Gay Marriage

Kick back and relax. Anything that does not have to do with footbag goes here!

Should same sex couples be allowed to legally marry?

Yes
48
79%
No
9
15%
Undecided
4
7%
 
Total votes: 61

User avatar
Splint
Angry Hippy
Posts: 2095
Joined: 27 Oct 2003 13:58

Gay Marriage

Post by Splint » 04 Mar 2004 09:40

Currently the largest civil rights movement in a generation is taking place.
I live in New Paltz, NY where our mayor has decided to go against the authorities and marry gay couples. He is the second in the country and is drawing national media attention for this little town. (I need to get some footbag in the background of one of the camera shots).
The question as to the rights of same sex couples to marry has been going on for decades and has finally made it's way to the forefront of the United States social agenda.
I believe in the rights of same sex couples to marry and to be given equal protection under the law.
I am interested to hear what others in the footbag community think. Positive or Negative.

Thanks
Old Skool

User avatar
sen
Post Master General
Posts: 2648
Joined: 08 Mar 2003 19:29
Location: Coaldale, AB, CA
Contact:

Post by sen » 04 Mar 2004 09:52

In the Bible it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.[/b]

Seath
Craptacular Spatula
Posts: 2126
Joined: 29 Sep 2003 12:16
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canadia
Contact:

Post by Seath » 04 Mar 2004 09:57

as far as legal marriage under the law im all for it, but I dont think its fair to tell the church to change ancient teachings, if you dont like it, leave the church.

so if your asking if catholic marriages should be available for gay people i say no but non religious marriages i say yes!
Image
The Goggles do nothing.

Do you like Mazes?!
Read my blog!

User avatar
oZonE-juNkie
Shredaholic
Posts: 190
Joined: 18 Jul 2003 11:36
Location: Lost somewhere in New Jersey

Post by oZonE-juNkie » 04 Mar 2004 09:57

Being denied one's rights based on one's sexual preference is the same as being denied rights based on skin color. 2004, and this discrimination still exists. Sickening, if you ask me.

EDIT: gg spelling...
Last edited by oZonE-juNkie on 04 Mar 2004 10:16, edited 2 times in total.
John M
Fear is the mind-killer.

shredj
Rain Man
Posts: 1083
Joined: 06 Nov 2003 20:09
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Post by shredj » 04 Mar 2004 10:00

sen wrote:In the Bible it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
I'd have to agree.
Jim Jansen

User avatar
oZonE-juNkie
Shredaholic
Posts: 190
Joined: 18 Jul 2003 11:36
Location: Lost somewhere in New Jersey

Post by oZonE-juNkie » 04 Mar 2004 10:04

Damn bible-thumping literalists... there was no adam and eve. get over it...
John M
Fear is the mind-killer.

Seath
Craptacular Spatula
Posts: 2126
Joined: 29 Sep 2003 12:16
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canadia
Contact:

Post by Seath » 04 Mar 2004 10:07

oZonE-juNkie wrote:Damn bible-thumping literalists... there was no adam and eve. get over it...
haha its true.. I friggin love apples tho.
Image
The Goggles do nothing.

Do you like Mazes?!
Read my blog!

User avatar
SeRiAl ThIlLa~
BSOS Beast
Posts: 362
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 08:58
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Contact:

Post by SeRiAl ThIlLa~ » 04 Mar 2004 10:13

oZonE-juNkie wrote:Being denied one's rights based on one's sexual preference is the same as being denied rights based on skin color. 2004, and this descimination still exists. Sickening, if you ask me.
I completly agree with this statment and think that its completly discrimitory to tell someone they can't marry someone they love because they are the same sex. Its almost like racism if u ask me. They preach about not being racist towards blacks and whites but people go against what they tell us and say that being gay is wrong. Im not gay (obviously). If They are the same sex who cares. If you think its not right then dont be gay. How can u tell someone to live there life.

Ya seriously i believe there might be a holy power in the sky but F*ck adam and eve man. Science is the way to go.

User avatar
Tsiangkun
Post Master General
Posts: 2855
Joined: 23 Feb 2003 02:27
Location: Oaktown
Contact:

Post by Tsiangkun » 04 Mar 2004 10:17

sen wrote:In the Bible it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.[/b]
It was also in the Bible that I shall burn a calf upon my alter . . . and should my neighbor complain of the odor I shalt smite him . . .


Gay marriage has nothing to do with the bible. . . it has to do with committed individuals recieving rights as spouses. The right to pick up kids from school, share health insurance, visitations in hospitals, life insurance issues, etc etc etc

The religous loading of the word marriage is just a smoke screen in a room full of mirrors disguising the prejudice and disciminations against a group of people. Full civil rights should be awarded to SS couples . . . and a marriages certificate should be given if the SS couple finds a religious leader to perform the cerimony.

edit: Basically put marriage back into the realm of religion, and use another term for government of couples vs singles . . .maybe civil union, or legally bound . . . or some such.
Now any church that wants can issue marriage certificates so gay couples can proclaim their love before friends and god . . . and the state can issue civil union certificates so that gay couples can enjoy the dignities that are rewarded without question to straight married couples.

--Tsiangkun for President in 2016
"I'll scream louder than Dean in 0h Three"
Last edited by Tsiangkun on 04 Mar 2004 12:13, edited 1 time in total.

mc
Modifiend
Posts: 7628
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 15:16
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Contact:

Post by mc » 04 Mar 2004 11:16

cam,

I'm with you on that point, about the smokescreen. That's why I think that those lobbying for SS marriages should drop the word marriage and use some kind of term (civil union, whatever) that implies equal rights, priveleges, and responsibilities as marriage. That would take away a lot of the weight the Right Wing is putting on the religious implications of SS marriages.

