Decision on Prop 8 pending

Status
Not open for further replies.
Separation of Church and State is why I support everyone getting civil unions and justly returning marriage to religious institutions
 
Separation of Church and State is why I support everyone getting civil unions and justly returning marriage to religious institutions

Some conservatives say how letting gays marry would destroy traditional marriage. This is what they mean. I agree with you, but giving everyone civil unions might create more problems than solutions (although what do I know? I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to these kinds of issues and I know it)
 
Just a hint, but maybe, just maybe, you may want to rethink referring to the majority of people in the USA as 'them bigots'....because honestly, doing so isnt really helping you out that much, if at all. In fact, I would think such polarization does more against it than for it.

But hey, I am just a reasonable guy, what do I know.

Mob counts resonable "moderate" conservative these days. Its true.
Not a big deal really. Were far from the days where "divorce" triggered a schism of the Church and several wars.

Like the whole rage at "stem cell research" seems like your vainly swimming against history and advancement of civlisation.

Eventually like divorce it'll become acceptable and well look back and wonder why it was such a contencious issue.
 
Mob counts resonable "moderate" conservative these days. Its true.
Not a big deal really. Were far from the days where "divorce" triggered a schism of the Church and several wars.

Like the whole rage at "stem cell research" seems like your vainly swimming against history and advancement of civlisation.

Eventually like divorce it'll become acceptable and well look back and wonder why it was such a contencious issue.

The rage is against embryonic stem cell research, not adult stem cell research
 
I think only the state of California is able to appeal further (and I doubt it is eager to do so, much like Obama's DoJ with the Massachusetts DOMA case), and not the crazies that were saddled with defending Prop 8 here (because Arnold/Jerry Brown wanted nothing to do with it), so isn't it settled? Every article, CNN, etc. states otherwise, and it ending up in the Supreme Court is apparently a foregone conclusion, so I must be missing something.
 
I'd be interested to know if anyone can provide a good argument against gay marriage without referencing religion.
 
I'd be interested to know if anyone can provide a good argument against gay marriage without referencing religion.

I think there are a lot of arguments against gay marriage. They just arn't good.

I find most people who disagree with gay marriage have a similar argument pattern. They come up with evidence that really shouldn't matter (like how gay marriages often have higher divorce rates or how gays can change or gays are unnatural or something similar) while disregarding reasons why gays should marry by ignoring/disregarding it with no reason, or if there is a reason it's backed up with the above evidence that really shouldn't matter. They often have religious motives, but since those arguments don't count because of Seperation of Church and State they grasp all arguments in their favor - even if the argument doesn't make sense - like a starved person grabbing food.
 
I'd be interested to know if anyone can provide a good argument against gay marriage without referencing religion.

marriage is a religious institution thus saying gay marriage references religion so you can't make a good argument for gay marriage without referencing religion either, congratulations on checkmating yourself though
:lmao:
 
i propose heterosexist as word choice instead of bigot.
 
Marriage is a legal contract between two people that can contain an optional religious ceremony.

As such, the government should have juristiction over the legal aspect of marriage, and churches should retain juristiction over the optional religious aspect (as it is their right to do so)

The government being what it is, must open up marriage to any 2 legally able human beings, no matter the gender, in order to not be discriminatory.

A church can decline to perform the religious ceremony for whatever reasons they choose, but the government obviously can't discriminate based on gender.

Makes perfect sense to me; I don't understand why some people have such a hard time understanding this.
 
marriage is a religious institution thus saying gay marriage references religion so you can't make a good argument for gay marriage without referencing religion either, congratulations on checkmating yourself though
:lmao:

Just because you beleive marriage should be a religious institution doesn't mean it is - hence the reason Athiests marry all the time.
 
I think only the state of California is able to appeal further (and I doubt it is eager to do so, much like Obama's DoJ with the Massachusetts DOMA case), and not the crazies that were saddled with defending Prop 8 here (because Arnold/Jerry Brown wanted nothing to do with it), so isn't it settled? Every article, CNN, etc. states otherwise, and it ending up in the Supreme Court is apparently a foregone conclusion, so I must be missing something.

The state is more or less required to appeal, as far as I'm aware.
 
marriage is a religious institution thus saying gay marriage references religion so you can't make a good argument for gay marriage without referencing religion either, congratulations on checkmating yourself though
:lmao:
I would contest that assertion- I see marriage as a social and legal institution first and foremost, and the religious associations simply reflect the human tendency to tie religion to any major event in their lives. Remember, most of these institutions, in their basic forms, date back to a pre-Abrahamic era, when the line between religious and secular life was far less well defined, and the modern concept of secular life simply didn't really exist, so the fact that Christianity later usurped paganism as the associated religion does not at all imply that it also usurped the more ancient secular aspects of marriage.
 
Are Christmas and Easter therefor not religious matters?

marriage is a legal contract couples can enter.

personally i think it should also be possible for 3 or more persons to enter such a contract, but let's get the homosexual thing straight first. :p


whether you celebrate the signing of this contract with a religious ceremony or not really is not of anyone's concern.
 
Are Christmas and Easter therefor not religious matters?

Yes, they are, but they arn't limited to the religious. My father's side of my family (completely Athiest) all celebrate Christmas and Easter, but just for candy and presents. The reasons for Christmas and Easter are religious, though. The reasons for marriage are not religious. Marriage is about spending the rest of your life (or a part of it) with someone you love, not celebrating the birth of your god. You can intertwine your religion in marriage, but that doesn't change that the reasons for marriage is not religious.
 
I'd be interested to know if anyone can provide a good argument against gay marriage
PERIOD.

screw the no religion rule, give me a good argument against gay marriage, keeping in mind that we are not saying "no christian gay marriage" (aka, there are no more blue laws all over the place, we recognize that a single religion cannot control the country and so on, meaning you can't argue that its against the bible, since that would mean muslims can still get gay married).
 
I'm glad that this happened. :) I knew that, even as my beloved California is falling apart, sometimes good things can happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom