I they were so worried about the sanctity of marriage, they would stop having affairs. Again, who gives a rat's ass if one or more religions think that it is immoral? This is not a theocracy...not yet anyhow...so the opinion of religions don't count. Not everyone thinks that it is immoral...so if marriage is to be kept constitutional, either everyone can marry their partner of choice (assuming it doesn't violate other laws that have nothing to do with religious beliefs like bestiality and pedophilia) or no one gets to get marries. It says that ALL shall be treated equally under the law. This is why religion does not and should not have a voice in government. There are too many religions to allow that and to keep it fair for all. So unless we adopt a state religion and become a theocracy, religion doesn't get to dictate and anyone pushing to do so is in violation of the constitution. So just because some think it is immoral or icky...tough shit. I have a few good suggestion on where they can shove their morality.
-----Original Message----- From: Sisk, Kris [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 4:03 PM To: cf-community Subject: RE: interesting opinion piece on Beck and the teabagging party I disagree. Opposition to gay marriage is VERY MUCH about two things. One is the sanctity of marriage. The other that most people opposed to gay marriage believe that homosexual sex is an immoral act. Allowing gay marriage is, to them, our society saying that a morally wrong act is OK. They see the acceptance of gay marriage as a harmful moral decline in our society. It's easy to call those opposed to gay marriage haters and dismiss them. Some of them, admittedly the most visible, are just haters, but do try to remember that there is a reason besides hate for the views most gay marriage opponents hold. You'll make more headway in changing their minds that way than by calling them homophobic bigots. That is unless you want to go after the true haters like Phelps. Nothing's going to change their minds. A more effective argument is pointing out how ludicrous it is to try to outlaw everything immoral. Extramarital sex (most of them are guilty of that, even if it were just premarital and not adultery), drinking, smoking, cussing....the list goes on and on. I've seen that approach convert people on the issue. -----Original Message----- From: G Money [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:25 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: interesting opinion piece on Beck and the teabagging party Opposition to gay marriage has nothing to do with people preserving the sanctity of marriage. They find homosexuality icky, and they don't want to think about them as sharing a part of the same "normal" life as they do. They don't want to have to have discussions with their children about their friend who has two daddies, because they themselves can't even come to terms with it, even though I guarantee that their kid would have absolutely no problem with it. If we could just get over our own icky feelings and grow up a little bit, explain it simply and honestly to our kids, homophobia could be all but erased in only a few generations. Sounds easy, don't it? But alas....... On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > There would still be people against it. Most likely still the Bible > thumpers. > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > So why isn't that your fight. Fight to change the marriage license to > > civil union and it's done. > > Oddly enough that could be done easily bit what's the fun in that. > > With no opponents who do you get to brand as haters? > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I have stated for quite sometime that the biggest hurdle with gay > >> marriage is the religious institutions and the government use the same > >> word for different reasons. > >> > >> Religious institutions use the word 'marriage' to describe a religious > ceremony. > >> The government uses the word 'marriage' to describe a civil contract > >> between 2 consenting adults. > >> > >> A lot of opponents of gay marriage I have spoken to seem to think that > >> because I am a proponent of gay marriage that it means that I want to > >> force their church to allow gay couples to be married in a religious > >> ceremony. I would be willing to bet there are quite a few opponents fo > >> gay marriage who feel the same way. > >> > >> I think that government should get out of the marriage business. When > >> I got married in a religious ceremony in a church, I had to get a > >> 'marriage license' from the state. That 'marriage license' should be a > >> 'civil union' license. And the guidelines for a civil union should be > >> simple. Any 2 consenting adults should be allowed to enter into a > >> civil union so long as both are not in a civil union with another > >> person. > >> > >> If you get married in a church, you go through the religious ceremony > >> of marriage, but need to get the civil union or contract handled > >> through the government. > >> > >> To me, the biggest hurdle in gay marriage boils down to nomenclature. > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:326470 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
