i guess i could agree to that, but then know that if it gets turned down then no state gets gay marraiage where in the other instance at least some could have it
also its tough to draw the line at what exactly is civil rights i mean that could include alot of topics possibly
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
obama
It's inevitable. Once you give people liberties they aren't usually keen on giving them up. A decision that overturns Perry vs. Schwarzenegger will in turn be overturned some day. If there's one thing I'm virtually certain about, it's that gays will be able to marry in the US some day. It's just a matter of when.
Civil rights are pretty much any rights to freedom or equality, in any demographic.
alright then in that case lighting off fireworks is a civil rights issue cause it enfringes on my freedom, affirmative action is a civil rights issue cuz it enfringes on my equality...see what i mean..
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
obama
Not explicitly, but there's reasonable debate, considering the 3 most important inalienable rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I believe that the right to marry may not be in there, but to not be discriminated under the law due to your sexual orientation is definitely to be included. Gays are not given the same rights as married couples under any circumstance, which is definitely a violation.
Your Obama has been busy taking away our rights. Signed Martial Law Executive Order. Trespass Bill. And the National Defense Authorization Act. King Obama does all this and more without the approval of Congress. 8-X
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
not voting
marriage should just be defined by the state period..if your gay and you wanna get married so bad move to a state that has gay marriage..if you wanna be gay and live in spr republican texas then tough titties....but then at the same time i feel if we do that to long some states would get way ahead of other states socially causing more problems...the whole 50 different states thing really makes things tough as fuck we should just split the country into four smaller countries lol
Are you saying this because currently marriage is defined by the states? Because you dont get a federal marriage license but a NY marriage license for example? So you are advocating that it should remain a states issue not because you are against gay marriage, but because you are against the federal government regulating morality?
If so- then I agree with you. However the federal government recognizes marriage as far as tax purposes go. And it would be discriminatory for the federal government to not recognize a gay couple in the same way they recognize a straight couple. So that is a huge hole in what you said, and needs to be addressed on a federal level.
Personally I think anyone who advocates against gay marriage these days is has stupid as people advocating segregation 50 years ago. they are fucking dinosaurs.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
obama
Your Obama has been busy taking away our rights. Signed Martial Law Executive Order. Trespass Bill. And the National Defense Authorization Act. King Obama does all this and more without the approval of Congress. 8-X
Tresspass was authorized by Congress, and NDAA is one of the more debated acts currently in the judicial system, but it was signed after a court ruling, which is part of the checks and balances system. Also, the martial law executive order has been ordered by so many presidents that it's ridiculous to say that Obama's EO is any more suspect than anyone else's.
Personally I think anyone who advocates against gay marriage these days is has stupid as people advocating segregation 50 years ago. they are fucking dinosaurs.
No matter what I believed, I'd get the fuck out of the way, because I'd be ending up on the wrong side of history in this debate. If I personally believed that you go to hell without confession and communion, but was fine without the government regulating that, I'd downgrade homosexuality to confession and communion's practical status.
It's just inevitable, because you can't stop progress. Consensual adults want marriage, and the population is heading that way. No matter the amount of Jesusing or anything the anti-gay lobby does, it's happening. It's just about who gets run over trying to fight it.
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
obama
I don't believe it's the government's duty to dictate polygamy either. Strictly contingent upon it being consensual.
The government got locked into this heterosexual monogamous marriage thing somewhere along the line, and it's being broken.
I think polygamy could become legal, but it's different, since the polygamist population isn't nearly as big as the LGBT population. Society prefers monogamy as of right now as their form of structured marital relationships, and I don't see that changing. But if it does, then yes, I'd support polygamy.
Currently, I'd vote against it because I'm a monogamist, but I would have no problem with it being legalized, and if I began to think that it could improve the quality of life of the population, then I would absolutely vote for it.
consent with polygamy is gray area doe... i mean most people just grow up with being brainwashed into thinking that some things are just the way you do it and i think polygamy is one of those instances where if you teach people from birth that its way you do that people would just go along with it... i have no problem with govt budding the fuck out and letting people live their lives the way they want i just hate seeing kids being taught shit from a really early age that this is the only way to do things when you grow up
drinkwine732Posts: 20,418destroyer of motherfuckers
obama
consent with polygamy is gray area doe... i mean most people just grow up with being brainwashed into thinking that some things are just the way you do it and i think polygamy is one of those instances where if you teach people from birth that its way you do that people would just go along with it... i have no problem with govt budding the fuck out and letting people live their lives the way they want i just hate seeing kids being taught shit from a really early age that this is the only way to do things when you grow up
Yeah, but that's from the outside looking in. I don't see it as any different from teaching your kids a religion from an early age and teaching it as fact. It's not the government's place to change how kids are raised by their parents. With that said, it is their place to provide structure in the event they do not want to live the way their parents raised them (proper education, etc.)
