Homosexual Marriage

[g1asswa1ker]

But, not that this has anything to do with homosexual marriage, I think the President does have some power; he has the veto (line-item at that, right?)

Things are still allowed through and you know it.

I think it might be a bit melodramatic and giving them too much credit to say the Christian Coalition has ****e* everything up. They have little more political sway than American demographics suggest they should. (i.e. it's their right to influence politics, just as it's the ACLU's right and the NRA's right and the Socialist Party's right). That's how democracy works.

The christian Coalition has done a lot to effect laws. They try and effect anything and everything that might be against there moral standard.
IE prostitution, weed. Heck their even trying to pass a law in louisana to out law low cut pants.

If it is religion then yes they can since there is an amendment in the Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion.

That only works if your religion is accepted. I'm pagan. One in which it would be allowed to have multiple partners. Yet I can't do so because it's not recognized. Mormons are but only in some states.

But the states use it to determine financial and land ownership purposes. When you get married by the state it pretty much makes you one entity with the person you are being married to so lets say you die, go into a coma or whatever then your other half would be able use the property and finances the way they see fit.

And that is what wills are for....

[g1asswa1ker]

instead these politicians who should be worrying bout homeland security and shit are bothered with this and don't mind being bothered with it.

You know what other country in history had a Department of Homeland Security....Nazi Germany....That disturbs me...

[Jos Elkink]

Homosexual marriage *is* allowed nationwide ....


.... Well, not in the US, but at least in the Netherlands where I'm from ... Why do you guys assume all players are from the US?


And I'm definitely in favour of equal treatment between gays and straight people, but I'm against marriage, so what, if it were about my country, should I vote?


(To clarify: marriage could be a church issue or something, but imho it's not a business of the state, which should treat all ways of living together equally and treat their citizens as individuals.)

[west]

My two cents:

Civil Unions should be legal contracts between two people, gay or straight. Marriage should be a religious concept.

So you get your civil union papers from the gov't.
then if you want your marriage to be recognzied by your church or whatever, you get a church marriage.

[g1asswa1ker]

Homosexual marriage *is* allowed nationwide ....


.... Well, not in the US, but at least in the Netherlands where I'm from ... Why do you guys assume all players are from the US?


And I'm definitely in favour of equal treatment between gays and straight people, but I'm against marriage, so what, if it were about my country, should I vote?


(To clarify: marriage could be a church issue or something, but imho it's not a business of the state, which should treat all ways of living together equally and treat their citizens as individuals.)

We are not assuming that all are part of the US this is just apart of a non-cantr discussion on a US issue.

My two cents:

Civil Unions should be legal contracts between two people, gay or straight. Marriage should be a religious concept.

So you get your civil union papers from the gov't.
then if you want your marriage to be recognzied by your church or whatever, you get a church marriage.

I like this thought. But what about people like me who approve of group civil unions?

[rklenseth]

My two cents:

Civil Unions should be legal contracts between two people, gay or straight. Marriage should be a religious concept.

So you get your civil union papers from the gov't.
then if you want your marriage to be recognzied by your church or whatever, you get a church marriage.

Some states already to that. I think that is what Massachusetts and Vermont call it.

[Pirog]

I see no reason for not allowing homosexuals to marry.

As long as divorces are allowed the whole "marriage is sacred" crap doesn't have any effect anyway...

[Jos Elkink]

My two cents:

Civil Unions should be legal contracts between two people, gay or straight. Marriage should be a religious concept.

So you get your civil union papers from the gov't.
then if you want your marriage to be recognzied by your church or whatever, you get a church marriage.

Why then only two?

Why should the state determine what kind of unions are acceptable and what are not?

[Der Zauberer]

Good question.

What about polygyny?
There are some contracultures, as well as extreme fundamentalist sects of Islam and Mormonism, that support that custom. Most would argue, however, that it exploits women, and would be severely socially retrogressive for any Western society.

But, then, as you say, how can a government make such judgements? The answer is that sometimes governments have to weigh the cost of a loss of a particular civl liberty with the cost of the sacrifice of other freedoms.
The cost of homosexual marriage is arguably extremely low compared to the severity of the civil liberties infringement involved with denying. Polygamy, especially polygyny, does not share, in my opinion, that characteristic.

Some things in life are black-and-white. Most are not, however, and government rarely is. That's why it can allow some things but proscribe apparently similar things.

[g1asswa1ker]

True most would argue that it wxploits women but my wife and I are open to each other she is just as free as me to do as she likes with whom ever she so choses. So, I guess that kills that side of their arguement.

[rklenseth]

Amazonian women supposedly took on many male mates. And if it is agreed to by all parties then why is there a problem?

[west]

Amazons were a myth, Jayne.

The purpose of them was to be as crazy-different from the current social structure as possible.

[Der Zauberer]

Yeah, plus I said, especially polygyny, which means men having more then one wife.
There would be fewer people disagreeing with a woman taking multipule husbands; though, it is of coruse much less common.

[Snake_byte]

Bush doesn't mean what hes says bout gay mariages. You know bout saying no to it cuz of its definition and crap. It's all bull, Hes just another homophobe and is afraid to admit it because of the upcoming election.

[Der Zauberer]

Can you explain what you mean there more, Snake?

I think there might actually be more of a dichotomy between what Mr Bush believes and what his policy is actually than most people think.
Most people say he's a Christian and I won't deny it because I dont know; but I'd like to see someone keep a stright face while saying that his policies are christian too