I think most people lobbying for SS marriages are not trying to twist the arm of the church into inclusion. it's about equal rights for equal citizens.

you don't have to worry about the big guns if you take away the ammo. The right wing wants their word and their ceremony? let them keep it. rights are rights. equal is equal. fair is fair. and things are NOT right, fair, or equal as it stands.
BRICK!

rfa::never give up::
nyfa

User avatar
oZonE-juNkie
Shredaholic
Posts: 190
Joined: 18 Jul 2003 11:36
Location: Lost somewhere in New Jersey

Post by oZonE-juNkie » 04 Mar 2004 11:27

Matt - I see you're point - it's a good one. However, I'm of the opinion that if you're going to fight that fight, do it right. The more heat in the fire, the better - make this the big issue that it really is - don't dillute it. Besides, I can just see the new forms, and discrimination that would follow - having a delineation between marriage and "union" or whatever term is used...
John M
Fear is the mind-killer.

User avatar
Splint
Angry Hippy
Posts: 2095
Joined: 27 Oct 2003 13:58

Post by Splint » 04 Mar 2004 11:56

Applying different terms really just leads to the "separate but equal" debate. You can't have equality if you don't apply the same rules, rights, conditions, and yes even terminology.

The religious "wrong" really doesn't have a leg to stand on. Catholic Priests don't HAVE to perform marriages to anyone if they don't want to. They can refuse to perform the cerimony for a straight couple for any number of reasons.

Many other sects of Christianity and Judaism and Buddhism etc... include Gays and Lesbians in their communities and even their ministries. If couples want a religious ceremony they have options beyond Catholicism or other Orthodox religions.

It is not and should not be a Consitutional right to be married by your Priest. That would not be in line with the separation of church and state.

However there are many other people, like mayors or justices of the peace or boat captains, and any number of clergy members from various religions who are fully authorized by law to perform marriage ceremonies. If those ceremonies are not legally recognized by everyone and for everyone then they are not equal and THAT is unconsitutional.

P.S. If it was Adam and Steve, Eden would still exist today because that bitch Eve wouldn't have been there to break G_d's law, and it would be populated by one very happy gay couple.
Old Skool

mc
Modifiend
Posts: 7628
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 15:16
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Contact:

Post by mc » 04 Mar 2004 13:45

ozone and brad,

you guys are right, I'd never thought of it that way. Still, I can't help but feel that by using the word marriage, it simply opens the door to the opponents of SS marriage to turn this into a matter of religious morality, than a matter of equality under US law, and that if their religion was taken out of the matter, not only would they lose their standing leg, but also their voice box. This can't be made into a religious matter if religion simply isn't involved.

i can't talk about this any more right now. way too distracted. maybe later.
BRICK!

rfa::never give up::
nyfa

User avatar
Matt
Post Master General
Posts: 2826
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 14:07
Location: Iowa city
Contact:

Post by Matt » 04 Mar 2004 13:47

god hates gays because they found a loophole in the system
Like every man of sense and good feeling, I abominate work
-Aldous Huxley

User avatar
carl winslow
Atomsmashasaurus Dex
Posts: 994
Joined: 14 Jun 2003 21:54

Post by carl winslow » 04 Mar 2004 13:55

people think that letting gays be married will ruin the respect and sanctity of marrage...
I say its already ruined 50 percent of marrages end in divorce
letting gays get married isnt gonna hurt it anymore in my opinion

User avatar
Splint
Angry Hippy
Posts: 2095
Joined: 27 Oct 2003 13:58

Post by Splint » 04 Mar 2004 14:02

Matt wrote:god hates gays because they found a loophole in the system
I hope that's just a really bad joke.
Especially from someone who lives in Iowa City which has quite a large Gay and Lesbian Community.
A place I used to live too.
Last edited by Splint on 05 Mar 2004 11:15, edited 1 time in total.
Old Skool

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 04 Mar 2004 16:32

Clearly the marrige system is much older than christianity - and the only people who do not believe that are ignorant christians who like to think that only their crazy beliefs are ones that are true.
Seeing christians try to ban gay marrige or even try to have any kind of influence with the sane public makes me pretty angry.

Lets just assume for the second that the gay people getting married are not hardcore fundamentalist you get aids because you are bad fucking christians - why should they be forced to follow someone elses religion?

It's debates like this where you see the true colours of the church. You hear them talk about how they believe people should have rights to believe what they want - but that's a load of crap - clearly every church that opposes gay marrige - also believes that people who don't believe its specific beliefs should have no rights at all.

If the churches didn't want to perform any gay marriges or even allow gay people into their church, then that's fine with me - but when they try to enforce their beliefs on the rest of society - I think it's pretty fucked up.

User avatar
wolfpac444
Your Friendly Admin
Posts: 1890
Joined: 24 Mar 2003 00:07
Contact:

Post by wolfpac444 » 04 Mar 2004 16:37

By the way Jeremy, what is the status of gay marriages in Australia?
Mike Hansen

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 04 Mar 2004 16:52

I'm not sure. I don't think you can get married, but in most states you can have a legal union - which is basically the same thing, except it's not called a marrige.

FlexThis
Post Master General
Posts: 3025
Joined: 14 Nov 2003 16:27
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by FlexThis » 04 Mar 2004 16:58

Image
Last edited by FlexThis on 12 Jul 2005 13:10, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply