Prop 8

[VicSkimmr]

There's already laws in place, all over this country that allow gay couples to have everything (medical, dental, vision and tax breaks) but the title "married". And as Markseven pointed out, if the courts called this "Union" instead of marriage, made it nearly if not identical to "Marriage", would the gay community and rights activists be happy?

Of course they would, that's all anyone is asking for. The reason they want to be able to get married is to get the legal benefits. Nobody gives a crap if they can call themselves married or not, they just want the same rights as a straight couple who are married.

[Naplm00]

They shouldn't. This is part of the entire problem. If there were no benefits involved it would remain a mostly religious personal issue, as it should be.

I think this is the point here... in today’s society marriage is not a religious issue as observed when the practice was created. It is essentially a civil contract made at the state level, that is recognized by the federal government for tax and benefit purposes.

The religion part of the ceremony and contract is purely incidental and only effects the two parties engaging in the act of marriage.

For example:

1. Two Catholics man a woman want to marry, they apply for marriage lic at the town hall and have a priest oversee the catholic ceremony at the church and report the end result (*marriage) to the township. Bingo hitched until divorce or death.

2. A black Lutheran woman and a white Jewish man want to marry, they apply for a marriage lic at the town hall and have a judge oversee the non-denominational ceremony at the courthouse and record the end result (*marriage) for the township. Bingo hitched until divorce or death.

3. A Chinese scientologist woman and a native American woman want to marry, they apply for a marriage lic at the town hall and have a judge oversee the non-denominational ceremony at the courthouse and record the end result (*marriage) for the township. Bingo hitched until divorce or death.





Now explain to me how any of this affected YOUR LIFE. Oh wait it doesn’t. Because marriage is a contract in PERSONAL terms between two people recognized by the government.

Religion has nothing to do with it, it is simply icing on the cake.

[Naplm00]

Marriage has nothing to do with religion in our society, unless the people making the contract want it to.



If you disagree with this, then you are saying that non-denominational marriages also have no meaning and that your religious preference is to be applied to other people against their will.

[87e30]

there is more to it, but this should get you started

http://www.factcheck.org/what_is_a_civil_union.html

Interesting. I can't decide on the issue.

[z31maniac]

Why do married couples receive benefits? (serious question)

Social engineering through use of the tax code.

Although strong families and producing offspring help strenghthen the nation etc etc etc.

[87e30]

Social engineering through use of the tax code.

Although strong families and producing offspring help strenghthen the nation etc etc etc.

The only argument I can think of for married couples receiving benefits revolves around the ideal that heterosexual couples can responsibly raise children and create a lineage that furthers/benefits society.

Can a homosexual couple do this? Granted many heterosexual couples do not, but then again many do. I don't believe that a homosexual couple has this same capacity. Personal opinion, I suppose.

[briansjacobs]

. I don't believe that a homosexual couple has this same capacity. Personal opinion, I suppose.

well then read this from Cal State University

http://www.csun.edu/~psy453/harm_n.htm

[Naplm00]

The only argument I can think of for married couples receiving benefits revolves around the ideal that heterosexual couples can responsibly raise children and create a lineage that furthers/benefits society.

Can a homosexual couple do this? Granted many heterosexual couples do not, but then again many do. I don't believe that a homosexual couple has this same capacity. Personal opinion, I suppose.

Except through adoption

[87e30]

well then read this from Cal State University

http://www.csun.edu/~psy453/harm_n.htm

I understand that homosexual couples may raise "normal" and "healthy" children. However, they do not have the capacity to reproduce nor do I see a high likely hood of creating a strong family lineage. (can't reproduce)

Seems to me we need reproduction and therefore we reward a relatively effective system (marriage) that does this.

Though we really don't need the extra people.


I don't care if someone is homosexual or not (know several) but equating it to marriage just bothers me. Call it provincial or ignorant but it's the truth for a lot of people.

[reelop19]

I still say its a liberal agenda to disrupt religious practices. Why not say that along with jesus we now have to worship satan so that its fair for the gays who are going to hell :)

[briansjacobs]

I understand that homosexual couples may raise "normal" and "healthy" children. However, they do not have the capacity to reproduce nor do I see a high likely hood of creating a strong family lineage. (can't reproduce)

Seems to me we need reproduction and therefore we reward a relatively effective system (marriage) that does this.

Though we really don't need the extra people.


I don't care if someone is homosexual or not (know several) but equating it to marriage just bothers me. Call it provincial or ignorant but it's the truth for a lot of people.

production of unwanted babies is not being ramped up to fill the demand of same sex couples. There are same sex couple that would like to care for and raise babies that are in foster care that by the way you as a tax payer you are fronting the bill for. Not only that, studies show that children raised in foster care are at higher risk for commiting crimes and winding up in jail, that as a tax payer you front the bill for.

you got it right, it is ignorant.

[briansjacobs]

I still say its a liberal agenda to disrupt religious practices. Why not say that along with jesus we now have to worship satan so that its fair for the gays who are going to hell :)

liberal agneda, ill buy that. But how does it disrupt religous practice? mind your own business, it does not affect you, move along. No one is forcing you to worship anything.

[87e30]

production of unwanted babies is not being ramped up to fill the demand of same sex couples. There are same sex couple that would like to care for and raise babies that are in foster care that by the way you as a tax payer you are fronting the bill for. Not only that, studies show that children raised in foster care are at higher risk for commiting crimes and winding up in jail, that as a tax payer you front the bill for.

you got it right, it is ignorant.

No, I understand logically it makes sense. America freedom taking care of kids blah blah blah.

I'm just saying I'm not a big fan, and I'm not alone.

I realize needing production to survive + being overpopulated is a bit ironic. Still trying to make sense of that one in my head.

I'd rather keep producing and stop holding hands of those failing. Stop preventing death... cynical but makes sense.

[VicSkimmr]

I love how everyone says this is a liberal agenda. This is a civil rights issue, it bypasses party affiliation. Claiming that it's a liberal agenda essentially implies that conservatives support suppression and inequality.

I just don't understand how people can oppose this. Allowing gay marriage in no way affects your life (unless you're gay, obviously), and yet the majority of Americans are so opposed to it that they are willing to suppress a significant amount of American citizens to keep it from happening. I just don't understand how anyone can logically support their opposition of it.

[Kershaw]

STOP THE HATE!