User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:20:29 AM EDT
Ok, option to long to fit in box - so flame me
Protecting rights by allowing Gay marriage Denying rights by defining moral and immoral behavior in opposition to religion  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:21:13 AM EDT
[#1]
They're all gay
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:23:01 AM EDT
[#2]
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:35:11 AM EDT
[#3]
Inventing rights to buy votes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:40:07 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Inventing rights to buy votes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:40:53 AM EDT
[#5]
Gay marriage is the result of a society and government being tossed to and fro after their historical,mutually agreed upon, moral anchor was willfully cut loose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:42:02 AM EDT
[#6]
As long as the government supports marriage by giving married couples special privileges in contract law, taxation, parenting, medical & end of life issues, then discrimination of who can be married to whom is discrimination & forbids equal protection of the law. If a state were to eliminate all references to marriage from their law code, and marriages were concluded in that state by private contract, there would be no need to legalize gay marriage.
If you want to bring the particular moral code from your religion into the laws of the government, move to Iran - you'll be quite comfortable there. Farmers Fight! backbencher |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:43:49 AM EDT
[#7]
He who frames the question wins the debate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:45:26 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Inventing rights to buy votes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:47:32 AM EDT
[#9]
You have no right to force religions to accept your lifestyle choices.
There is no such thing as "Gay Marriage". Marriage is a religious act and only sanctioned between a man and woman. The state has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:48:33 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:54:07 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on your marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? We have a winner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:54:23 AM EDT
[#12]
Government just needs to stay out of this and everything else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:57:38 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: As long as the government supports marriage by giving married couples special privileges in contract law, taxation, parenting, medical & end of life issues, then discrimination of who can be married to whom is discrimination & forbids equal protection of the law. If a state were to eliminate all references to marriage from their law code, and marriages were concluded in that state by private contract, there would be no need to legalize gay marriage. If you want to bring the particular moral code from your religion into the laws of the government, move to Iran - you'll be quite comfortable there. Farmers Fight! backbencher Well stated. The GD morality cops will be along shortly to yell at you, assuming they even understood what you wrote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 7:59:55 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on your marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? We have a winner. Not really. The issue centres around economics, but the American Taliban members need to assure themselves they are fighting some great moral crusade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:04:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Government just needs to stay out of this and everything else. Not going to happen. This issue will be decided at the federal level, good or bad, and sooner rather than later. The only choice left is how it will be decided –– USSC opinion or Constitutional Amendment. Nine life appointees or the people/states as a whole. Those are the only two options at this point. I know which of the two I would prefer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:05:48 AM EDT
[#16]
Non-issue IMHO... If someone wants to screw their life up by getting married, all power to them. I personally don't care if someone marries/fucks someone of the opposite sex, same sex, farm animal, car, or farm implement, if doesn't effect my life.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:06:36 AM EDT
[#17]
Set precedent for government to dictate laws church must follow.
Church compromises values = statest win + leverage anytime church takes exception to any law based on moral grounds Church portrayed in bad light = statest win Non compliant church forced to pay fines = statest win |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:08:26 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
As long as the government supports marriage by giving married couples special privileges in contract law, taxation, parenting, medical & end of life issues, then discrimination of who can be married to whom is discrimination & forbids equal protection of the law. If a state were to eliminate all references to marriage from their law code, and marriages were concluded in that state by private contract, there would be no need to legalize gay marriage. If you want to bring the particular moral code from your religion into the laws of the government, move to Iran - you'll be quite comfortable there. Farmers Fight! backbencher This X 1000 Very well said |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:10:17 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on your marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? We have a winner. Very much so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:19:20 AM EDT
[#20]
I would spend less time worrying about other peoples marriage and relationship, and spend more time making my own better, but what the fuck do I know.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:19:56 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Inventing rights to buy votes. This, and forcing more government and private employees to be covered by health insurance. It's about benefits. All this could be solved by eliminating the corporate deductibility of health care. Which shouldn't be an issue anyway since the corporate tax rate should be zero. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:22:29 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Government just needs to stay out of this and everything else. +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:24:00 AM EDT
[#23]
Ummm OP were is your box:
States deciding how they will handle there citizens marital options? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:28:15 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? You've just made the case that this isn't about forcing views on a particular religion, and that - in fact - marriage is a secular legal institution that is part of society at large, going beyond religious communities. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:35:08 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. Fags just want the same benefits and recognition that breaders and DINKS are afforded. If you have objections to the term religious "marriage" being used to describe this legal arrangement, the the term marriage should be removed from laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:36:36 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Government just needs to stay out of this and everything else. This is really what it gets down to. I don't support laws "permitting gay marriage" as much as I oppose laws that limit what consenting adults can do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:37:08 AM EDT
[#27]
All laws are moral codes.
