No. I realized later I didn't really agree with that post in its entirety.
I want government out of sanctioning marriage for anyone. I think it's silly. Even if gay marriage wasn't part of the issue, I still don't think the government should sanction it.
Using the same word doesn't matter one bit to me.
Ok well then sorry for being such a dick. I can do that.
But tell me... if the government gets out of marriage altogether... who issues green cards for spouses? Who polices wether people are writing off dependents?
And how to we divide property after the death of a spouse or a divorce?
Sadly... there's really no way around it... the government DOES have to be involved at some level.
And besides... there are two different kinds of marriages already in the US... there are civil and religious marriages. The government recognizes religious marriages as civil ones... but churches are not forced to recognize civil ones.
So really... just allowing same-sex couples to have civil marriages won't change anything for churches that don't recognize them. And nobody wants to change that, either.
No worries.
I'm saying let ANY 2 PEOPLE enter into a government recognized contract that gives them all those privileges, and let the individuals or churches or supper clubs or whatever decide what they want to call that partnership.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I mean really... how could you vote against these two?
(that's my husband Carlo in the foreground. Me blurry in the background. When we met we looked like two Backstreet Boys. Although I had the cassette of "10" in the car when we were driving to the restaurant for our first date. Now we look like.. that. But Still... how could you vote against us?)
Definitely have my vote (even before you mentioned listening to "10")
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
I mean really... how could you vote against these two?
(that's my husband Carlo in the foreground. Me blurry in the background. When we met we looked like two Backstreet Boys. Although I had the cassette of "10" in the car when we were driving to the restaurant for our first date. Now we look like.. that. But Still... how could you vote against us?)
I have never gotten the chance to vote on this and hopefully never will as it has been legal for almost a decade. But if that ever changes you have my vote and my support.
Im fiscally conservative and socially moderate and I dont mind at all who marries who and I can hang out with gays or bi's and it dont matter to me. I am very easy going for a Conservative Christian man. I understand the rationality and I empathize with everyone's right to do whatever they feel.
However, I must say that for hundreds and even thousands of years, the entire world has defined marriage as between one man and one woman, therefore, they are also at odds for calling a gay union, a marriage. I mean, who are we to force the entire world to change the definition of marriage just because over the past few decades people wish to do so. Who are we to tell the world that we are changing the definition of marriage? Why cant gay marriages be called "civil unions". What if all civil unions got all the tax breaks that a marriage does? What if the only difference is the word itself? How can %15 of the population force %85 to accept these changes? Even if is %50 support gays to marry, does that same amount support changing the definition of it? Also, why is the word marriage so important to attain for gays? Wouldnt they be proud to have their own word(s). Can they find pride in "civil union" or something else?
Just wondering!
I'm late to this thread and I realize the thread has taken a positive turn (nice picture Prince even though you do need a cup of coffee). But I feel I want to address the post I have quoted. The first sentence of this post seems to be a disclaimer and attempts to soften the remainder of the post which, in my opinion, reflects a serious level of disdain for the gay community and an attitude that desperately needs to be re-shaped.
Who are we to tell the world that we are changing the definition of marriage?
Weak. The world has evolved despite efforts from people in possession of such attitudes to prevent it from doing so. Why would the preservation of the definition of marriage have any bearing at all in your life? Do you think the world couldn't deal with that? No. I think you have expressed such because a gay marriage isn't really a marriage given your easy going, Conservative, Christian beliefs. Regardless, I'm sure the gay community really appreciates that you "understand the rationality and [...] empathize with everyone's right to do whatever they feel." How very noble and generous to tolerate something you simply fail to understand.
Can they find pride in "civil union" or something else?
For me, this actually reads like this: go do what you want behind closed doors where I can't see you and your behaviours. As much as we say we accept the gay 'community', we truly don't and we'll remind you of this fact by forcing you to develop another term for your unions just so you know this and we can keep distinguishing 'right' from 'wrong'.
I truly hope people who subscribe this line of thinking re-think this subject. I can honestly say (with some level of shame) that in my much younger years, without the proper guidance and education, I felt similar to you. Forgiving myself: I just didn't know any better and was surrounded by people who felt the same. Fortunately, with the right support mechanisms, I overcame these ill-formed beliefs and have become much better for doing so. My children will not grow up as I did. Given I was once there, I have hope for anyone, but an open mind is critical for such attitudes to evolve.
