Headless Man
Why must gays insist that there union be called a marriage?
A civil union, also referred to as a civil partnership, is a legally recognized form of partnership similar to marriage.
So why must gays insist that there union be called a marriage?
Why must the meaning of a word be changed? Marriage= A union between a man and woman.
Why can't gays accept that their union is different and should be kept that way?
If gays are proud of their union then why not be proud enough to want it to be identified as such?
Try to answer the questions, not just jump me for asking and trying to understand.
The Gays want the cake and eat it too! -- Forget Christianity it goes against the Laws of Nature.
No, it doesn't. Even animals in nature are gay. Want cake and eat it too? Marriage? Just like you have? Who wants their cake and eat it too? Just the homophobes is all. Your thinking is against nature, In nature, homosexuality is accepted.
Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in various (non-human) species. Such behaviors include sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same sex animals. A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them. Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species. The motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied. According to Bagemihl, "the animal kingdom [does] it with much greater sexual diversity – including homosexual, bisexual and nonreproductive sex – than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept." Current research indicates that various forms of same-sex sexual behavior are found throughout the animal kingdom. A new review made in 2009 of existing research showed that same-sex behavior is a nearly universal phenomenon in the animal kingdom, common across species. Homosexual behavior is best known from social species.
Homosexual behavior in animals refers to the documented evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in various (non-human) species. Such behaviors include sex, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same sex animals. A 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them. Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species. The motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied. According to Bagemihl, "the animal kingdom [does] it with much greater sexual diversity – including homosexual, bisexual and nonreproductive sex – than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept." Current research indicates that various forms of same-sex sexual behavior are found throughout the animal kingdom. A new review made in 2009 of existing research showed that same-sex behavior is a nearly universal phenomenon in the animal kingdom, common across species. Homosexual behavior is best known from social species.
Good argument Colleen, so you want to be like the animals not a human?
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
So you want to keep making yourself look desperate and silly with these kinds of arguments? Let me step DOWN to your level for a minute.
Dogs fight over bones because they believe the bone to be only theirs. Do you want to keep acting like a dog fighting over a bone, yelling "Mine, mine, mine and you can't have it!"? My point was to show BM that his claim that it is unnatural is wrong, not to say I want to be an animal, oh close minded one.
Animals love and are willing to die to protect their young. Would you die to protect your young? Would you say you were acting like an animal if you did? By the way, man lives by instinct too. You should pay more attention to nature instead of ignoring it like you are so far more superior and can't be bothered with it. Even Jesus defended animals as living creatures that should not be abused. Why do you suppose he did that? Why would he defend something without Soul or without the ability to love? Jesus knew, he knew that animals have Soul and contain God's love. Again I ask, who do you really follow oh dark one? You truly have no compassion for anyone but yourself, do you?
LOVE IS MORAL! SOUL HAS NO GENDER. MORAL PEOPLE SEE BEYOND THE BODY AND LOVE SOUL. YOU CAN NOT GET ANY MORE MORAL THAN THAT!
Dogs fight over bones because they believe the bone to be only theirs. Do you want to keep acting like a dog fighting over a bone, yelling "Mine, mine, mine and you can't have it!"? My point was to show BM that his claim that it is unnatural is wrong, not to say I want to be an animal, oh close minded one.
Animals love and are willing to die to protect their young. Would you die to protect your young? Would you say you were acting like an animal if you did? By the way, man lives by instinct too. You should pay more attention to nature instead of ignoring it like you are so far more superior and can't be bothered with it. Even Jesus defended animals as living creatures that should not be abused. Why do you suppose he did that? Why would he defend something without Soul or without the ability to love? Jesus knew, he knew that animals have Soul and contain God's love. Again I ask, who do you really follow oh dark one? You truly have no compassion for anyone but yourself, do you?
LOVE IS MORAL! SOUL HAS NO GENDER. MORAL PEOPLE SEE BEYOND THE BODY AND LOVE SOUL. YOU CAN NOT GET ANY MORE MORAL THAN THAT!
Close minded people don't ask questions that will only mean they will be hammered by others. Only someone trying to understand why you think a word will make your lifestyle better.
An open minded person would not keep saying lifestyle even after I've explained that it is not a lifestyle yet you stubbornly refuse to open your mind and see that it is not a lifestyle. But I expected as much from you who does tend to act like a child in these debates. You just keep proving your close mindedness. You can't win so you type in stuff hoping to tick me off. :)
You are not trying to learn. You are pushing your agenda. I've answered your question a dozen different way to help you to understand. Which one are you going to acknowledge and not brush off with some slippery slope or inane argument?
You are not trying to learn. You are pushing your agenda. I've answered your question a dozen different way to help you to understand. Which one are you going to acknowledge and not brush off with some slippery slope or inane argument?
Sorry to re-post this but I did not get a response... I am trying very hard to understand both sides of this debate...
Randy, honey.. I dont meat to sound obtuse... but I really dont understand what it is you have a problem with...
It sounds as if you are in favor of gays having rights... you just want them to fight for them.
But you want to keep the name "marriage" between a man and woman...
So Can we call their union "purple" and give them them same rights? .... Military pention, health care, federal taxes, power of attirny... ect...
Randy, honey.. I dont meat to sound obtuse... but I really dont understand what it is you have a problem with...
It sounds as if you are in favor of gays having rights... you just want them to fight for them.
But you want to keep the name "marriage" between a man and woman...
So Can we call their union "purple" and give them them same rights? .... Military pention, health care, federal taxes, power of attirny... ect...
Jenn, who is going to understand purple union? They don't even understand that civil unions and legal unions are suppose to be the same as marriage at the state level. When you give it another word or name, you give it another meaning and pull it right away from the idea of that it is the same as marriage.
Colleen, Lifestyle:
noun
the way in which a person or group lives.
Are you trying to change the meaning of another word?
Jenn, I think you got it honey, that is all I ask.
OK Colleen make up a better word, let us see if we can.......
noun
the way in which a person or group lives.
Are you trying to change the meaning of another word?
Jenn, I think you got it honey, that is all I ask.
OK Colleen make up a better word, let us see if we can.......
Lifestyle is a life one CHOOSES to live, something they are not naturally born to do. Something they choose later on in life to do. I did not choose to be a lesbian. I was born this way.
I choose the word marriage. Let me repeat myself for the umpteenth time.......to call it anything else would be separate but equal which it never does become equal or recognized as equal. No other word but marriage with carry the correct weight and acknowledgment.
I choose the word marriage. Let me repeat myself for the umpteenth time.......to call it anything else would be separate but equal which it never does become equal or recognized as equal. No other word but marriage with carry the correct weight and acknowledgment.
The word CHOOSES is not in the definition your trying to change another word to meet your lifestyle.......
The word Marriage has already been chosen by MEN AND WOMEN, you can do better I'm sure, think....
The word Marriage has already been chosen by MEN AND WOMEN, you can do better I'm sure, think....
Headless Man:
3 noun
A common-law marriage.
Isn't a common-law marriage a name for people not legally married.
>>>>>So if you must use the word marriage put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept that.<<<<<<
So this argument is done. I've been calling it gay marriage right along. The states that allow gays to get married call it gay marriage. Where exactly is your argument now about gays using the word marriage as you've already stated "put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept"
Unless you are not one of those people?
3 noun
A common-law marriage.
Isn't a common-law marriage a name for people not legally married.
>>>>>So if you must use the word marriage put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept that.<<<<<<
So this argument is done. I've been calling it gay marriage right along. The states that allow gays to get married call it gay marriage. Where exactly is your argument now about gays using the word marriage as you've already stated "put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept"
Unless you are not one of those people?
lifestyle [ˈlaɪfˌstaɪl]
n
1. a set of attitudes, habits, or possessions associated with a particular person or group
2. such attitudes, etc., regarded as fashionable or desirable
3. NZ
a. a luxurious semirural manner of living
b. (as modifier) a lifestyle property
adj
1. suggestive of a fashionable or desirable lifestyle a lifestyle café (
2. (Medicine / Pharmacology) (of a drug) designed to treat problems, such as impotence or excess weight, which affect a person's quality of life rather than their health.
>>>>> A way of life or style of living that reflects the attitudes and values of a person or group: "It was a millionaire's lifestyle on the pocketbook of a hairdresser" (People).
****** Usage Note: When lifestyle became popular a generation ago, a number of critics objected to it as voguish and superficial, perhaps because it appeared to elevate habits of consumption, dress, and recreation to categories in a system of social classification.
No Randy, I am not trying to change the meaning of the word. I used it correctly as to mean choice of a way of life.
"The word Marriage has already been chosen by MEN AND WOMEN"
I am a women. It belongs to me also just on the grounds that I am a living, breathing, red blooded human woman. I feel no need to pick another name.
n
1. a set of attitudes, habits, or possessions associated with a particular person or group
2. such attitudes, etc., regarded as fashionable or desirable
3. NZ
a. a luxurious semirural manner of living
b. (as modifier) a lifestyle property
adj
1. suggestive of a fashionable or desirable lifestyle a lifestyle café (
2. (Medicine / Pharmacology) (of a drug) designed to treat problems, such as impotence or excess weight, which affect a person's quality of life rather than their health.
