PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Californians have civil unions with all the same rights as marriage. The whole fight is over the label of marriage.
DOMA and Prop 8 bite the dust
- Thread starter BabyPeterzz
- Start date
Californians have civil unions with all the same rights as marriage. The whole fight is over the label of marriage.
DutchJazzer
Banned
hence, to stopt he fighting label chance would be ideal
TheStormofWar
Well-Known Member
Still not sure why this is an issue. If you don't want a gay marriage, don't get one. Otherwise, keep the *bleep* out of other people's business.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Here is what I think of the matter:
- Christians were not the first people to create the institution of marriage. Yes, you can argue on semantics, and insist that our current definition of 'marriage' stems from the practice rooted in Christianity, but I would vehemently disagree.
- So, since Christians don't really own this label, WHO is to decide what it means? Just because the majority of America is Christian, does that mean that we have to only grant the most sacred of institutions of society that has existed even before the dawn of Abrahamic faiths-- to Christians alone?
- Does this mean that we cannot grant a couple practicing a non-Christian faith the label of "marriage", if it is not similar to Christianity? So, we can consider a Sikh couple married, or a Baha'i couple married ONLY if their union is analogous to one of a Christian one? How on earth does this agree with the secular country that we pride ourselves on? Why do we feel the desire to impose our religious interpretations on other citizens of a country in the hundreds of millions? Why do we feel the need to only grant homosexuals a 'second-tier' institution of a union that isn't even exclusively ours?
Just some food for thought. One can argue that homosexuality has no genetic roots, or that a homosexual couple cannot raise kids as effectively as a heterosexual couple can. But until there is extensive, unanimous proof that children are placed at serious risk of danger when being raised by homosexuals (and I don't think this will ever be the case), then the Gays will win this battle, and it will only be a matter of time before homosexual marriage is legalized nation-wide. Sorry.
- Christians were not the first people to create the institution of marriage. Yes, you can argue on semantics, and insist that our current definition of 'marriage' stems from the practice rooted in Christianity, but I would vehemently disagree.
- So, since Christians don't really own this label, WHO is to decide what it means? Just because the majority of America is Christian, does that mean that we have to only grant the most sacred of institutions of society that has existed even before the dawn of Abrahamic faiths-- to Christians alone?
- Does this mean that we cannot grant a couple practicing a non-Christian faith the label of "marriage", if it is not similar to Christianity? So, we can consider a Sikh couple married, or a Baha'i couple married ONLY if their union is analogous to one of a Christian one? How on earth does this agree with the secular country that we pride ourselves on? Why do we feel the desire to impose our religious interpretations on other citizens of a country in the hundreds of millions? Why do we feel the need to only grant homosexuals a 'second-tier' institution of a union that isn't even exclusively ours?
Just some food for thought. One can argue that homosexuality has no genetic roots, or that a homosexual couple cannot raise kids as effectively as a heterosexual couple can. But until there is extensive, unanimous proof that children are placed at serious risk of danger when being raised by homosexuals (and I don't think this will ever be the case), then the Gays will win this battle, and it will only be a matter of time before homosexual marriage is legalized nation-wide. Sorry.