NY Gay Marriages

Cripes are we gonna have to watch gay marriages in NY all day today? No, I'm not a homophobe. I've had gay friends I would have preferred civil uniions than marriage, but I do believe they deserve all the rights and responsibilities that marriage affords in any case.
I just don't wanna watch it all day lol

I don't quite follow, is the issue them being allowed to marry or that because it's been legalised or such people are jumping on the opportunity and there's lots of instances happening on one day or? I don't get it you're annoyed that gay people are getting married it seems.

And who's making you watch these marriages, i didn't think you were under any obligation.

lol ok I'm not *that* annoyed. but I do watch cnn pretty much all day, I'm a news junkie. I have a feeling they're going to be showing these marriages all day, yeah. Like I said though, I am against gay MARRIAGE. No problem with gay lifestyle, and I support civil unions. But I would support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man/one woman etc. That's just how I feel about it, but not so strongly that I would be an activist or anything. I state my opinion once in a while like this, and I vote when it comes up (Maine, 3 times now). It comes out how it comes out. I don't have to like it, but I would never discriminate.

Marriage is nothing but a contract affording rights and benefits, nothing more. Why must it be one man one woman? Why do they have more rights than a man and a man. Why not ban all marriages and make everything a civil partnership so there's no discrimination. Why the discrimination?

I've never been offered a single valid reason why someone is against gay marriage other than the "i don't like it", never an actual reason other than form the religious nutters who claim their texts forbid it. We're not talking families and children, we're talking a contract affording rights benefits and protections. Either we're all equal or you wish to discriminate. In the UK there is currently a joint campaign going where a bunch of gay couples are fighting to be allowed to marry alongside a bunch of straight couples who wish for the right to enter a civil partnership.

so again, you have the choice not to watch them but you are anyway and it's annoying you as a result, change the channel.. if you can't then i'd be more concerned about the addiction to CNN than the annoyance with gays being married.

You're right about changing the channel. I can certainly do that if it annoys me.

As for my position on gay marriage, it is not just because "I don't like it.". It is a redefinition of marriage. Not merely an extension of a civil right, as some would argue. It is redefining what a marriage is. Ok, so be it. You want to redefine it to include gays, the majority rules in our society (more or less). However, I really don't see how you can stop there in a legal sense. What about a man and two women? Brother and sister? There is no limit where it could go.
"But those relationships are illegal" you might say. Well, so was gay marriage in NY yesterday. Think about this. We'll take the more absurd example, brother and sister. Or aunt/newphew. Whatever. What if it isn't incest, but for other reasons they might seek marriage. Keeping important property in the family for example, or any number of reasons I can't conceive at the moment. What I am saying is, from a legal standpoint (not a moral one), you open the door to these things by redefining marriage. With a narrow definition (one man/one woman) it is cut and dried. Start making exceptions/changes, then how do you argue about further expansion later on?

tet1953 said:

I don't have to like it, but I would never discriminate.

Click to expand...

defining the union between two gays as something inferior to the union between two straights is the essence of discrimination.

I never said inferior. It is different. Hence the redefinition.

tet1953 said:

I never said inferior. It is different. Hence the redefinition.

Click to expand...

if it's not inferior, then why not argue for gays to have marriage and straights can be content with civil unions?

[video=youtube;FSQQK2Vuf9Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q[/video]

tet1953 said:

It is a redefinition of marriage.

Click to expand...

in ancient greece and rome, marriage was simply a social institution without much romance.

the israelites used it to basically keep women as property.

the church then got into the whole issue in medieval europe.

eventually, it became an institution recognized by the state.

marriage has been redefined over and over and over again.

buff up on your history, champ.

I thought going Homosexual was so you did not have to get married? I guess they want to be miserable too.
When folks ask if my girl and I are married I say "NO, I thought that was for Homo's" LOL!

tet1953 said:

I never said inferior. It is different. Hence the redefinition.

Click to expand...

how is it different? 1+1= adoption, happens alot regardless who the married people are. Why should a marriage have anything to do with the government, at all. No one should get a tax break for choosing to have children, nobody should get a tax break for living with a partner, these things made sense when it was realistic for one person to stay home and take care of the house and kids, but in this day and age its either both parents work all day or the house gets foreclosed, Why should I have to pay more for your child's education than you do, especially if I have chosen not to have a child of my own.

marriage means what ever you want it to mean, the truth is that marriage in our society has been used as a predicted breeding program, so the government knows how the populus is changing,

uh oh to many single people, bette spread some marriage propaghanda, cause someone in a committed relationship is less likely to think for themselves, and more likely to think for their family,

its alot easier to scare a parent into giving up his gun to protect his children from it, than it is to get a bachelor to give up his gun for his own protection.

UncleBuck said:

in ancient greece and rome, marriage was simply a social institution without much romance.

the israelites used it to basically keep women as property.

the church then got into the whole issue in medieval europe.

eventually, it became an institution recognized by the state.

marriage has been redefined over and over and over again.

buff up on your history, champ.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and Utah had to redefine their idea of marriage before they could join the union,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community

i am actually ok with polygamy and think it should be legal, even though i think these women who do it are crazy and i cringe when i watch them on TV trying to act like their lives are on par with more traditional partnerships.

tet1953 said:

lol ok I'm not *that* annoyed. but I do watch cnn pretty much all day, I'm a news junkie. I have a feeling they're going to be showing these marriages all day, yeah. Like I said though, I am against gay MARRIAGE. No problem with gay lifestyle, and I support civil unions. But I would support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man/one woman etc. That's just how I feel about it, but not so strongly that I would be an activist or anything. I state my opinion once in a while like this, and I vote when it comes up (Maine, 3 times now). It comes out how it comes out. I don't have to like it, but I would never discriminate.

Click to expand...

You do realize CNN is not news, right? I mean most of what you see on T.V is Propaganda or subtle suggestions and viewpoints of an Editor / Producer. Not saying it did not happen, rather you only see what they want you to see. PBS even has it's own slant on what it reports. Like the War, you do not see the bags of money changing hands or young men being killed by training drills or freindly fire, rather reports of 23 dead and peace talks are in the works. Or Peace works or failing because a Contractor need another 1/2 Billion from our Tax money and the one passing it out gets reciprocity.
That would be News.

UncleBuck said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community

i am actually ok with polygamy and think it should be legal, even though i think these women who do it are crazy and i cringe when i watch them on TV trying to act like their lives are on par with more traditional partnerships.

Click to expand...

I'm a descendant of Mormon polygamy. My father's family came from the east with Brigham Young. Ended up colonizing northern Mexico and then getting chased out by Pancho Villa. They settled in New Mexico where my mother's family have been living for hundreds of years. Anyway, My great-grandmother was my great-grandfather's second wife and she had her own business as did the first wife. She ran a store while my great-grandmother ran a hostel. From what I read from their journals, it was a pretty happy arrangement.

I'm glad the church no longer follows that particular doctrine. I don't think I could handle a gaggle of sister-mothers.

its a free land
go do wtf you want
if you like dick? so be it
and it shouldn't take a government to approve that.