Homosexuality is right up there with incest, it's deviancy. The liberals and Libertarians are all just libtards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:37:41 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
As long as the government supports marriage by giving married couples special privileges in contract law, taxation, parenting, medical & end of life issues, then discrimination of who can be married to whom is discrimination & forbids equal protection of the law. Equal protection of the law does not require the government to treat all persons equally, as most people seem to believe. It requres that the government treat all similarly situated persons equally. That's the point of argument. Are a man who wishes to marry a women and a man who wishes to marry another man similarly situated? If you answer that question "yes" you have to conclude that the two men who wish to marry have had their rights violated if they are not allowed to marry. If you answer that question "no" there is no deprivation of rights. As with every issue, different people answer the threshold question differently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:38:14 AM EDT
[#29]
The government CANNOT define morality. That is beyond its scope. It can only define legalities.
Lots of stuff I personally consider immoral, should never-the-less be legal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:38:39 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Gay marriage is the result of a society and government being tossed to and fro after their historical,mutually agreed upon, moral anchor was willfully cut loose. That's what we get from freeing the negros and letting women vote 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:39:22 AM EDT
[#31]
Government can be state or federal. People already could marry (or not) in each others eyes and the eyes of their religion.
I see this as the Government's (never by popular vote) either granting rights or taking them away. It is either a "you can" to the homosexuals, or a "you will" to the rest of the people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:46:05 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: You have no right to force religions to accept your lifestyle choices. There is no such thing as "Gay Marriage". Marriage is a religious act and only sanctioned between a man and woman. The state has nothing to do with it. If it is a religious act, why do you have to get the marriage paper from a court house and send to the state? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 8:49:15 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
They're all gay 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:07:12 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on your marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? We have a winner. Not really. The issue centres around economics, but the American Taliban members need to assure themselves they are fighting some great moral crusade. Who are the American Taliban? CARE hasn't voiced an opinion as far as I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:08:49 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? I like this |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:09:57 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? I have no problem with Civil Unions |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:13:53 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
I have no problem with Civil Unions Then what is your problem with marriage? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:16:16 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
You have no right to force religions to accept your lifestyle choices. There is no such thing as "Gay Marriage". Marriage is a religious act and only sanctioned between a man and woman. The state has nothing to do with it. Ever seen anything like this? 
They make you pay and fill out paperwork, and then they give you that. Having that grants one privileges unavailable without it. So actually, it would seem that the state has quite a lot to do with it. ETA- also, one can get that piece of paper without any intercession or involvement of any religious authorities. A JOP can do it. So it would seem that marriage is an institution in which religious involvement is optional, but state involvement is mandatory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:17:58 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have no problem with Civil Unions Then what is your problem with marriage? Imposing your political views on my religious views. Civil Union is a great compromise. It gives them all the benefits of Marriage but doesn't force religions to go against their faiths.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:18:44 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have no right to force religions to accept your lifestyle choices. There is no such thing as "Gay Marriage". Marriage is a religious act and only sanctioned between a man and woman. The state has nothing to do with it. Ever seen anything like this? http://macquirelatory.com/Marriage%20License/marriage%20license%203.jpg They make you pay and fill out paperwork, and then they give you that. Having that grants one privileges unavailable without it. So actually, it would seem that the state has quite a lot to do with it. Civil Unions would negate that |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:21:39 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have no right to force religions to accept your lifestyle choices. There is no such thing as "Gay Marriage". Marriage is a religious act and only sanctioned between a man and woman. The state has nothing to do with it. Ever seen anything like this? http://macquirelatory.com/Marriage%20License/marriage%20license%203.jpg They make you pay and fill out paperwork, and then they give you that. Having that grants one privileges unavailable without it. So actually, it would seem that the state has quite a lot to do with it. Civil Unions would negate that They would, if the legwork was done to ensure that CU couples had the same protection under the law as married