Gay Marriage? How about no marriage?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/03/2...eut/index.html
Oregon's Benson county stops issuing marriage licenses. Woo. Way to treat everyone equally. I like their thinking.
Oregon's Benson county stops issuing marriage licenses. Woo. Way to treat everyone equally. I like their thinking.
Comments
a) Those who oppose gay marriages are happy.
b) Those that want all marriages handled equally are happy.
Everyone wins!
Well, unless you want to get married...
Originally posted by BR
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/03/2...eut/index.html
Oregon's Benson county stops issuing marriage licenses. Woo. Way to treat everyone equally. I like their thinking.
Good to see some common sense about this issue.
Does anyone think that Bush will actually get his Anti-Gay amendment passed? And if he does, can you actually have an unconstitutional amendment to the constitution?
And I think, awww, you guys are great.......
Originally posted by crazychester
Dammit! Just when I think Americans are the most f**ked up bunch of people on the planet, one little pocket of your country goes and does something like this.
And I think, awww, you guys are great.......
Don't get your hopes up for us yet. We still have a presidential election coming up. Nothing ruins your faith in humanity like a US presidential election.
Originally posted by BR
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/03/2...eut/index.html
Oregon's Benson county stops issuing marriage licenses. Woo. Way to treat everyone equally. I like their thinking.
I'm sure you'll feel the same way when certain offices in California decide not to renew your driving license because some people don't endorse licenses for illegal immigrants.
Nick
Moronic.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
I think there should be a law against no-sex marriages.
Keep your future personal life out of this.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
I'm sure you'll feel the same way when certain offices in California decide not to renew your driving license because some people don't endorse licenses for illegal immigrants.
Nick
Totally different issue.
Originally posted by BR
Totally different issue.
Totally the same issue. Licensing in both instances. Both involve human beings and civil rights issues according to their supporters. You just don't like the fact that you would totally blast the same actions when done on an issue you don't support. I suspect that if San Francisco started giving out drivers licenses to anyone who showed up, paid the fee and passed the test, you would be throwing a major league fit.
Nick
kerry is against gay marriage, bush is against gay marriage.
gay people are out of luck.
Originally posted by tonton
That would be a valid point except that drivers licenses also serve as our main proof of identity documents -- for which legal identity status is required.
Marriage licenses' only purpose is as proof of marriage.
Yeah, people are arguing about marriage because it has nothing to do with your legal status and proof of it isn't required for anything.
I mean those folks complaining about health care benefits, retirement benefits, etc. They weren't complaining about a requirement of your legal identity and status regarding your partner.
This just gets more and more hilarous.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Totally the same issue. Licensing in both instances. Both involve human beings and civil rights issues according to their supporters. You just don't like the fact that you would totally blast the same actions when done on an issue you don't support. I suspect that if San Francisco started giving out drivers licenses to anyone who showed up, paid the fee and passed the test, you would be throwing a major league fit.
Nick
Bull. Discrimination by legality of residency is a wholly different issue.
Originally posted by trumptman
Yeah, people are arguing about marriage because it has nothing to do with your legal status and proof of it isn't required for anything.
I'll bite the trollfood.
Driver's licenses require citizenship (or other legal status), which is a status handed out by the state.
Marriage licenses (up until now) require heterosexual gender orientation, which is a property of the person *NOT* handed out by the state, but instead by nature. (Heck, call it nurture if you want, doesn't matter for these purposes.)
The driver's license issue is simply one of the state deciding which of it's own handouts to require for another handout.
The civil union license (marriage is for religions) cuts directly to the heart of separation of church and state, and is therefore a constitutional issue.
I have *never* seen a rationale for 'no gay marriages' other than ones based ultimately on religious beliefs. If you can provide one, great. Until then, the churches have no business dictating government policy in this matter any more than they in any other.
Originally posted by BR
Bull. Discrimination by legality of residency is a wholly different issue.
Why is it different? You know the folks arguing for drivers licenses are going to declare they meet all the same requirements and criteria aside from the residency. Likewise they will argue that residency wasn't a requirement in the past.
They work, pay taxes, must pass the test, have insurance, etc.
Show me the diffence instead of just being dismissive.
Nick
Originally posted by Kickaha
I'll bite the trollfood.
Good luck.
Driver's licenses require citizenship (or other legal status), which is a status handed out by the state.
Driver's licenses are almost entirely a state issue, exactly like marriage. Some states allow you to drive when you are 13 provided you are in a rural area and helping in the operation of a farm. Some states require proof of legal residency, others do not. States have entirely different laws with regard to driving in some instances. They also have reciprication agreements that allow your license to be recognized in other states. In many ways it is supremely close to marriage with regard to being a licensing issue.
Marriage licenses (up until now) require heterosexual gender orientation, which is a property of the person *NOT* handed out by the state, but instead by nature. (Heck, call it nurture if you want, doesn't matter for these purposes.)
Actually they didn't require any sort of sexual orientation. There is a gender requirement, but there is no heterosexual orientation requirement. It is just assumed because of the gender. However many homosexual marriage advocates will likewise mention that they were allowed to marry when they were still in denial/in the closet, but are not allowed to do so now with their partner.
The driver's license issue is simply one of the state deciding which of it's own handouts to require for another handout.
Ask cohabitating couples, homosexual or heterosexual if they feel the same way about marriage. Marriage is largely being abandoned by heterosexuals. There are plenty of issues where the state can force you into marriage because of a denial of benefits or recognition. If this were true homosexuals wouldn't care or be advocating for marriage rights.
The civil union license (marriage is for religions) cuts directly to the heart of separation of church and state, and is therefore a constitutional issue.
Incorrect, plenty of people have argued that marriage is societies way of endorsing preferred family forms, usually for the benefit of raising children, forming legal relationships, etc. Religion doesn't have to have anything to do with it. Most homosexual rights advocates have been arguing it as a states rights issue as of late. The exact opposite of what you contend.
I have *never* seen a rationale for 'no gay marriages' other than ones based ultimately on religious beliefs. If you can provide one, great. Until then, the churches have no business dictating government policy in this matter any more than they in any other.
Try looking harder because I just gave you one. If they seem arbitrary than also look up voting age, the draft, drinking age, marriage being limited to 2 people, retirement age, driving age, etc.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Why is it different?
Why is loud different from white?
You are comparing apples to dogs.
Originally posted by Smircle
Why is loud different from white?
You are comparing apples to dogs.
Says the man that considers both genders the... same.
How is the exact same human crossing an imaginary line in the dirt, but meeting all the same criteria any different then folks declaring that marriage is more than just the number 2. They add age requirements, number requirements, and yes GENDER requirements. All of them are societal constructs. Just like drivers licenses and yes, country borders.
Nick