>>>>> A way of life or style of living that reflects the attitudes and values of a person or group: "It was a millionaire's lifestyle on the pocketbook of a hairdresser" (People).
****** Usage Note: When lifestyle became popular a generation ago, a number of critics objected to it as voguish and superficial, perhaps because it appeared to elevate habits of consumption, dress, and recreation to categories in a system of social classification.
No Randy, I am not trying to change the meaning of the word. I used it correctly as to mean choice of a way of life.
"The word Marriage has already been chosen by MEN AND WOMEN"
I am a women. It belongs to me also just on the grounds that I am a living, breathing, red blooded human woman. I feel no need to pick another name.
Am I blind or did the word chooses appear in the definition of Lifestyle? Mute point.
I could accept a hyphenated word Gay-Marriage but thats just me good luck with it, it won't change the way you are treated by others.
Now take back all the names you called me...........lol
I could accept a hyphenated word Gay-Marriage but thats just me good luck with it, it won't change the way you are treated by others.
Now take back all the names you called me...........lol
"Am I blind"
Apparently yes as the description alone speaks "choice or choosing".
I did not call you names. I described your actions and way of thinking. I will take back the descriptions when I am convinced you're more educated on the subject than you were yesterday.
Apparently yes as the description alone speaks "choice or choosing".
I did not call you names. I described your actions and way of thinking. I will take back the descriptions when I am convinced you're more educated on the subject than you were yesterday.
Colleen I am not suggesting that the union be called purple... I am trying to understand where he is coming form...
As I said before.. If it walks like a duck, talks like and swims like a duck it is a duck... Calling it a horse would just be stupid.
As I said before.. If it walks like a duck, talks like and swims like a duck it is a duck... Calling it a horse would just be stupid.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This question is 3 years old, has had almost 2500 views and has been debated by some, as though they simply MUST win this argument. (Nothing new there.) I say, enough is enough and this question has been more than sufficiently answered. Thank you for all of your responses. The question is now locked.
48 Answers (1-30 Displayed)
hector5559
Each to his/her own,do they interfier with you in some way,??????
| 12 years ago. Rating: 17 | |
Not directly, but neither do murders directly, but I wouldn't want someone to change all killing to mean murder. As some has tried to do to the taking of the life of an animal.
So now you you use murderers as example as to why homosexuals should not be allowed to marry? Really? This is very extreme and extreme always means desperate. Homosexual marriage will not interfere with your marriage. You will lose nothing if homosexuals marry. We are people too. We are not in with the likes of murderers or animals. Your ignorance and ego is interfering with our lives. Look at yourself before casting judgment on others.
Colleen, I knew you would do that, the murder example was just that an example, I'm not ignorant and have no ego problems and am not casting stones, only asking a few questions and trying to understand, I ask for answers not insults.
Then do not make silly comparisons. I still do not see where you are trying to learn. I just see you using this as a way to promote your agenda to not allow gays the right to marry.
I am not saying gays don't have the legal right to become a couple. Just by a different name because it is a different union.
The joining of two same sex people is not different. It is still two people coming together to make a life together and for some even to raise a family together. Separate but equal does not work and is not a fair settling. Separate but equal is low income housing compared to a mansion. I pay the same taxes for my rights in this country as you do. I want equal across the board. Not second class citizenship that divides me from you.
ROMOS
I presume the first definition is the Christian choice Randy?
1 noun The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
2 noun
The state of being married; wedlock.
3 noun
A common-law marriage.
4 noun
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
5 noun
A wedding.
6 noun
A close union: "the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” ( Lloyd Rose).
7 noun
Games The combination of the king and queen of the same suit, as in pinochle.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 16 | |
"4 noun
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage."
There you have it. This is the problem with union.
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage."
There you have it. This is the problem with union.
Yes, I realize men have adjusted the word to make all happy, soon they will include the union between a person and another living thing to include bestiality.
3 noun
A common-law marriage.
Isn't a common-law marriage a name for people not legally married.
So if you must use the word marriage put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept that.
A common-law marriage.
Isn't a common-law marriage a name for people not legally married.
So if you must use the word marriage put the word gay in front of it. Gay Marriage, maybe people could accept that.
Common law marriage does not hold the same rights as regular marriage does. The two are not equal.
As it stands, states that allow gays to marry, do call it Gay marriage. Are you not paying attention?
As it stands, states that allow gays to marry, do call it Gay marriage. Are you not paying attention?
How did I miss this outdated and olllldddd argument?
"soon they will include the union between a person and another living thing to include bestiality"
Don't go stupid on us Randy. Use rational arguments, not slippery slope foolishness. Animals can not sign consent forms. They can not make informed decisions about sex with humans. Do not equate my life to the level of people who have sex with animals.
"soon they will include the union between a person and another living thing to include bestiality"
Don't go stupid on us Randy. Use rational arguments, not slippery slope foolishness. Animals can not sign consent forms. They can not make informed decisions about sex with humans. Do not equate my life to the level of people who have sex with animals.
It's a slippery slop Colleen, once we change things to meet our selfish needs there is no stopping.
I know you don't think your being selfish, but you can live with your gay partner and get legal rights without marriage, you only want you lifestyle to become accepted as normal and its not. Being born that way or because of something happening in your young life to change you may be debatable but its not normal.
I wish you well in your wish to be treated equal.
I know you don't think your being selfish, but you can live with your gay partner and get legal rights without marriage, you only want you lifestyle to become accepted as normal and its not. Being born that way or because of something happening in your young life to change you may be debatable but its not normal.
I wish you well in your wish to be treated equal.
Yes, that slippery "slop" started with giving women the right to vote and then extending equal rights to black people. Civil rights always pull out the people who love to play the slippery "slop" cards. You can't win on rational and logical arguments so you make up the slippery slope theories. To me, people like you are not normal. The normal people are open and accepting and do not see differences when they look at their fellow man. What they see are God's creations existing as they were meant to exist. They hold nothing against them because of it. That is normal. That is the way God intends us to be. Not selfish power grabbing individuals who think they are normal in their quest to deny others their rights. For me to want to MARRY my partner is not selfish. It's responsible for taking care of my partner and ensuring her future should I die. I should be able to do that with the price of a marriage license, not for the thousands of dollars in court costs. This is not a case of looking to be accepted, it is a case of having my rights acknowledged and the word MARRIAGE says that best. Selfish is stomping your feet yelling, "mine, mine, mine! And you can't have it!" I bet you didn't share well as a kid either. I wish you well in swallowing your pride and prejudice when the federal court makes the decision that denying the gay their right to marry is against the US Constitution. A Constitution you do not believe in because if you did, you would see it is our right! I think this is why you shy away from Ron Paul because he wants to put the Constitution back into the government. My life is a life, not a lifestyle. Ignorance is a lifestyle. Partying, drinking and getting drunk is a lifestyle. Getting stoned, high, whacked out on drugs is a lifestyle. Homosexuality is a sexuality and a LIFE. You do not live the heterosexual lifestyle, you live the heterosexual life. I was born a lesbian. 8 kids and I'm the only one. You can not blame it on my home life. I did not wake up one day and say, I think I'll go gay. It has always been with me. You however will not even give ground on this. You are too adept at having a close mind and living in ignorance. You just made up your mind that I chose this life and you will believe you are god and just know people even though they tell you different. You soo love to judge others. I hope it's worth it, I hope it at least makes you feel better about yourself. Enjoy your lifestyle.
Colleen
God recognizes love, not the gender of the body that houses the Soul. Soul has no gender and God sees and loves only Soul. We are all equal in God's eyes. It's too bad that those who profess to love God can not love as God loves.
Outside of the God factor, here in the USA, there is still the 14th amendment that guarantees equal rights to all. The word marriage belongs to all. No one holds the patented rights to the word. Man invented language, not God. Man invented the word marriage and it was a contract of ownership. Why does religion make people selfish and combative and non sharing?
Didn't you already ask this question months ago Randy? Are you stirring?
"Why can't gays accept that their union is different and should be kept that way?"
The only difference is gender. Other than that, a homosexual marriage would be no different than a heterosexual marriage. Keep thy nose out of the homosexual bedroom because that is the only difference.
It is being proven time and time again in states with Gay Unions that the people are still being treated differently and being discriminated against because the ones in charge see union as being different as marriage and are not allowing those legally joined together in a Gay Union as having all the same rights as married people do. They understand marriage and all that it implies but do not understand the words gay union as being the same. It's too confusing to have a separate class that should grant the same rights as the other. Call it a case of close mindedness that refuses to yield on giving equal rights because the words are different.
"their union is different and should be kept that way"
Total ignorance and a clear sign that you are not trying to understand. You are just saying "mine, mine, mine and you can't have it because you're different than me!" I see no love in this. It just shows you are not as close to God as you think you are.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 16 | |
First, no I never ask this question before, I have commented on other questions.
"The only difference is gender."
ONLY, thats a big difference if you ask me....
