Your Stories of how Gay Marriage ruined your Marriage

[Pop23]

No, I wouldn't. However those who claim marriage is only for producing children either have a very bad argument, or do think this is fair.

How fair is it that gay people can't marry?

This is exactly the point I'm making.

No, there are many reasons that hetro couples can't or don't want children. Those that can't should be exempt from any such law due to disability. Gays, or so they say, are not disabled. They just can't. Some fear the consequences of having children, including death. Legitimate fear of death would also qualify for an exemption. Old age would be exempt as we all know you can not discriminate due to age.

Fertility is only the burden of hetros. It is moot to same sex.

Proceed

Pop....I have a thread for you:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...aws-require-proof-of-procreation-ability.html

I have three children from the coupling of myself and my wife.

No same sex couple has, in the history of the world, been able to make that statement.

 

[Nosmo King]

So you would deny access to a marriage license to someone who cannot have children? How is that fair? Are married couples mandated to have children? What if a married couple do not want kids? Should their marriage be annulled?

No, I wouldn't. However those who claim marriage is only for producing children either have a very bad argument, or do think this is fair.

How fair is it that gay people can't marry?

This is exactly the point I'm making.

No, there are many reasons that hetro couples can't or don't want children. Those that can't should be exempt from any such law due to disability. Gays, or so they say, are not disabled. They just can't. Some fear the consequences of having children, including death. Legitimate fear of death would also qualify for an exemption. Old age would be exempt as we all know you can not discriminate due to age.

Fertility is only the burden of hetros. It is moot to same sex.

Proceed

So if there is no mandate for married couples to have children, and if there are exemptions for those who cannot or will not, why is there opposition to same sex marriage again? You left enough loopholes for hetero couples, yet explicitly deny homosexual couples equal access.

 

[bodecea]

No, there are many reasons that hetro couples can't or don't want children. Those that can't should be exempt from any such law due to disability. Gays, or so they say, are not disabled. They just can't. Some fear the consequences of having children, including death. Legitimate fear of death would also qualify for an exemption. Old age would be exempt as we all know you can not discriminate due to age.

Fertility is only the burden of hetros. It is moot to same sex.

Proceed

Pop....I have a thread for you:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...aws-require-proof-of-procreation-ability.html

I have three children from the coupling of myself and my wife.

No same sex couple has, in the history of the world, been able to make that statement.

Here's the thread for you, Pop. http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...aws-require-proof-of-procreation-ability.html

BTW...my wife and I have a beautiful daughter....there, I just made that statement.

 

[BlindBoo]

Tell it to those who bash gays with a bible, like the many bible thumpers here and post #146.

The "thought police" are the narrow minded cons and fundies who have no reason for being against marriage equality, except that they don't like it.

This is like the other freedoms the right wants to end - if you don't like it, don't do it. But in the meantime, MYOB.

That's not the way equality works.

You know....if it weren't for secular laws....many WOULD want to physically hurt us. Just my opinion, of course.

Bullshit.

I'm afraid I agree with you on that. They ignore the laws and physically hurt Gays anyway.

RIP Paul Broussard.

Murder of Paul Broussard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[hazlnut]

How would three brothers marrying, or a mom and her daughter, destroy your marriage?

Someone is confused about the topic.

Yep. You are. The topic was how changing definitions of marriages changes marriage so I provided an example to illustrate the point that it does. It was a point a child would have picked up on, seriously.

You were not defining marriage -- or giving any relevant examples.

A marriage license application asks for your age (consent), your state of residence, and if you've been married before.

How does two adult men filling that out effect you?

Stay on topic.

 

[BlindBoo]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

That gay marriage will destroy traditional marriage of one man and one women has been in the GOP platform for several years now. I think the OP is asking for examples of any traditional marriage that has been destroyed by gay ones

 

[frigidweirdo]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

Articles: Why Homosexual Marriage is Wrong

Check out #8:

Homosexual marriage will devalue your marriage. A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued. For example:
If the Smithsonian Museum displays a hunk of polished blue glass next to the Hope Diamond with a sign that says, "These are of equal value," and treats them as if they were, the Hope Diamond is devalued in the public's eye. The government says it's just expensive blue glass. The history and mystery are lost too.
If an employer uses a robot as an employee and treats the robot the same way it treats human employees, human employees are devalued. By doing so, the employer says, "A robot can do your job, you're no better." What will you and the public think of your job and you?
If the government issues a license to babysitters that grants them the same rights, protections and responsibilities as a child's parents, parenthood is devalued. The government says parents are just babysitters.
If government grants professional licenses to just anybody, every profession and qualified professional is devalued. The government says an uneducated panhandler can do brain surgery.

