Same sex marriages!

Dita.Von.Teese.:

spill_no_sick:

NeoSteph:

''-this post doesn't matter because there will be a bunch of stereotypical fucking idiots who have been brainwashed by liberals (I know conservatives brainwash too) who will say, "they r teh sam as strate copels so they shold have teh sam rites" and I will flame them to the fullest extent of GSB law''

great, now that you made page 38 no one will see my post

Like they would read it anyways...

even though I said it as a joke you're right
now the entire issue is again boiled down into one sentence and I'll get pissed off in a week and say the same thing that Steph will read....screw this

Bloodraine:

beans:

Bloodraine:

Homosexuals are no different that anyone else.

They look the same, they act the same, they are exactly the same as heterosexuals, in every respect bar one. Yet they are still treated differently.

Of course they should have the right to adopt children, to be married, to do everything a heterosexual couple can do.

for starters they dont look anything like the same, everyone is an individual, they definately dont act the same,

and they shouldnt be able to get married its against nature they cant make their own babies its just all wrong.

and please dont reply back talking in a language i dont understand I.E. huge words that make you sound like your right.

I would passionately advise you to seek counsel from a thesaurus or dictionary if you find my grammatical composture behemothically advanced for your intellectual capacity.

I do believe your mentality is abhorrently medieval and I rebuke your mindset. My point in case is that homosexuals are of the same element as the average anthropoid and thus should be treated as such. Thankfully, the majority of most reasonable people would acquiesce with me. Love is love; no matter what gender persues it. I can only optimize that the rest of humanity shares this same aspiration although I do not bemoan the fact that you yourself have chosen such a thorny path of close mindedness.

I love you.
k.

Bedroom Gangsta:

Bloodraine:

beans:

Bloodraine:

Homosexuals are no different that anyone else.

They look the same, they act the same, they are exactly the same as heterosexuals, in every respect bar one. Yet they are still treated differently.

Of course they should have the right to adopt children, to be married, to do everything a heterosexual couple can do.

for starters they dont look anything like the same, everyone is an individual, they definately dont act the same,

and they shouldnt be able to get married its against nature they cant make their own babies its just all wrong.

and please dont reply back talking in a language i dont understand I.E. huge words that make you sound like your right.

I would passionately advise you to seek counsel from a thesaurus or dictionary if you find my grammatical composture behemothically advanced for your intellectual capacity.

I do believe your mentality is abhorrently medieval and I rebuke your mindset. My point in case is that homosexuals are of the same element as the average anthropoid and thus should be treated as such. Thankfully, the majority of most reasonable people would acquiesce with me. Love is love; no matter what gender persues it. I can only optimize that the rest of humanity shares this same aspiration although I do not bemoan the fact that you yourself have chosen such a thorny path of close mindedness.

I love you.
k.

yeah, but she still can't fool me

spill_no_sick:

yeah, but she still can't fool me

I was joking, buddy.
I mean, come on, it would take some sort of retard to think I was serious.

Bloodraine:

spill_no_sick:

yeah, but she still can't fool me

I was joking, buddy.
I mean, come on, it would take some sort of retard to think I was serious.

PFFFT whatever, what kind of crazy alcoholic would even tell you using a thesaurus for every word was a good idea.

NeoSteph:

Well i could lie and debate it but i do believe the sanctity of marriage shoudl stay between man and wife.

I'm just going to nitpick here.
But, assuming you're talking about the Christian sacrament of Marriage, that should only be for a Man and Wife who are Christians.
Because I can't get 'married', even if I wanted to get 'married' to a man. Which is fair enough, ja?. Heterosexual atheists seem to be allowed to call it 'marriage' though, and nobody kicks up a fuss.

Dita.Von.Teese.:

PFFFT whatever, what kind of crazy alcoholic would even tell you using a thesaurus for every word was a good idea.

You sure didn't give me that idea, C, on no

Bloodraine:

NeoSteph:

Well i could lie and debate it but i do believe the sanctity of marriage shoudl stay between man and wife.

I'm just going to nitpick here.
But, assuming you're talking about the Christian sacrament of Marriage, that should only be for a Man and Wife who are Christians.
Because I can't get 'married', even if I wanted to get 'married' to a man. Which is fair enough, ja?. Heterosexual atheists seem to be allowed to call it 'marriage' though, and nobody kicks up a fuss.

Dita.Von.Teese.:

PFFFT whatever, what kind of crazy alcoholic would even tell you using a thesaurus for every word was a good idea.

