Gay Marriage 2008- Topic revisited

[DUMBRIT!]

Like i said, if you remove all differences of the word "marriage" between the gay and the straight couple you can call it the same thing. Of course, if you support gay marriage it is not possible to see a religious meaning. Thats why i said you are biased. People who oppose gay marriage - as biased as they might be - could see a religious reason. But unlike you they have a human right to do so. I know todays society does not value religion anymore, but its fascinating how fast everyone discriminated people who are against societys ideals. However you are right on one thing: If i do not want society to create laws i certainly do not want religion to do that either. But luckily the approach at law is becoming more and more reasonable.

Your argumentation is illogical and against all evidence. Just type marriage into google, the second link (after the russian bride website) links to http://www.christianitytoday.com/

Yeah, what Google says you should take as the Gospel! hahah

-DB!

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

This just in--search engine indices now count as definitive fact!

[Fluffz]

the word 'married' is NOT religious.

Like i said, if you remove all differences of the word "marriage" between the gay and the straight couple you can call it the same thing. Of course, if you support gay marriage it is not possible to see a religious meaning. Thats why i said you are biased. People who oppose gay marriage - as biased as they might be - could see a religious reason. But unlike you they have a human right to do so. I know todays society does not value religion anymore, but its fascinating how fast everyone discriminated people who are against societys ideals. However you are right on one thing: If i do not want society to create laws i certainly do not want religion to do that either. But luckily the approach at law is becoming more and more reasonable.

Your argumentation is illogical and against all evidence. Just type marriage into google, the second link (after the russian bride website) links to http://www.christianitytoday.com/

[Mantra-Slider]

here it would conc!!!!!! :P

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

It's like saying a funeral is solely a religious concept and that gay people shouldn't be allowed to have funerals either.

You mean my gay viking-themed funeral won't be allowed to happen?

[DankNuggets]

once we finally kill all the gays in one fell swoop i doubt we'll have the time or resources to give them all proper funerals, so

burnn (literally)

[Liquid Blue]

I don't know what's so hard to understand.

People who are NOT religious GET MARRIED all the time.

Countries and civilizations who have never had a dominant religion ALSO have a concept of marriage, and people GET MARRIED all the time.

Therefore, the idea of being married is not solely a religious concept, even if religion does embrace it.

It's like saying a funeral is solely a religious concept and that gay people shouldn't be allowed to have funerals either.

them dirty liberals want you to think gays go to heaven

but they go straight to hell and burn for eternity don't they?

oh wait

[Vykromond]

It's like saying a funeral is solely a religious concept and that gay people shouldn't be allowed to have funerals either.

once we finally kill all the gays in one fell swoop i doubt we'll have the time or resources to give them all proper funerals, so

[Stompa]

I don't know what's so hard to understand.

People who are NOT religious GET MARRIED all the time.

Countries and civilizations who have never had a dominant religion ALSO have a concept of marriage, and people GET MARRIED all the time.

Therefore, the idea of being married is not solely a religious concept, even if religion does embrace it.

It's like saying a funeral is solely a religious concept and that gay people shouldn't be allowed to have funerals either.

wow I agreed with Epi

[Epinephrine]

@Epinephrine, you need to realize that you cant just subtract the religious meaning of marriage like that. In previous posts i also stated differences unrelated to marriage, as laughable you might have thought they were. On a personal note: If state gave me civil union as an option next to marriage i would have choosen the civil union.

I don't know what's so hard to understand.

People who are NOT religious GET MARRIED all the time.

Countries and civilizations who have never had a dominant religion ALSO have a concept of marriage, and people GET MARRIED all the time.

Therefore, the idea of being married is not solely a religious concept, even if religion does embrace it.

It's like saying a funeral is solely a religious concept and that gay people shouldn't be allowed to have funerals either.

[Fluffz]

It's like you're saying 'well black people should have just accepted that they had to sit at the back of the bus, because white people of the time in the U.S. had rights too and they wanted them to sit there'. So honestly I disagree with you and I'm willing to bet that in the next 20 years or so we'll see a shift where my arguments POV will probably be adopted and yours will seem discriminatory and incorrect.

The rights of the wight people back then were questionable. Thats why i oppose a justificatin of law based on society. As soon as society would change to the "bad" those rules would be thrown overboard. Anyway, what you said is probably what is going to happen, and to make sure the justification is based on truth you have to stop society from changing. Society based law, a thought that makes all my alarm bells ring.

@Epinephrine, you need to realize that you cant just subtract the religious meaning of marriage like that. In previous posts i also stated differences unrelated to marriage, as laughable you might have thought they were. On a personal note: If state gave me civil union as an option next to marriage i would have choosen the civil union.

[Galleleo]

Seems I missed something on these forums as it send me past posts I hadn't read yet with the new posts button, but Fluffz seems to get more idiotic with every posts he makes.

[froedrick]

The assumption that gay people aren't religious is also blatently incorrect. Just because you're gay doesn't mean you can't be a religious man or woman, or that you believe that Jesus christ was out to hate homos.

[Epinephrine]

Why would a gay person want to use a religious term from a church that does not accept him?

I think you need to actually realize that:
1) Non-religious people get married too in Western countries all the time.
2) 1/4 of the world that has never seen religion, gets married (China).

So in fact... the word 'married' is NOT religious.

[froedrick]

I'm not going to accept that gays have to piss off about it. They have just as much of a right to fight for this as anyone does. It's like you're saying 'well black people should have just accepted that they had to sit at the back of the bus, because white people of the time in the U.S. had rights too and they wanted them to sit there'. So honestly I disagree with you and I'm willing to bet that in the next 20 years or so we'll see a shift where my arguments POV will probably be adopted and yours will seem discriminatory and incorrect.