Same Sex Marriage Legalized

[posty 2,852]

We just draw lines in different places. Why can't we just respect that about each other instead of slinging hatefulness towards anyone who sees it differently.

You do realize you are talking about Newbie, right?

[tanatastic 2,062]

 

 

 

Look, Newbie, you don't believe any two people should be able to get married any more than I do. You just draw your line in a different place. If a 30 year-old man wants to marry a 13-year old girl, that also has no effect on you. NONE. But, you might object to it. Another person might see that to be fine, but would object to a man being married to three people at once. Nobody truly believes that marriage should be open to any and all situations. We just draw lines in different places. Why can't we just respect that about each other instead of slinging hatefulness towards anyone who sees it differently.

I will say this is a good rebuttal. Some cultures dont view underage girls as being taboo sexually so this makes sense. Not saying I agree with it, but its a good argument to show that dif people draw lines in dif places. the difference tho being that underage is illegal here and we are discussing gay marriage in the USA.

[posty 2,852]

Until the state forces churches to marry gay couples, I don't see the issue. Like, why do religious people care so much about state sanctioned marriage?

I wonder if a church refuses to perform a gay marriage if they will lose their tax exempt status?

[Sho Nuff 720]

The underage example is dumb.

 

As they are not legally able to gove consent.

 

That c word many have a problem with (like when they bring up the equally idiotic example of someone marrying an animal)

[GobbleDog 1,019]

You just draw your line in a different place. If a 30 year-old man wants to marry a 13-year old girl, that also has no effect on you. NONE. But, you might object to it. Another person might see that to be fine, but would object to a man being married to three people at once. Nobody truly believes that marriage should be open to any and all situations. We just draw lines in different places. Why can't we just respect that about each other instead of slinging hatefulness towards anyone who sees it differently.

 

But we're talking about drawing LEGAL lines, not moral lines. As far as the government is concerned, marriage is about tax implications more than anything else. I think we can all agree the legal line should at least include:

 

1. Only two human beings

2. Must be of legal age

3. Must be of sound mind

 

Other than that, I honestly wouldn't care if fathers were allowed to marry their daughters (legal age) simply to avoid inheritence taxes. Now once churches start marrying gays or related parties or whatever, I understand people's outraige. But from a legal standpoint, who gives a crap who marry's who beyond the 3 basics? In my mind it's just a legal document with tax implications.

[Mike Honcho 5,553]

To be fair some prominent republicans have been pretty reasonable about it. Jeb Bush, for example

 

That's why I didn't quote him

[parrot 790]

 

But we're talking about drawing LEGAL lines, not moral lines. As far as the government is concerned, marriage is about tax implications more than anything else. I think we can all agree the legal line should at least include:

 

1. Only two human beings

2. Must be of legal age

3. Must be of sound mind

 

Other than that, I honestly wouldn't care if fathers were allowed to marry their daughters (legal age) simply to avoid inheritence taxes. Now once churches start marrying gays or related parties or whatever, I understand people's outraige. But from a legal standpoint, who gives a crap who marry's who beyond the 3 basics? In my mind it's just a legal document with tax implications.

 

I don't agree with point 1. I have no problem with polygamy as long as all are consenting adults and no one is coerced into it. Their life, their choice.

[Fumbleweed 555]

The underage example is dumb.

 

As they are not legally able to gove consent.

 

That c word many have a problem with (like when they bring up the equally idiotic example of someone marrying an animal)

 

And 10 years ago, gays were not able to marry. What's your point? They were blocked legally. All you are talking about is a legal block...just like the one that was just abolished. Saying something is dumb because it's isn't legal holds no water. That's exactly what gay marriage was just a few years ago.

 

You have drawn your line at consenting adults. That's a reasonable place to be. Some draw it further up, some further back.

