Bush is trying to ban gay marriages nation-wide.... wow.

No it isn\'t. Should we redefine the word normal also?

[SirMystiq]

SHUT IT DAMN IT!! They already went through all that and you know what I mean so don\'t get technical.

Should we define technical?

I\'ve been dealing with this issue on two other boards so I am getting somewhat punch-drunk.

Originally posted by Bozco
Ok, let me make it a little more clear for you.  I\'m not talking about what the mayor of SF is doing.  I\'m simply commenting on how it might become an ammendment.  How does it hurt you when two gay guys get married?

It hurts the INSTITUTION of marriage for which I am a part of.  When you have a wife feel free to comment on the institution that a majority of Americans still feel is sacred.  This leads me to ask you a few questions regarding the Mayor and what he is doing...  

Do you not approve of what he is doing?  Do you feel he has overstepped his bounds by issuing marriage certificates?  Since no politician or judge in California has any backbone to actually enforce the law an ammendment is the only answer.  

Also 38 states have already passed legislation recognizing marriage as only between a man and a woman.  38 is the number needed to call a Constitutional Convention and bypass Congress all together since the Democrats oppose gay marriage, yet won\'t support an ammendment saying as much... go figure :rolleyes:

Do some of you even know what a democracy is?  

As far as Jbean saying its a matter for each state... sorry that won\'t work either since all 50 states are bound to recognize the laws of other states.  Meaning if you get married in state #1 states 2 through 50 have to recognize your marriage.

[SirMystiq]

Sacred in what way?

They already said this amendment might take some years, and when it does it will affect future generations also. Do we really need to set a standard that defines marriage? Why? What is the purpose of doing so? Save you money?

It should be a matter of the State. It\'s all a matter of a person\'s opinion and shouln\'t have anything to do with Government. Government should be blind to sexual orientation, race, age...etc when it comes to things like these. The only reason Bush is against it is because of HIS OWN POSITION on the topic. Christianity > Just Government I suppose.

Originally posted by GigaShadow
It hurts the INSTITUTION of marriage for which I am a part of.  When you have a wife feel free to comment on the institution that a majority of Americans still feel is sacred.  

I find the ideological part of this the most interesting.  Are you saying that if gay marriages were fully legal, you might one day say to your wife "Wow, our marriage feels somehow tarnished and less meaningful.  Do you feel it too?  Hey, you know what, I think it\'s because of those GAYS who got married down the street!"

I gotta tell you honestly I think it\'s a cop out to use the argument of this weakening the INSTITUTION of marriage.  I think there is some other reason behind this.  I\'m not going to venture a guess as to what that is, because quite honestly, I have no idea what it could be.  I simply don\'t understand this "institution of marriage" argument at all.  I wish someone would help me understand it, and I\'m open to hearing it.

I attended the gay wedding of a friend of mine some years ago.  Of course it had no legal significance, but in a way I think that only underscores the strength of the commitment and love that went into that relationship.  I\'ve been to many many marriages over the years, and this one was the MOST heartfelt and meaningful of them all.  It was a very moving experience for me, and after that, I find it hard to believe that a legal gay marriage could in any way tarnish the institution of marriage.  THAT marriage would have only strengthened it.

Maybe if more Americans had gay friends like mine (YES, I HAVE MORE THAN ONE!  ) , and attended a gay wedding like the one I did, then this whole thing would become the non-issue it deserves to be.  Then any human could marry any other human if they wanted to.

Then any human could marry any other human if they wanted to.

No limits?

[SirMystiq]

I always thought the "Institution" of marriage was based upon love, trust and respect for your significant other...Not what sex they are...Just a guess...

Originally posted by Ace
No limits?

How about displaying the teeth before I put my arm into that trap?

Just a little closer . . . come on . . . one more step . . .

[SirMystiq]

I think he\'s just trying to pull strings....


How long are the strings?
Define pulling?
A limit to pulling?!

It all depends on what is is.

Originally posted by GigaShadow
It hurts the INSTITUTION of marriage for which I am a part of.  When you have a wife feel free to comment on the institution that a majority of Americans still feel is sacred.  This leads me to ask you a few questions regarding the Mayor and what he is doing...  

Do you not approve of what he is doing?  Do you feel he has overstepped his bounds by issuing marriage certificates?  Since no politician or judge in California has any backbone to actually enforce the law an ammendment is the only answer.  

Also 38 states have already passed legislation recognizing marriage as only between a man and a woman.  38 is the number needed to call a Constitutional Convention and bypass Congress all together since the Democrats oppose gay marriage, yet won\'t support an ammendment saying as much... go figure :rolleyes:

Do some of you even know what a democracy is?  

What he is doing is completely wrong but that doesn\'t change my stance on same sex marriage.  As for knowing what democracy is, kind of pathetic that we are still in a time of age where inequality is rampant.  The fact that more than half the country is against this goes to show you people aren\'t right in the head.  I do agree though on whatever is finally decided should be enforced nationwide.  

Now who said that?

You might as well of considering you won\'t give them the same rights.  

Earlier I asked you how it hurts your life if John and Mark were married and you state that it hurts the institution.  That isn\'t an explanation at all.  I completely agree with where Cored was taking this.  What they are doing with their life doesn\'t affect your marriage any.  He wouldn\'t go as far as to guess why but I could take a stab in the dark.  Frankly I don\'t agree with their lifestyle but I don\'t let that affect my opinion on all this.

Originally posted by Coredweller
I find the ideological part of this the most interesting.  Are you saying that if gay marriages were fully legal, you might one day say to your wife "Wow, our marriage feels somehow tarnished and less meaningful.  Do you feel it too?  Hey, you know what, I think it\'s because of those GAYS who got married down the street!"

I gotta tell you honestly I think it\'s a cop out to use the argument of this weakening the INSTITUTION of marriage.  I think there is some other reason behind this.  I\'m not going to venture a guess as to what that is, because quite honestly, I have no idea what it could be.  I simply don\'t understand this "institution of marriage" argument at all.  I wish someone would help me understand it, and I\'m open to hearing it.

I attended the gay wedding of a friend of mine some years ago.  Of course it had no legal significance, but in a way I think that only underscores the strength of the commitment and love that went into that relationship.  I\'ve been to many many marriages over the years, and this one was the MOST heartfelt and meaningful of them all.  It was a very moving experience for me, and after that, I find it hard to believe that a legal gay marriage could in any way tarnish the institution of marriage.  THAT marriage would have only strengthened it.

Maybe if more Americans had gay friends like mine (YES, I HAVE MORE THAN ONE!  ) , and attended a gay wedding like the one I did, then this whole thing would become the non-issue it deserves to be.  Then any human could marry any other human if they wanted to.

You asked for a frank answer and I will give you one.  Homosexuality is not accepted in this country.  Sorry, but marriage is a heterosexual ceremony - not a homosexual one.  Gays will never be accepted by the majority of this country because it goes against the social morals and norms of our culture.  Don\'t ask me to define it, because everyone here has a good idea of what is considered normal and what isn\'t.  No need in arguing semantics.

Gays have an agenda to make homosexuality an accepted norm and this is part of it IMO.  No offense core, but I would never attend a gay "wedding" as they don\'t exist and are a farce.

The institution of marriage will feel tarnished if gays are allowed to marry - I do feel that way.

GigaShadow: I hope you never get a guy son/daughter cause that would be hell for him/her. Open your mind