"Total ignorance"
I thought you weren't suppose to call people names, and yes you did call me ignorant.
Union is different because a gay union cannot bare a child.
"The only difference is gender."
ONLY, thats a big difference if you ask me....
"Total ignorance"
I thought you weren't suppose to call people names, and yes you did call me ignorant.
Union is different because a gay union cannot bare a child.
OK, it wasn't you. You just wanted to rehash it. Got it.
"thats a big difference if you ask me."
An open mind sees Soul, not gender and loves accordingly.
"Total ignorance"
Ignorance is a state of being uninformed (lack of knowledge). The word ignorant is an adjective describing a person in the state of being unaware.
I was describing, not name calling.
"gay union cannot bare a child."
Neither can barren and sterile people. Do you really want to go down this slippery slope again? You are speaking of holy matrimony and the understanding that holy matrimony is for procreation. Marriage is a government contract that does not demand procreation. Homosexuals find a way to have children be it natural, through medical assistance or adoption. We have families too. Only ignorance has trouble seeing this. Two of my lesbian lovers bore children. Just because they had heterosexual sex to create the children did not make them heterosexual. They were and are still lesbians. I know it's hard to wrap your head around this but please do try. You said you wanted to understand. Understanding takes an open mind and being educated about that which you do not understand.
"thats a big difference if you ask me."
An open mind sees Soul, not gender and loves accordingly.
"Total ignorance"
Ignorance is a state of being uninformed (lack of knowledge). The word ignorant is an adjective describing a person in the state of being unaware.
I was describing, not name calling.
"gay union cannot bare a child."
Neither can barren and sterile people. Do you really want to go down this slippery slope again? You are speaking of holy matrimony and the understanding that holy matrimony is for procreation. Marriage is a government contract that does not demand procreation. Homosexuals find a way to have children be it natural, through medical assistance or adoption. We have families too. Only ignorance has trouble seeing this. Two of my lesbian lovers bore children. Just because they had heterosexual sex to create the children did not make them heterosexual. They were and are still lesbians. I know it's hard to wrap your head around this but please do try. You said you wanted to understand. Understanding takes an open mind and being educated about that which you do not understand.
There is a big difference between a barren couple and a gay couple.
I won't argue that with you.
I won't argue that with you.
Colleen, My State is very close to recognizing gay and lesbian marriages..a few more hoops to jump through but it's looking good this time...Separation of Church and State!
And the church groups will be right there to fight it if it goes through. They will spend hundreds of thousands of church money to drag it through court while their members suffer with rising costs of living with no help from the church they support. Nice, huh? This is more important to them than to help their followers who are losing their homes. They instead refer them to the very government they fight against because it creates equality laws they do not agree with.
doolittle, Separation of Church and State! That means the State will not interfere with the church not vice versa.
We've discussed this already Randy, the Government can impose some laws for even religion to follow. The government however is not telling the church they must marry homosexuals.
Only laws that would be for the safety of people not moral law.
I glad you see why some churches would not marry gays.
I glad you see why some churches would not marry gays.
So you see that I see those churches as close minded bigots? I'm glad you do. Moral laws are not strictly for the church. In many instances, the church is wrong when it imposes IT'S moral laws on the lives of others. The church has long fought civil rights for people. The churches morals are not good for all. The church has moral issues too. The church is not perfect and thankfully does not set the law of this country.
"churches as close minded bigots"
No, only choose to believe the bible.
True, all churches are not the same or right never said that, but to say they "imposes IT'S moral laws on the lives of others" is not true, no church forces it believes on others only invite people to join.
If you did one thing accept Christ and live as he wants you will be happy as I am, I'm not closed minded as you think only trying to get some answers.
No, only choose to believe the bible.
True, all churches are not the same or right never said that, but to say they "imposes IT'S moral laws on the lives of others" is not true, no church forces it believes on others only invite people to join.
If you did one thing accept Christ and live as he wants you will be happy as I am, I'm not closed minded as you think only trying to get some answers.
If you chose to believe the bible, you would love thy neighbor and leave judgment and persecution to God.
You need to study more churches. You need to awaken an see that it is religious institutes, yours included that fund the fight to keep gays from ever being able to get married. THAT IS forcing their version of morals on me as they see me as being immoral and if I were to be married to a woman as even more immoral. Their money is used to impost their morals on my life. You are not happy Randy, because if you were, my life and my ability to have equal rights in the area of marriage would not affect you. You would be like others and say live and let live and not have a problem with sharing a word.
What exactly is in your head as you try yet again to force your God on me? You are not looking for answers, you are looking to push your agenda based on your biblical beliefs. If you wanted to learn, you would open your mind and see that I speak true when I say I was born a lesbian and am deserving of rights afforded under the 14th amendment of the US Constitution. An open mind would see that as a tax paying natural born citizen this rights should extend to me regardless of my sexuality. Marriage between one man and one women didn't even enter into the Constitution until 1998 I believe under Clinton's presidency. It's not like the phrase has been standing for centuries. It was put in there to appease the bigots who feared gays being allowed to get married.
You need to study more churches. You need to awaken an see that it is religious institutes, yours included that fund the fight to keep gays from ever being able to get married. THAT IS forcing their version of morals on me as they see me as being immoral and if I were to be married to a woman as even more immoral. Their money is used to impost their morals on my life. You are not happy Randy, because if you were, my life and my ability to have equal rights in the area of marriage would not affect you. You would be like others and say live and let live and not have a problem with sharing a word.
What exactly is in your head as you try yet again to force your God on me? You are not looking for answers, you are looking to push your agenda based on your biblical beliefs. If you wanted to learn, you would open your mind and see that I speak true when I say I was born a lesbian and am deserving of rights afforded under the 14th amendment of the US Constitution. An open mind would see that as a tax paying natural born citizen this rights should extend to me regardless of my sexuality. Marriage between one man and one women didn't even enter into the Constitution until 1998 I believe under Clinton's presidency. It's not like the phrase has been standing for centuries. It was put in there to appease the bigots who feared gays being allowed to get married.
I've told you a couple times that I love you as I do everyone and can love and not judge but try to help as only I know how. I've never called you a name or questioned your intelligence as you have mine.
"It's not like the phrase has been standing for centuries"
No it wasn't needed for centuries but only when gays tried to take away our rights to be married as a man and woman only as the word was for centuries.
"It's not like the phrase has been standing for centuries"
No it wasn't needed for centuries but only when gays tried to take away our rights to be married as a man and woman only as the word was for centuries.
Words mean nothing Randy. Actions speak. Your actions do not speak of love. They speak of disdain and belittlement and separation. That is not love. I never asked for your help. You just think you have a right to push your "help" and idea or "morals" on me. I spoke of your lack of education in the area of homosexuals. In this I am correct. You are not educated to their plight or their rights because you simply do not care to have us equal with you. You would still have the right to be married as one man and one woman. Gay marriage would not take that away from you. No one is saying you would have to marry a same sex person. I do not see where your right to marry is in danger here.
Colleen, I totally agree with you that an open mind sees the Soul, not gender and loves accordingly. That was my intention with the other answer I'd given and was voted down. Love, no matter between a man and man, woman and woman or man and woman is still love - period.
witchway, I left you a message there last night. I caught my mistake and corrected it. I had meant to give you a TU and not a TD....it's fixed and you got a TU for it. Thanks for your words :)
the only difference is gender??and you think that is a small difference..without that small difference,,there is no us,,,is that not important....nice talking..................
Yes, I believe it's a small issue because I am not advocating that everyone become gay. It's a small issue because there are still heteros making babies. Heck, even homosexuals find a way to make babies. Do you really believe that even if everyone was gay, there wouldn't be a way of continuing the human race? Homosexual reproductive systems still work you know. Now, let me ask you this, do you really believe God considers love to be a sin Terry? Love should not be limited because of gender. I personally believe God feels the same way. Love should have no barriers. Back to your point about procreation; there are heterosexuals and homosexuals. The heterosexuals can keep pumping out babies and the homosexuals will keep adopting the babies that too many heterosexuals throw away. At least the unwanted babies have a chance at having a home with loving parents even if the parents are of the same gender. This of course always leads to the next argument of kids needing a mother and father. Nice dream but that's not the way of the world now, at least not here in the states with it's 50% + divorce rate and too many couples just living together, having babies then the father runs. There's always family members to fill the roll of the other gender. Kids growing up with a hetero single parent get their other gender roll model through a family member too. Especially when the mother or father goes missing and doesn't bother to ever see the child. 2 moms or 2 dads mean doubly blessed in my opinion. Studies show, kids raised in same sex households are doing just fine, if not better than kids in hetero families. Look it up.
Chiangmai
Many gay people probably take their relationships more seriously than a lot of straight people. Let them call whatever makes their relationships feel special. Who are we to judge?
| 12 years ago. Rating: 16 | |
We are normal Randy. We are flesh and blood human beings. You can not define normal, no one can. Based on perspectives, normal is undefinable.
lambshank
Why not? the union of gay couples is as legitimate as anyone else and should be acknowledged as is in the mainstream, it may also remove some of the misconceptions of some of the ignorant comments that I have heard (living in a country town) that all gay men are pedophiles! and because one of our managers is gay staff are reluctant to approach her in case she may be interested in them in a personal or sexual way, normalizing gay marriage should be the same right we all enjoy and may dispel some of the ignorance we as a society appear to have
| 12 years ago. Rating: 16 | |
Read my comment under Daisy's comment. Legal Unions are NOT being recognized as the same as being married. Their rights are still being denied and it is costing the legally unioned gay couples thousands of dollars to fight it out in court to have their rights recognized.
The word will not change the way people treat people, the same way political correct words hasn't.
You're correct. It's the people and their close minded ways that need to change. Love is love and ,marriage is marriage. It protects two people (and their children) who have committed their lives to being together and supporting each other. All that is achieved and amassed in the marriage is protected by law even after the death of one of the partners.
Colleen, sorry I meant that gay people should have the right to be married, using the word union I was referring to the union of 2 people in marriage
God said, "man shall not lay with man nor woman with woman!" Do your research. Many nations have fallen to their demize do to this life style. When will we learn our lesson? And what person in their right mind would care to pump and hump on another hairy man's butt? Sicking!!!!! Repeat and get your soul right with God!!!!
How did I miss gman's drivel. I can only say, *Yawn*. Get your head out of their bedrooms if you do not want to see hairy butts. Many nations have fallen to their demise due to homosexuality? Really? Please, bring me a list and proof they fell because of homosexuality. Do not use Sodom and Gomorrah. It was not homosexuality that caused their demise. If the towns had even one homosexual, it was not proven in the story. The people of the towns worshiped idols, they broke man's laws and God's laws. They were murderers, rapist, thieves and all manner of ill repute, they were skilled at human torture. Heterosexual men raped other men as a torture technique used during times of war to violate a man, to weaken his masculinity and belittle him to a point that he could be broken. The attempted rape of the angles was just that, torture because the men of the town believed them to be spies sent in by the people they were warring with at the time. The men were heterosexuals using rape to break the spirit of the spies to get them to talk. This is why even the wives and children were invited to the event. Public rape was even more humiliating.
Men shall not lie with men and women with women. Yes, they needed procreation back then to populate the earth. Something we are not in need of today as we are over populated in certain areas, China for one where people are allowed only one child. Also, men shall not lie with men was about pedophilia. It was male shall not lie with male. Back then, it was common practice of the affluent men to take in house boys as companions in all manner including the bedroom. Men of wealth and stature did this. It was part of their LIFESTYLE. A choice, a way of life not natural from birth and a way to show they were above the commoners. Paul (you know who Paul is right? He was one of the leaders in the founding of Christianity) wrote many letters to Rome about this LIFESTYLE and the evils of raping children. He railed against pedophilia and wanted the practice to be made illegal.
Now, YOU do your research. If you had, you would have known this already. And it's repent, not repeat. Make sure you get it right on your day of reckoning.
Men shall not lie with men and women with women. Yes, they needed procreation back then to populate the earth. Something we are not in need of today as we are over populated in certain areas, China for one where people are allowed only one child. Also, men shall not lie with men was about pedophilia. It was male shall not lie with male. Back then, it was common practice of the affluent men to take in house boys as companions in all manner including the bedroom. Men of wealth and stature did this. It was part of their LIFESTYLE. A choice, a way of life not natural from birth and a way to show they were above the commoners. Paul (you know who Paul is right? He was one of the leaders in the founding of Christianity) wrote many letters to Rome about this LIFESTYLE and the evils of raping children. He railed against pedophilia and wanted the practice to be made illegal.
Now, YOU do your research. If you had, you would have known this already. And it's repent, not repeat. Make sure you get it right on your day of reckoning.
Daisy!
I don't agree with gays marrying, I'm old schooled. I believe to each his own, but this is crossing the line.
It's like a free for all. Before long no one will know what the norm is.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 14 | |
I agree, but am trying to understand why changing the meaning of a word is important to them.
So they can be part of the main stream. Not considered different, or wrong. It's for acceptance.
Being married and recognized as being married is important to them. The words marriage and married define the relationship so much better than legal union does. Businesses have legal unions when they merge into one another. The homosexual relationship is not a cold sterile union. We are married sounds so much better than we are legally unioned. Gay marriage would not detract from heterosexual marriage in any way shape or form. Just ask the heterosexual married people in states where gay marriage is legal. Their marriages remain intact in spite of the homosexuals sharing the word. We do not seek to change the word as it would mean the same to us as it does to you. Between one man and one woman was added when heterosexuals sought to discriminate against those not like them. It needs to be removed as it wasn't there originally.
Daisy, what is the "norm" here its Aboriginals getting drunk, for me its working, up the road they have 5 generations of unemployed, it's the norm for all of them, whats so abnormal about 2 people of the same gender marrying?
When I was growing up, the norm was seeing man and woman married. That was the norm. That is changing.
I don't think it's right, for same sex to marry, I'm entitled to my belief. I don't hold it against anyone that does it. I believe it's their choice. I do what is right for me, I expect no less form someone else.
I would never push my belief on others, I think its something they have heard a thousand times.They don't need to hear it again.
It's something I personally will never have to worry about. I am tolerant, in freedom of choice. I don't want to be bullied, anymore than anyone else does that has a difference of opinion.
I don't think it's right, for same sex to marry, I'm entitled to my belief. I don't hold it against anyone that does it. I believe it's their choice. I do what is right for me, I expect no less form someone else.
I would never push my belief on others, I think its something they have heard a thousand times.They don't need to hear it again.
It's something I personally will never have to worry about. I am tolerant, in freedom of choice. I don't want to be bullied, anymore than anyone else does that has a difference of opinion.
Daisy, when you were growing up, did the blacks have their freedoms yet? Was desegregation the law of the land? Did women have the right to vote? These civil rights had to see a change too.
The only choice I have about my sexuality is to embrace it or deny it. I chose not to deny it. I was not born heterosexual. Denying me my rights is bullying.
The only choice I have about my sexuality is to embrace it or deny it. I chose not to deny it. I was not born heterosexual. Denying me my rights is bullying.
I said to each his own, free will, mine will is different. That doesn't make me wrong or right, just different.
It makes you anti civil rights in my opinion. But if you're good with that, it's your right to be so. Just remember, telling the government that it's OK to withhold rights from others, makes it OK for them to take rights from you. :)
I agree with you Daisy. It's a hard concept for me to support, but you won't find me protesting it, either. I know several homosexual couples who are wonderful people, much more together than too many husbands and wives.
Me too. I don't have a problem with others being gay. It's wrong for me. It's not something I have put much thought in. There are other things higher on my list to worry about.
Dollybird
Jenn
I know i am late to the game and sorry for posting a new answer but i wanted to ask Randy.... Do you realize the the same right are not afforded to ppl in a civil union as a marriage... I dont think it is the title that gays are looking for I think it is the rights and that come with it. If they are a married/unoined couple they are married... and they should have the same rights...
| 12 years ago. Rating: 12 | |
Then they need to fight for the equal rights not the name because the union is not the same.
Randy, honey.. I dont meat to sound obtuse... but I really dont understand what it is you have a problem with...
It sounds as if you are in favor of gays having rights... you just want them to fight for them.
But you want to keep the name "marriage" between a man and woman...
So Can we call their union "purple" and give them them same rights? .... Military pention, health care, federal taxes, power of attirny... ect...
It sounds as if you are in favor of gays having rights... you just want them to fight for them.
But you want to keep the name "marriage" between a man and woman...
So Can we call their union "purple" and give them them same rights? .... Military pention, health care, federal taxes, power of attirny... ect...
@ Randy, The union is the same. You just want to believe it is not because you do not want us equal to you while you sit on your holier than thou pedestal. Why should we have to fight for rights that the 14th amendment guarantees us? I'll tell you why. It's because of selfish bigots who see us as less than human. Secured people, people who are secure in their own lives do not have a problem with gays being married.
gloriafrmCal
Beam me up Scotty...This is a question that the answer would only cause another question, depending on your opinion and you know what they say about opinions their like a--holes everyone got one.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 12 | |
You know, I've always hated that condescending cliche. Are you calling everyone here an a$$hole?
Ann
NH. just passed a law that recognizes same sex marriage, I say, its about time.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 11 | |
Actually, that law is under threat of the religious right. They are seeking to have it tossed out. The same thing is happening in Vermont. Washington D.C. just approved gay marriage also. The religious right should be racing off to D.C. already. <rolling eyes>
The 9th district court in California did just rule however that prop 8 that took gay marriage away in California is unconstitutional. The religious groups are of course fighting the ruling so next stop, US supreme court. Now if the US supreme court rules as the 9th distinct court did, then the box is open and all states who do not allow gay marriage will be forced to allow it based on the US Constitution. Discrimination will be beaten again!
The 9th district court in California did just rule however that prop 8 that took gay marriage away in California is unconstitutional. The religious groups are of course fighting the ruling so next stop, US supreme court. Now if the US supreme court rules as the 9th distinct court did, then the box is open and all states who do not allow gay marriage will be forced to allow it based on the US Constitution. Discrimination will be beaten again!