Ideologically, I'd be down for none of it to happen and to allow the kids to make up their own minds, but it's not really possible.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
not voting
I don't believe it's the government's duty to dictate polygamy either. Strictly contingent upon it being consensual.
Good to hear. I agree with this statement 100% and yes it is contingent upon it being consensual. And this is also the same reason why I support prostitution. If two consensual adults make an agreement between the two of them, and they both feel they are better off for making this agreement then not making this agreement, then I see no reason why the government should stop this. So long as it doesnt infringe on the liberty of anyone else.
Currently, I'd vote against it because I'm a monogamist, but I would have no problem with it being legalized, and if I began to think that it could improve the quality of life of the population, then I would absolutely vote for it.
say what nigga? just because you are a monogamist, doesnt mean if it was made legal that you would need to participate. This statement is like saying "Currently I'd vote against gay marriage because I am a hetrosexual, but I would have no problem with gay marriage being legalized."
yea i agree, im not for parent teaching kids any religious shit..it really just fucks them up i know it fucked me up and i didnt even get it hardcore or anything... to this day its still hard to be pretty much an atheist, i still feel like im letting people down
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
not voting
consent with polygamy is gray area doe... i mean most people just grow up with being brainwashed into thinking that some things are just the way you do it and i think polygamy is one of those instances where if you teach people from birth that its way you do that people would just go along with it... i have no problem with govt budding the fuck out and letting people live their lives the way they want i just hate seeing kids being taught shit from a really early age that this is the only way to do things when you grow up
Dude... there are MANY religions that brainwash children into their ways of life and force them into marriages. I know of a sweet little girl in kindergarten who starting next year will be pulled out of school and put in this religious school whose stated purpose is to literally groom girls for marriage. They will be strictly taught that a womans place is in the kitchen and baring children for the man of the house. That she will not speak back and will do as instructed. I shit you not. This school does no educational teaching and 0% of their graduates go to college. They are married at 18 to some guy in the church.
So you want to get all huffy puffy about polygamy but give 0 fucks about this legal hetro marriage?
Comments
It was right for slavery, and it's right for gay rights.
also its tough to draw the line at what exactly is civil rights i mean that could include alot of topics possibly
Civil rights are pretty much any rights to freedom or equality, in any demographic.
The type of civil rights I was talking about are inalienable civil rights. Rights that can't be taken away from you under the constitution.
I believe that the right to marry may not be in there, but to not be discriminated under the law due to your sexual orientation is definitely to be included. Gays are not given the same rights as married couples under any circumstance, which is definitely a violation.
If so- then I agree with you. However the federal government recognizes marriage as far as tax purposes go. And it would be discriminatory for the federal government to not recognize a gay couple in the same way they recognize a straight couple. So that is a huge hole in what you said, and needs to be addressed on a federal level.
Personally I think anyone who advocates against gay marriage these days is has stupid as people advocating segregation 50 years ago. they are fucking dinosaurs.
It's just inevitable, because you can't stop progress. Consensual adults want marriage, and the population is heading that way. No matter the amount of Jesusing or anything the anti-gay lobby does, it's happening. It's just about who gets run over trying to fight it.
The government got locked into this heterosexual monogamous marriage thing somewhere along the line, and it's being broken.
I think polygamy could become legal, but it's different, since the polygamist population isn't nearly as big as the LGBT population. Society prefers monogamy as of right now as their form of structured marital relationships, and I don't see that changing. But if it does, then yes, I'd support polygamy.
Currently, I'd vote against it because I'm a monogamist, but I would have no problem with it being legalized, and if I began to think that it could improve the quality of life of the population, then I would absolutely vote for it.
Ideologically, I'd be down for none of it to happen and to allow the kids to make up their own minds, but it's not really possible.
So you want to get all huffy puffy about polygamy but give 0 fucks about this legal hetro marriage?