and:

Ten Reasons Why ?Same-Sex Marriage? Affects Your Marriage

example of what it says:

1. Same-sex marriage reduces the worth of your marriage

Redefining marriage to include people of the same sex is a legal endorsement of the fungibility of a man and woman in marriage. To set “any two persons” on a par with a man and a woman in marriage is to reduce the worth of their roles. To draw an analogy, if a government declared the price of coal to be equivalent with the price of gold, would the cost of coal go up, or would the cost of gold come down? The price of gold would come down. Traditional marriage is the gold standard of marriage. People who affirm gay/lesbian marriage as equivalent in worth to the marriage of a husband and a wife devalue the worth of your marriage.

Just for starters.

Thanks to Bootlicker for giving me the opening I was waiting for Freewill to give me...but he was too chicken to commit.

Homosexuality will devalue your marriage? Jeez, if people get married and they need the marriage to actually have a decent relationship, then they have problems.
Now, saying that gay marriage is "lesser" is just ridiculous and opinion, not fact. People might say that black people can marry and use the same arguments. How would that go down?

 

[Freewill]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

Articles: Why Homosexual Marriage is Wrong

Check out #8:

Homosexual marriage will devalue your marriage. A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued. For example:
If the Smithsonian Museum displays a hunk of polished blue glass next to the Hope Diamond with a sign that says, "These are of equal value," and treats them as if they were, the Hope Diamond is devalued in the public's eye. The government says it's just expensive blue glass. The history and mystery are lost too.
If an employer uses a robot as an employee and treats the robot the same way it treats human employees, human employees are devalued. By doing so, the employer says, "A robot can do your job, you're no better." What will you and the public think of your job and you?
If the government issues a license to babysitters that grants them the same rights, protections and responsibilities as a child's parents, parenthood is devalued. The government says parents are just babysitters.
If government grants professional licenses to just anybody, every profession and qualified professional is devalued. The government says an uneducated panhandler can do brain surgery.

and:

Ten Reasons Why ?Same-Sex Marriage? Affects Your Marriage

example of what it says:

1. Same-sex marriage reduces the worth of your marriage

Redefining marriage to include people of the same sex is a legal endorsement of the fungibility of a man and woman in marriage. To set “any two persons” on a par with a man and a woman in marriage is to reduce the worth of their roles. To draw an analogy, if a government declared the price of coal to be equivalent with the price of gold, would the cost of coal go up, or would the cost of gold come down? The price of gold would come down. Traditional marriage is the gold standard of marriage. People who affirm gay/lesbian marriage as equivalent in worth to the marriage of a husband and a wife devalue the worth of your marriage.

Just for starters.

Thanks to Bootlicker for giving me the opening I was waiting for Freewill to give me...but he was too chicken to commit.

I never argued that there was a rational argument against going against the will of the people and redefining marriage. Such as the two paragraphs you produce state. What I said is there is no one saying it ruined their marriage. And when said there was no rational reason to ban gay marriage I argued the same can be said about abortion. Gay marriage won't ruin anyone's marriage as the lie in the OP states.

 

[bendog]

Well, back to the OP, the two guys who live across the street seem too damn happy to be married, and I'm jealous (-:

 

[bodecea]

Same old tired BS coming from the liberal lying left. Sure makes it easy for them when they define what the other side wants and then expect the other side to argue against what they have made up.

It is a lie and all the flying monkeys circle chiming in to support the lie.

The reason that the liberal left has to ask questions like in the OP is because they can't find where anyone who opposes their idea said what they are asking. Again, it is just another bit of flying monkey BS we can expect from liberals.

Oh?

 

[bendog]

"Gay marriage won't ruin anyone's marriage as the lie in the OP states"

The OP doesn't state gay marriage will ruin any marriage. The OP challenges those who believe it will to pony up.

 

[bodecea]

"Gay marriage won't ruin anyone's marriage as the lie in the OP states"

The OP doesn't state gay marriage will ruin any marriage. The OP challenges those who believe it will to pony up.

Reading is fundamental, eh?