It's not suppose to anyway but too many of the religious are in political office and they use their religion to make decisions that affect the masses.
Religious people have the right to vote as they see fit, sadly religion has almost become a bad word in todays society but things will change back when peoples eyes are open or Christ returns.
Politicians should not bring their religion into their office. They can not be impartial when it comes to laws that affect ALL PEOPLE. Not just the religious ones. We have a whole slew of religions here along with those who do not believe in god. A person with their mind wrapped only in their religion can not cast a fair vote that considers ALL THE PEOPLE. We have Islamic men in our senate. Should we let their religious beliefs influence laws that affect your life Randy? Should they pull out the Qua'ran when they vote on bills concerning your religion?
Christ is not returning so thankfully we have no worries about going back in time. Forward we go following the 14th amendment and into equal rights for all. Thank God, the bible is left in the dust when it comes to civil rights otherwise we'd all be suffering the Christian persecutions still.
Christ is not returning so thankfully we have no worries about going back in time. Forward we go following the 14th amendment and into equal rights for all. Thank God, the bible is left in the dust when it comes to civil rights otherwise we'd all be suffering the Christian persecutions still.
HL. I respect what you belief in, But you schould also respect other peoples belief. I was born and raised a catholic, but I no longer belief in organized relgion.
bulletman
LOOK ,you may have some members saying what you want but i'm a free man and i can voice my opinion whether you agree with it or not. As soon as some one says something against a minority you get labeled , a racist, a bigot, shallow, commie ,no wonder you have problems over there , as soon as you make a speech, you are labelled something, what happened to the freedom of speech, it doesn't apply if you disagree. --- i will continue tomorrow night., looking forward to it, Colleen.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 11 | |
Look, I am free to respond to your small minded thinking also. You have just as many problems over there as we do. Please drop the Oz is better than the USA act. I have friends in Oz that I talk to almost daily and they tell me what goes on there. Oz has a lot of problems and trouble going on there. I imagine there are those in your country who find your views on gays just as small minded as I do. I am doing no different than you as far as not sitting back and just letting opinions I do not agree with, slide. I have not stepped on your right to freedom of speech. Speak away. Freedom of speech has never been about just being able to speak unchallenged. Go check the law. It does not say that. This is my life being debated in this thread. I have every right to step up to those who stand against me and my right.
The Gays want the word Marriage instead of union for the simple reason they can get what they want by lobbying constantly to show the straights they have the power and we let them. -- this one subject i'm against. i will not go with the flow.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 11 | |
"lobbying constantly to show the straights they have the power and we let them."
Do you hear yourself? Thank you for letting me know just how shallow and small minded you are.
HOMOSEXUALS ARE PEOPLE TOO, WE ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO LOBBY FOR RIGHTS FFS! Ughhhh and people wonder why hatred exists in this world.
You are my peer. You are not better than me. The only power I have is the power of right and the only reason we win is because right beats wrong and prejudice is wrong.
Do you hear yourself? Thank you for letting me know just how shallow and small minded you are.
HOMOSEXUALS ARE PEOPLE TOO, WE ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO LOBBY FOR RIGHTS FFS! Ughhhh and people wonder why hatred exists in this world.
You are my peer. You are not better than me. The only power I have is the power of right and the only reason we win is because right beats wrong and prejudice is wrong.
Actually Colleen, i was referring to OZ that is what is happenimg here. As for being shallow that is my prerogative, i will never agree with their ideals for marriage and adoption of children or I.V.F. homosexuality is definately not the norm, and you can't say it is . Propagation can only be performed by a man and a woman, not male to male or female to female. - i knew once again i would receive flack for voicing my opinion. As i said people go with the flow rather than voice their true feelings.
Doesn't matter where you live. Your prejudice reaches all shores. If we based everything on someones idea of the norm, no one would have rights because there will always be something about everyone that another would not consider normal. Maybe an adult being a cartoon character on an internet forum is not considered normal. Maybe some busy body would decide that because of this, that person would not be mentally capable of raising children. Just showing how perspectives can affect anyone, even those who consider themselves to be normal.
Homosexuals adopt children heterosexuals do not want, even though it was heterosexuals who created them. Those children are finally getting loving homes and parents. Millions of kids grow up with one parent. Did you not know that men abandon their children everyday leaving the woman to raise the kids on their own? The argument used against gays adopting is that kids need a mother and father. Preach that to the heterosexuals, apparently they do not know this. I had a friend years back who had 3 kids. Her husband walked out one day and never looked back. She had a friend who's husband had also walked out, leaving behind 4 children. The two heterosexual women joined forces and got an apartment together so they could afford to raise their kids. They were roommates together for 12 years and raised all the kids together like one big family. They even shared a bedroom so there was enough rooms for the kids to have bedrooms. They raised those kids together. NO ONE EVER GOT IN THEIR FACE AND TOLD THEM IT WAS BAD! No one ever said those kids needed to be raised by one man and one women......now, had they have been lesbians, small minded people would have been beating down their door screaming those kids need a daddy!!!!
"i will never agree with their ideals for marriage and adoption of children or I.V.F. "
Our ideals for marriage are the same as yours. Commitment to a partner we love. Adoption and I.V.F happen to straight people who can not have children on their own also. Should they stop doing it? Single heteros are able to adopt children. No partner required. What happened to the kid needs a mommy and a daddy in this? Why are single people allowed to adopt? It's not the "norm"! Ooooh! Quick go jump on that "it's not normal wagon" too!!
I will never go with the flow and just accept small mindedness. I will fight it hard because once you let small mindedness win on one thing, it begins to infect everything else.
Homosexuals adopt children heterosexuals do not want, even though it was heterosexuals who created them. Those children are finally getting loving homes and parents. Millions of kids grow up with one parent. Did you not know that men abandon their children everyday leaving the woman to raise the kids on their own? The argument used against gays adopting is that kids need a mother and father. Preach that to the heterosexuals, apparently they do not know this. I had a friend years back who had 3 kids. Her husband walked out one day and never looked back. She had a friend who's husband had also walked out, leaving behind 4 children. The two heterosexual women joined forces and got an apartment together so they could afford to raise their kids. They were roommates together for 12 years and raised all the kids together like one big family. They even shared a bedroom so there was enough rooms for the kids to have bedrooms. They raised those kids together. NO ONE EVER GOT IN THEIR FACE AND TOLD THEM IT WAS BAD! No one ever said those kids needed to be raised by one man and one women......now, had they have been lesbians, small minded people would have been beating down their door screaming those kids need a daddy!!!!
"i will never agree with their ideals for marriage and adoption of children or I.V.F. "
Our ideals for marriage are the same as yours. Commitment to a partner we love. Adoption and I.V.F happen to straight people who can not have children on their own also. Should they stop doing it? Single heteros are able to adopt children. No partner required. What happened to the kid needs a mommy and a daddy in this? Why are single people allowed to adopt? It's not the "norm"! Ooooh! Quick go jump on that "it's not normal wagon" too!!
I will never go with the flow and just accept small mindedness. I will fight it hard because once you let small mindedness win on one thing, it begins to infect everything else.
I don't care what the others think , you may be a high and mighty moderator,but what you express is not gospel i guess you can get away with it with all that power of suspending members, after all i'm just a cartoon character.
Another one who can not stand on his own merits. I'll have the admin drop my moderator tag and abilities right now and I will not change. I will still be the same person you see here every day. I do not suspend anyone just for kicks or to abuse the power. The admin get a report on every person I suspend so don't even try to say I abuse the moderator position. I am in this thread as Collen the lesbian, as my real self, not as Colleen the cyber forum moderator. I never claimed what I say is gospel. I will say it is logical however and I honestly do not care what you think about it or me. I'm just glad to see you showing your true colors after all these months. Good on you mate. You found your feet and stood up. Just remember to duck, I have to duck all the time. A lot of crap gets hurled at you when you stand up. Things like, high and mighty and abuse of power, stuff like that.
I see you missed the point. It's no fun having to defend yourself if "not normal" is tossed your way, is it? Understand, I used it as an example, this does not mean I think it or believe it.
I see you missed the point. It's no fun having to defend yourself if "not normal" is tossed your way, is it? Understand, I used it as an example, this does not mean I think it or believe it.
Why is it that anytime Colleen expresses her opinion and gives answers that she has even researched which is more than I can say for most of the members, that there is always someone that throws out there the "SHES A MODERATOR CARD" & thereby restricting other members FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Guess what she has just as many rights and just as much FREEDOM of SPEECH as me, you or anyone else. Cut the crap out. I have never seen her suspend anyone for arguing against her beliefs. But when you guys run out of arguments of which you cannot bring supporting facts into, then here you go let's throw out she's the moderator card. This is absolutely absurd, ridiculous and beyond comprehension that people throw that card out when it is not true they only do so when they fail in their agenda. Get over it. Quit beating dead horses so to speak and quit beating her up for being a moderator when she does really great on this site. Tired of this could you guys possible pick another subject and quit running this into the ground??????
