Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
there have been some give on both sides.
When the government performs the marriage...it's a civil union, no matter who it is that gets married, and when a church performs the marriage between a man and a woman, it's a marriage.
Then please tell me why my piece of paper says "Marriage License".
These were opinions that some from both sides could agreed with on this board.....try and stay up to speed.
Some gays are concerned about the legal aspects of not getting everything that a marriage between a man and a woman get....I agree they should have all the bells and whistles.
But, it seems that with other gays, it goes beyond that.....they need to morph the sanctity of the term marriage, I'm not for that.
Then please tell me why my piece of paper says "Marriage License".
These were opinions that some from both sides could agreed with on this board.....try and stay up to speed.
Some gays are concerned about the legal aspects of not getting everything that a marriage between a man and a woman get....I agree they should have all the bells and whistles.
But, it seems that with other gays, it goes beyond that.....they need to morph the sanctity of the term marriage, I'm not for that.
So long as the government uses the word "marriage" sanctity has nothing to do with it. It is legal. I have a marriage license, so it is legally a marriage. So long as that is the word used in the law, anything else is not equal. So they are not morphing the word, they are using the word appropriate to the issue.
there have been some give on both sides.
When the government performs the marriage...it's a civil union, no matter who it is that gets married, and when a church performs the marriage between a man and a woman, it's a marriage.
Then please tell me why my piece of paper says "Marriage License".
These were opinions that some from both sides could agreed with on this board.....try and stay up to speed.
Some gays are concerned about the legal aspects of not getting everything that a marriage between a man and a woman get....I agree they should have all the bells and whistles.
But, it seems that with other gays, it goes beyond that.....they need to morph the sanctity of the term marriage, I'm not for that.
It is the little deaths that eventually steal away the freedoms we hold.Your point?
I'm just giving you what was presented in this thread that both sides had some common ground...I don't feel that the government should be in the marriage business, but could be in the civil union business, where all would have equal rights.
Marriage be with the church and the same equal rights between a man and a woman. But, that IS MY opinion.
Homosexuals will never be able to marry if the church keeps hold of marriage, as they constantly discriminate.
Get rid of marriage and have civil unions. Then everyone is equal - but you wait for the heterosexuals to start bitching.
The churches don't have a hold on marriage. The only thing any church can do is perform the ceremony. The cermony confers no rights of any kind. It is the civil government which confers those rights.
The Catholic church will not perform a marriage for a Lutheran, but that does not make the married Lutheran any less married. An Atheist married by a justice of the peace is just as married as someone who was married in a church. This issue has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is entirely about the legal benefits of marriage under the law.
Fine do it. Make it so. Civil Unions for all. In the meantime I'm going to go the cheaper, more efficient route and just get equal access to civil marriage.
Marriage isn't civil, its divine, thats the mistake you and others have made about marriage. Marriage is only for churches, it got twisted up somewhere along the lines by retards.
For this issue, marriage is purely civil. If you want your marriage blessed by a divinity there are ceremonies you can undergo for that purpose, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the legal benefits the condition of being married brings. God does not get involved with medical decisions, tax benefits or probate.
These were opinions that some from both sides could agreed with on this board.....try and stay up to speed.
Some gays are concerned about the legal aspects of not getting everything that a marriage between a man and a woman get....I agree they should have all the bells and whistles.
But, it seems that with other gays, it goes beyond that.....they need to morph the sanctity of the term marriage, I'm not for that.
So long as the government uses the word "marriage" sanctity has nothing to do with it. It is legal. I have a marriage license, so it is legally a marriage. So long as that is the word used in the law, anything else is not equal. So they are not morphing the word, they are using the word appropriate to the issue.
I forgot to mention that I don't feel the government should be in the marriage business, but should be in the civil union business....there, I think I clarified that for you.
I think I know where you stand in regards to civil unions with all the rights that a marriage has. Thank you
It is the little deaths that eventually steal away the freedoms we hold.Homosexuals will never be able to marry if the church keeps hold of marriage, as they constantly discriminate.
Get rid of marriage and have civil unions. Then everyone is equal - but you wait for the heterosexuals to start bitching.
The churches don't have a hold on marriage. The only thing any church can do is perform the ceremony. The cermony confers no rights of any kind. It is the civil government which confers those rights.
The Catholic church will not perform a marriage for a Lutheran, but that does not make the married Lutheran any less married. An Atheist married by a justice of the peace is just as married as someone who was married in a church. This issue has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is entirely about the legal benefits of marriage under the law.
Marriage isn't civil, its divine, thats the mistake you and others have made about marriage. Marriage is only for churches, it got twisted up somewhere along the lines by retards.
For this issue, marriage is purely civil. If you want your marriage blessed by a divinity there are ceremonies you can undergo for that purpose, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the legal benefits the condition of being married brings. God does not get involved with medical decisions, tax benefits or probate.
Civil unions are civil, MARRIAGE itself is divine and between a man and woman, therefore gays who have a civil union with all the same rights as a marriage are not being discriminated against nor do they have unequal rights, if the argument is over a fucking word you gays and gay activists are fucking retards arguing over stupid shit.
For this issue, marriage is purely civil. If you want your marriage blessed by a divinity there are ceremonies you can undergo for that purpose, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the legal benefits the condition of being married brings. God does not get involved with medical decisions, tax benefits or probate.
Civil unions are civil, MARRIAGE itself is divine and between a man and woman, therefore gays who have a civil union with all the same rights as a marriage are not being discriminated against nor do they have unequal rights, if the argument is over a fucking word you gays and gay activists are fucking retards arguing over stupid shit.
Marriage is not divine. Marriage is a legal contract and it is nothing else. You are free to believe otherwise, but that does not give you ownership over a word. If it is just a "fucking word" then why do you care?
