Question Details	Asked By	Asked On
Gay Marriage 2	Petesharky	05/18/04
Gay marriage is a choice that should be left to the participants. No one judges a straight couple who marries even if the guy is 5' tall and weighs 500lbs and the girl is a stunning beauty queen. It is not the business of the Church especially who houses so many closet homosexuals that just never knew how to handle their feelings and went into priest hood only to take out their frustrations on young boys and other priests. What business is it of yours who gets married to who? What gives you or anyone else the right to say what is right or wrong, and to use the Bible to promote your hatred and prejudice? Ignorant and stupid is no way to go through life. Who are you to decide who can be happy and who can't just because you think what they are doing is wrong? I am sure I will get a load of quotes from the bible so I will post the first 2. "Let ye who lives without sin cast the first stone." How about "Judge not lest ye be judged." My oldest brother who is 14 years older than me is gay and if he came home tomorrow and said that he was getting married I would be happy for him. Pete
Clarification/Follow-up by Petesharky on 05/18/04 1:44 pm: Steve, I have gone to that site and I see what you are talking about. But lets take a poll on how many people want their taxes to go up next year and I bet almost all would say no. Yet the government passes new tax laws and increases oall the time. I hate to keep using Black Americans as an example but in the early part of the century if you took a poll as to how many Americans wanted Black Americans to be treated as equal? I have a feeling it would be a strong oppisition. Yet the civil rights movement happened anyway and though a lot of blood was spilled and hatred expressed they did finally win their equal right. Hatred is hatred. How many people polled answered no strictly because they strongly are opposed to a gay marriage and how many because they hate queers and dykes? Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 05/18/04 2:24 pm: Pete, We're not talking about fiscal matters, and the law defines your tax burden just as the law defines marriage as between one man and one woman...or at least it did. Courts do not have the right to legislate. Mayors and county clerks do not have the right to pick and choose which laws their office upholds and which laws their office subverts. While I understand your position, you should be disturbed that issues such as this are being force-fed to us by pressing the issue in the courts, circumventing the legislative process and totally ignoring the will of the people. Gays already had an equal right to enter into a legal marriage. It is not discrimination, it is not segregation, it is not oppression. Nobody is advocating owning gays as slaves, forcing them to sit in the back of the bus, drink from their own fountains, sending them to their own schools, keeping them from visiting their partner in the hospital or knowing about their condition. Calling it hatred to defend the institution of marriage is absurd, and frankly I'm fed up with "enlightened" people equating those of us with even a hint of conservative values as bigoted, ignorant and stupid. Gays want understanding and acceptance, fine. Gays want the right to a "civil union," fine. Gays want domestic partner benefits, fine. Gays want equal protection under the law, fine. Gays want to force me into accepting whatever definition of marriage and sexuality no matter how bizarre, "punish" me for defending the only historical and workable definition of marriage and force feed their agenda on me...that crosses the line. It was just a short while ago that civil unions supposedly would've satisfied the homosexual community, but it's clear from their own words they won't be satisfied until their entire agenda is in place, and that offends me. What gives gays the right to be "radically reordering society's view of reality?" Steve
Answered By		Answered On
Itsdb		05/18/04
Pete, This is not about "who can be happy and who can't just because you think what they are doing is wrong." It's not about using "the Bible to promote your hatred and prejudice." It's about redefining a centuries old institution recognized cross-culturally that can only be "fully functional" between a man and a woman. It's about the courts increasing encroachment of the legislative process by making laws instead of enforcing them. It's about public officials, like the mayor of San Francisco deciding which laws to uphold and which to ignore. What gives him the right to say which law is right and which is wrong? It's about the will of the people. In the most recent polls as much as 64% of the American public oppose gay marriage, and as much as 46% oppose any form of legal recognition. http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm It's about an agenda that goes far beyond discrimination: "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. ... Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. ... As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. ...In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. ... We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality." --Paula Ettelbrick, "Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?", in William Rubenstein, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405. "Because American marriage is inextricable from Christianity, it admits participants as Noah let animals onto the ark. But it doesn't have to be that way. In 1972 the National Coalition of Gay Organizations demanded the 'repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.' Would polygamy invite abuse of child brides, as feminists in Muslim countries and prosecutors in Mormon Utah charge? No. Group marriage could comprise any combination of genders." -- Judith Levine, "Stop the Wedding!: Why Gay Marriage Isn't Radical Enough," The Village Voice, July 23-29, 2003. Nobody is saying people can't be happy, determining who can share their life with who, that gays can't adopt and be good parents, and the notion that marriage "benefits" are at stake is spurious. Now, with that said I have gay friends and I wish them all the happiness in the world, but don't tell me I have to recognize or endorse their "marriage." Around 2/3 of America agrees with me, so I guess the bigoted, "Ignorant and stupid" are the majority here. Steve

Additional Options and ratings are only visible when you login!