I never commented on Colleen far as being a moderator it's a hard and thankless job I'm sure.
Her knowledge on gays is understandable and wanting to have equal rights is too, but her unbending attitude is not.
Her knowledge on gays is understandable and wanting to have equal rights is too, but her unbending attitude is not.
My unbending attitude??? Because I want the same rights that you enjoy?? You can not understand why I will not bend to your will that I do not enjoy a government sanctioned marriage? Wow. Do you ever hear yourself when you're pointing fingers and accusing others of something that you do yourself? You have an unbending attitude of sharing the marriage platform. Don't forget to include yourself in your judgments.
BTW, Darci was talking to Bulletman.
BTW, Darci was talking to Bulletman.
Headless Man
Hebrews 13:4
Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriagebed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
I believe the bible, I know some don't, but you will be judged as stated. I not saying anyone will go to hell, but you will be judged as will I.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 11 | |
This is the religious bit. This has nothing to do with the federal or state contract of marriage. Again, what you've put here speaks of holy matrimony, which is not legally recognized in the eyes of man's law which we ALL exist under, even the Christians.
Yes, you shall be judged and judged for how you loved all in this lifetime. You shall also be judged on the ego that told you to separate others from yourself and to put yourself above others. The law does not recognize homosexuality as immoral, only certain religious people do. We do not live under the laws of religion so this verse you posted is a mute argument.
"Marriage should be honored by all"
Yes it should be. Speak to the 50% of marriages that have ended in divorce. I do not see how a great percentage of heterosexuals are honoring this right they have. My bed was pure. I never shared it with anyone but my partner and she likewise.
Yes, you shall be judged and judged for how you loved all in this lifetime. You shall also be judged on the ego that told you to separate others from yourself and to put yourself above others. The law does not recognize homosexuality as immoral, only certain religious people do. We do not live under the laws of religion so this verse you posted is a mute argument.
"Marriage should be honored by all"
Yes it should be. Speak to the 50% of marriages that have ended in divorce. I do not see how a great percentage of heterosexuals are honoring this right they have. My bed was pure. I never shared it with anyone but my partner and she likewise.
headless man, I am not religious but do believe that sexually immoral behavior to be absolutely wrong,I believe this applies to all of us, gay or not,I also don't believe that the word marriage would be tainted if gay people choose to enter into marriage
Colleen- "This has nothing to do with the federal or state contract of marriage"
Your right to me its common sense.
Good point, 50% of marriages do end in divorce. So why are you so excited about becoming a part of such a group. If you could show a union could do better, go for it.
PS, I can love you and not agree with you, thank GOD.
lambshank- My argument in not if the word would be tainted, why not keep it separate and equal because the union is different.
Water is water but there is hot and cold, if someone told you to drink hot thinking it was cold you would see why they gave it two names.
What is the problem with two names, people will not treat you different because of the name will only create more hate.
Your right to me its common sense.
Good point, 50% of marriages do end in divorce. So why are you so excited about becoming a part of such a group. If you could show a union could do better, go for it.
PS, I can love you and not agree with you, thank GOD.
lambshank- My argument in not if the word would be tainted, why not keep it separate and equal because the union is different.
Water is water but there is hot and cold, if someone told you to drink hot thinking it was cold you would see why they gave it two names.
What is the problem with two names, people will not treat you different because of the name will only create more hate.
THE BIBLE SAYS MAN SHALL NOT LAY DOWN WITH MAN,BUT CAPTAIN SCOTT AND CAPTAIN OATS LAY TOGETHER TO KEEP WARM.IN THE ANARTIC.
Common sense would dictate equal right s for all at the same level of each other. No differences, same, same across the board. Separate but equal does not work. We learned that during the civil rights for blacks. Segregation was not the way. You want to segregate us and put us in our own corner away from you and your perceived idea of "normal".
"So why are you so excited about becoming a part of such a group."
Who says we will? We might show you all how it's done. We will have fought hard for it and worked for it, not just had it handed to us. We will respect it better. We will at least be part of the married group and be afforded ALL the rights and protections that come with marriage, not just some of them as it is now.
You do not love me, control or attempted control is not love. You are trying to control, my right and my happiness. You do not know how to love anyone outside your circle. That is not God's love so do not thank him.
"people will not treat you different because of the name will only create more hate."
You have not read what I said about this. Go back, it's right here in this thread. They do get treated differently because the name is different. Many heterosexual people do not understand legal union or civil union. They do not see it as the same as marriage. The hate comes from people who can not share or see others as equal to them, people like you!
"So why are you so excited about becoming a part of such a group."
Who says we will? We might show you all how it's done. We will have fought hard for it and worked for it, not just had it handed to us. We will respect it better. We will at least be part of the married group and be afforded ALL the rights and protections that come with marriage, not just some of them as it is now.
You do not love me, control or attempted control is not love. You are trying to control, my right and my happiness. You do not know how to love anyone outside your circle. That is not God's love so do not thank him.
"people will not treat you different because of the name will only create more hate."
You have not read what I said about this. Go back, it's right here in this thread. They do get treated differently because the name is different. Many heterosexual people do not understand legal union or civil union. They do not see it as the same as marriage. The hate comes from people who can not share or see others as equal to them, people like you!
Don't tell me how better you would be at marriage, moral values have gone out the window and you won't do any better.
I can't control your happiness only you can do that.
You think the word will change anything your wrong, it won't, only a few gays will get married and live as a couple.
I can't control your happiness only you can do that.
You think the word will change anything your wrong, it won't, only a few gays will get married and live as a couple.
Don't just tell me we wouldn't do any better. Give us the chance to prove it to you. I think you fear it. I think you fear that we could actually do better than heteros do with marriage. You are impeding on my happiness by fighting to keep my rights from me. You control how you fight. You control your choice to try and control the happiness of others.
As for the rest, you are talking out of your a....butt. You have no idea how many will marry. The word will make every difference in people respecting the union and not questioning what the union actually covers as they do now with legal unions and civil unions. You have no idea what goes on when it comes to those. Peoples rights are not being recognized because they are called civil unions and legal unions. Those who have gay marriage do not suffer the same set backs as those who have legal unions or civil unions. People understand the word marriage.
You started this saying you wanted to know, you want to understand. Then start listening to me instead of arguing against everything I say.
Did you know that the homosexuals who are married, legal unioned or civil unioned now are only that way in the state they live in? Did you know that if they leave that state, they are no longer married, legal unioned or civil unioned? We are trapped to one state just to get a small fraction of the rights you enjoy so freely. Oh yeah, separate but equal works so well for us. You need to lose a few rights in order to open your mind Randy. I hope the government does just that to you. QUIT WHINING that they stuck their hand into the church while you back their discrimination of homosexuals. You can't have it both ways. You want your rights and you want to keep them, so do I. Stop stepping on my rights!
As for the rest, you are talking out of your a....butt. You have no idea how many will marry. The word will make every difference in people respecting the union and not questioning what the union actually covers as they do now with legal unions and civil unions. You have no idea what goes on when it comes to those. Peoples rights are not being recognized because they are called civil unions and legal unions. Those who have gay marriage do not suffer the same set backs as those who have legal unions or civil unions. People understand the word marriage.
You started this saying you wanted to know, you want to understand. Then start listening to me instead of arguing against everything I say.
Did you know that the homosexuals who are married, legal unioned or civil unioned now are only that way in the state they live in? Did you know that if they leave that state, they are no longer married, legal unioned or civil unioned? We are trapped to one state just to get a small fraction of the rights you enjoy so freely. Oh yeah, separate but equal works so well for us. You need to lose a few rights in order to open your mind Randy. I hope the government does just that to you. QUIT WHINING that they stuck their hand into the church while you back their discrimination of homosexuals. You can't have it both ways. You want your rights and you want to keep them, so do I. Stop stepping on my rights!
I say go for it but make up your own word for it so as to be separate from Men and Women.
I'm not stepping on your rights but your trying to take away heterosexual rights to better your lifestyle.
I'm not stepping on your rights but your trying to take away heterosexual rights to better your lifestyle.
Are you so ignorant as to not learn? LIFE, not lifestyle. I've explained this already. We are taking no rights from you. None what so ever. We like the word and you do not own it. Stop being selfish.
Your the one trying to change the word that meant between a man and woman for centuries.
Yes, it is a lifestyle as is my marriage or are you trying to change the meaning of another word?
Yes, it is a lifestyle as is my marriage or are you trying to change the meaning of another word?
No, for centuries it meant between two people. For centuries it only implied but did not mandate until it was added to the US Constitution to appease the bigots. In ancient Rome, homosexuals married each other.
This is not ancient Rome, the ancient Rome I have read about they were stoned to death as in some other cultures, thank God this is the USA where you can be free.
This is not ancient Christendom either but you keep trying to push ancient beliefs found in your ancient book. I read that it was Christians who stoned people and burned them at the stake but you want to take us back in time when Christianity ruled the moral codes of society.
Its amazing how you can take anything I say and interpret it to mean something I never said, yes I do believe that ancient book but I'm not forcing it on anybody, only offering it as a good alternative.