Lets put the issue on the national ballot let both sides make there case and have the people vote on it.
So long as the government uses the word "marriage" sanctity has nothing to do with it. It is legal. I have a marriage license, so it is legally a marriage. So long as that is the word used in the law, anything else is not equal. So they are not morphing the word, they are using the word appropriate to the issue.
I forgot to mention that I don't feel the government should be in the marriage business, but should be in the civil union business....there, I think I clarified that for you.
I think I know where you stand in regards to civil unions with all the rights that a marriage has. Thank you
I realize that. But the fact is the government is involved and marriage is the legal term. So it is appropriate that that be the term to use. It is not true same sex marriage proponents are attempting to morph the word. They are using the word precisely as it is set out in the current law.
My position is that everyone be treated equally under the law. If you have marriage for heterosexuals and civil unions for homosexuals, then they are not being treated equally under the law. It should be one thing for everyone. If we want to call all legal marriages civil unions, I have no problem with that. "Marriage" is just a word. It is, however, the word which is going to continue to be used regardless of changes in the law. I was not married in a church, but I am not going to stop saying I am married.
Civil unions are civil, MARRIAGE itself is divine and between a man and woman, therefore gays who have a civil union with all the same rights as a marriage are not being discriminated against nor do they have unequal rights, if the argument is over a fucking word you gays and gay activists are fucking retards arguing over stupid shit.
Marriage is not divine. Marriage is a legal contract and it is nothing else. You are free to believe otherwise, but that does not give you ownership over a word. If it is just a "fucking word" then why do you care?
No, marriage is divine, its been hijacked into something civil, so technically what they call marriage in America has been corrupted into glorified civil unions. Marriage belongs to churches and was always man and woman thing. Whats the fucking problem with having civil unions for gays if they contain all the rights of a marriage? No claim of discrimination can be made.
Would heterosexuals be happy to have their marriages reduced to civil unions?
After all, civil unions are the same as marriage, aren't they? All the right wing Republicans tell us that, but you know what? If straight people were handed civil unions they'd complain that they didn't have equal rights.
I wonder why?
I forgot to mention that I don't feel the government should be in the marriage business, but should be in the civil union business....there, I think I clarified that for you.
I think I know where you stand in regards to civil unions with all the rights that a marriage has. Thank you
I realize that. But the fact is the government is involved and marriage is the legal term. So it is appropriate that that be the term to use. It is not true same sex marriage proponents are attempting to morph the word. They are using the word precisely as it is set out in the current law.
My position is that everyone be treated equally under the law. If you have marriage for heterosexuals and civil unions for homosexuals, then they are not being treated equally under the law. It should be one thing for everyone. If we want to call all legal marriages civil unions, I have no problem with that. "Marriage" is just a word. It is, however, the word which is going to continue to be used regardless of changes in the law. I was not married in a church, but I am not going to stop saying I am married.
Marrige is not equal. Everyone cannot marry whomever they want for any reason. Men cannot marry children ---- even if the children say they are all too willing. A person cannot marry someone who in not willing to reciprocate that desire. At present, men cannot marry their pets, but that is likely to change as society imagines that anything goes and everything becomes "equal." True marriage is a closed family unit, in that outside contibutions are unnecessary to the procreation and child rearing aspects of it. Sure a family doesn't usually live in a vacuum; however, a young gentleman and a young lady , who found themselves shipwreaked on a deserted island, could certainly marry in the eyes of the LORD and civilize/populate the island with HIS blessing. The very same cannot be said of two men... Therefore they are not married and there is no social value to their union. Oh, they might have THEMSELVES a "gay old tyme;" however, the value of their escapades is worthless to establishing and promoting civilization.
Marriage is not divine. Marriage is a legal contract and it is nothing else. You are free to believe otherwise, but that does not give you ownership over a word. If it is just a "fucking word" then why do you care?
No, marriage is divine, its been hijacked into something civil, so technically what they call marriage in America has been corrupted into glorified civil unions. Marriage belongs to churches and was always man and woman thing. Whats the fucking problem with having civil unions for gays if they contain all the rights of a marriage? No claim of discrimination can be made.
Marriage is not divine. It has been hiacked by people who wish to turn it into something it is not. It is a legal contract, has always been a legal contract and it has never been anything but a legal contract. If you wish to pretend it is something else., if you wish to pretend that people who were not married in a manner you approve are not really married, you are free to do so. You can pretend anything you like. But so long as marriage continues to be a legal contract then it should be available to everyone equally. Anything else is discrimination.
True marriage is a closed family unit, in that outside contibutions are unnecessary to the procreation and child rearing aspects of it.
accepting lies is the road to enslavement. When you accept that government is the source of your liberty, you have given them utter control over your life.It is the little deaths that eventually steal away the freedoms we hold.The churches don't have a hold on marriage. The only thing any church can do is perform the ceremony. The cermony confers no rights of any kind. It is the civil government which confers those rights.
The Catholic church will not perform a marriage for a Lutheran, but that does not make the married Lutheran any less married. An Atheist married by a justice of the peace is just as married as someone who was married in a church. This issue has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It is entirely about the legal benefits of marriage under the law.
Ignoring reality does not change reality.
Would heterosexuals be happy to have their marriages reduced to civil unions?
After all, civil unions are the same as marriage, aren't they? All the right wing Republicans tell us that, but you know what? If straight people were handed civil unions they'd complain that they didn't have equal rights.
I wonder why?
there have been some give on both sides.
When the government performs the marriage...it's a civil union, no matter who it is that gets married, and when a church performs the marriage between a man and a woman, it's a marriage.
Then please tell me why my piece of paper says "Marriage License".
