Another State Legalizes gay Marriage

[ICantSpellDawg]

You didn't answer the question. You hinted around that there is some "reason" we want marriage to only be between a man and a woman, but you didn't make it explicit. What is it, childrearing? That argument has been brought up many times and retired. If childbearing is the only reason we affirm man-woman marriage, then should we revoke the "privilege" of marriage for barren couples, or couples which choose not to have children? IF childbearing is your hidden reason, then perhaps the marriage "privilege" should be revoked, as it's giving unfair tax advantages and rights to a couple which doesn't need them with regards to raising children.

You are using the exception to negate the rule. A traditional marriage between one man and one woman for the purpose of raising children is something that society has deemed unique and worthy of special note. Not allowing barren couples to be wed would be discrimination based on disability and is the exception to the rule.

I'm all for the dialogue on what marriage means and why we have it if you feel it is necessary, but I think I have answered the question at hand.

He asked me why two people of the same gender shouldn't be married and I said because it would not be a union between one man and one woman and that the union of one man and one woman is unique and special. What else do you want me to say about it from a secular and legal point of view?

The government has other procedures for sharing assets and power of attorney if you are of the same gender, utilized by friends and family. You guys are saying that the government should make up a new institution without the consent or interest of the people and I fundamentally reject that idea.

Why don't you write what you wanted me to say and I will accept or reject it?

[Koga No Goshi]

You are using the exception to negate the rule. A traditional marriage between one man and one woman for the purpose of raising children is something that society has deemed unique and worthy of special note. Not allowing barren couples to be wed would be discrimination based on disability and is the exception to the rule.

I'm all for the dialogue on what marriage means and why we have it if you feel it is necessary, but I think I have answered the question at hand.

He asked me why two people of the same gender shouldn't be married and I said because it would not be a union between one man and one woman and that the union of one man and one woman is unique and special. What else do you want me to say about it from a secular and legal point of view?

The government has other procedures for sharing assets and power of attorney if you are of the same gender, utilized by friends and family. You guys are saying that the government should make up a new institution without the consent or interest of the people and I fundamentally reject that idea.

Why don't you write what you wanted me to say and I will accept or reject it?

You compared man-man to man-toaster. Toaster is an inanimate object. You can't dedicate your life meaningfully to a toaster or have the toaster make hospital decisions for you when you are incapacitated. So give me a meaningful explanation of why a gay marriage doesn't need all the same "unique and special" legal recognitions of rights as a couple other than comparing gay people to inanimate objects.

[ICantSpellDawg]

You compared man-man to man-toaster. Toaster is an inanimate object. You can't dedicate your life meaningfully to a toaster or have the toaster make hospital decisions for you when you are incapacitated.

How dare you judge the love between a man and his toaster? I'd bet the toaster would have professional knowledge about when it was time to pull the plug...

Marriage is special because it is between a man an a woman. Because it exemplifies the ideal it has been allotted special recognition and privileges. A union between two men or two women is not the same kind of special and shouldn't be allotted those privileges. It is not mystical. You can't put a piece of your body in one end of their body and then 9 months later a human being comes out. You have to admit that action is pretty freaking unique and worthy of note.

You can argue that society has no right to define an ideal or give special recognition to the naturally incredible miracle of life - but I would disagree. Are you guys going to take the issue up with mother nature and sue her because the relationships that you support don't have that amazing element of surprise inherent in them?

Anybody who doesn't see how unique the 1male/1female relationship is is already at least half way out of their minds. I think it deserves its own recognition and shouldn't be crowded out by court mandated, politically charged, sexual confusion.

[Koga No Goshi]

This is getting circular very fast. Marriage is man + woman, man + woman is good, so marriage is good for man + woman.

Remember that "pursuit of happiness" business? It wasn't just for one kind of person. The "well gay people can marry too, they just have to marry someone of the opposite gender" argument is really bad, please don't repeat it.

What the U.S. hasn't mmm "gotten over yet", is that, for willing couples, same sex + same sex is good too, and so is being able to share medical decisions, and share property, and have the law recognize that as a couple, they have certain rights over their relationship and property that biological family shouldn't simply be able to step in and usurp when one partner dies, or is injured or ill.
And further, that acknowledging this in no way diminishes the good of man + woman, or in any way detracts from or harms their relationship or their legal status as married couples in the U.S.

It still comes down to, however, this is an issue of prejudice and not wanting to accept something different which in no way other than being different affects or harms or diminishes you or your rights or your marriage/future marriage.

[m52nickerson]

How dare you judge the love between a man and his toaster? I'd bet the toaster would have professional knowledge about when it was time to pull the plug...

Marriage is special because it is between a man an a woman. Because it exemplifies the ideal it has been allotted special recognition and privileges. A union between two men or two women is not the same kind of special and shouldn't be allotted those privileges. It is not mystical. You can't put a piece of your body in one end of their body and then 9 months later a human being comes out. You have to admit that action is pretty freaking unique and worthy of note.

You can argue that society has no right to define an ideal or give special recognition to the naturally incredible miracle of life - but I would disagree. Are you guys going to take the issue up with mother nature and sue her because the relationships that you support don't have that amazing element of surprise inherent in them?

Anybody who doesn't see how unique the 1male/1female relationship is is already at least half way out of their minds. I think it deserves its own recognition and shouldn't be crowded out by court mandated, politically charged, sexual confusion.

A toaster is not a connecting adult.

People have children without being married all the time. Some married couples don't have children. Some married couples can't have children, should we not let them get married.

You say people who share a fetish should not be able to get married. Some states still have laws that make fellatio and cunnilingus illegal. Should couples who partake in these not be allowed to marry? What about couples into S&M, or swinger?

Marriage = 1 man and 1 women and we should not change that definition is your other argument. Well in this country at one time Black = Slave.

As far as mother nature, do your research other animals in nature display gay behavior. Plus, mother nature would have people die of simple diseases, should we let people die as well. Mother nature would have men having sex with every women he could, should we applaud this behavior, which is more dangerous to marriage.

Your finale point was that marriage between a man and a women is special. How does letting gay couples marry make your or my marriage less special?

It all comes down to the fact that you don't like what gay people do, so you can't bring yourself to allow anything that would make being gay "ok".