that's the difference. Marriage is a "religious" ceremony.. "That which GOD has joined." most liberals are atheists and I would think their bigoted selves would want nothing to do with a Christian/Religious ceremony.

The religious ceremony is not what we are fighting for equal access to. We already have equal access to the religious institution of marriage. We can find religious leaders in pretty much every denomination to perform a religious ceremony for us. What gays and lesbians want equal access to is legal, civil marriage. The king that givers your partner health benefits through your job, hospital visitation rights, ability to make decisions about that persons care or final wishes, inherit property or get survivor benefits. There are hundreds and hundreds of rights, benefits and privileges associate with legal marriage.

I don't suppose you could back up your "most liberals are atheists" statement with any kind of factual data could you?

Sure just read liberal talking points.. You get it.. sic.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Simply put its disgusting. And the mere fact that you label me intolerant because my "opinion" differs from yours shows where the real intolerance is.

No one is saying they can't dip their sticks in each others fecal matter. Were just saying it can't be defined as marriage. There is nothing wrong with the appropriate title of civil unions.

But sticking you dick in a vagina without being married is fine with you righty? Divorce is fine, infidelity is fine, but gay "marriage" is wrong because the sanctity of "marriage" is so important to you righty?

Fuck you...you fucking hypocrite. Oh and god bless.

How am I a hypocrite? I didn't say any of those things you said. Kinda like to make shit up don't ya?

 

[Seawytch]

There is an idea of the collective good of society. Gay marriage does not further that good. In fact it impinges on it.
Gays wuld have to show where their rights are being infringed on. They cannot because they are not.
You want to be "married" to another woman? Go right ahead. But dont expect the state to bless such a thing.

Simply stating "gay marriage does not further that good" does not provide evidence of that. If a heterosexual couple having access to this legal contract provides a societal benefit, then how does providing it to gay and lesbian couples not provide that same benefit?

I have a partner. We have been together in a monogamous relationship for 15 years. We have a home and are raising two children together. What justification do you have to provide legal, civil marriage to a heterosexual couple and not to me and my partner? What is your compelling state reason? (that would actually hold up in court. So far...epic fail)

What benefit does it provide? Keep in mind no one is preventing anyone from moving in with each other or having their union blessed by any church willing to do it or the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame, if that's their thing.

And the exact same thing can be said for heterosexual relationships. There is no difference between my relationship and a heterosexual relationship. On what basis would you deny me the rights benefits and privileges of legal marriage and not the heterosexual couple?

What is the rate of fidelity of homosexual couples over heterosexual couples? What is the incidence of mental illness among homosexuals vs heterosexuals? What is the rate of STDs among homosexuals vs heterosexuals? What is the rate of self destructive behavior among homosexuals vs heterosexuals? How are these obvious differences going to be helped by giving state protections to homosexual unions?

What does it matter? It can certainly be argued that allowing gays and lesbians equal protections for their relationships would lead to a decrease in the things you listed.

The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage
Why same-sex marriage is an American value.

The Religious Case For Gay Marriage

 

[Zona]

a marriage is a sacred bond. That is the traditional view in Western Culture. Marriage is different fundamentally from other relationships.
Gays aren't denied any rights whatsoever. Whoever told you they were?

Wow sacred bond you say, and yet the divorce rate is over 50% in this nation. You would think something so sacred would have a lower % number.
Once again this is all in your head.

Sexual orientation and human rights

The rights to social security, assistance and benefits, and from here - the standard of living - are affected, for example when they have to disclose the identity of their spouse.

What does the divorce rate have to do with the traditional idea of a sacred bond? Another non sequitur.
Gays have the same rights as straight people. Go check it out. Surely you've been schooled on this enough times we dont have to go through it yet again.

Yup, especially when their partner is dying in a hospital room and the doc says immediate family only can come in to visit. Thats fair. Oh yeah, same rights.

When you are with a person for 20 years and cant get them on your health insurance plan because you are not married. Oh yeah, same rights.

 

[Seawytch]

In response to post #160 (Wry Catcher wrote: What good does divorce do (and in particular, what good does it do for children when the parents split)? You might make sense Rabbi if you put your biased opinions to rest and actually thought? Have you ever tried? )
Nice try, allowing married Heterosexuals to divorce may not be desirable, neither is Gay marriage. Divorce is avoidable, and Gay marriage is unnecessary. Don’t hedge your bets here. And, lets please drop the crap about bias. WE ALL have a bias here, SO? Your bias is better somehow?

