+389

It's ridiculous that we're even voting on if gay people can marry or not. You can be against homosexuality all you want, but it is just weird that in this modern day we're voting on wheather or not a group of people get to do something everybody else gets to do. Like, what the fuck society? amirite?

91%Yeah You Are9%No Way
dickys avatar
Share
15 50
The voters have decided that dicky is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

I know this has been posting constantly before, but it is disgusting when you think about it.

Basically, a straight married man can vote to tear a couple apart, because no matter the outcome of Prop H8, his wife will still be his wife - where other's aren't that lucky.

A straight person knows that if their partner dies, they will have custody of their own children that they raised, while voting to take that off other families.

Simons avatar Simon Yeah You Are +19Reply
@Simon I know this has been posting constantly before, but it is disgusting when you think about it. Basically, a...

I was watching My Life on the D List and they were doing a rally. This man's spouse had cancer and he wasn't allowed to visit him in the hopsital because they weren't related or anything. Wtf? That should never happen.

twisted_memoriess avatar twisted_memories Yeah You Are +22Reply

"You can't eat pigs! It's a sin!"
"Why don't you just shut the fuck up about my life?"

"You can't let gays marry! It's a sin!"
"Holey shit, you've got a point!"

Double-standard much?

FlyingGuineaPigs avatar FlyingGuineaPig Yeah You Are +17Reply

It personally offends me when someone is against gay marriage. I don't go around telling people who they can and can't love or marry, I wish people would stop doing that with me.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are +12Reply

If you are against gay marriage, that's fine, but don't think you can prohibit someone from doing it

AtheisticMystics avatar AtheisticMystic Yeah You Are +10Reply

If you're against gay marriage don't have one and shut up. Simple as that.

annies avatar annie Yeah You Are +8Reply

Just want to start off by saying that I'm 100% for gay marriage.

But technically, the government isn't telling a group of people that they can't do something everybody else can do. You can get married if you're gay, you just can't be a man and marry another man (in most states). It isn't "gays getting married" that isn't allowed, it's "gay marriage."

@ihatesocks Just want to start off by saying that I'm 100% for gay marriage. But technically, the government isn't telling a...

"It isn't ''gays getting married'' that isn't allowed, it's ''gay marriage.'' "

Are you stupid or

aZIGAZIGAHHHs avatar aZIGAZIGAHHH Yeah You Are -3Reply
@aZIGAZIGAHHH "It isn't ''gays getting married'' that isn't allowed, it's ''gay marriage.'' " Are you stupid or

I'm just saying that the way OP worded the post makes it incorrect. The law doesn't say gay people can't get married, so it's not telling a group of people that they can't do something everyone else can do.

@ihatesocks I'm just saying that the way OP worded the post makes it incorrect. The law doesn't say gay people can't get...

Though it kinda is, in that it's saying you can't marry who you love (if they're the same gender as you).

@twisted_memories Though it kinda is, in that it's saying you can't marry who you love (if they're the same gender as you).

I know. I'm definitely not saying it's right, just that the way this post is worded isn't correct.

@ihatesocks I know. I'm definitely not saying it's right, just that the way this post is worded isn't correct.

I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying that if you want to get even more technical, it is worded correctly. Does that make sense? I dunno, I get what you're saying.

Maybe this sounds stupid, and off topic a little. Maybe I'll get voted down. Whatever.
But wouldn't it be cool if there was no such thing as actual "marriage", and two people could just love each other freely, and both the government AND religion could be kept out of it? Why do religion and the law have to be involved in a relationship we have with a person? I know this sounds ridiculous. Because, of course, dishonesty and infidelity (and other common factors that ruin marriages) would have to cease to exist, and that's extremely unlikely to happen.
Eh, just a thought. I'll close my hippy dippy mouth and get back in the kitchen.

aZIGAZIGAHHHs avatar aZIGAZIGAHHH Yeah You Are +3Reply
@aZIGAZIGAHHH Maybe this sounds stupid, and off topic a little. Maybe I'll get voted down. Whatever. But wouldn't it be cool if...

See in theory that sounds amazing, but the amount of rights granted to married couples is what makes marriage really worht while. I said in an earlier comment that Kathy Griffin says there are over 1,000 rights granted to married couples that are not granted in a union, and thus even more for those not in a union. Even common law marriages have some spousal rights that "single" people don't have.

Whether or weather used incorrectly I can understand...but wheather? Seriously?

Again? Really... a post like this makes the homepage every week.

inb4 debate

Anonymous +1Reply

Haters gonna hate.

Well, the good old document Universal Human Rights says that no government can deny marriage.

So yeah, I don't really see why this has to be an issue here.

Plus, what kind of society do we live in where we honor a man as a hero if he kills another during war but will shun and hate that same man if he wants to marry another man?

I think government shouldn't have any say in any marriage. No marriage licenses at all, no fee and if it still affects taxes then there can be a standard form that the administrator of the marriage fills out and you send in with your tax form.

