|
| |
why_is_marriage_a_legal_status
|
|
|
karl the weed
|
BAM! problem_solved! no more gay_marriage worries! everyones happy now, you idiots dont have to legalize gay marriage, and you gay couples dont have to get married, and if you want to, then you just tell people you are, what difference does it make, because marriage isnt a legal status now! now its the churches problem! wheehee!
people should listen to me more often.
|
040224
|
| |
... |
|
|
whitechocolatewalrus
|
what about the tax reductions and stuff like that that married people get? what about the insurance policies and things?
i really don't care either way, i am just questioning.
|
040224
|
| |
... |
|
|
karl the weed
|
thats the point. all im saying is that i think the reason a lot of gay people are huge on getting married is the benefits. well if you take away the benefits then that solves much of the problem. the rest of the problem is the churhes problem
|
040224
|
| |
... |
|
|
.
|
hm.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
birdmad
|
ha.
okay, so instead of just saying, "you live here, and as such are entitled to the same rights and privileges as anyone else who lives here"
we should say:
"ok, since certain people don't want you to have these rights and privileges based on their religious beliefs, we won't let ANYONE have them - so there's a good chance that they may come to hate you even more than they are prone to"
why does that not sound like such a hot idea to me?
again, it's as simple as referring back to the 14th_amendment (section I), to impose an amendment that runs contrary to the principles of that amendment is to put the US back in time to when only white, (and now conditionally christian) male land/property-owners had any right to anything
marriage as a legal status dates back thousands of years and is predominant in western culture as one of the better inheritances of from the Roman Empire, if not for the legal status provided to married couples, before that, anyone with ample power could sieze a dead man's property and either evict or take custody of his family and there wouldn't be a damned thing they could do about it.
that's why, karl
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
bird
|
besides, lots of people, straight or gay just seem to get married for the "benefits" and plenty of people, straight or gay would get married because they are in love, so your argument on that point is something of a straw_man
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
bird
|
the third problem is that the people who argue this based on religious principle don't just want to harass gay people, this is just one front among many that they are after because they think that instead of being governed by consittutional law that the US should be governed by their rather subjective interpretations of biblical law which is a direct violation of one of the principles that this country was founded on.
i mostly think you're alright, karl, but i'm sorry to say that i think you totally fished that one out of your ass
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
fish
|
karltheweedisanass
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
falling_alone
|
somewhere it says that if you live together with your partner for 7 years (possibly more) you are legally married...
common-law marriage isnt it called?
yea...i think the only significance of that is that you can share a checking account.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
who i am doesnt matter anymore
|
marriage is retarded. yea im a sappy romantic type of girl and everynow and then a long beautiful white dress and having that "perfect day" is neat to dream about. but come on now. i told my boyfriend if we decide to get married, we're headin to vegas. but then again i dont care if our marrige is "legal", we already share everything...why worry about signing some damn papers. love is what it should symbolize, not numbers and papers.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
whitechocolatewalrus
|
common-law marriage is only active in a few states anymore.
And as for the religion thing, that's a bunch of shit. Everyone has a different religion, and some people don't even have a religion. Those who don't have religions would not think that gay marriage is a sin because they don't have a book to tell them that it's a sin. It has never been legally defined in the constitution that marriage is only a union between a man and a woman. It could be a man and a man or a woman and a woman or an it and an it. If you are not part of the union being made, than it is none of your damn business as to what the two people involved consider a sin. You don't have to be associated with them, you don't have to have a same sex marriage, you don't have to do anything. It's not like people know or care when heterosexual marriages occur, because it's not a big fucking deal. Why should same sex marriage be a big deal? Just because we don't allow same sex marriages doesn't stop same sex relationships from occuring. It's time we stopped hiding from the truth and just accept that things are going to happen in this world that not everyone wants to acknowelage.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
walrie
|
acknowledge.
i just couldn't leave it like that.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
karl the weed
|
nonono thats not what i meant... oh forget it i always just make myself look more stupid.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
karl the weed
|
i just meant if marriage didnt have benifits, and it just was a statement that person a is related to person b. not that there are no relations between people.
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
bird
|
i understand your baisc point, Karl, and as well intended as it might be, it oversimplifies the matter way too much
while i can appreciate the idealism of it, you'd have to rewind and rewrite most of human history to make that sort of change at that level
and for what it's worth karl, while i do belive that, pragmatically speaking, the idea may have been fished from around that general area, i do not believe that you are an ass in particular
|
040225
|
| |
... |
|
|
karl the weed
|
thanks, lol im glad that someone thinks that karltheweedisntreallyanass
|
040228
|