[NewbieJr 541]

 

Gay is not a race of people. It is a group of people defined by sexual attraction to those of the same sex and subsequent behaviors based on that attraction.

lol Thanks for the lesson. I thought it was a race. They are still "God's people" that He created. (if you want to still use the Bible bullsh1t to back your point).

[Magnificent Bastard 192]

I am calm...go pick a fight elsewhere.

 

You're the one getting hysterical with all the cursing and picking fights.

[Fumbleweed 555]

 

I don't agree with point 1. I have no problem with polygamy as long as all are consenting adults and no one is coerced into it. Their life, their choice.

 

And therein lies my point. Parrot and Gobble Dog don't draw their lines in the same places. We don't "all agree" on much of anything.

[Sho Nuff 720]

You're the one getting hysterical with all the cursing and picking fights.

 

Troll on elsewhere focko.

[NewbieJr 541]

 

 

Look, Newbie, you don't believe any two people should be able to get married any more than I do. You just draw your line in a different place. If a 30 year-old man wants to marry a 13-year old girl, that also has no effect on you. NONE.

But the 13 year-old girl isn't mature enough to make adult decisions. I don't think two 13 year old gay boys should be married either. Any two CONSENTING ADULT humans should be able to have equal rights. Period.

 

As for respecting people with different opinions, I have no respect for anyone who thinks it's fair to deny anyone the same rights as he has.

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

And 10 years ago, gays were not able to marry. What's your point? They were blocked legally. All you are talking about is a legal block...just like the one that was just abolished. Saying something is dumb because it's isn't legal holds no water. That's exactly what gay marriage was just a few years ago.

 

You have drawn your line at consenting adults. That's a reasonable place to be. Some draw it further up, some further back.

 

My point is a 13 year old cannot give consent.

Its a different legal block...one there was no real legal basis to actually block other than bigotry.

[GobbleDog 1,019]

 

I don't agree with point 1. I have no problem with polygamy as long as all are consenting adults and no one is coerced into it. Their life, their choice.

 

I wouldn't care if churches marry polygamists, but this legal tax shelter called marriage should only apply to two people. That's reasonable. How can you have 10 people all having the final say on "pull the plug" decisions and various tax issues.?.

[parrot 790]

You have drawn your line at consenting adults. That's a reasonable place to be. Some draw it further up, some further back.

 

Would you "respect" someone who thinks it should be legal to marry children? I mean if that's where they draw their line, what are you going to do.

[Fumbleweed 555]

lol Thanks for the lesson. I thought it was a race. They are still "God's people" that He created. (if you want to still use the Bible bullsh1t to back your point).

 

You know, there was a time I found you to be a pretty decent person to interact with here. I love 80s music and you do, too (or did). I guess you've changed or I thought of you as someone that you aren't. Lately, your posts just appear more and more caustic. That's too bad.

[NewbieJr 541]

 

My point is a 13 year old cannot give consent.

Its a different legal block...one there was no real legal basis to actually block other than bigotry.

When they're desperate, they always pull out minors and/or animals.

[NewbieJr 541]

 

You know, there was a time I found you to be a pretty decent person to interact with here. I love 80s music and you do, too (or did). I guess you've changed or I thought of you as someone that you aren't. Lately, your posts just appear more and more caustic. That's too bad.

Sorry, I have no respect for people who hate or try to deny other people their rights due to race, religion, or sexual preference. Stick to 80's music if you want me to agree with you. You think you deserve more rights than other people and want people to respect that? lol Not a chance

[tanatastic 2,062]

The underage example is dumb.

 

As they are not legally able to gove consent.

 

That c word many have a problem with (like when they bring up the equally idiotic example of someone marrying an animal)

This si true, it has to be legal. Any 2 people of legal age should be able to marry. If its a mother and son, well, weird but still has nothing to do with me so more power to them.

[Fumbleweed 555]

 

Would you "respect" someone who thinks it should be legal to marry children? I mean if that's where they draw their line, what are you going to do.

