Why can't gays accept civil unions and just be done with it?

[Meister]

Correct, and when the Bible cites a man having multiple wives - that is part of the Biblical definition of marriage (at least at that time). If you are going to cite the Bible as a source, please don't cherry-pick.

Good grief!


>>>>

(at least at the time)?
Please cite the early explicit definition of a marriage using defining language like I did with my examples, WW.
"Multiple Wives" is not defining

Now who's spinning.


Fact remains that thousands of years ago polygamy was a valid form of marriage and it was even documented in the Bible and remains so today in various countries around the world.


>>>>

With the pagens....

 

[PredFan]

So if A=B, then why do you have to call them seperate names? The semantical issue is all on the side of those opposed to same sex marriage. "Make everything exactly the same but call them different names" makes zero logical sense.

It's a compromise. Let the anti-gay marriage people keep the name, let gay people join unions that have all the rights and privileges of marriage.

Separate schools and drinking fountains were a "compromise" too. How did that work out?

Not even close to the same thing, but you know that. Hack.

 

[J.E.D]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

I'm tired of people like you telling other people what they should be happy with. If you like civil unions so much, take them. Let gay couples have marriage.

 

[J.E.D]

It's a compromise. Let the anti-gay marriage people keep the name, let gay people join unions that have all the rights and privileges of marriage.

Separate schools and drinking fountains were a "compromise" too. How did that work out?

Not even close to the same thing, but you know that. Hack.

Actually, King Hack, it's spot on. Back in the days of segregation, blacks were given there own water fountains, buses and schools. Now gays are given their own version of marriage. It's just the same, people say. You have yours, we have ours. What's the problem? Well, the problem is, when you forbid people from having something that other people have, and then tell them they can have their own, that it's the same thing, then they wonder (rightly so) if it's the same thing then why doesn't everybody get the same treatment? If civil unions are so great, why don't you accept them as well? It inevitably leads to a feeling of being a second class citizen.

 

[EriktheRed]

Gays aren't happy unless they are flouting their perversions and pressing to have them accepted as the norm. They are a snippy, agressive lot more self-righteous than fundametalist preachers.

Where did you park your time machine? I'm sure you're sorely missed in the 1930's.

As I am equally sure you belong on the set of The Hunger Games. Decadence isn't progress.

Too bad for reactionary wingnuts such as yourself this isn't considered "decadence" by the majority.

 

[Seawytch]

It's a compromise. Let the anti-gay marriage people keep the name, let gay people join unions that have all the rights and privileges of marriage.

Separate schools and drinking fountains were a "compromise" too. How did that work out?

Not even close to the same thing, but you know that. Hack.

Separate but equal is separate but equal. Discrimination is discrimination no matter how justified you feel in yours.

 

[Spoonman]

Why can't negroes who want to marry white women accept civil unions and just be done with it? Marriage is reserved for two people of the same race!

tell that to kim kardashian

 

[flacaltenn]

Why is it nobody is doing anything to "get Gubmint out of marriage" like they say they want to and only talk about it when "the gheys" want in?

Because if you treat marraige only under contract law that defines things like spouses, beneficiaries, powers of attorney, etc --- there would be no special "gay" class. Only the literal interpretation of those contracts. I like the idea --- because gays can have any right they want TODAY by signing the appropriate paperwork.. Problem is --- it's NOT good enough for the movement extremists -- who want to hijack marraige as a trophy to shove in the face of those who don't condone their lifestyle choices.

We SHOULD get "gubermint" out of it. But that would end the vendetta.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Liberals don't care about gays or gay marriage. They just use it as another political platform.

I think a lot of liberals do care about gays and gay marriage but the fact that the Dems are using it in their political platform is just plain fantastic. And why the hell not? Republicans are pissed they didn't think of it first. See how the righties are all jumping on board now too?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

Because separate but equal is also an equal protection civil rights violation, where same-sex couples are still denied access to marriage law.

To paraphrase Justice Kennedy in Romer, your ‘proposal’ does nothing further a proper legislative end but seeks only to make homosexuals unequal to everyone else.

And one cannot be compelled to ‘compromise’ his inalienable civil liberties.

 

[Cowman]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

Why can't homophobes just accept gay marriage and be done with it?

Oh right, homophobia.

Carry on.

 

[Cowman]

Gays swordfighting invalidate your own marriage.

Truth.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

They want to be able to force, FORCE, churches, etc, to have ceremonies, any that refuse will be sued into the ground.


This never had anything to do with equality, at least not to the puppet masters.

 

[Cowman]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

They want to be able to force, FORCE, churches, etc, to have ceremonies, any that refuse will be sued into the ground.


This never had anything to do with equality, at least not to the puppet masters.

Uhh, what does legalized gay marriage have to do with forcing churches to have ceremonies?

There are TONS of churches and religious communities that will openly accept and marry gays.

They don't need your pretentious stick up their evil little asshole church.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

Because separate but equal is also an equal protection civil rights violation, where same-sex couples are still denied access to marriage law.

To paraphrase Justice Kennedy in Romer, your ‘proposal’ does nothing further a proper legislative end but seeks only to make homosexuals unequal to everyone else.

And one cannot be compelled to ‘compromise’ his inalienable civil liberties.

I'll give you that there are "inalienable civil liberties" involved here. But the happiness of 2 same sex people should not be conditioned by hijacking a well-defined and time-honored term of legal and social importance..

(or 3 folks of various persuasions, or a matronly leftist and her Akita)

 

[Political Junky]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

They want to be able to force, FORCE, churches, etc, to have ceremonies, any that refuse will be sued into the ground.


This never had anything to do with equality, at least not to the puppet masters.

No one has said anything about forcing churches to perform same sex marriage, but many churches already do.

 

[UKRider]

Human Rights Campaign

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Because LGBT have an agenda.

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

They want to be able to force, FORCE, churches, etc, to have ceremonies, any that refuse will be sued into the ground.


This never had anything to do with equality, at least not to the puppet masters.

Uhh, what does legalized gay marriage have to do with forcing churches to have ceremonies?

There are TONS of churches and religious communities that will openly accept and marry gays.

They don't need your pretentious stick up their evil little asshole church.

That's pretty naive.. You KNOW people sue even when they KNOW they will not be served. That's why photographers and bakeries and all those folks get sued right now if they try to refuse to serve. And there are gay folks out there who are LOOKING for an opportunity to draw legal blood.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why is it nobody is doing anything to "get Gubmint out of marriage" like they say they want to and only talk about it when "the gheys" want in?

Because if you treat marraige only under contract law that defines things like spouses, beneficiaries, powers of attorney, etc --- there would be no special "gay" class. Only the literal interpretation of those contracts. I like the idea --- because gays can have any right they want TODAY by signing the appropriate paperwork.. Problem is --- it's NOT good enough for the movement extremists -- who want to hijack marraige as a trophy to shove in the face of those who don't condone their lifestyle choices.

We SHOULD get "gubermint" out of it. But that would end the vendetta.

This makes no sense.

Allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law, as required by the 14th Amendment, would in no way ‘hijack’ marriage; indeed, same-sex couples wish to preserve marriage exactly as it is, unaltered, and have their unions recognized for exactly what they are: marriages.

Also, there’s no ‘getting government out of marriage,’ that’s idiocy. The states write the marriage law, which is administered by state courts.

 

[Seawytch]

I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.

They want to be able to force, FORCE, churches, etc, to have ceremonies, any that refuse will be sued into the ground.

No we don't. You can't force a church to accept members or marry them. You HAVE heard of the 1st Amendment, yes?

This never had anything to do with equality, at least not to the puppet masters.

Of course it does.