There are other ways to do the things marriage does,
But no... there isn't.
:fp:
so there is only one way to do things huh?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
However, I must say that for hundreds and even thousands of years, the entire world has defined marriage as between one man and one woman, therefore, they are also at odds for calling a gay union, a marriage. I
The more that I think about it the "tradition" argument makes no sense either, since the whole concept of two adults who love each other making their own choice to get married, and then one of them proposing with a ring, and then them getting married with the option of a divorce if they don't want to be married is hardly traditional. Traditionally weddings were arranged things usually by the parents of the couple and they were more like political or business arrangements (with dowries and that sort of thing). Hell if you go back far enough one guy with a bunch of wives was traditional ( I believe it shows up all over the place in the bible). So that kind of argument doesn't really hold up.
Same sex marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005. I got married in 2009 and the only difference it made to me was the fact that when I filled out the form to apply for a marriage licence instead of the fields where we wrote our names saying Bride and Groom they said something like Applicant 1 and Applicant 2, which means we had to decide whose name to write first. Other than that it has had no effect on my life and my marriage.
There are other ways to do the things marriage does,
But no... there isn't.
:fp:
so there is only one way to do things huh?
Legally, yes.
There are about 1300 rights, protections, responsibilities, perks and privileges that are ONLY available to married couples at the federal level and there are no other ways to get them. I'm not sure how else to explain that. But the way the system is set up, marriage provides things that there are NOT other ways to do.
I think maybe we are crossing wires, you are right, right now that is the way it is done, but there are other avenues that could be used to do each and everyone of those things, but legally right now marriage is how it is done. A State granted marriage license does not HAVE to be the way it is done.
There should not be 1300 rights protections responsibilities perks and privileges that are only available to married couples. My marriage wasn't for someone else, it was for me, just as I assume yours was and neither of us deserve special rights because of it. It is sad that I get them and you don't. And that isn't ok. Give them to all or give them to none. I prefer the latter on principle alone, but would be more than happy with the former.
The only thing a government body or representative should give you for your marriage is a congratulations, and that is only if the congratulations is no cost to other tax payers.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
All I want is to be able to sponsor him for a green card as my spouse. So we don't have to continue to shovel money into flying back to Canada to renew work visas and so there's no danger of m being deported if he should lose his job. Or hey... Decide to go to school and not work at all.
Not beg kept out of his hospital room by some nurse who doesn't approve or not be able to make healthcare decisions for him should he not be able to himself.
You've mentioned that nurse before, and I really hope that experience was the exception and not the rule.
(fortunate we live in an area that's generally open-minded...in our many times at Cedars, the majority of the nurses have been quasi-angels for us - perhaps for you as well)
As to the first part of your post...well, absolutely. No need to have that hanging over your or anyone's head. Life's hard enough.
You've mentioned that nurse before, and I really hope that experience was the exception and not the rule.
And of course,.. Exception or not, it should never be allowed to happen at all. It shouldn't be an option. Nobody should ever have to hope they get a nice nurse.
As to the first part of your post...well, absolutely. No need to have that hanging over your or anyone's head. Life's hard enough.
Well... Seems that the president is adding same gender couples to the immigration reform package. So hopefully it will be a separate issue from marriage equality.
You've mentioned that nurse before, and I really hope that experience was the exception and not the rule.
And of course,.. Exception or not, it should never be allowed to happen at all. It shouldn't be an option. Nobody should ever have to hope they get a nice nurse.
True, and not to be construed as such. But, shit does happen. (and fuck knows we have had our fingers crossed for a nice night nurse many times, precisely because of the opposite).
Comments
No worries.
I'm saying let ANY 2 PEOPLE enter into a government recognized contract that gives them all those privileges, and let the individuals or churches or supper clubs or whatever decide what they want to call that partnership.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
You have mine as well
In this particular case, my "yes" vote is conditioned on getting the surly one two or three cups o'joe
(and if it really is necessary to echo earlier thoughts...NO. Love is love, just let it be.)