 

I don't think marrying a child is a good idea. I don't think two children getting married is a good idea. My line is further up, so you're going into territory that clearly I don't believe to be the right thing to do. I'm not sure where respect comes into play.

[tanatastic 2,062]

lol Thanks for the lesson. I thought it was a race. They are still "God's people" that He created. (if you want to still use the Bible bullsh1t to back your point).

Remember this is the god that put Tyrannosaurus rex and modern day man on the planet on the same day 6k years ago. so hes got some pretty weird notions as it is.

[Fumbleweed 555]

Sorry, I have no respect for people who hate or try to deny other people their rights due to race, religion, or sexual preference. Stick to 80's music if you want me to agree with you. You think you deserve more rights than other people and want people to respect that? lol Not a chance

 

When did I say that I deserve more "rights"? I am not in favor of there being any financial advantage for one type of couple over another. I do believe that marriage should have been maintained in its traditional form, however.

[Sho Nuff 720]

I do believe that marriage should have been maintained in its traditional form, however.

My question is why?

what legal basis is behind that?

[NewbieJr 541]

 

When did I say that I deserve more "rights"? I am not in favor of there being any financial advantage for one type of couple over another. I do believe that marriage should have been maintained in its traditional form, however.

Well thankfully, the country has officially progressed today. As it did with women's rights and black rights.

[Mike Honcho 5,553]

When they're desperate, they always pull out minors and/or animals.

 

Exactly, just because people work underground and pull coal out of the earth, doesn't mean we should look down on them or treat them any differently then the rest of us.

[parrot 790]

I don't think marrying a child is a good idea. I don't think two children getting married is a good idea. My line is further up, so you're going into territory that clearly I don't believe to be the right thing to do. I'm not sure where respect comes into play.

I's not either, that's why I'm not sure why suggested it.

 

 

 

Nobody truly believes that marriage should be open to any and all situations. We just draw lines in different places. Why can't we just respect that about each other instead of slinging hatefulness towards anyone who sees it differently.

You disagree with people who might want to marry children and don't feel any need to "respect" their view. Why are those of us who disagree with your view compelled to respect it? I respect you personally, but I don't respect your view, because I think it's wrong.

[vuduchile 1,947]

I will say this is a good rebuttal. Some cultures dont view underage girls as being taboo sexually so this makes sense. Not saying I agree with it, but its a good argument to show that dif people draw lines in dif places. the difference tho being that underage is illegal here and we are discussing gay marriage in the USA.

gay sex acts used to be illegal here too

 

In 1779, Thomas Jefferson wrote a law in Virginia which contained a punishment of castration for men who engage in sodomy.^[2]Jefferson intended this to be a liberalization of the sodomy laws in Virginia at that time. It was rejected by the Virginia Legislature, however, which continued to prescribe death as the maximum penalty for the crime of sodomy in that state.^[3]

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor.

[tanatastic 2,062]

 

Exactly, just because people work underground and pull coal out of the earth, doesn't mean we should look down on them or treat them any differently then the rest of us.

Miners is a dif spelling, so your joke is a fail. I give it a 2 for the attempt tho.

[Fumbleweed 555]

My question is why?

what legal basis is behind that?

 

It's not based on anything legal, per se. It's based on my belief that there still need to be moral ideals in society. I believe a man and woman married represent the ideal for relationships. That doesn't mean that homosexual relationships don't contain some very good things, too. I believe our society should hold up what is ideal and lovingly accept what is not as well. That means marriage remains man and woman, but other forms of relationship are also given dignity and worth from a legal standpoint. That would mean that civil unions be granted. Or maybe the government should just get out of the marriage business altogether and make everything about civil unions. Then, churches could decide what is marriage and what is not based on their own set of beliefs. There is no hate in me with respect to this subject. I just see it through a different lens. It isn't a hateful lens.

 

And yes, of course my views are rooted in my faith. The two are inseparable. And because they are, I really have no business denying rights to anyone. I just think there should be a separation between what is ideal and what is less ideal, but still acceptable.

