They're not "preserving" anything. Marriage has been used for many things, including giving your daughter as breeding stock to old men in exchange for money or goats.
If they really wanted to "preserve" marriage they would be more interested in making divorce illegal, closing down the wedding chapels where drunk vacationers stagger in to get married in Vegas. They would have lost their minds over the "marriage as publicity stunt" by Kim Kardashian..... ...
Agree - this is not about preserving an institution but preserving their own values (usually christian based - at least in the western world), disregarding others.
it matters not the name of the union now or then what matters is rights.
Exactly - so why try to suggest a marriage should be called something else because one set of 'participants' does not fit in one's values or morals. Marriage is a good enough word for all.
I preserve my marriage that's all any of us can do, and NO RELIGOUS INSTITUTION can
layy claim to preserving any marriage. That's a couples job
What do I beleive
I beleive in the rights of the individual
Not in rights of religous group to control mine or anyone elses life.
Marriage is a personnel choice. A religion can lay claim to not allowing it as a part of their own practices but that's all
If a gay couple wants to marry then why not
I give massive kudos to Obama today. Another big step in American politics
The real American public needs to step up and support it or the religous right will strip people's rights as they always have
and if it ever is you want it called something else because why again...?
You presume I want this ...
I am speaking of the preservers of marriage those who voted loud and clear yesterday,
I understand their position and see the hinderance that is happening
continuing down this path.
My stance is I would like to see gays have equal rights today and by all means not less rights
for people as the vote brought yesterday.
By making a new gay union term to take into all the future years to come
leaving marriage as it was created and intended, a union of a man and woman,
equal rights will not be lost but gained and perhaps even very soon....
not decades.
That would be good for all unions and the country.
then why dont you tell us exactly what it is you do want pandora instead of talking in ever diminishing circles. where is it you stand on the terminology? youve basically been saying lets allow the gays to marry(cause youre down with that) but lets not actually call it marriage(because thousands of years of tradition dictate that term is the property of man/woman marriage) lets give it a fantastically awesome name... any name but not marriage because thats the preserve of the straights. thats what im getting from your posts. and im not the only one so either youre being deliberately vague or the majority of us here have mistaken what it is youve been saying. please clarify this for me so i at least can move on in understanding.
the english language is the mose fluid language in history. it absorbs words from everywhere... it sometimes morphs their meaning into something else whilst still managing to retain the original definition. it even eliminates words.. and none of this has caused the downfall of civilisation as we know it... EVER. so why such a stranglehold on the definition of marriage? isnt it about time we modernise the word and drag all the preservers into the present?
your answer was there you perhaps just didn't want to see it :?
blinded by the light? mama told me not to look into the sun ...
but that's where the answers are
too much of a "diminishing circle" for ya ... always true to character cate,
not a good thing at all, your bias is showing yet again.
:fp: here we go again,same ol' debate same ol' out-come we all know where each other stand and we know we can't change each others minds so there is no reason to call each other names...am I right ?
"give me an AHMEN ! brothers and sisters" and lets go back to trashing politicans and such insted of each other....come on now ..let's play nice.
really I don't care who marries who,what does bother me are the attacks on religen (God) while I agree some religens have some rules I don't agree with but at the end of the day God is still God.
it just seems to be an ez out for argument by gay supporters to blame God for their struggles.
I don't understand how two men can find sexual pleasure with each other but I guess that's just me so it also makes hard for me to understand a marriage between to same sex people,I don't need to give a reason why because it's just the way I feel about it in fact I don't think I could give you/anybody a reason that would make you undrstand my feelings on it I also know it's not my position to tell people like POD they can't marry the one that they love..I sure don't understan it at all and I have always seen marriage as union between a man and a woman but I also can't tell you how gay people feel abouit each other so for the most part I have been trying to keep my comments to myself..untell God is blammed anyway or someone like Cliffy and a few others comes on here calling people names in support of gay rights and feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs...so that's it in a nutshell understanding is a two way street.