Do you believe that legal marriage is "unnecessary" or only gays and lesbians having equal access to it?

There is bias and there is bigotry. Wanting to deny someone equality based on the fact that you don't like the consenting adult they are in love with is bigotry not bias.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I don't have a problem with polygamy either. My only point of concern is how much of a say should wife #1 get in the marriage between the husband and wife #2 that he marries at a later date. Since a contract between him and #2 could effect the split of assets or whatever with #1, I'm wondering if she should have some legal ground to prevent that marriage. I guess it could just be up to the three of them to work out. Probably just one of many headaches for having multiple spouses.

maybe they use the seniority system....

 

[Seawytch]

I just glanced through quickly. Seems GC is determined that it be bigotry.. well,, then he made bigoted statements about religion. Ah yes,, religion.. that's the difference. Marriage is a "religious" ceremony.. "That which GOD has joined." most liberals are atheists and I would think their bigoted selves would want nothing to do with a Christian/Religious ceremony.

The religious ceremony is not what we are fighting for equal access to. We already have equal access to the religious institution of marriage. We can find religious leaders in pretty much every denomination to perform a religious ceremony for us. What gays and lesbians want equal access to is legal, civil marriage. The king that givers your partner health benefits through your job, hospital visitation rights, ability to make decisions about that persons care or final wishes, inherit property or get survivor benefits. There are hundreds and hundreds of rights, benefits and privileges associate with legal marriage.

I don't suppose you could back up your "most liberals are atheists" statement with any kind of factual data could you?

Sure just read liberal talking points.. You get it.. sic.

Don't you mean the Faux News interpretation of what they think liberal talking points would be? Of course you do...because liberals tend to look at facts, conservatives at emotions and the FACTS are that Most Americans Say They're Christian

Now run along to Frank Luntz and find out what YOUR talking point is supposed to be.

 

[Seawytch]

I am a military retiree and my legal spouse cannot even shop in the fucking exchange. That's not equality...that's discrimination without a rational basis, period.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I just glanced through quickly. Seems GC is determined that it be bigotry.. well,, then he made bigoted statements about religion. Ah yes,, religion.. that's the difference. Marriage is a "religious" ceremony.. "That which GOD has joined." most liberals are atheists and I would think their bigoted selves would want nothing to do with a Christian/Religious ceremony.

most liberals are Willow?......i think it would be the ones with the mindset of a guy like Dean.....i work with too many who seem to have some kind of a higher being mindset to think that of them.....

 

[brono921]

Speaking of bigots, I couldn't help but notice that you framed your argument to provide only one point in opposition. It's called being prejudiced, but that doesn't seem to be a problem for liberals.
That being said, I'd like to introduce you to a position you are absolutely unprepared to deal with.
My opposition to gay marriage is derived from their position that they are pursuing an agenda to force employers to recognize gay spouses so that they may be eligible for healthcare at the expense of everyone.
All one needs do is look at the rate of HIV/AIDS transmission and you'll notice that homosexual males are at the top of the list. When you force insurance companies to provide healthcare for such a group, insurance companies will have no choice but to defer the cost to their clients.
That's money you plan on taking out of my pocket pal, for nothing more than an ideological bent.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Enlighten me, HOW do I get past my instinctual feelings of revulsion at what seems such a horrid act?

if you dont have to experience it or witness it.....why should it bother you?.....there was a guy at the market the other day whose wife was disgustingly obese and wore clothes to show it......i thought this guy having sex with this woman was like....holy shit ....yikes ......but as long as i dont have to see them screwing.....it dont bother me....

 

[Seawytch]

Speaking of bigots, I couldn't help but notice that you framed your argument to provide only one point in opposition. It's called being prejudiced, but that doesn't seem to be a problem for liberals.
That being said, I'd like to introduce you to a position you are absolutely unprepared to deal with.
My opposition to gay marriage is derived from their position that they are pursuing an agenda to force employers to recognize gay spouses so that they may be eligible for healthcare at the expense of everyone.
All one needs do is look at the rate of HIV/AIDS transmission and you'll notice that homosexual males are at the top of the list. When you force insurance companies to provide healthcare for such a group, insurance companies will have no choice but to defer the cost to their clients.
That's money you plan on taking out of my pocket pal, for nothing more than an ideological bent.

Someone's fat fucking husband or wife is more of a health risk. Obesity is the number one health problem in this country. Are you gonna be the fat police at weddings? Trying an economic angle to your bigotry is pretty transparent.

Oh, and lesbians have the LOWEST HIV risk. Can we get married?