This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Gay marriage.
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
donnymurph
Interested to see people's opinions, and why.
Me personally, I vote for "I don't give a crap!", mostly because I don't give a crap about marriage in general. You don't need a legal document to profess your undying love for another person; but at the same time, I do believe homosexuals should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals.
Post by
ExDementia
I voted Hell yes! even though I really don't feel that strongly about it. A simple "sure' would work fine :)
I don't understand why it's such a big deal. It doesn't effect me if they get married or not, so why try to stop them? Let them be happy, it's no skin off my back. I think they should be able to because the whole "sanctity of marriage" thing is just a huge steaming pile of ^&*!. You know what the divorce rate is in this country?
Let them do what ever the hell they want to do, it shouldn't concern anyone else.
Post by
donnymurph
People generally tend to have very strong opinions on the matter, hence the exaggerated options. Nice sig by the way.
Post by
Squishalot
"Hell" as in, they'll go to it? "Yes!"
Ok, in all seriousness, I'd like to see it happen here in Australia. I agree, it's mainly so they should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals, but given the current marriage laws, by definition, that means that I support gay marriage.
Post by
buzz3070
I voted Hell yes! even though I really don't feel that strongly about it. A simple "sure' would work fine :)
I don't understand why it's such a big deal. It doesn't effect me if they get married or not, so why try to stop them? Let them be happy, it's no skin of my back. I think they should be able to because the whole "sanctity of marriage" thing is just a huge steaming pile of ^&*!. You know what the divorce rate is in this country?
Let them do what ever the hell they want to do, it shouldn't concern anyone else.
Pretty much this.
Post by
Perkocet
I voted Hell yes! even though I really don't feel that strongly about it. A simple "sure' would work fine :)
I don't understand why it's such a big deal. It doesn't effect me if they get married or not, so why try to stop them? Let them be happy, it's no skin of my back. I think they should be able to because the whole "sanctity of marriage" thing is just a huge steaming pile of ^&*!. You know what the divorce rate is in this country?
Let them do what ever the hell they want to do, it shouldn't concern anyone else.
Because JESUS! Don't you
know?
Post by
190432
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
wildx22
Interested to see people's opinions, and why.
Me personally, I vote for "I don't give a crap!", mostly because I don't give a crap about marriage in general. You don't need a legal document to profess your undying love for another person; but at the same time, I do believe homosexuals should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals.
I chose "Hell yes" even though I agree with your point of view. Hell yes for them being able to have their relationships legally recognised as being on-par with marriage and heterosexual de-factos. But don't really care if at the end of the day it is indeed a "marriage". A definite hell yes for civil unions though.
"Hell" as in, they'll go to it? "Yes!"
Ok, in all seriousness, I'd like to see it happen here in Australia. I agree, it's mainly so they should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals, but given the current marriage laws, by definition, that means that I support gay marriage.
There is "gay marriage" in Australia already. Well for some states at least.
Australia currently has civil unions in the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania and Victoria.
Post by
TheMediator
Couples should be able to have legally recognized unions regardless of sex.
Strip the power of churches to create legally recognized unions, and I couldn't care less if Homophobic Church A doesn't perform ceremonies for gay couples. Once you give those churches power to create legally recognized unions however, and I think that any couple that wants one is and is otherwise eligible (IE not in another union, etc) should be allowed to get one regardless of the church's opinion on the issue.
Again, I'm more for stripping the power from the churches. Separation of Church and State anyone?
Post by
Squishalot
Civil union =/= marriage.
Marriage
=
marriage
.
Once you give those churches power to create legally recognized unions however, and I think that any couple that wants one is and is otherwise eligible (IE not in another union, etc) should be allowed to get one regardless of the church's opinion on the issue.
No, for the same reason that I would allow an atheist convention from excluding religious people joining in if they chose to do so.
