Jump to content
LTnewsDawg

Wanted: civil talk on gay marriage

Recommended Posts

LTnewsDawg

Is there a better way to resolve the gay marriage debate? I am convinced that the current approach will not lead to a civil resolution of mutual respect. Although I am known as one who does not endorse gay marriage, I am inviting both sides of the debate to look for a less divisive way to resolve it...

 

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pastor of Muppets

Sorry Mr. Butts, but spewing bigotry under the guise of christianity is no way to sit down at the table and have a civil discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thelsa Doom

Sorry Mr. Butts, but spewing bigotry under the guise of christianity is no way to sit down at the table and have a civil discussion.

Civil discussion= totally agreeing with you.

 

Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fishbulb

Civil discussion= totally agreeing with you.

 

Got it.

 

Civil discussion means starting from a standpoint lacking bigotry.  But I can see how it would be difficult for someone who tosses around terms like "chimp out" to understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thelsa Doom

Civil discussion means starting from a standpoint lacking bigotry.  But I can see how it would be difficult for someone who tosses around terms like "chimp out" to understand this.

So you are the arbitrator of what is or isn't bigotry? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatdavebeans

 

Sorry Mr. Butts, but spewing bigotry under the guise of christianity is no way to sit down at the table and have a civil discussion.

Well put! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
culturalinfidel

So you are the arbitrator of what is or isn't bigotry? LOL

 

Actions are.  There are a lot of people that I don't think should get married, but I don't advocate legislation that would prevent them from doing so.  That would cross the line into bigotry.  For example, I personally believe that anyone who has had a divorce should never marry again.  But, I wouldn't support a law preventing them from being married. 

 

Later...CI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatdavebeans

Even if there are legitimate comparisons between the way gay people and people of race have been wrongly treated, it is best not to carry the comparison between race and sexual preference too far.

Otherwise your only "leg to stand on" will be taken out? Steve, it's not a leg. It is a prosthetic. You are standing on hate and bigotry.

 

 

Civil discussion means starting from a standpoint lacking bigotry. But I can see how it would be difficult for someone who tosses around terms like "chimp out" to understand this.

Werd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skeptic2mod

Civil discussion= totally agreeing with you.

 

Got it.

 

We can assume you are opposed to mariage equality.. is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatdavebeans

 

We can assume you are opposed to mariage equality.. is that correct?

Marty seems to be opposed to anything that may make certain segments of the population equal and/or happy, so the answer is most likely "yes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daisy-dog

Can your dog consent to marriage? If so may I come to the wedding?

 

Yes and you will be the first to get one of the pups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatdavebeans

 

Yes and you will be the first to get one of the pups.

How thoughtful and strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52skidoo

Ah marriage has a definition...one man and one woman

 

 

 

 

 

House GOP Drop DOMA Defense - 7/18/13

 

Why can't I marry my dog ?

 

 

you want to have sex with animals?

 

leave it to a conservative...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
o311mc

Sorry Mr. Butts, but spewing bigotry under the guise of christianity is no way to sit down at the table and have a civil discussion.

Mr Butts doesn't present a very decent argument, but on the other hand those who choose not to believe in God seem quick to dismiss any faith based argument? seems to me that the lines are drawn hard and fast by both sides pre-emptive like. I doubt there will ever be civil agreement on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer Vincent

Marriage was an institution long before Christianity, so Chistianity doesn't own it.  If there is a god that disagrees, let him, her, or it appear before the Supreme Court to explain. 

 

Denying two adult people the right to be wed and enjoy the legal benefits of marriage and the benefits of what we call family is just as unjust as laws that deny two people of differet races to marry.  Neither causes any real hardship to anybody else.  If it causes someone to be uncomfortable because of what they believe in their religion, then that's the fault of their religion for making them uncomfortable rather than the fault of people who don't believe that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thatdavebeans

Marriage was an institution long before Christianity, so Chistianity doesn't own it. If there is a god that disagrees, let him, her, or it appear before the Supreme Court to explain.

 

Denying two adult people the right to be wed and enjoy the legal benefits of marriage and the benefits of what we call family is just as unjust as laws that deny two people of differet races to marry. Neither causes any real hardship to anybody else. If it causes someone to be uncomfortable because of what they believe in their religion, then that's the fault of their religion for making them uncomfortable rather than the fault of people who don't believe that.

Amen. I mean right on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
culturalinfidel

Mr Butts doesn't present a very decent argument, but on the other hand those who choose not to believe in God seem quick to dismiss any faith based argument? seems to me that the lines are drawn hard and fast by both sides pre-emptive like. I doubt there will ever be civil agreement on this one.

 

I think the debate gets lost a little bit when it comes to the religious angle. 

 

As a supporter of gay marriage and non-believer in God, I fully support the right of those who are religiously opposed to gay marriage to not enter into such a marriage should it become legal.  If the pro gay marriage, non god believers were somehow pushing or forcing heterosexual religious people into gay marriages, I would be totally against that and would fully support the right of god-believers to enter into heterosexual marriages of their choosing. 

 

I really don't understand what business it is or of what consequence it is to those who believe in whatever God they choose, if a homosexual couple that may or may not believe in the same God chooses to marry.  It would be like me suggesting that churches should be outlawed because I don't believe in God.  The argument comes off as a bit silly to me.

 

Later...CI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daisy-dog

 

I think the debate gets lost a little bit when it comes to the religious angle. 

 

As a supporter of gay marriage and non-believer in God, I fully support the right of those who are religiously opposed to gay marriage to not enter into such a marriage should it become legal.  If the pro gay marriage, non god believers were somehow pushing or forcing heterosexual religious people into gay marriages, I would be totally against that and would fully support the right of god-believers to enter into heterosexual marriages of their choosing. 

 

I really don't understand what business it is or of what consequence it is to those who believe in whatever God they choose, if a homosexual couple that may or may not believe in the same God chooses to marry.  It would be like me suggesting that churches should be outlawed because I don't believe in God.  The argument comes off as a bit silly to me.

 

Later...CI

 

Are you against polygamy ?

 

I am not because it is not my business what people do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer Vincent

Are you against polygamy ?

 

I am not because it is not my business what people do.

I'm against communities that shun the left over men who might be competition or don't want to be part of a polygamous community while the rich and powerful take multiple wives.  It doesn't affect me, but I have empathy for those who have been ostracized. 

 

http://familyscholars.org/2012/08/30/the-many-differences-between-polygamy-and-same-sex-marriage/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
culturalinfidel

Are you against polygamy ?

 

I am not because it is not my business what people do.

 

Not particularly if all parties are legally consenting, and certainly not form a moral standpoint.  However, all laws related to the dissolution of such relationships would still apply for each individual spouse.  For example, if Mr. Bigman wants to marry 3 chicks.  And at some point in the marriage it is discovered that Mr. Bigman is cheating on them with a 4th, and the three wives decide to divorce, each of the three wives should each get individual divorce settlements.  Essentially Mr. Bigman would be hit with three simultaneous divorces.  Take that Newt.

 

Later...CI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ToldYouSo

What is the state's interest in marriage in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nvh

What is the state's interest in marriage in the first place?

 

Regulating a legal contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pastor of Muppets

What is the state's interest in marriage in the first place?

social engineering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...