Am I the only one who just couldn’t care less about this?
Seems like there are always bigger fish to fry. If the economy tanks, you’re fucked whether you’re gay or not.
[quote]csulli wrote:
Am I the only one who just couldn’t care less about this?
Seems like there are always bigger fish to fry. If the economy tanks, you’re fucked whether you’re gay or not.[/quote]
Well, yes, I agree, to an extent. With a $16 trillion maw opening up to swallow our children whole if we don’t get serious about reform, the “progressives” insistence that this is a crucial priority for society has always puzzled me.
Just thought of another reason why I support gay marriage.
The only thing that will reform divorce laws will be gay divorce. With the ways things are nowadays, feminist willdo everything in their power to prevent reform.
Although I wouldn’t marry at this point in my life regardless, current marriage and divorce laws are a big disincentive for me and many men.
Just ask tiger woods or Kobe bryant
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Although I wouldn’t marry at this point in my life regardless, current marriage and divorce laws are a big disincentive for me and many men.
[/quote]
You know what word my friend used to describe marriage the other day? Punitive… Kinda sad.
Hence the old half-joking/half-serious comment about “Let gay people get married so they can be just as miserable as the rest of us.”
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
In all 32 states where gay “marriage” has been put to the vote it has been rejected. Not once has it been supported via popular vote - it’s only been enacted legislatively.
[/quote]
On a side note, this could be delved deeper with the idea that should minority issues ever be discussed in direct democracy through referendums or plebiscites? Should a popular vote ever determine the treatment of a minority? For example a referendum on black reparations, or Native American land reclamation or land reserves or the mass populace voting on minority rights etc…
[/quote]
Correction, it has only been enacted judicially. It’s been shot down in flames on ballots. Which begs the question, should it be made law in a republic, where people have spoken clearly that they do not want it, by majority vote? Or should the majority vote simply be ignored as it has been over turned by courts acting legislatively?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Just thought of another reason why I support gay marriage.
The only thing that will reform divorce laws will be gay divorce. With the ways things are nowadays, feminist willdo everything in their power to prevent reform.
Although I wouldn’t marry at this point in my life regardless, current marriage and divorce laws are a big disincentive for me and many men.
Just ask tiger woods or Kobe bryant[/quote]
I still haven’t seen anybody prove that gay marriage is the same as the standard heterosexual marriage. If you are calling for equality, should you not first prove that the action and institution is in fact equal?
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
In all 32 states where gay “marriage” has been put to the vote it has been rejected. Not once has it been supported via popular vote - it’s only been enacted legislatively.
[/quote]
On a side note, this could be delved deeper with the idea that should minority issues ever be discussed in direct democracy through referendums or plebiscites? Should a popular vote ever determine the treatment of a minority? For example a referendum on black reparations, or Native American land reclamation or land reserves or the mass populace voting on minority rights etc…
[/quote]
Correction, it has only been enacted judicially. It’s been shot down in flames on ballots. Which begs the question, should it be made law in a republic, where people have spoken clearly that they do not want it, by majority vote? Or should the majority vote simply be ignored as it has been over turned by courts acting legislatively?[/quote]
Tyranny of the majority then?
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Just thought of another reason why I support gay marriage.
The only thing that will reform divorce laws will be gay divorce. With the ways things are nowadays, feminist willdo everything in their power to prevent reform.
Although I wouldn’t marry at this point in my life regardless, current marriage and divorce laws are a big disincentive for me and many men.
Just ask tiger woods or Kobe bryant[/quote]
I still haven’t seen anybody prove that gay marriage is the same as the standard heterosexual marriage. If you are calling for equality, should you not first prove that the action and institution is in fact equal?[/quote]
Whatever you want to call gay marriage recognition, it will lead to heterosexual marriage/divorce reform.
That’s my point
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…
For those who believe homosexuality is a sin, why do you not want it to be criminalized?
How do you determine which sins should be made illegal and which to keep legal?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Just thought of another reason why I support gay marriage…
[/quote]
Oh, I bet you’ve got a million of 'em ducky.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…[/quote]
Incentive for what? And the answer is not marriage
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…[/quote]
Incentive for what? And the answer is not marriage[/quote]
No, the answer is marriage.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
For those who believe homosexuality is a sin, why do you not want it to be criminalized?
How do you determine which sins should be made illegal and which to keep legal?[/quote]
I second this question.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
For those who believe homosexuality is a sin, why do you not want it to be criminalized?
How do you determine which sins should be made illegal and which to keep legal?[/quote]
I second this question.[/quote]
You might want to ask it in one of the religion threads.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
For those who believe homosexuality is a sin, why do you not want it to be criminalized?
How do you determine which sins should be made illegal and which to keep legal?[/quote]
I second this question.[/quote]
Duh, whatever that person doesnt personally do besides the main obvious ones (kill, rape, etc.).
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…[/quote]
Incentive for what? And the answer is not marriage[/quote]
No, the answer is marriage. What the heck do you mean the answer is not marriage? If I want the reproductive sexes to direct sex into the institution of marriage, incentives for marriage make all the sense in the world.
[/quote]
So your ultimate goal is to encourage lifetime monogamy of opposite sexes?
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…[/quote]
Incentive for what? And the answer is not marriage[/quote]
No, the answer is marriage. What the heck do you mean the answer is not marriage? If I want the reproductive sexes to direct sex into the institution of marriage, incentives for marriage make all the sense in the world.
[/quote]
So your ultimate goal is to encourage lifetime monogamy of opposite sexes?[/quote]
Me and you are done here.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Receiving crime victims’ recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
[/quote]
Okay lets go with this one. First I am having trouble understanding why heterosexual marriage includes this. Can you explain that to me? If I can see a good reason for that which does not apply to gay marriage then I can understand more of why you are against it.[/quote]
Incentive…[/quote]
Incentive for what? And the answer is not marriage[/quote]
No, the answer is marriage. What the heck do you mean the answer is not marriage? If I want the reproductive sexes to direct sex into the institution of marriage, incentives for marriage make all the sense in the world.
[/quote]
So your ultimate goal is to encourage lifetime monogamy of opposite sexes?[/quote]
Me and you are done here.
[/quote]
But we are so close