The idea that churches are empowered to create legally recognised unions is the same as the way they are empowered to educate children. It's just helping perform civil activities that would otherwise need to be paid for by the Government.
Post by
TheMediator
Civil union =/= marriage.
Marriage
=
marriage
.
Once you give those churches power to create legally recognized unions however, and I think that any couple that wants one is and is otherwise eligible (IE not in another union, etc) should be allowed to get one regardless of the church's opinion on the issue.
No, for the same reason that I would allow an atheist convention from excluding religious people joining in if they chose to do so.
The idea that churches are empowered to create legally recognised unions is the same as the way they are empowered to educate children. It's just helping perform civil activities that would otherwise need to be paid for by the Government.
Churches aren't the de facto place for children to get an education though. It is a tertiary function. However, churches are widely recognized as that which creates legal unions between couples, aside from their other obvious primary function.
That is wrong, in my opinion. Separation of church and state in my mind suggests that the government should handle functions relevant to the government and keep religious opinions, like the stance against gay couples, out of the matter. In the distant past, churches may have been able to collect taxes or hear court matters... but the government now handles that which pertains to the government. Although in this case, for some reason it doesn't. You can go to the government for a certificate I believe, but that isn't the primary source for such. That needs to be severely corrected. Either the churches need to be government regulated, or the church needs to be separated from such a government function.
Post by
530888
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Churches aren't the de facto place for children to get an education though. It is a tertiary function. However, churches are widely recognized as that which creates legal unions between couples, aside from their other obvious primary function.
That's only because of the highly Christian society you live in. Again, here in Australia, we have plenty of weddings occurring outside of churches, in parks, gardens, and in court chambers, conducted by non-religious civil celebrants.
In fact, of all the weddings I've been to, only ones with at least one religious person in the couple were held in a church. All the rest were held in a garden or public park.
That is wrong, in my opinion. Separation of church and state in my mind suggests that the government should handle functions relevant to the government and keep religious opinions, like the stance against gay couples, out of the matter. In the distant past, churches may have been able to collect taxes or hear court matters... but the government now handles that which pertains to the government. Although in this case, for some reason it doesn't. You can go to the government for a certificate I believe, but that isn't the primary source for such. That needs to be severely corrected. Either the churches need to be government regulated, or the church needs to be separated from such a government function.
I'm sure you'll appreciate the fact that I'm going to ignore this, on the basis that I don't consider a church do be the primary place for marriages.
I'm sure you've got married secular friends. Did they get married in a church?
Post by
OverZealous
I voted Hell yes! even though I really don't feel that strongly about it. A simple "sure' would work fine :)
I don't understand why it's such a big deal. It doesn't effect me if they get married or not, so why try to stop them? Let them be happy, it's no skin of my back. I think they should be able to because the whole "sanctity of marriage" thing is just a huge steaming pile of ^&*!. You know what the divorce rate is in this country?
Let them do what ever the hell they want to do, it shouldn't concern anyone else.
This, more or less.
Post by
wildx22
Civil union =/= marriage.
Marriage
=
marriage
.
Why should the term matter so much? If civil unions are treated exactly the same way as marriages do, then it's just a different label.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Thror
I chose the third option.
Post by
Squishalot
Civil union =/= marriage.
Marriage
=
marriage
.
Why should the term matter so much? If civil unions are treated exactly the same way as marriages do, then it's just a different label.
Because if it's a
different
label, they're not being treated exactly the
same way
.
Post by
Thror
Because if it's a
different
label, they're not being treated exactly the
same way
.
I tend to treat asses the same way as butts. When from a legislative point of view both the terms are pretty much the same, they are nothing more than synonyms. The only problem is that some people have same kind of weird emotional relationship with the word "marriage". Seriously, pulled straight from wikipedia:
"there really is no comparison, because there is nothing that is like marriage except marriage."
Holy crap what a logical and wise argument.
Post by
mindthegap5
I work with 2 gay guys, one of them is married
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.