My church hasn't stoned anyone for weeks now, not physically.
My church hasn't stoned anyone for weeks now, not physically.
"only offering it as a good alternative."
Only your opinion, certainly not mine.
By continuing to push it on someone (or even "offer" it since you really think that makes a difference) to someone who has told you too many times, NO, is the same as forcing it. It's akin to attempting to brainwash or force feed the kool aid. You are hoping to break my resolve and I just give into your will. All techniques used by a controlling personality. Words are no different than stone Randy. Both can hurt. Both can be used to force someone to do something against their will if used hard enough, long enough and forcefully enough. You've been doing this to me for almost a year now. When do you quit and accept and respect the fact I have my own beliefs in who God is and your Jesus is not it? You just keep pushing the spiked kool aid like a drunk who does not like to drink alone.
Only your opinion, certainly not mine.
By continuing to push it on someone (or even "offer" it since you really think that makes a difference) to someone who has told you too many times, NO, is the same as forcing it. It's akin to attempting to brainwash or force feed the kool aid. You are hoping to break my resolve and I just give into your will. All techniques used by a controlling personality. Words are no different than stone Randy. Both can hurt. Both can be used to force someone to do something against their will if used hard enough, long enough and forcefully enough. You've been doing this to me for almost a year now. When do you quit and accept and respect the fact I have my own beliefs in who God is and your Jesus is not it? You just keep pushing the spiked kool aid like a drunk who does not like to drink alone.
I'm hoping God will speak to you, not pushing only doing as told by Him. I do love you something you can't understand and gay or not I only hope you the best in life, I wish you could understand that.
God does "speak" to me all the time. Not in voice but I do not need to explain how for if he ever spoke to you, you would know how He speaks. He just does not give me the message you think he should. Too bad for you because your message is wrong. I understand clearly your version of love and it is not a good one. Keep it as it contains darkness. It does not come from a good and loving place. It comes from a place of control and manipulation. You have no comprehension of what God's love is. I wish you the best in understanding that and hope that you find it someday. Your actions and words show me the god you follow and it is not the Creator. You call him Jesus but it is not him. Get some intervention before it is too late.
Thank you for your advice, I will check in for mental evaluation soon...........I will tell them DR. COLLEEN sent me..............lol
daren1
mycatsmom
The Bible says......" for this reason, a man shall leave his mother and his father, and cleve to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh "
| 12 years ago. Rating: 10 | |
I'm sorry but you've entered the wrong question for this. This is NOT a church matter, this is a CIVIL RIGHTS MATTER. Please remember to take your bible with you when you leave.
ed shank
This subject always produces a spirited discussion which eventually does nothing but create a rift amongst us. For the past 18 HRS many have voiced their opinion on this subject, how many have been persuaded to change their thinking? NOT ONE. This dialog is harmful as seen here, and is also not what this site was intended for, I'm sure.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 10 | |
It's a help site. According to Randy, he needs help understanding the gay marriage issue and why we need gay marriage. It is being discussed. I am trying to help him. :)
Your both ignoring the fact that the two of you have a philosophically different mindset and neither will concede or accept what the other believes. At this point, is it really an answer to a question?
Even if he doesn't listen to me or hear me, I know others will. I will not yield the floor to ignorance and prejudice. D.C. just passed the law allowing Gay MARRIAGE. Another state on the right side.
Psst, Randy, Don't go to D.C. You'll have to see MARRIED homosexuals. :)
Psst, Randy, Don't go to D.C. You'll have to see MARRIED homosexuals. :)
My question had nothing to do with gay rights but as to why using the same word to describe different unions. The word will not give gays any more respect only more anger.
Maybe more angry from you because your ego will bust with the loss of your agenda. We want gay marriage because everyone understands the word marriage and it does not imply separate but equal which is a segregationist in nature and does not work as history has shown us. I do not believe your only intent was about the word. I think you would be happy if we were never given any rights on any kind of legal union. Your book tells you we are wrong and not normal. That's what you run with.
Colleen, It is not nice to state, that some people have different opinion to you, mean that they are,ignorant, and prejudice. We, like you have our opinion also.
Dolly, ignorance is lack of understanding. If the shoe fits, wear it, if not, don't put it on. When a difference of opinion interferes with the rights of others based on personal beliefs and those opinions hurt and interfere with the happiness of others, then that is prejudice. I've used neither word in an incorrect manner. Please do not cherry pick my words. Read them all or none at all. When you cherry pick, you make things go out of context.
Darci13
Randy,
I am sick and tired of you and this type commentary. What is it to you how does it harm you? I am a Christian, I believe in God and the bible and all in it. But, you drag this stuff around and around and around and around I am supposing because you have days that you can only act like a 2 year old having a tantrum. I myself believe God is the judge not you nor I nor anyone else. I believe in Civil Rights also and they do indeed have Civil Rights as well as other rights. My life & my morals & my Christianity are not threatened or harmed by Gay Marriage, why is yours & why are you so insecure?
| 12 years ago. Rating: 10 | |
Please point out where I said it harmed me or am trying to judge others or asking for rights not to be equal.
My only question was to the use of a word, I'm not insecure but apparently some gays are.
My only question was to the use of a word, I'm not insecure but apparently some gays are.
Headless Man Good argument Colleen, so you want to be like the animals not a human?
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
This is not judging?
It's a slippery slop Colleen, once we change things to meet our selfish needs there is no stopping.
I know you don't think your being selfish, but you can live with your gay partner and get legal rights without marriage, you only want you lifestyle to become accepted as normal and its not. Being born that way or because of something happening in your young life to change you may be debatable but its not normal.
I wish you well in your wish to be treated equal.
This is not judging?
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriagebed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
I believe the bible, I know some don't, but you will be judged as stated. I not saying anyone will go to hell, but you will be judged as will I.
Right here Randy, GOD WILL JUDGE don’t see anywhere where it says RANDY WILL JUDGE.......
What happens to judge not lest you be judged??????
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
This is not judging?
It's a slippery slop Colleen, once we change things to meet our selfish needs there is no stopping.
I know you don't think your being selfish, but you can live with your gay partner and get legal rights without marriage, you only want you lifestyle to become accepted as normal and its not. Being born that way or because of something happening in your young life to change you may be debatable but its not normal.
I wish you well in your wish to be treated equal.
This is not judging?
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriagebed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
I believe the bible, I know some don't, but you will be judged as stated. I not saying anyone will go to hell, but you will be judged as will I.
Right here Randy, GOD WILL JUDGE don’t see anywhere where it says RANDY WILL JUDGE.......
What happens to judge not lest you be judged??????
None of the post you comment to was judgement:
1- Good argument Colleen, so you want to be like the animals not a human?
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
This was a reply to her trying to make her lifestyle to be fine as animals do it too.
2- It's a slippery slope........
Not Judging only stating a few truths. Married people have their word why can't gays have theirs, with equal rights the word won't do it.
3- Hebrews 13:4........
Yes, God will judge as I said he will me, I'm not judging anyone here.
1- Good argument Colleen, so you want to be like the animals not a human?
Animals act on instink nothing moral about them.
This was a reply to her trying to make her lifestyle to be fine as animals do it too.
2- It's a slippery slope........
Not Judging only stating a few truths. Married people have their word why can't gays have theirs, with equal rights the word won't do it.
3- Hebrews 13:4........
Yes, God will judge as I said he will me, I'm not judging anyone here.
Call it what you like you get on these tangents Randy against Colleen and quite frankly I am most tired of it. Just stop already. We can have fun but we all have rights and our own opinions. I am a Christian albeit not the greatest example but thank God God has not given up on me so put this to rest once and for all and quit it.
My reply was to BM about homosexuality being natural. You read it and made the judgment that I was saying I wanted to be like an animal. Well Mr. Speak before you think, animals have heterosexual sex too. Are you trying to be an animal?
Slippery slopes are not based on truths. They are broad based conjectures and possibilities not truths. You judge my rights based on these conjectures and the implication that if I get the right to be married then your so far non truths may become a truth which they will not.
To use a verse of judgment as your own words and thoughts, then you become the judger. Especially when you use the verse on a person who does not follow or believe in your book, something you are quite well aware of.
Slippery slopes are not based on truths. They are broad based conjectures and possibilities not truths. You judge my rights based on these conjectures and the implication that if I get the right to be married then your so far non truths may become a truth which they will not.
To use a verse of judgment as your own words and thoughts, then you become the judger. Especially when you use the verse on a person who does not follow or believe in your book, something you are quite well aware of.
The question has been asked answered,asked-answered,asked-answered...~ I miss the Q&A of yesterday. I'm out of here! See everyone in a few days when you all have cooled off.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 10 | |
Best solution for you. There are many other questions out there for you to look at. This one will be a while and apparently is not one you have an interest in. That's OK, you can ignore it :)
valR
Silly question ... Why is it you insist on it not being called a marriage? ( that was my question is silly, not your...)
| 12 years ago. Rating: 9 | |
I thought I would get a reason why to call a different union by the same name.
If I were gay I would want to be treated equal but being married is not going to do it.
