Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
How can it be the same institution when a same sex couple is different from an opposite sex couple?

They are both in a romantic and legal relationship, just like a heterosexual couple. The only difference is what happens behind closed doors, and that's not even what the relationship is about.

=============

They are NOT the same thing. But they are EQUAL.
A black man is not a white man - but they are EQUAL.
A woman is no the same thing as a man - but they are EQUAL.

I can tell from your post that you responded to garysher (I have him on ignore) - he's been given the truth/facts about this "same thing as/equal to" issue myriad times. He just keeps repeating the same garbage for years (at least four that I know of) - and refuses to acknowledge when he's lost an argument (he thinks if he ignores it, he can say he's correct - he's not exactly a bright bulb).

Gay marriage is not a "threat" except to those who simply fear change.
It has been shown over and over again that NO aspect of marriage is damaged with gay marriage.
The ONLY claim of "threat" is that there would be change. That's it.

And that's a pretty pathetic and shallow argument...


Blacks are not the same as whites.
Jews are not the same as Christians.
Women are not the same as men.
Gays are not the same as straights.

All four of those statements are true, and all four are IRRELEVANT to the fact that regardless of those differences, they are TREATED the same with the same rights and privileges.

A black person can be different than a white person, but still have the same rights.
A Jew can be different than a Christian, but still have the same rights.



Because it's absolutely true.
When people start dictating morality, people lose freedom. It's a logical fact.
When liquor sales are forbidden on sunday, people lose the freedom to buy liquor on sunday.

What baffles me is why the obvious needs to be explained to you.

Everything I stated was a fact. Not opinion.
Can you show any supposed "threat" to marriage which doesn't revolve around JUST the fact that it will be "changed"?


The majority don't like gay marriage.
The reason they don't like it is not stated. To pretend that they agree with you that it's a "threat" is b.s., and irrelevant.
If a majority of Americans thought that the moon was made of green cheese that wouldn't make it so.


I never said that.
Can you quote where I said "all change is good"?
No?

Quit lying Garysher.


1) You are not a "we".
You are a sole individual.
2) And each time you give this stupid response it is explained to you that nobody is "equating" homosexuality with race or religion.
It's an ANALOGY regarding the attempted justification for discrimination.
Yet, we patiently explain to you that you are wrong, and still you can't get it...


You keep repeating your old arguments, but then it's the follow-up that you fall flat on.
Men have a right to marry a woman.
Woman do not have a right to marry a woman.
The rights are not equal.


I realize you want to jump in on one of your regular and favorite diversions, but I won't have that...
Stay on topic.
The claim was that laws on morality limit freedom.
I was proving that point.

I never made any claim that there are no morality-based laws in America.
Please learn some reading comprehension.

No. It is not.
The only substantiation of "gay marriage is a threat to marriage" that you can give is that it is a change.
If you can give MORE substantiation to that claim, then do so.

Until then, my statement is accurate. To date, nobody has supplied any detriment to marriage.


It's the truth.
If you don't like it, then I recommend you stop lying.


No. That is not a "clear inference". Nor is it an intelligent inference.
Obviously, the SPECIFICS of the issue at hand come into play.
Some change is good.
Some change is bad.
On the issue of gay marriage, the only argument that I have seen that "gay marriage is a threat" revolves around change to the definition of marriage. Calling it a "threat" because changing the definition is a "threat".

I could care less what absurd notions fly through your head...


AGAIN you LIE.
I said that a majority of Americans are against gay marriage.
Whether or not they share your REASONS for being against gay marriage has not been shown.
And you in NO WAY "represent" their views. Quite frankly, you are quite alone in a LOT of the absurd claims you make...


No. The right is NOT equal.
The RESTRICTION is the same.
I could claim "men and women have an equal right to marry somebody of their own religion", and that wouldn't mean an "equal" right for Christians and Jews.

You keep trying to misrepresent a similar RESTRICTION as being the same thing as an equal RIGHT.


Another lie.
I never made any argument about no morality laws.
I never made that claim.

It seems that you have returned to your penchant for lying...

Quote:

Stating that "Gay marriage is not a "threat" except to those who simply fear change" is an opinion

No, it's actually a fact. Every single argument that claims that "traditional marriage" has to eb upheld is based solely on theoretical concepts and outdated beliefs. You have no proof that gay marriage will harm society. There are no precedents, no accurate studies, no reliable sources to back you up.

Quote:

I represent the views of the majority of Americans - you already conceded that.

First off, no you don't. Second, even if you did the majority of Americans years ago believed that blacks were inferior, women should not work, and immigrants' sole purpose is to interbreed and destroy the moral fabric of America. Popular opinion has been changing, because it's becoming clearer that some narrow-minded bigots who loathe anything different from themselves and a 2,000 year old book written by nomads living in huts are NOT good sources for morality.

Quote:

Men and woman have an equal right to marry a qualifying person of the opposite sex. The rights are perfectly equal. Your attempts to spin words fool nobody

*sigh* Yet those who cannot engage in fulfilling relationships in heterosexual pairings have nowhere to go. The only way to achieve happiness would be for them to follow their hearts and minds. Because they can't, the system needs change.

I'm very much for public nudity, providing people bring a towel to sit on. Too many USAns have way too many body hangups.

Waitaminnit, what was the topic about again? Oh yeah. I'm all for anyone getting married to their boyfriend or their girlfriend should they choose it. I'm all for repealing antipolygamy laws as well, even if that induces a bunch of brand-new tax headaches.

What I don't understand is why only same gender couples qualify for DP status in CA and why opposite gender couples only qualify for DP in WA if they're over 62 years old? I have no wish to ever ever get married and if something happened to me (and I was in a long term relationship) and I was sitting in intensive care, I'd want him and my friends to see me and make decisions and see that any wishes of mine are carried out if I die (definitely NOT my immediate family. I don't trust them to know when to take the garbage out).

True, gay and bisexual people have dealt with a bigger ration of crap than a straight person like myself has. Nobody's going to beat me to death or throw a rock in my window because I'm heterosexually inclined. Thing is, I feel the bennies should be distributed equally, not "no if you're straight". I'm not gonna know what it's like to be bisexual or a lesbian any more than I'll know what it's like to be a black or a man.

I'm wondering, do common law states exist anymore? That's been repealed in IL but I think when it was still recognized, people had to be in a long-term relationship for seven years.

I almost went into transgender marriage but that's a whole nother post entirely.

Actually, MA has had gay marriages for three years now - and the only effect it's had on traditional marriage is that MA has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

This is a bit off topic but yes there are some states that still recognize common law marriages.

The seven year requirement is not the case in any of them. I am not sure it ever was.

Here is a list I found of the states that still allow for common law marriage.


Fact Sheet On Common Law Marriage


I know that in Alabama the only requirements are that you declare yourselves to be husband and wife and cohabitate for at least one night.