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Sadly, no. I always look like that.
I'm late to this thread and I realize the thread has taken a positive turn (nice picture Prince even though you do need a cup of coffee). But I feel I want to address the post I have quoted. The first sentence of this post seems to be a disclaimer and attempts to soften the remainder of the post which, in my opinion, reflects a serious level of disdain for the gay community and an attitude that desperately needs to be re-shaped.
Who are we to tell the world that we are changing the definition of marriage?
Weak. The world has evolved despite efforts from people in possession of such attitudes to prevent it from doing so. Why would the preservation of the definition of marriage have any bearing at all in your life? Do you think the world couldn't deal with that? No. I think you have expressed such because a gay marriage isn't really a marriage given your easy going, Conservative, Christian beliefs. Regardless, I'm sure the gay community really appreciates that you "understand the rationality and [...] empathize with everyone's right to do whatever they feel." How very noble and generous to tolerate something you simply fail to understand.
Can they find pride in "civil union" or something else?
For me, this actually reads like this: go do what you want behind closed doors where I can't see you and your behaviours. As much as we say we accept the gay 'community', we truly don't and we'll remind you of this fact by forcing you to develop another term for your unions just so you know this and we can keep distinguishing 'right' from 'wrong'.
I truly hope people who subscribe this line of thinking re-think this subject. I can honestly say (with some level of shame) that in my much younger years, without the proper guidance and education, I felt similar to you. Forgiving myself: I just didn't know any better and was surrounded by people who felt the same. Fortunately, with the right support mechanisms, I overcame these ill-formed beliefs and have become much better for doing so. My children will not grow up as I did. Given I was once there, I have hope for anyone, but an open mind is critical for such attitudes to evolve.
:fp:
so there is only one way to do things huh?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
The more that I think about it the "tradition" argument makes no sense either, since the whole concept of two adults who love each other making their own choice to get married, and then one of them proposing with a ring, and then them getting married with the option of a divorce if they don't want to be married is hardly traditional. Traditionally weddings were arranged things usually by the parents of the couple and they were more like political or business arrangements (with dowries and that sort of thing). Hell if you go back far enough one guy with a bunch of wives was traditional ( I believe it shows up all over the place in the bible). So that kind of argument doesn't really hold up.
Same sex marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005. I got married in 2009 and the only difference it made to me was the fact that when I filled out the form to apply for a marriage licence instead of the fields where we wrote our names saying Bride and Groom they said something like Applicant 1 and Applicant 2, which means we had to decide whose name to write first. Other than that it has had no effect on my life and my marriage.
Legally, yes.
There are about 1300 rights, protections, responsibilities, perks and privileges that are ONLY available to married couples at the federal level and there are no other ways to get them. I'm not sure how else to explain that. But the way the system is set up, marriage provides things that there are NOT other ways to do.
I think maybe we are crossing wires, you are right, right now that is the way it is done, but there are other avenues that could be used to do each and everyone of those things, but legally right now marriage is how it is done. A State granted marriage license does not HAVE to be the way it is done.
There should not be 1300 rights protections responsibilities perks and privileges that are only available to married couples. My marriage wasn't for someone else, it was for me, just as I assume yours was and neither of us deserve special rights because of it. It is sad that I get them and you don't. And that isn't ok. Give them to all or give them to none. I prefer the latter on principle alone, but would be more than happy with the former.
The only thing a government body or representative should give you for your marriage is a congratulations, and that is only if the congratulations is no cost to other tax payers.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Not beg kept out of his hospital room by some nurse who doesn't approve or not be able to make healthcare decisions for him should he not be able to himself.
(fortunate we live in an area that's generally open-minded...in our many times at Cedars, the majority of the nurses have been quasi-angels for us - perhaps for you as well)
As to the first part of your post...well, absolutely. No need to have that hanging over your or anyone's head. Life's hard enough.
And of course,.. Exception or not, it should never be allowed to happen at all. It shouldn't be an option. Nobody should ever have to hope they get a nice nurse.
Well... Seems that the president is adding same gender couples to the immigration reform package. So hopefully it will be a separate issue from marriage equality.
I get you, though.