couples. That's my only issue with the whole thing, equal protection. The quibbling over definitions and minutiae is bullshit. Equal protection under the law is a constitutional matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:23:18 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. Fags just want the same benefits and recognition that breaders and DINKS are afforded. If you have objections to the term religious "marriage" being used to describe this legal arrangement, the the term marriage should be removed from laws. I'm good with that |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:23:24 AM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Inventing rights to buy votes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:24:16 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have no problem with Civil Unions Then what is your problem with marriage? Imposing your political views on my religious views. Civil Union is a great compromise. It gives them all the benefits of Marriage but doesn't force religions to go against their faiths.. Except no religious group would be forced to perform marriages between gays. The whole thing is a red herring. Do Christian groups have issue with the idea that couples are married in courthouses now, or in Jewish ceremonies? I personally would like to see marriage licenses become "civil union" licenses, thus eliminating that argument. I think it would also eliminate the semantics argument, and allow everyone to really see the issues. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:24:49 AM EDT
[#45]
State government reflects the wishes and beliefs of the state's people. Except for where the state constitution forbids legislation and except for where power is ceded to the federal government through the US Constitution.
States have always had the authority to protect the morality of the people of the state. And morality is defined by the prevailing beliefs of the majority. I know a lot of people don't like it, but states absolutely have the authority to be involved in marriage. Because the people want them to be involved, and by wide margins. I think I'm going to start a thread discussing how everyone who believes in "gravity" is a sheep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:27:21 AM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I can't just go off marrying anyone I want. I need daddy gov't to tell me better. Wrong. You CAN go marry anyone you want. No one will stop you (maybe the other groom's father but that's not what I mean). You and any guy you pick can go get married today. Invite your friends and family, get a minister willing to preside over it and read some poetry, exchange vows, promises and rings and kiss each other will everyone wipes tears away from their eyes. You are now "married". Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. See how that works? If "the people" don't recognize your relationship in what THEY define as "marriage", well then you're not "married" in the eyes of "the people". Why can't gays leave us "the people" out of their private relationship???? You've just made the case that this isn't about forcing views on a particular religion, and that - in fact - marriage is a secular legal institution that is part of society at large, going beyond religious communities. Some religions sanction marriage between gays, some don't. So it's not a "religious" issue. So yes, marriage is more than just a religious issue. It's a morals/cultural/values issue of the society. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:27:37 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Imposing your political views on my religious views.
Quoted:
I have no problem with Civil Unions Then what is your problem with marriage? Civil Union is a great compromise. It gives them all the benefits of Marriage but doesn't force religions to go against their faiths.. What about an heterosexual atheist couple that gets married by the county clerk? Or couples that get married without the intent to procreate? They obviously do not meet your definition of "marriage", but I do not see the uproar over those situations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:28:54 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Oh, but you want gov't (i.e. "the people") to sanction your particular relationship? Well then you need permission of "the people" to get their stamp of approval on what YOU are calling marriage. Fags just want the same benefits and recognition that breaders and DINKS are afforded. If you have objections to the term religious "marriage" being used to describe this legal arrangement, the the term marriage should be removed from laws. I'm good with that And I think you and I have had this exact same conversation before. I really have to stop reading these threads... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:29:31 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Inventing rights to buy votes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2012 9:30:30 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
State government reflects the wishes and beliefs of the state's people. Except for where the state constitution forbids legislation and except for where power is ceded to the federal government through the US Constitution. States have always had the authority to protect the morality of the people of the state. And morality is defined by the prevailing beliefs of the majority. I know a lot of people don't like it, but states absolutely have the authority to be involved in marriage. Because the people want them to be involved, and by wide margins. I think I'm going to start a thread discussing how everyone who believes in "gravity" is a sheep. Indeed. It is definitely not a federal issue - except where "full faith and credit" is at play. Of course, if a state who has decided to only allow one type of marriage must recognize people married in another... what does that mean about carry permits? So much drama. So much lofty language and legal wrangling to disguise what usually amounts to kneejerk opinions on one side or another. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