[vuduchile 1,947]

 

But we're talking about drawing LEGAL lines, not moral lines. As far as the government is concerned, marriage is about tax implications more than anything else. I think we can all agree the legal line should at least include:

 

1. Only two human beings

2. Must be of legal age

3. Must be of sound mind

 

Other than that, I honestly wouldn't care if fathers were allowed to marry their daughters (legal age) simply to avoid inheritence taxes. Now once churches start marrying gays or related parties or whatever, I understand people's outraige. But from a legal standpoint, who gives a crap who marry's who beyond the 3 basics? In my mind it's just a legal document with tax implications.

This is really where the rubber meets the road. Setting morals and belief systems aside, they government should only be focusing on the legal implications.

[Fumbleweed 555]

I's not either, that's why I'm not sure why suggested it.

 

 

 

 

You disagree with people who might want to marry children and don't feel any need to "respect" their view. Why are those of us who disagree with your view compelled to respect it? I respect you personally, but I don't respect your view, because I think it's wrong.

 

Here's the rub on this:

 

I might disagree with a 30-year old man who thinks he truly loves a 13-year old girl and wants to marry her. But, I would not turn my disagreement into a personal attack. When people start mocking/ridiculing people they disagree with, that is the lack of respect I am talking about.

 

Personal attacks based on differences of worldview/opinion are the heart of the problem from my perspective. We should all be able to attack an idea without attacking the person who holds the idea.

[NewbieJr 541]

 

Here's the rub on this:

 

I might disagree with a 30-year old man who thinks he truly loves a 13-year old girl and wants to marry her. But, I would not turn my disagreement into a personal attack. When people start mocking/ridiculing people they disagree with, that is the lack of respect I am talking about.

 

Personal attacks based on differences of worldview/opinion are the heart of the problem from my perspective. We should all be able to attack an idea without attacking the person who holds the idea.

Whose attacking you?

[TimmySmith 2,783]

gay sex acts used to be illegal here too

 

In 1779, Thomas Jefferson wrote a law in Virginia which contained a punishment of castration for men who engage in sodomy.^[2]Jefferson intended this to be a liberalization of the sodomy laws in Virginia at that time. It was rejected by the Virginia Legislature, however, which continued to prescribe death as the maximum penalty for the crime of sodomy in that state.^[3]

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor.

This Jefferson schmuck also apparently owned slaves and was a serial rapist. I have not confirmed if flew a controversial flag, but I'll bet he did.

[posty 2,852]

Who's attacking you?

Fixed...

[NewbieJr 541]

Fixed...

Thanks. So who's attacking anyone here?

[Fumbleweed 555]

Well thankfully, the country has officially progressed today. As it did with women's rights and black rights.

 

I am thankful for both of those realities. And, I am thankful that we as a nation are seeking to be loving to all people. That doesn't mean I approve of gay marriage. Like I said, I think there was another path, but that really doesn't matter much now.

 

Done with the discussion. Today's decision should have come as a surprise to no one. It is what it is. I am going to enjoy my afternoon and take my son to the driving range to hit some balls this evening when it's cooler. Peace to all.

[tanatastic 2,062]

Fixed...

Id also accept whos, but whose is def unacceptable lol.

[Mike Honcho 5,553]

Miners is a dif spelling, so your joke is a fail. I give it a 2 for the attempt tho.

 

Yeah, I know...I was purposely confusing them...I give your ability to get a joke a -1000.

[SUXBNME 1,629]

 

You know, there was a time I found you to be a pretty decent person to interact with here. I love 80s music and you do, too (or did). I guess you've changed or I thought of you as someone that you aren't. Lately, your posts just appear more and more caustic. That's too bad.

He's a useless troll. Most of his posts are intended for nothing more than shock value.

He hasn't had anything of quality to add here in quite some time.