You sure didn't give me that idea, C, on no

that's because marriage was started as a religious tradition, and the Jews decided that it should athiests should be allowed to see "the wonderful gift of God" and it was their way of converting people

but then we violated seperation of Church and State by giving people benefits (State) for getting married (Church) and no one kicked up a fuss, and yes, we went wrong there

but that was the Church changing the State
now, saying that we should allow homosexuals to marry, we are allowing the State to change the Church

two wrongs don't make a right here

honestly, what is so hard with saying, "look, all dedicated couples fill out paper work and get benefits and get divorced five years later. As for marriage, that's for the Church to decide, as long as they aren't breaking laws we aren't getting involved"

I hope that was breif enough for people to read

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

In Memory...:

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

no one said that
and that is a different topic

homosexuals parents are actual fine with me

but marriage was started by Jews
the U.S. government started giving benefits for getting married
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
we should give benefits to couples who request it, but marriage should be kept in the Church, no help from the government

also, the government should not be allowed to change the rules of the Church if the Church isn't breaking any laws

and they aren't, so yes, marriage is wrong in the U.S.
but it would also be wrong to tell the government to change the rules of the Church

spill_no_sick:

In Memory...:

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

no one said that
and that is a different topic

homosexuals parents are actual fine with me

but marriage was started by Jews
the U.S. government started giving benefits for getting married
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
we should give benefits to couples who request it, but marriage should be kept in the Church, no help from the government

also, the government should not be allowed to change the rules of the Church if the Church isn't breaking any laws

and they aren't, so yes, marriage is wrong in the U.S.
but it would also be wrong to tell the government to change the rules of the Church

Lucifers Angel:

Girls need a mum and boys need a dad.

First page, it was said.

In Memory...:

spill_no_sick:

In Memory...:

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

no one said that
and that is a different topic

homosexuals parents are actual fine with me

but marriage was started by Jews
the U.S. government started giving benefits for getting married
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
we should give benefits to couples who request it, but marriage should be kept in the Church, no help from the government

also, the government should not be allowed to change the rules of the Church if the Church isn't breaking any laws

and they aren't, so yes, marriage is wrong in the U.S.
but it would also be wrong to tell the government to change the rules of the Church

Lucifers Angel:

Girls need a mum and boys need a dad.

First page, it was said.

oh yeah

but you know, it is completely wrong
and also a completely different topic...I was just pointing out that not too far into this thread we decided to make another one specifically for homosexual parents

spill_no_sick:

In Memory...:

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

no one said that
and that is a different topic

homosexuals parents are actual fine with me

but marriage was started by Jews
the U.S. government started giving benefits for getting married
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
we should give benefits to couples who request it, but marriage should be kept in the Church, no help from the government

also, the government should not be allowed to change the rules of the Church if the Church isn't breaking any laws

and they aren't, so yes, marriage is wrong in the U.S.
but it would also be wrong to tell the government to change the rules of the Church

It started as a Jewish thing. Alright.

But now there is marriage in all religions.

And now marriage is a social thing too (state). Otherwise there wouldn't be married atheist, as some said earlier. The reasons why some athesit people get married can be multiple. However benefits are a real practical thing as well.

For example: A guy from England goes to Canada to visit some family there, and there he falls in love with a Canadian girl. The love is mutual. The decide they want to spend the rest of their lives together. Without marriage they couldn't do that as easily because they have different nationalities. It'd be a real pain in the ass for the one to become to the nationality of the other so they could live in the same country together. But they get married and it's the end of the problem. She becomes Britsh and he becames Canadian by law, and they can then choose where to live and settle in and live a happy life together and have a houndred kids.

*But* we are discussing gay marriage here right, so what law in the USA or the UK says that homosexuality is wrong? No law says that, right? so why don't they legalize gay marriage if being homsexual is totally fine? The only logical reason why I think it wouldn't be legalized is because catholic chruch and msot churches don't admit gay marriage or gay people at all. Now isn't that uncostitutional?

CristhyneS:

spill_no_sick:

In Memory...:

I think it's only fair that same sex couples are allowed to marry and adopt children.

Saying that girls need a mom and boys need a dad is wrong. What about single moms with a boy(s). Why isn't that wrong then?

no one said that
and that is a different topic

homosexuals parents are actual fine with me

but marriage was started by Jews
the U.S. government started giving benefits for getting married
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
we should give benefits to couples who request it, but marriage should be kept in the Church, no help from the government

also, the government should not be allowed to change the rules of the Church if the Church isn't breaking any laws

and they aren't, so yes, marriage is wrong in the U.S.
but it would also be wrong to tell the government to change the rules of the Church

It started as a Jewish thing. Alright.

But now there is marriage in all religions.