If I were gay I would want to be treated equal but being married is not going to do it.
I am the type of person that does not argue over semantics.. As far as I am concerned if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and swims like a duck ... it is a duck. Marriage is marriage... is marriage.. I dont know why I either side would fight over the name...
No Colleen, but in reviewing the Q&A personality and emotions were playing a big part in the answers. Which turned a debate into cat fight.
Debate. Debates get heated. Debates are a part of human existence especially when someone has an issue with sharing because of their religious views. More wars happen because of religious views.
JDB
Headless Man you stated "Headless Man I'm not arguing, just asking a question that people would prefer putting me down and not coming up with a solution to, are we the congress, or are we free americans with a free will to discuss things." If WE ARE FREE AMERICANS WHAT THE H*LL MAKES THE DIFFERENCE IF ITS CALLED MARRIAGE OR NOT????
| 12 years ago. Rating: 9 | |
digger
To religious followers, their denominational "holy book", be it the Bible, Quran, Torah or other, is their indisputable road-map to eternal salvation. No rational debate will ever get in the way of challenging any of the myriad contradictions, inconsistencies and fanciful depictions that they all contain.
Add to that, the creative interpretations of key scriptural passages by any follower who wishes to prove to himself and others, that the Holy Book conforms to their personal social-order agenda (instead of the other way around) , and what you get is an end of discussion.
Personally, I fail to see any negative causal effect that an institutionalized, state-sanctioned gay marriage would have on my own union or that of my fellow citizens'. As a free-thinking individual who is not chained to a holy book, I am at liberty to argue my position based on reason,evidence and openness; a luxury not afforded to those that prefer to be chained to religious dogma. I realize that this may offend many of you even though that is not my intent.
I applaud all those that have expressed their view on this question, regardless of position. The silence by the many regulars who either prefer to keep silent for fear of offending a akaqa friend or simply have no opinion, is deafening indeed.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 8 | |
Thanks for your input, as you can see I do believe the bible as God's word, however my question had nothing to do with that only the use of a word to identify a gay marriage and a heterosexual marriage.
What will be next multiple marriage, open marriage, animal marriage.......
Marriage should be between a Man and a Woman.
What will be next multiple marriage, open marriage, animal marriage.......
Marriage should be between a Man and a Woman.
"What will be next multiple marriage, open marriage, animal marriage......."
SLIPPERY SLOPE B.S. AGAIN!!!! YOU LOSE!!
"Marriage should be between a Man and a Woman."
It is and you guys are failing at it. What a waste of a right when it's not respected by the ones who have it.
SLIPPERY SLOPE B.S. AGAIN!!!! YOU LOSE!!
"Marriage should be between a Man and a Woman."
It is and you guys are failing at it. What a waste of a right when it's not respected by the ones who have it.
Thank you Digger. I have more support than you see here but you are correct, they do not want to get involved because they do not want to fight with another akaQA member. This I understand and respect and am thankful for their messages of support that I receive in other ways. : )
Randy... No I dont think I do understand...Now I understand what you are asking for... But I dont understand why the word is a point of contention for you... And I am not going to. We have different views on this.
To save future aggravation you may want to stay away for sexual orientation questions. People are going to disagree and get their feels hurt. I haven't seen one of these questions that was answered to any satiation and and the debates that follow become hostile.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 8 | |
Randy, by the way remind me never ever to go on a road trip with you I do not enjoy 2 year olds arguing....by the way what about all the finger pointing about the religious laws in the bible of the Pharisees????/
| 12 years ago. Rating: 8 | |
I'm not arguing, just asking a question that people would prefer putting me down and not coming up with a solution to, are we the congress, or are we free americans with a free will to discuss things.
figtree3
So they can fit in?
| 12 years ago. Rating: 8 | |
So we can protect our families with all the same rights and laws that only marriage brings. Civil unions and legal unions do not provide these rights and laws. They fall about 1200 short of what marriage offers. Made up names do not speak the same as marriage does. Everyone recognizes marriage and the whole idea behind it. Few recognize legal union or civil union at the same level as marriage. It's the same as common law marriage does not say the same thing to a person as marriage does.
michmar118
coolandy2000
To make their union and love for each other recognised by society. At present, they are considered "illicit" or "illegal" and with the more narrow minded "buggery!", as such, as much as those who love one another want to communicate this to the world through marriage, the gays want their relationships recognised as legal, lawful and blessed and not to be treated as something that generates contempt or a cause for disparaging remarks because they are different from the norms (as recognised only by society). One does not know how God would react to this, but that is left to him to judge. How does one became gay is a matter of opinion.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 8 | |
Hi guys i'm back, i thought about this post all day at work, when i went to bed last night i was not a happy chappy, now that 24 hours have passed, i 'vr come to the conclusion it is not worth any more discussion on the matter as it seems like a no win situation. love a heated debate, but it got out of hand. case closed for me, i'm going to look for another question that does involve gays, thanks guys.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 7 | |
That does NOT involve gays... Silly boy... I am right behind you... What question are we stalking now?
This turned into a very hot polarized debate. More than enough was said. I suggest a general agreement to disagree and to move on.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 7 | |
Better late than never yet not true acccording to the time of your latest comment: "Colleen: An enlightened man would not see my words as a put down. He would take them and grow by them. I am showing you the truths of your ways. Take the blinders off. You've been told by enough people here that you are doing everything wrong. Take your fingers out of your ears and listen. Jesus went to the cross because he had followers he needed to play martyr to and for no other reason. Jesus accepted his fate. You are neither a messenger nor a martyr, you are an egotist if you place yourself there. I am not trying to kill you Randy. I am just showing the falseness of your personal message which is a warped version of the message Christ actually brought to this world. Again I ask you, where is God's love in your words of belittlement, accusations, judgment and scare tactics? No Randy. You do not speak the words of God. You speak the words of Randy. A scared, unhappy man who does not want to be alone in his doom and gloom. Always trying to feed the kool aid to others so you won't go alone. Jim Jones did the same. He could not stand alone. He needed others to support his cause because it failed when he tried to go it alone. I stand alone here with my beliefs. I do not try to get others to fall in line with me. I can stand alone Randy and still be secure in my beliefs. You can not do this. You need the confirmation of others to give you some semblance that what you believe is correct. This is why you need a church. You need the support and confirmation. Your faith is just not good enough to allow you to stand alone. Trust in God that He and He alone can take care of His Souls. He does not need a man who sends darkness rather than light to gather the people. An enlightened man does not see the differences in people. An enlightened man sees Soul only. An enlightened man shares with the grace of God and does not cry, "Mine, mine, mine!". He shares because He loves God and loves all of God's creation. An enlightened man sets people free to do as they will within their own world. He does this because he loves them. He does not try to tempt them with a proverbial "free gift". Parents warn their children of the stranger offering free candy for a reason. I see you as the stranger with the free candy. Nothing is free. Everything comes with a price. Even your Christian salvation. I refuse to give up my freedom of choice and freedom of thought to accept your candy Randy. An enlightened man would accept and respect that. You however can not because you come from darkness and not from the light. You own fellow Christians have told you as much. Now stop feeling sorry for yourself and stop acting like I am the evil one just trying to destroy you. I am simply protecting myself from your darkness and false claims of love.
Report abuse • commented 18 minutes ago"
Report abuse • commented 18 minutes ago"
valR , that had nothing to do with this question. It has to do with the other question he opened. That is what I was responding to. Randy knows this. He also chose to extend this question into a new area. Please keep up with the rest of the class.
Actually Randy, neither you nor I are in charge of the agreement as to what it is called. The US Supreme court will handle that. Not you, not me and not your bible. If you agree to gay-marriage, good on you. This settles a dilemma in your life. You can move along happily. The problem is, you perpetuated it all by continuing to post your disagreement with gays having any kind of rights to be married. Then you introduced a same thought from your other question you posted right after this one got "resolved". You are a player Randy and many on akaQA are calling you out on it.
lewboy
I have never been to a gay marriage/union, but do they get a license ? and is it a marriage or a union license ? by the way if any gays out there are going to get married unionised i would love to attend.
| 12 years ago. Rating: 7 | |
It depends on the state and what they call it. It is a license but it does not offer all the same rights that the heteros have. Just some of them.
MAYBE one day Colleen, l used to have a few gay friends when they were not considered normal (what is normal) they never bothered me in a sexual way, because l was straight,but l have had some great times with them.
Top contributors in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered category
Unanswered Questions
u888pictures
Answers: 0
Views: 4
Rating: 0
Thietbinhabepeu.com - Nổ Hũ Cực Đã, Rinh Thưởng Cực Khủng!
Answers: 0
Views: 6
Rating: 0
VIN88
Answers: 0
Views: 9
Rating: 0
leo88vncc
Answers: 0
Views: 8
Rating: 0
leo88vncc
Answers: 0
Views: 6
Rating: 0
leo88vncc
Answers: 0
Views: 9
Rating: 0
leo88vncc
Answers: 0
Views: 8
Rating: 0
leo88vncc
> More questions...
Answers: 0
Views: 9
Rating: 0