Let me see it is really society changes or a small group of citizens wishing to force their view points on the majority. In every state where this has come up to a vote to the public, gay marriage has been voted down. Only in those areas like MASS, where one judge over ruled the will of the people, do you have it legal.

I don't know what any political has to worry about in Mass as far as over turning a very liberal judges opinion, since it has been proven that the majority of the public do not want it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

Let me see it is really society changes or a small group of citizens wishing to force thier view points on the majority.

---

Dude, I hear you, I feel the same way about the Jehovah's Witnesses ringing my doorbell. They actually COME TO MY HOUSE, UNINVITED! At least the gays aren't doing that.

My solution to this whole thing would be for each state to have a voter referendum allowing "same sex civil unions" That would give the gay people access to the wonderful world of divorce court and spousal maintenance. I think that a majority of voters in most states would support such a measure. Just don't give it the official title of marriage, which should keep the church people happy. Then we could move on to the many really important issues before us.

There is no more important issue than how humans treat each other. When we solve that problem we'll have a chance with the others.

I agree that how humans treat each other is very important in a civilized society. Unfortunately, or fortunately, as one may view it; it is not the function of government to mandate that people are nice to one another. It is their job to insure that all people are treated equal under the law, and to protect individuals from criminal acts by others. Society as a whole has that responsibility. Mankind has a very poor track record in that regard. To me it seems that the Seven Dealy Sins have been present for a long time and will not be eliminated by government fiat. The point that I tried to make is that there are many life and death issues that the government must address: food, disease,fuel,terrorism, nuclear proliferation, global warming... need I go on? If we expend all our time and energy debating same sex unions we might all be dead.

I read somewhere, from a credible seeming enough source, that 40% of the world's population does not have indoor plumbing, which frankly blew my mind a little at the time. Not that a bathroom is any kind of benchmark of civilization but... it suggests a kind of obvious risk to disease on the most fundemental level that caused me to think "holy cowabunga, we have a loooooooooooog way to go before we get to the dawn!"

Maybe we need to start a "Commodes for Civilization" movement here?

If we all were committed to treating each other the way we wanted to be treated, We wouldn't have any problems. Would you let your brother sit in filth? Would you let his children starve? How we treat each other is a testiment to society, not the price of gas! Equal under the law means we all entitled to the same treatment by government. Gay straight black white jew gentile.., need I go on??

If if's and but's were candy and nuts then we'ed all have a merry Christmas. Dear Talaniman, I am doing my best to find some common ground with you, but you continue to vent wishes that may not be based in reality. I thank you for agreeing with my statement that we should all be treated equally under the law. Your... Jew, Gentile gay, straight adendum was redundant. Even though we all deserve equal treatment by government, the results of our efforts are not guaranteed equal results. We all regret starving children and misery in the world, and do our best to improve their lot. It sounds like your suggestion would be to pass a law eliminating all such misery. It is too bad that the government is not a "horn of plenty" that can solve all of the world's ills; only society through the work and toil of its members can provide relief. Your statement that "how we treat each other is a testament to society" is correct. The price of gas is a function of government.

If you wish to continue a spirited debate on this topic, please pick out any and all statements that I have made thus far, and feel free to provide rebuttals to them. Point out errors in logic or fact. Please do not recite platitudes such as "can't we all just get along", or "workers of the world unite, and throw off your shackels". I am still trying to figure out what you found so offensive in my "solution" to the same sex civil union debate.

Until the country can do a better job of holding elections, we better not try any referendums.

You have to excuse me D, I was on my save the world soapbox and as you can see I do the rant thing, now and again. Actually I agree with your same sex marriage solution, but honestly there are already solutions and options already in place for gay couples, that are already recognised by the courts its called a contract. Even though a state doesn't recognise their marriage the business end cannot be ignored. Most gay couples already have some form of contract, or will, documenting how health care and property division will occur in case of illness and death. Its valid all over the country. More laws in this area is redundant and useless. As far as being married in a church and having that union recognised through out the states? Most states have already voted No on every referendum that has come up so far. Sorry for the rant though, I get like that now and again. More room out than in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Most gay couples already have some form of contract, or will, documenting how health care and property division will occur in case of illness and death. Its valid all over the country. More laws in this area is redundant and useless.

---

I don't think that's the case Tal. If you ask a good number of same-sex couples who are living together I'm sure they have no idea of this supposed contract. Of course a will doesn't enter into this discussion because that only applicable after death.