And now marriage is a social thing too (state). Otherwise there wouldn't be married atheist, as some said earlier. The reasons why some athesit people get married can be multiple. However benefits are a real practical thing as well.

For example: A guy from England goes to Canada to visit some family there, and there he falls in love with a Canadian girl. The love is mutual. The decide they want to spend the rest of their lives together. Without marriage they couldn't do that as easily because they have different nationalities. It'd be a real pain in the ass for the one to become to the nationality of the other so they could live in the same country together. But they get married and it's the end of the problem. She becomes Britsh and he becames Canadian by law, and they can then choose where to live and settle in and live a happy life together and have a houndred kids.

*But* we are discussing gay marriage here right, so what law in the USA or the UK says that homosexuality is wrong? No law says that, right? so why don't they legalize gay marriage if being homsexual is totally fine? The only logical reason why I think it wouldn't be legalized is because catholic chruch and msot churches don't admit gay marriage or gay people at all. Now isn't that uncostitutional?

alright, it started as a way for the Jews to convert other religions

then, it was fine

but a few hundred years ago the government started to get invovled

THAT IS WHEN IT BECAME UNCONSTITUTIONAL

now, what you're suggesting is that the government should change the rules of marriage

that is also unconstitutional

reason #1 that gay marriage is unconstitutional = well, marriage is unconstitutional
marriage should stay with the Church, and the government should not change it OR give benefits regarding it

reason #2 = the government doesn't have the right to change the rules of marriage since it should be kept in the Church to begin with
it would be like taxing Bat Mitzvah earnings

and you're right, couples who want to spend the rest of their lives together should get benefits from the government, and you're right: marriage is socially accepted as "money from government" as opposed to its original "gift from God"
it would be like athiests getting Bar Mitvahs and then one hundred years later it's as Jewish as Christmas and marriage are Christian

so yes, the government should give those benefits to couples who want to spend their lives together
it shouldn't require marriage
and I'm sure homosexuals don't want to bother the Church any more than the Church wants to be run by the government

I never knew you earned anything from a Bar Mitzvah
Interesting.

Bloodraine:

I never knew you earned anything from a Bar Mitzvah
Interesting.

you get thousands of dollars in gifts and money...but not from the government so my analagy isn't quite correct...but the point is the government shouldn't give money to the Church (or Temple or Seminary) and it shouldn't try to change any of their rules either (unless it is against the law

I ♥ gay people. They have a right to marry people who are the same sex as them. Conservative people are so stupid. No one cares about tradition. Gay people need to be respected. It's not their fault they were born like that.

Life Is But A Dream:

I ♥ gay people. They have a right to marry people who are the same sex as them. Conservative people are so stupid. No one cares about tradition. Gay people need to be respected. It's not their fault they were born like that.

I think Nick might break something when he reads this post.
Oh boy.

#1 Well, Conservatives aren't stupid. They just have different beliefs.
#2 You don't love gay people. You can't 'love' such a huge group. Gay people do have personalities after all.
#3 They actually don't have a right to 'marry'. Because if you take a look at Lev. it says gays can't get married, which means marriage is a no-go.

I'm going to finish this some time when it isn't 3 AM.

Bloodraine:

Life Is But A Dream:

I ♥ gay people. They have a right to marry people who are the same sex as them. Conservative people are so stupid. No one cares about tradition. Gay people need to be respected. It's not their fault they were born like that.

I think Nick might break something when he reads this post.
Oh boy.

#1 Well, Conservatives aren't stupid. They just have different beliefs.
#2 You don't love gay people. You can't 'love' such a huge group. Gay people do have personalities after all.
#3 They actually don't have a right to 'marry'. Because if you take a look at Lev. it says gays can't get married, which means marriage is a no-go.

I'm going to finish this some time when it isn't 3 AM.

I thinking either neck or pelvis.


and lol at 3am

The only people i would ever call stupid is someone that believes in something they know nothing about. Firstly being conservative doesn't mean straight away your against gay marriage it's just an aspect of that concept.

secondly I care about tradition, and seeing as every year people celebrate, christmas, easter, hannukah, halloween, 4th of july, which all counts as tradition the rest of the world does to.

thirdly I've met some arrogant nasty pieces of shit people, who happen to be gay. now that doesn't mean i'm saying all gay people are like that. So how can you claim to love them all.


''Gay people need to be respected. It's not their fault they were born like that.''


so you 'love' gay people but you see homosexuality as a sickness?




and fourthly for 14647642222 time in this thread.