@ThatOneNut This is retarded. Who would you like to control marriage?

Why does marriage need to be controlled? Churches can decide to marry whomever they want to marry, and justices of the peace will just marry whomever. Really if you look at the origins of marriage it's religious, so the state doesn't need to be that involved. Even if you're atheist, there's no reason for the government to get in your business.

@Sqwancho Why does marriage need to be controlled? Churches can decide to marry whomever they want to marry, and justices of...

What about the benefits that come with marriage? The government controls those benefits...

@twisted_memories What about the benefits that come with marriage? The government controls those benefits...

Taxes: It would be solved by the form filled out by the administrator of the marriage.
Inheritance: Put it in your will.
Anything else?

@Sqwancho Taxes: It would be solved by the form filled out by the administrator of the marriage. Inheritance: Put it in your...

The right to visit your spouse in the hospital, to have full parental control should your spouse die, I'm pretty sure that there are actually somewhere over 1,000 rights (according to Kathy Griffin) granted to married couples that are not granted any other way (i.e., a union, or whatever you're saying).

@twisted_memories The right to visit your spouse in the hospital, to have full parental control should your spouse die, I'm pretty...

Your source is Kathy Griffin?
And I'm sorry, I don't remember how this went from not paying a marriage tax to civil unions. Which, in most places are almost the same except by name. But that's not my point. My point is that government should not be so involved with marriage.

@Sqwancho Your source is Kathy Griffin? And I'm sorry, I don't remember how this went from not paying a marriage tax to...

Yes. That is my source. I'm sure I could look it up, but I didn't want to.

Anyway, the government should be involved because of all those rights. What would taking the government involvement out of marriage make it? What would your rights be as a married couple? Would there be any, seeing as the government grants those rights? Or would you simply be a long-term couple? Marriage is bringing two people together legally, emotionally, and sometimes religiously. You need the legal rights or else you've only got part of a marriage.

@twisted_memories Yes. That is my source. I'm sure I could look it up, but I didn't want to. Anyway, the government should be...

Marriage is traditionally a religious rite. And regarding hospital rights, that'd all be up to the hospital.
I don't think taking away the government involvement would change those rights, and even if they were gone it's not only part of a marriage. Those are just some physical benefits of marriage.

I just want to get rid of a few unnecessary steps. Nothing else.

@Sqwancho Marriage is traditionally a religious rite. And regarding hospital rights, that'd all be up to the hospital. I...

So what exactly would a marriage be? What rights would you have as a couple? Because rights are granted by law granted by government... So I'm not quite sure exactly what you think marriage would be.

@twisted_memories So what exactly would a marriage be? What rights would you have as a couple? Because rights are granted by law...

A marriage would be the same thing, eliminating the first step prior to the marriage to be granted a license. The same forms would be given to the same administers, and the rest of the process would be the same. If marriage licenses weren't involved, then government couldn't stop a couple from marrying.

@twisted_memories So what exactly would a marriage be? What rights would you have as a couple? Because rights are granted by law...

A marriage would be the same thing, eliminating the first step prior to the marriage to be granted a license. The same forms would be given to the same administers, and the rest of the process would be the same. If marriage licenses weren't involved, then government couldn't stop a couple from marrying.

And the reason why I asked about Kathy Griffith is because she's a comedian. I wouldn't take what they say as fact, and considering how many different kinds of unions there are, and how different they are in each state/country, it's hard to determine what rights are withheld in general. And I wouldn't say that married couples have 1000's of rights beyond even a boyfriend/girlfriend type of relationship.

@Sqwancho A marriage would be the same thing, eliminating the first step prior to the marriage to be granted a license. The...

She has a show that's not simply about her being funny and she's a leader in the gay rights movement. She does things like get rallies together and spread awareness all the time. She's actually HUGE in the gay/straight equality fight. And yeah, there are WAY more rights than most people even know about when it comes to marriage, but if those rights aren't gone with what you're talking about, all you're saying is that it's one less paper to sign? I think that the government should simply redefine marriage in such a way as that it not be based of the bible or gender (like we did in Canada). It would solve the problem, I think (and probably be less confusing).

Also, what happens if say, a inter-sex wants to get married, or a transvestite? It seems like people only think of gays and straights when talking about marriage. (None of that was really relevant, just a thought I had.)

@Sqwancho Marriage is traditionally a religious rite. And regarding hospital rights, that'd all be up to the hospital. I...

Why get married if you don't even care about the physical benefits? Why not just live together and have a commitment ceremony with your church ? We have civil marriages to cut down all the thousands of steps it would take to get all the benefits awarded to a married couple. Marriage was originally a symbol of ownership, so you can't even say that marriage is all about the church and that the government needs to stay out of it.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are 0Reply
@pikabeau Why get married if you don't even care about the physical benefits? Why not just live together and have a...

A wedding, if done through a church, is a commitment ceremony. That is why I got married. It's nice to have gotten a tax break, but I definitely would have gotten married without that bonus.
I'm not saying that the government wouldn't know who was married, it simply wouldn't issue a license. The second half would stay the same.

@Sqwancho A wedding, if done through a church, is a commitment ceremony. That is why I got married. It's nice to have gotten...

Next time just get married in the church then. Register your relationship with city hall so everyone knows you're together and call it done. Leave the legal aspects for everyone who actually wants those benefits.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Sqwancho Why does marriage need to be controlled? Churches can decide to marry whomever they want to marry, and justices of...

Because letting the church decide who to marry worked out so well before, and who do justices of the peace work for? Oh yea... the government.

@ThatOneNut Because letting the church decide who to marry worked out so well before, and who do justices of the peace work...

You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church & state. I don't want to take away justices and captains ability to marry people, just that we don't have marriage licenses and fees. It's dumb that you have to pay $35 to get the signature of a clerk before you can get married.

@Sqwancho You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church & state. I...

Even if gay marriage were legal the church wouldn't have to marry them. Religious marriage ceremonies are at the discretion of the priest. Even though it's legal for a black person and a white person to marry, the church is not required to recognize the marriage if it is against their beliefs. When two people get married in a church they still need a marriage license through the government. Civil marriage offers tax breaks and the legal status that makes being married better and easier than just having the title of being in a relationship and calling each other husband and wife. Yes, you can pay to get certain things put in your will and you can also pay to have joint property, but why pay more when marriage is cheaper in the long run?

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are +4Reply
@pikabeau Even if gay marriage were legal the church wouldn't have to marry them. Religious marriage ceremonies are at the...

I know that it's up to the discretion of the church, what exactly is your point? I know that they get tax breaks, that's why I think the priest could send in a document (like they have to do already) for the tax break. It'll still have the benefits without having the extra fees.

@Sqwancho I know that it's up to the discretion of the church, what exactly is your point? I know that they get tax breaks...

"You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church & state"

You said this. My point is that it is at the discretion of the church so it's not a breech of separation of church and state. We pay marriage licenses and fees because it's cheaper to pay for the paper form of marriage than to pay for the paper work to get all those benefits separately. The priest does not have any legal status, so because of the whole separation of church and state he can't be the one to sign the documents for tax breaks.

My comment was also more or less a reply to comment #1241939 down there.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are 0Reply
@pikabeau "You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church &...

twisted_memories said that when the church decides who gets to marry something bad happens, so I what I meant is that the church always decides who they marry to a degree, because you can't force them to marry two people.

When I got married the priest had to mail back a form that he signed the day we got married to prove that we got married (people have to be certified to marry someone, so priests to have a limited legal status). That step wouldn't' be much different, it would just get rid of previous steps.

@Sqwancho twisted_memories said that when the church decides who gets to marry something bad happens, so I what I meant is...

So are you against gay marriage or the whole marriage process in general? Your profile says you're a Libertarian, so I assume you're all for human rights and what not. But it also says you're married, so I don't see why you seem so anti-marriage.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are +1Reply
@pikabeau So are you against gay marriage or the whole marriage process in general? Your profile says you're a Libertarian...

I'm not anti-marriage, I'm anti-government, making me pay $40 ish bucks for something that could be done easier. As with most government processes, they add a lot of unnecessary steps.

@Sqwancho I'm not anti-marriage, I'm anti-government, making me pay $40 ish bucks for something that could be done easier. As...

In the long run, it's more expensive to pay for the things that come with marriage separately. Marriage benefits are a hassle, but I know that they're worth it in comparison to all the work it would take to be able to see my partner in the hospital or to have full custody of our kids if something bad were to happen. I want to be able to have joint bank accounts and the I want to be able to file my taxes as a unit so I won't have to pay as much. The government really shouldn't be so involved with marriage, but it's for the best that they are. It gives you all those rights, and hundreds more, with just $40ish dollars, a little paper work, and a few signatures. Yeah, there are a lot of unnecessary steps, but a lot fewer steps in comparison to how it would be if marriage wasn't a government institution.

pikabeaus avatar pikabeau Yeah You Are 0Reply
@Sqwancho You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church & state. I...

"You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church & state."

Separation of church and state is ONLY for the sake of the church not becoming a government body. Yet it seems everyone misunderstands... It doesn't mean that the church can't protest laws. It doesn't mean that the church can't declare something morally wrong. It doesn't mean that the church can't try to influence people in power.

Separation of church at state is not intended to render the church mute and lame. It is merely intended to prevent another incident like The Holy Roman Empire.

On topic: woo hoo gay marriage.

@Totobean "You can't force a priest/minister/pastor to marry someone, that's a huge breach of separation of church &...

I didn't mean to say that church can't protest, declare or influence. Trust me, I'm part of a fairly large and well-organized church.

I meant that if a government body tried to force a church representative to force someone they did not want to, THAT would be a breach of the separation of church & state. I don't think government should make a church do something, unless it's to stop them from doing something that is harmful towards others.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.