Let's take god right out of the equation then
No more anti gay stances from those of religous based on their beliefs
Let's move to RIGHTS
do you beleive that everyone should hav the same rights
If you do how can you argue against 2people who love each other celebrating their love and commitment to each other as the rest of society does
I'm not gay. Not interested at all. I have a loving wife who is my world. I'm so lucky and would be shattered if I couldnt have had a ceremony attended by all we love and respect to devote myself to her
If we are going to argue that 2 males or for that case 2 females in a relationship cannot create new life maybe we should be banning people who are infertile from marriage
Well, but no, you're not. And you know it. So drop that crap.
You're speaking of a bunch of prejudiced people who claimed ownership of both the word and concept of marriage with no historical facts to back that up. They claim to be "preservers of marriage" when they're really just a bunch of hateful assholes who get a kick out of putting themselves atop a mountain of their own creation.
They're not "preserving" anything. Marriage has been used for many things, including giving your daughter as breeding stock to old men in exchange for money or goats.
If they really wanted to "preserve" marriage they would be more interested in making divorce illegal, closing down the wedding chapels where drunk vacationers stagger in to get married in Vegas. They would have lost their minds over the "marriage as publicity stunt" by Kim Kardashian and most of all, they would be carrying burning torches through the streets upon finding out that Maggie Gallagher, the leader of NOM, is in one of those "money for green card" marriages with a man from India that she's only met a few times (and although her Wikipedia page tries to suggest they have a child together, she had that kid out of wedlock before she met her "husband").
So nobody is "preserving marriage," they're just doing their best to stay legally better than the gays. Because they're assholes. And no other reason.
By the way... tell your "preserver of marriage" friends that gay marriages have a MUCH lower divorce rate. Much. That always blows their tops. And I love seeing those people burst into fits of tears. Warms my heart.
this is a great post. Can't say it any better.
I wonder if some bigots 50 years ago justified making blacks sitting in the back of the bus, or drink out of their own drinking fountains by saying things like "they will all be together in the back of the bus, they will all have that to themselves in common it will be beautiful"
bottom line it is discriminatory. People against this are either homophobic, blinded by an exclusionary interpretation of a religion, or just hateful toward certain others for whatever reason (nature, nurture, deeply repressed homosexual feelings, etc). Hiding behind "preserving the word marriage" is completely transparent. What are you preserving it from? Mind you there were also "traditions" that needed to be altered, like all other general civil rights (women voting, African-Americans being treated like human beings, etc....) Im sure the Peoples Republic of China has some great "traditions" like the 'one child policy'
We need to evolve as a society. We are almost ready. This vote in North Carolina is most disappointing.
your answer was there you perhaps just didn't want to see it :?
blinded by the light? mama told me not to look into the sun ...
but that's where the answers are
too much of a "diminishing circle" for ya ... always true to character cate,
not a good thing at all, your bias is showing yet again.
oh for fucks sake pandora why cant you ever just answer the question and stop hiding in the shadows the way you do. i know you support equal marriage.. we ALL know. but do you support gay marriage BY THAT NAME? or are you one of the 'preservers'? i dont see the question being a diffcult one. i get more sense out of my 5 year old grand daughter than i get from you... probably cause she has not yet learnt the art of obfuscation the way you have.
and if me wanting clear answers is me being true to my character then yahoo for me cause i will do it every time.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Well, but no, you're not. And you know it. So drop that crap.
You're speaking of a bunch of prejudiced people who claimed ownership of both the word and concept of marriage with no historical facts to back that up. They claim to be "preservers of marriage" when they're really just a bunch of hateful assholes who get a kick out of putting themselves atop a mountain of their own creation.
They're not "preserving" anything. Marriage has been used for many things, including giving your daughter as breeding stock to old men in exchange for money or goats.
If they really wanted to "preserve" marriage they would be more interested in making divorce illegal, closing down the wedding chapels where drunk vacationers stagger in to get married in Vegas. They would have lost their minds over the "marriage as publicity stunt" by Kim Kardashian and most of all, they would be carrying burning torches through the streets upon finding out that Maggie Gallagher, the leader of NOM, is in one of those "money for green card" marriages with a man from India that she's only met a few times (and although her Wikipedia page tries to suggest they have a child together, she had that kid out of wedlock before she met her "husband").