The ones I know are a bit older and have been together for decades that may be a difference, as far a health care they each have their own insurance. Hm This contract goes beyond gender as a lot of older couples who live together have similar contracts to ensure their partners are protected in case of emergencies and family members swoop in and kick the partners out. A talk with a lawyer is all anyone needs to do to get a binding contract written up and notarized.

Dear Talaniman,

I wish to extend to you a sincere apology for my previous answer to you. Upon rereading it in the clear light of day, I realize that it was unduly harsh, and uncalled for. As you pointed out, we are all capable of going on a rant.

Dr. D

Forget it, I know it felt good

There are so many important topics in this world I cannot understand why people dwell on same-sex couples- and same-sex couples are the main culprits with all their parades and publicity stunts.

Important topics like, Is Elvis alive? And Where is he living? :-)

Here's the problem with allowing gay-marriage. Where does it end? If the same-sex can get married how can you keep the right of marriage between one man and two women, or one women and two men? Oh, wait, a 16 year old boy wants to marry a 19 year old women. Can we say no? He ca be convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison, but he can't get married?

Of course I am not and advocate of any of these scenarios, but it has been shown that if we keep protecting these "special classes" we will end up in dissolving the rules we have lived by for decades.

Furthermore, why is it that every liberal calls me intolerant or a hater if I am against gay-marriage. I am not arguing against it in ignorance, I have just chosen my side. I agree with chuck completely. Why can't I stand up against homosexuality because I think it is disgusting and wrong? As a matter of fact, now that we have practically labeled gays as a preotected class, they are now discriminating against straight people. I have read articles about towns with high populations of gays where they verbally abuse straight people.

Look in Europe. Chery said the state and church should be completely separated. I agree but it is not going to happen. There are ministers in countries that have been imprisoned because on the pulpit they preach against homosexuality. Not in the sense of hate 'em all, kill 'em all. But instead, just preaching that it is wrong and sinful. THEY WERE PUT IN JAIL. How ridiculous. I thought church and state couldn't mix.

Well man-women marriage has been going on a long time, how come your 16 yearl nboy - 19 year old woman scenario hasn't surfaced? Because there are rules in place that don't allow that. Same with all your other scenarios. They made an amendment for same-sex but keep all the other rules in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bhayne

There are so many important topics in this world I cannot understand why people dwell on same-sex couples- and same-sex couples are the main culprits with all their parades and publicity stunts.

Important topics like, Is Elvis alive? and Where is he living? :-)

---

Elvis is alive and well and living in a doublewide off Signal Butte near the I-90.


http://www.elvispresleynews.com/images/Pres03Sm.jpg

M:)RGANITE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Well man-women marriage has been going on a long time, how come your 16 yearl nboy - 19 year old woman scenario hasn't surfaced? Because there are rules in place that don't allow that. Same with all your other scenarios. They made an amendment for same-sex but keep all the other rules in place.

---

Wait one second. If you want to use history as an example, than homosexuality was shunned for a very long time, why does that one rule become null without having any impact? Laws are progressive in nature and always have been. Just look at voting rights. First, white male land owners, and after two centuries of progression everyone is finally able to vote. You cannot say that absolving the rules against gay marriage (social rules) and sanctioning gay marriage by law will not lead to the legalization of polygamy, pedaphilia, child pornography. Maybe you didn't realize this but this is onel of the ultimate goals of some of these uber leftist interest groups. NAMBLA, who is supported by the ACLU who by the way is in favor of polygamy. You think they will stop with gay-marriage. No way in hell, will they ever stop their bombardment on the traditional status quo. SO don't give me your pontificating ramble on the fact that we have rules in place that can't be broken because to do so would be against the current american ideal and.. uh.. and.. uh.. we have rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SSchultz0956

You cannot say that absolving the rules against gay marriage (social rules) and sanctioning gay marriage by law will not lead to the legalization of polygamy, pedaphilia, child pornography.

---

Why yes, I am saying exactly that. Using your voting example, are you suggesting that giving the vote to african americans and women is a step backwards and the vote should return to white males only? Of course not, it was a progressive decision. There are rules everywhere that reasonable people follow to maintain a safe and respectful society, is this not something you agree with? I don't really understand why you attack me on the facts that there are rules and laws. :confused: