Why is it that the current "administration" always says that it's just "doing the people's will" or "going with the people" when it tries to push through gay marriage bans?
The people shouldn't be allowed to choose what rights other people can have. Everybody should have the same rights automatically. If the people of Alabama had been allowed to choose whether or not blacks got equal civil rights with whites in the 1950s and 1960s, would they have?
If the people are allowed to pick and choose what rights each little minority group gets, what would our nation be but glorified mob rule? There IS a reason the Founding Fathers made us a republic, and not a direct democracy, after all.
Let people marry whoever or whatever they want. It's their choice.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-15 14:12
Do away with marriage laws completely. If a family cannot support it's children they will be taken into social care and the family will have to pay what they can in extra tax to support the child.
There can be no officially recognized liaison not offered to all pairs of citizens, it is a declaration of inferiority that will only lead to more anti-gay sentiments. The christians haven't earned the exclusivity, considering 50 % of their precious rituals end in judicial efforts anyway. I say what the incredibly amicable and humorous Kinky Friedman said about the issue: "I support gay marriage because I believe they have the right to be just as miserable as the rest of us." (Yes, he is as wonderful as that quote.)
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 15:54
Why cant the fags just live together? Why do they have to ruin the whole consept of marrige? Why do they have to be so fucking gay all the time?
Name:
Xel2006-07-16 16:06
>>8 Why can't heterosexuals just live together? Why do they have to ruin the whole conCept of marriage? Why do they have to be so fucking straight all the time?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 16:09
Marriage can be seen two ways. Marriage in the eyes of God(marriage(g)), and Marriage in the eyes of the State(marriage(s)). If you are a christian, then you see marriage(g) as a union between a man and a woman, and a gay couple can never have a marriage(g). That's all fine. But restricting them from having the legal and economic status of a marriage(s) for that reason is unfair. So we have people saying they can have that status, just don't call it marriage. Separate, but equivalent institutions in the eyes of the state. However, we've tried that whole separate but equal thing before. Didn't work. Therefore, the christian right should simply realise that a marriage(g) is different from a marriage(s), and console themselves that gay couples never can gain a marriage(g), and allow them to have a marriage(s).
Name:
Xel2006-07-16 17:12
>>10 Yup. You can't change what the scholars composed just for unnecessary equality, that is wrong. Fuck, if I ever want to hook up with a dude (odds are high for that, I guess) I wouldn't care for any holy approval. If Dawg and Jeebus don't like my buttfun or whom I love, I don't like them
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 21:45
Do away with marriage laws completely. 2 people wanting to make a deal which says the other person gets all their stuff if the other one has an affair, I fail to see why they should get my tax $s.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-16 23:05
ugh gay marriage
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 10:34
Xel is married to a black man
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 18:15
Just fuck marriage. It's not like any of us are monagamous anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-17 22:14
Just two sissy-faggots packin' the fudge! How sweet!