So nobody is "preserving marriage," they're just doing their best to stay legally better than the gays. Because they're assholes. And no other reason.
By the way... tell your "preserver of marriage" friends that gay marriages have a MUCH lower divorce rate. Much. That always blows their tops. And I love seeing those people burst into fits of tears. Warms my heart.
I am stating, I am identifying the problem, here is the hinderance to progress
the preservers of marriage will protect to have it remain a union between a man and a woman.
This is not crap as we saw yesterday. This movement may even escalate.
your words... "just a bunch of hateful assholes"
Who is just this? and who is prejudice? do you see yourself? and read your words?
How can you even claim anything about others when you do the same?
In my heart tenfold is your hate towards others than anyone
I have ever spoke with on gay rights.
No legally everything will be equal...
equal amendment, equal rights, an equal union only different by name because marriage is the union of a man and a woman
this where the conflict lies...
not in granting equal rights nor the union of gays but using and changing the heterosexual union that was created for,
has existed for thousands of years.
The word gay had been a slang term long before it became more popular in use
in the 50's 60's and has grown from there. It is a perfect example of a new term
for group of people identifying themselves, defining themselves and showing pride
for who they are.
Now a defining term for their union needs to be found so equal rights
are given now, so in 50, 60, 100 years the use will be as gay is now,
comon place and accepted. Perhaps even, as I have said, outnumbering the
traditional word, union of marriage.
Beyond that as humanity grows to a one gender, sexuality will no longer be an issue at all
and hopefully we can let go of the hate and find peace as a species.
untell God is blammed anyway or someone like Cliffy and a few others comes on here calling people names in support of gay rights and feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs...so that's it in a nutshell understanding is a two way street.
Godfather.
I'm gay now? Or am I just not reading this correctly?
your answer was there you perhaps just didn't want to see it :?
blinded by the light? mama told me not to look into the sun ...
but that's where the answers are
too much of a "diminishing circle" for ya ... always true to character cate,
not a good thing at all, your bias is showing yet again.
oh for fucks sake pandora why cant you ever just answer the question and stop hiding in the shadows the way you do. i know you support equal marriage.. we ALL know. but do you support gay marriage BY THAT NAME? or are you one of the 'preservers'? i dont see the question being a diffcult one. i get more sense out of my 5 year old grand daughter than i get from you... probably cause she has not yet learnt the art of obfuscation the way you have.
and if me wanting clear answers is me being true to my character then yahoo for me cause i will do it every time.
I am not a preserver of marriage but certainly understand their point
and I have already stated this numerous times.
This is beginning to get personal cate ... it should not matter if I was a preserver of marriage.
Better question is...
why are you questioning me personally? that is against posting rules! :?
No you being true to character and asking personal questions
comes from the personal conflict you have with me.
Everyone sees this with your rudeness and bias, it is embarrassing
and it is showing once again.
Give it rest cate... really I do not treat you like this.
it's like sometimes you are traveling and you decide to take a road because you think it will get you to where you want to go ... but you drive and drive and you are nowhere near where you want to go but you keep driving anyways ... passengers in the car start telling you that you are going the wrong way ... you ignore them ... they start pointing to maps ... ignore ... they show you their smartphones with gps showing that you are way off course ... but you just keep driving that road ...
This vote in North Carolina is most disappointing.
It is far more that, it is a message, a firm one that marriage is between a man and a woman.
It has nothing to do with prejudices, equal rights, gay unions or desegregation.
People will not allow and will fight to have marriage remain as it was created
and intended. This is a set back as the marriage preservers solidify their cause.
The gay rights people should jump on this and demand a gay union amendment, without the term marriage, demanding equal rights. There is no opposition
that could oppose that.
This vote in North Carolina is most disappointing.
It is far more that, it is a message, a firm one that marriage is between a man and a woman.
It has nothing to do with prejudices, equal rights, gay unions or desegregation.
People will not allow and will fight to have marriage remain as it was created
and intended. This is a set back as the marriage preservers solidify their cause.
The gay rights people should jump on this and demand a gay union amendment, without the term marriage, demanding equal rights. There is no opposition
that could oppose that.
i am demanding nothing less than gay marriage. if you don't like it, that is your problem. the movement is now. the time is now.
it is nobody's place to segregate or subjugate anyone because of how they were born.
equality is equality. this legislation and your justification of it is clearly in support of inequality.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
marriage is the union of a man and a woman
this where the conflict lies...
but using and changing the heterosexual union that was created for, has existed for thousands of years.
This is not correct. This vision of 'marriage' (the word and institution) is recent (talking in centuries and not millenia). Something that has evolved to reach this point and shall continue to evolve. Or maybe going full circle as if one wants to go back millenia, there were same sex unions (ie marriages) that were sanctioned (recognised ceremony, etc.).
But I've said this before so I'm guessing that some may have me on ignore as this mis-information about 'marriage', it's etimology and history has been repeated several times.
This vote in North Carolina is most disappointing.
It is far more that, it is a message, a firm one that marriage is between a man and a woman.
It has nothing to do with prejudices, equal rights, gay unions or desegregation.
People will not allow and will fight to have marriage remain as it was created
and intended. This is a set back as the marriage preservers solidify their cause.
The gay rights people should jump on this and demand a gay union amendment, without the term marriage, demanding equal rights. There is no opposition
that could oppose that.
you do realize that historically, these human rights issues always increase in support, not decrease... as the old curmudgeons die off and progressive thinking takes a firmer hold. They say support for gay marriage increases about 2% per year and as of now, the majority in the USA already support it. Certain states are just a little slower to get with the program. Was the same way with the Civil Rights movement in the 50's and 60's.
untell God is blammed anyway or someone like Cliffy and a few others comes on here calling people names in support of gay rights and feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs...so that's it in a nutshell understanding is a two way street.
Godfather.
I'm gay now? Or am I just not reading this correctly?
nooooo "feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs"
you I believe come on this thread calling people bigots and assholes I think ? whats up with that ? is that how you see the world..people that don't support gay rights are bigots and assholes ? judging by your comments you lack the understanding you seem to demand for yourself and others..do two wrongs make a right ?
your answer was there you perhaps just didn't want to see it :?
blinded by the light? mama told me not to look into the sun ...
but that's where the answers are
too much of a "diminishing circle" for ya ... always true to character cate,
not a good thing at all, your bias is showing yet again.
oh for fucks sake pandora why cant you ever just answer the question and stop hiding in the shadows the way you do. i know you support equal marriage.. we ALL know. but do you support gay marriage BY THAT NAME? or are you one of the 'preservers'? i dont see the question being a diffcult one. i get more sense out of my 5 year old grand daughter than i get from you... probably cause she has not yet learnt the art of obfuscation the way you have.
and if me wanting clear answers is me being true to my character then yahoo for me cause i will do it every time.
I am not a preserver of marriage but certainly understand their point
and I have already stated this numerous times.
This is beginning to get personal cate ... it should not matter if I was a preserver of marriage.
Better question is...
why are you questioning me personally? that is against posting rules! :?
No you being true to character and asking personal questions
comes from the personal conflict you have with me.
Everyone sees this with your rudeness and bias, it is embarrassing
and it is showing once again.
Give it rest cate... really I do not treat you like this.
i wasnt aware that asking where you stand and what you think were personal questions. guess i should stop doing that.
im not rude and biased. im blunt and inquisitive. you see me as rude cause you dont like the questions. as for biased.. well.. yeah i guess i am... im biased towards equal rights for all and the acknowledgement of such as well as the destruction of bigotry and ignorance..
so i see then that youre in agreeance that it should be termed gay MARRIAGE?
that is most excellent and very cool. . welcome to the light pandora.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i love gay people. i want them treated exactly the same as the rest of us. people are people regardless of who they have romanticly involved with. who they are sleeping with doesn't matter as long as both parties are adults, both men and women.
even steven.
gay men & women should be able to put one another on their spouse's insurance plan and other bullshit everyone else gets to do.
gay ass men & gay ass women really don't bother me so much as to withhold benefits and to not ever recognize them as a legal full on couple.
they are human and free to do as they wish with who they're banging
i love gay people. i want them treated exactly the same as the rest of us. people are people regardless of who they have romanticly involved with. who they are sleeping with doesn't matter as long as both parties are adults, both men and women.
even steven.
gay men & women should be able to put one another on their spouse's insurance plan and other bullshit everyone else gets to do.
gay ass men & gay ass women really don't bother me so much as to withhold benefits and to not ever recognize them as a legal full on couple.
they are human and free to do as they wish with who they're banging
but.. but chad... what if someone loves ice cream.. should they be allowed to marry that ice cream?? i heard some numbskull ask that question on jon stewart last night..
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i love gay people. i want them treated exactly the same as the rest of us. people are people regardless of who they have romanticly involved with. who they are sleeping with doesn't matter as long as both parties are adults, both men and women.
even steven.
gay men & women should be able to put one another on their spouse's insurance plan and other bullshit everyone else gets to do.
gay ass men & gay ass women really don't bother me so much as to withhold benefits and to not ever recognize them as a legal full on couple.
they are human and free to do as they wish with who they're banging
but.. but chad... what if someone loves ice cream.. should they be allowed to marry that ice cream?? i heard some numbskull ask that question on jon stewart last night..
catefrances, the almighty traveler from down under.... you are fantastic.
now about loving ice cream. yes a couple or lone person may make passionate fiery love to a bowl of ice cream.
one being gay may use his or her beloved ice cream as a stimulant to their flower or junk.
one may turn a banana split into exactly that.
at some point well into this manuver... orgasms
thank you.
p.s. i am not gay and i do enjoy ice cream and women. i would suggest dumping ice cream on a women and go to town. if ice cream is to cold pudding can be used instead. i do hope gay men and women use ice cream and pudding and other foods in their love making sessions. food is sex.
i love gay people. i want them treated exactly the same as the rest of us. people are people regardless of who they have romanticly involved with. who they are sleeping with doesn't matter as long as both parties are adults, both men and women.
even steven.
gay men & women should be able to put one another on their spouse's insurance plan and other bullshit everyone else gets to do.
gay ass men & gay ass women really don't bother me so much as to withhold benefits and to not ever recognize them as a legal full on couple.
they are human and free to do as they wish with who they're banging
but.. but chad... what if someone loves ice cream.. should they be allowed to marry that ice cream?? i heard some numbskull ask that question on jon stewart last night..
catefrances, the almighty traveler from down under.... you are fantastic.
now about loving ice cream. yes a couple or lone person may make passionate fiery love to a bowl of ice cream.
one being gay may use his or her beloved ice cream as a stimulant to their flower or junk.
one may turn a banana split into exactly that.
at some point well into this manuver... orgasms
thank you.
p.s. i am not gay and i do enjoy ice cream and women. i would suggest dumping ice cream on a women and go to town. if ice cream is to cold pudding can be used instead. i do hope gay men and women use ice cream and pudding and other foods in their love making sessions. food is sex.
wait...
food is for sex
i woulda thought guys would go for cones over a bowl.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
catefrances, the almighty traveler from down under.... you are fantastic.
now about loving ice cream. yes a couple or lone person may make passionate fiery love to a bowl of ice cream.
one being gay may use his or her beloved ice cream as a stimulant to their flower or junk.
one may turn a banana split into exactly that.
at some point well into this manuver... orgasms
thank you.
p.s. i am not gay and i do enjoy ice cream and women. i would suggest dumping ice cream on a women and go to town. if ice cream is to cold pudding can be used instead. i do hope gay men and women use ice cream and pudding and other foods in their love making sessions. food is sex.
wait...
food is for sex
i woulda thought guys would go for cones over a bowl.
you're right. i was just being piggy; what with the oveflowing bowl of ice cream and all. that's how we do it here catester....huge ice cream for lots of huge sexual pleasure and fat butts
small cones are banned. no one enjoys a small cone. ask any gay person
you're right. i was just being piggy; what with the oveflowing bowl of ice cream and all. that's how we do it here catester....huge ice cream for lots of huge sexual pleasure and fat butts
small cones are banned. no one enjoys a small cone. ask any gay person
quality over quantity dude.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
you're right. i was just being piggy; what with the oveflowing bowl of ice cream and all. that's how we do it here catester....huge ice cream for lots of huge sexual pleasure and fat butts
small cones are banned. no one enjoys a small cone. ask any gay person
quality over quantity dude.
what about both? large cream cone and very good amount. im not gay but if i were then i'd be gay.
i wasnt aware that asking where you stand and what you think were personal questions. guess i should stop doing that.
im not rude and biased. im blunt and inquisitive. you see me as rude cause you dont like the questions. as for biased.. well.. yeah i guess i am... im biased towards equal rights for all and the acknowledgement of such as well as the destruction of bigotry and ignorance..
so i see then that youre in agreeance that it should be termed gay MARRIAGE?
that is most excellent and very cool. . welcome to the light pandora.
I had answered that question numerous times throughout the thread and it was a personal unnecessary question to ask if a I was a marriage preserver. :nono:
Yes I guess you can see yourself as you wish ...
I am also for equal rights for all and am very fine with marriage remaining as it was intended
to be between a man and a woman ... I would cast for my vote for that today if it meant equal rights for gay unions right now and stop the marriage battle. I have a feeling others would do the same.
No legally everything will be equal...
equal amendment, equal rights, an equal union only different by name because marriage is the union of a man and a woman
this where the conflict lies...
not in granting equal rights nor the union of gays but using and changing the heterosexual union that was created for,
has existed for thousands of years.
The word gay had been a slang term long before it became more popular in use
in the 50's 60's and has grown from there. It is a perfect example of a new term
for group of people identifying themselves, defining themselves and showing pride
for who they are.
Now a defining term for their union needs to be found so equal rights
are given now, so in 50, 60, 100 years the use will be as gay is now,
comon place and accepted. Perhaps even, as I have said, outnumbering the
traditional word, union of marriage.
Beyond that as humanity grows to a one gender, sexuality will no longer be an issue at all
and hopefully we can let go of the hate and find peace as a species.
On July 20, 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world and the first country in the Americas to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide with the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act which provided a gender-neutral marriage definition.
While its not recognized on a federal level in the US, I think six states have accepted gay marriages....So NO, marriage is NOT the union of a "man and a woman"...it is in some places maybe...
And if you look at the trends (decline in religious following, increases in % acceptance of gay marriage over the years) it will be legal throughout the US one day, just like Canada, without the sticky, slimy, ridiculous need for a separate term for the exact same thing.
I've never heard of this idea -- creating a new term for the exact same thing (marriage) -- is it something people are really trying to do, or is it just your personal suggestion?
Comments
Agree - this is not about preserving an institution but preserving their own values (usually christian based - at least in the western world), disregarding others.
Exactly - so why try to suggest a marriage should be called something else because one set of 'participants' does not fit in one's values or morals. Marriage is a good enough word for all.
What do you beleive ???
I preserve my marriage that's all any of us can do, and NO RELIGOUS INSTITUTION can
layy claim to preserving any marriage. That's a couples job
What do I beleive
I beleive in the rights of the individual
Not in rights of religous group to control mine or anyone elses life.
Marriage is a personnel choice. A religion can lay claim to not allowing it as a part of their own practices but that's all
If a gay couple wants to marry then why not
I give massive kudos to Obama today. Another big step in American politics
The real American public needs to step up and support it or the religous right will strip people's rights as they always have
blinded by the light? mama told me not to look into the sun ...
but that's where the answers are
too much of a "diminishing circle" for ya
not a good thing at all, your bias is showing yet again.
really I don't care who marries who,what does bother me are the attacks on religen (God) while I agree some religens have some rules I don't agree with but at the end of the day God is still God.
it just seems to be an ez out for argument by gay supporters to blame God for their struggles.
I don't understand how two men can find sexual pleasure with each other but I guess that's just me so it also makes hard for me to understand a marriage between to same sex people,I don't need to give a reason why because it's just the way I feel about it in fact I don't think I could give you/anybody a reason that would make you undrstand my feelings on it I also know it's not my position to tell people like POD they can't marry the one that they love..I sure don't understan it at all and I have always seen marriage as union between a man and a woman but I also can't tell you how gay people feel abouit each other so for the most part I have been trying to keep my comments to myself..untell God is blammed anyway or someone like Cliffy and a few others comes on here calling people names in support of gay rights and feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs...so that's it in a nutshell understanding is a two way street.
Godfather.
No more anti gay stances from those of religous based on their beliefs
Let's move to RIGHTS
do you beleive that everyone should hav the same rights
If you do how can you argue against 2people who love each other celebrating their love and commitment to each other as the rest of society does
I'm not gay. Not interested at all. I have a loving wife who is my world. I'm so lucky and would be shattered if I couldnt have had a ceremony attended by all we love and respect to devote myself to her
If we are going to argue that 2 males or for that case 2 females in a relationship cannot create new life maybe we should be banning people who are infertile from marriage
this is a great post. Can't say it any better.
I wonder if some bigots 50 years ago justified making blacks sitting in the back of the bus, or drink out of their own drinking fountains by saying things like "they will all be together in the back of the bus, they will all have that to themselves in common it will be beautiful"
bottom line it is discriminatory. People against this are either homophobic, blinded by an exclusionary interpretation of a religion, or just hateful toward certain others for whatever reason (nature, nurture, deeply repressed homosexual feelings, etc). Hiding behind "preserving the word marriage" is completely transparent. What are you preserving it from? Mind you there were also "traditions" that needed to be altered, like all other general civil rights (women voting, African-Americans being treated like human beings, etc....) Im sure the Peoples Republic of China has some great "traditions" like the 'one child policy'
We need to evolve as a society. We are almost ready. This vote in North Carolina is most disappointing.
oh for fucks sake pandora why cant you ever just answer the question and stop hiding in the shadows the way you do. i know you support equal marriage.. we ALL know. but do you support gay marriage BY THAT NAME? or are you one of the 'preservers'? i dont see the question being a diffcult one. i get more sense out of my 5 year old grand daughter than i get from you... probably cause she has not yet learnt the art of obfuscation the way you have.
and if me wanting clear answers is me being true to my character then yahoo for me cause i will do it every time.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
the preservers of marriage will protect to have it remain a union between a man and a woman.
This is not crap as we saw yesterday. This movement may even escalate.
your words...
"just a bunch of hateful assholes"
Who is just this? and who is prejudice? do you see yourself? and read your words?
How can you even claim anything about others when you do the same?
In my heart tenfold is your hate towards others than anyone
I have ever spoke with on gay rights.
No legally everything will be equal...
equal amendment, equal rights, an equal union only different by name because
marriage is the union of a man and a woman
this where the conflict lies...
not in granting equal rights nor the union of gays
but using and changing the heterosexual union that was created for,
has existed for thousands of years.
The word gay had been a slang term long before it became more popular in use
in the 50's 60's and has grown from there. It is a perfect example of a new term
for group of people identifying themselves, defining themselves and showing pride
for who they are.
Now a defining term for their union needs to be found so equal rights
are given now, so in 50, 60, 100 years the use will be as gay is now,
comon place and accepted. Perhaps even, as I have said, outnumbering the
traditional word, union of marriage.
Beyond that as humanity grows to a one gender, sexuality will no longer be an issue at all
and hopefully we can let go of the hate and find peace as a species.
I'm gay now? Or am I just not reading this correctly?
and I have already stated this numerous times.
This is beginning to get personal cate ... it should not matter if I was a preserver of marriage.
Better question is...
why are you questioning me personally? that is against posting rules! :?
No you being true to character and asking personal questions
comes from the personal conflict you have with me.
Everyone sees this with your rudeness and bias, it is embarrassing
and it is showing once again.
Give it rest cate... really I do not treat you like this.
It has nothing to do with prejudices, equal rights, gay unions or desegregation.
People will not allow and will fight to have marriage remain as it was created
and intended. This is a set back as the marriage preservers solidify their cause.
The gay rights people should jump on this and demand a gay union amendment,
without the term marriage, demanding equal rights. There is no opposition
that could oppose that.
it is nobody's place to segregate or subjugate anyone because of how they were born.
equality is equality. this legislation and your justification of it is clearly in support of inequality.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
But I've said this before so I'm guessing that some may have me on ignore as this mis-information about 'marriage', it's etimology and history has been repeated several times.
you do realize that historically, these human rights issues always increase in support, not decrease... as the old curmudgeons die off and progressive thinking takes a firmer hold. They say support for gay marriage increases about 2% per year and as of now, the majority in the USA already support it. Certain states are just a little slower to get with the program. Was the same way with the Civil Rights movement in the 50's and 60's.
nooooo "feelings he couldn't possibly understand unless they are gay themselfs"
you I believe come on this thread calling people bigots and assholes I think ? whats up with that ? is that how you see the world..people that don't support gay rights are bigots and assholes ? judging by your comments you lack the understanding you seem to demand for yourself and others..do two wrongs make a right ?
Godfather.
i wasnt aware that asking where you stand and what you think were personal questions. guess i should stop doing that.
im not rude and biased. im blunt and inquisitive. you see me as rude cause you dont like the questions. as for biased.. well.. yeah i guess i am... im biased towards equal rights for all and the acknowledgement of such as well as the destruction of bigotry and ignorance..
so i see then that youre in agreeance that it should be termed gay MARRIAGE?
that is most excellent and very cool. . welcome to the light pandora.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
even steven.
gay men & women should be able to put one another on their spouse's insurance plan and other bullshit everyone else gets to do.
gay ass men & gay ass women really don't bother me so much as to withhold benefits and to not ever recognize them as a legal full on couple.
they are human and free to do as they wish with who they're banging
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
but.. but chad... what if someone loves ice cream.. should they be allowed to marry that ice cream??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
catefrances, the almighty traveler from down under.... you are fantastic.
now about loving ice cream. yes a couple or lone person may make passionate fiery love to a bowl of ice cream.
one being gay may use his or her beloved ice cream as a stimulant to their flower or junk.
one may turn a banana split into exactly that.
at some point well into this manuver... orgasms
thank you.
p.s. i am not gay and i do enjoy ice cream and women. i would suggest dumping ice cream on a women and go to town. if ice cream is to cold pudding can be used instead. i do hope gay men and women use ice cream and pudding and other foods in their love making sessions. food is sex.
wait...
food is for sex
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
i woulda thought guys would go for cones over a bowl.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
you're right. i was just being piggy; what with the oveflowing bowl of ice cream and all. that's how we do it here catester....huge ice cream for lots of huge sexual pleasure and fat butts
small cones are banned. no one enjoys a small cone. ask any gay person
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
quality over quantity dude.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Yes I guess you can see yourself as you wish ...
I am also for equal rights for all and am very fine with marriage remaining as it was intended
to be between a man and a woman ...
I would cast for my vote for that today if it meant equal rights for gay unions
right now and stop the marriage battle. I have a feeling others would do the same.
The light is not what you think
I am confused...who intended it as such, and why was I never given a memo?
On July 20, 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world and the first country in the Americas to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide with the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act which provided a gender-neutral marriage definition.
While its not recognized on a federal level in the US, I think six states have accepted gay marriages....So NO, marriage is NOT the union of a "man and a woman"...it is in some places maybe...
And if you look at the trends (decline in religious following, increases in % acceptance of gay marriage over the years) it will be legal throughout the US one day, just like Canada, without the sticky, slimy, ridiculous need for a separate term for the exact same thing.
I've never heard of this idea -- creating a new term for the exact same thing (marriage) -- is it something people are really trying to do, or is it just your personal suggestion?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
my, Cornell, and Stone's birthdays.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014