 

[Edgetho]

One of the best and most under-appreciated songs ever performed by one of the most under-appreciated Gay artists in history.

When he came out on Johnny Carson, I'm thinking, "So what? Who cares?"

Didn't change my opinion of him in the least. Not one bit.

And he did this back BEFORE hardly anybody else had the intestinal fortitude to do it.

Please try to forgive the 50's era arrangement (okay, don't) of this, but it's still a tribute to the incredible range of one of the most under-appreciated artists of all time.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Avkk6q4Oyw8]What Will My Mary Say - Lyrics - Johnny Mathis - YouTube[/ame]

I don't hate Gays. I hate the politics of it all.

This thread being a good example

 

[Seawytch]

It hasn't...just like my owning of several guns hasn't ruined my neighbor's life. (BTW...which neighbor? The one on the left who is a sheriff's deputy? or the one on the right who BOTH husband and wife are Border Patrol agents?)

This is the difference between bod and other people. She answered the question that it doesn't affect her..you can rightwinger don't like to answer the gay marriage issue because it shows them to be wrong.

Government actors don't count, because grabbers don't want to stop THEM from owning guns. I am saying if gay marriage is "OK" because it doesn't impact other marriages, shouldn't me owning a gun be "OK" because I don't impact anyone around me as well?

Okay. License and register each one and make it public record like civil marriage, and I'm okay with it.

 

[Seawytch]

driving whether gay or straight is not different. being same sex married and opposite sex married is different, no matter how much you fervently hope it isn't. Equal protection doesn't apply if things are not equal.

Marrying whether gay or straight isn't different either.

A gay couple can have babies? Really? If you believe there isn't a difference then I suggest a biology book. The marriage contract was intended to protect the family. In other words a man was not suppose to run out on his wife and if he did the marriage contract protected her. Marriage license used to protect the couple from marrying their sister or cousin. Now I do not see how that can be prevented by law.

Yes, they can and do. My partner and I have two and they are legally OURS.

 

[Seawytch]

Negative. It is because of the Equal Access Laws alone. But, tell you what. Show a case where someone was FORCED to go against their beliefs in their business in a state which does NOT have Equal Access Laws. Go for it.

I'd be a lot more comfortable if equal access laws were also struck down. If everyone can choose not to contract with anyone, there's no equal protection issue, and everyone would have an equal opportunity to be a jerk and be ridiculed for it.



But the equal access laws have nothing to with the OP and Marty is just trying to hijack.

The OP itself is a flawed concept. Harm has been done to SOME people due to gay marriage (via public accommodation laws.)

Except there was no marriage equality in the states where the challenges occurred. Argument fail.

 

[Seawytch]

ask the baker and the photographer who are being forced to go against their beliefs to keep their businesses about that.



And "could" is not enough to deny my Constitutional rights, of which owning a firearm is a right, and gay marriage is not, no matter what a bunch of un-elected lawyers says about it.

Proof?



Equality is indeed guaranteed by the Constitution.

Under the law. It is not guaranteed in a bake shop or with a photographer. The GOVERNMENT has to treat you equally. Forcing private organisations and individuals to do it is a progressive statist invention.

The locality has a public accommodation LAW. (Which has NOTHING to do with civil marriage)

 

[rightwinger]

Since NJ allows gay marriage it means that my marriage of 32 years is now a sham. I never would have gotten married in the first place if I had known they would someday allow gays the same privilege

 

[bodecea]

Marrying whether gay or straight isn't different either.

A gay couple can have babies? Really? If you believe there isn't a difference then I suggest a biology book. The marriage contract was intended to protect the family. In other words a man was not suppose to run out on his wife and if he did the marriage contract protected her. Marriage license used to protect the couple from marrying their sister or cousin. Now I do not see how that can be prevented by law.

Yes, they can and do. My partner and I have two and they are legally OURS.

And being legally married certainly helped ensure that our daughter was legally protected.

 

[Seawytch]

There is a right to equal protection of (equal access to) the law in the Federal Constitution, including the right to access marriage law.

There is absolutely no restriction on a gay man marrying a woman, none they have equal access.

As there was absolutely no restriction on a black man marrying a black woman....and a white man marrying a white woman. Do you know what the Supreme Court did with that argument from Virginia attorneys? They laughed.............out loud.

Eventually. It was actually a successful argument for 85 years. But now that it isn't, it's called precedent.