The sanctity of marriage is a religious ceremony that was adopted by the state. I am totally for civil partnerships because basically that is two people entering into an agreement that looks after boths interest. i also think civil partnerships should be offered for non sexual partners but thats another matter.

But not me, not you, not the state has the right to tell the church an institution that lives by the law of god that they have to change there beliefs because it is no longer politically correct.

civil partnerships gives gays the same rights as straights, there is no need to call it marriage.

Bloodraine:

Life Is But A Dream:

I ♥ gay people. They have a right to marry people who are the same sex as them. Conservative people are so stupid. No one cares about tradition. Gay people need to be respected. It's not their fault they were born like that.

I think Nick might break something when he reads this post.
Oh boy.

#1 Well, Conservatives aren't stupid. They just have different beliefs.
#2 You don't love gay people. You can't 'love' such a huge group. Gay people do have personalities after all.
#3 They actually don't have a right to 'marry'. Because if you take a look at Lev. it says gays can't get married, which means marriage is a no-go.

I'm going to finish this some time when it isn't 3 AM.

due to their name, signature, avatar, and posts in the gun section, I already have no respect for them and do not take them seriously and I actually pity their stupidity and the fact that they are a parrot (not sheep, overused metaphor)

whatever they here around other people they just repeat it

spill_no_sick:

CristhyneS:

It started as a Jewish thing. Alright.

But now there is marriage in all religions.

And now marriage is a social thing too (state). Otherwise there wouldn't be married atheist, as some said earlier. The reasons why some athesit people get married can be multiple. However benefits are a real practical thing as well.

For example: A guy from England goes to Canada to visit some family there, and there he falls in love with a Canadian girl. The love is mutual. The decide they want to spend the rest of their lives together. Without marriage they couldn't do that as easily because they have different nationalities. It'd be a real pain in the ass for the one to become to the nationality of the other so they could live in the same country together. But they get married and it's the end of the problem. She becomes Britsh and he becames Canadian by law, and they can then choose where to live and settle in and live a happy life together and have a houndred kids.

*But* we are discussing gay marriage here right, so what law in the USA or the UK says that homosexuality is wrong? No law says that, right? so why don't they legalize gay marriage if being homsexual is totally fine? The only logical reason why I think it wouldn't be legalized is because catholic chruch and msot churches don't admit gay marriage or gay people at all. Now isn't that uncostitutional?

alright, it started as a way for the Jews to convert other religions

then, it was fine

but a few hundred years ago the government started to get invovled

THAT IS WHEN IT BECAME UNCONSTITUTIONAL

now, what you're suggesting is that the government should change the rules of marriage

that is also unconstitutional

reason #1 that gay marriage is unconstitutional = well, marriage is unconstitutional
marriage should stay with the Church, and the government should not change it OR give benefits regarding it

reason #2 = the government doesn't have the right to change the rules of marriage since it should be kept in the Church to begin with
it would be like taxing Bat Mitzvah earnings

and you're right, couples who want to spend the rest of their lives together should get benefits from the government, and you're right: marriage is socially accepted as "money from government" as opposed to its original "gift from God"
it would be like athiests getting Bar Mitvahs and then one hundred years later it's as Jewish as Christmas and marriage are Christian

so yes, the government should give those benefits to couples who want to spend their lives together
it shouldn't require marriage
and I'm sure homosexuals don't want to bother the Church any more than the Church wants to be run by the government

I'm not too sure if I explained myself properly or if I even tried to explain this at all or not.

I'm not asking for goverment to make chruch accept gay marriage. I think goverment should legalize gay marriage.

If a homosexual couple walks in a chruch to get married but the priest says "no, I can't get you two married because it goes agaisnt my religion." Tha'ts perfectly alright and valid.

But if a judge tells the same couple, "I'm sorry, I can't get you two married." That's wrong. What's the excuse for the judge to say that. That the constitution doesn't allow marriage? And why doesn't the constituion allow homesexual marriage if being homsexual is perefectly legal?

Why doesn't the constituion allow homesexual marriage?


It sounds to me like a lot of you don't agree with marriage in general. And that's alright. But the discusion here is gay marriage.

And I don't see a logical reason (very different from valid), apart from a religious one, to not legalize gay marriage as long as heterosexual marriage is legal to the eyes of the state. (I'm not saying that chruch should allow gay marrige too).

But since some of you justify chruch not allowing gay marrige, think of this for a moment:

Not too long ago married people who decided to get ligally divorced weren't accepted by religion. That until a pope came and said that getting divorced was okay for religion, even though that *to the eyes of god* two peorsons married in the chruch would always be married. Maybe in a few more decades a pope might say that homosexuality is okay.