Printable View
Spain recently legalized Same-sex unions. Canada may do the same (if the bill has been passed or turned down, sorry I haven't followed it lately). Could this be the cue for other countries to begin following suit? Hopefully this thread won't turn into a warzone.
It is possibly in Canada too.
Don't really have a opinion about it. I guess it's good...
Let them do whatever they want. If legalizing their situation will do them good, let them.
If all religions are against it, it means...uhh...nothing. Their opinion shouldn't even count on this subject, but, unfortunately, it does. As I said, to gay people, it must mean nothing.
I think more countries should accept it, because the only ones truly against it are the evil masterminds behind all of the religions. But - think about it - who has to decide? The COUNTRY, that doesn't have anything against it. So...why not?
Marraige nowadays is more a civil union than a religious one. A Divorce lawyor would tell you that in a flash. If two people love eachother, and they're two consenting adults. Who gives a flying f**k? It's not our business. The biggest opposition to these unions is the religious right, of EVERY religion. In America, the state & church are supposed to be seperate, why then does Bush bring in God every time this legal issue comes up? Morals? Who on earth is he to start talking about morals? A gay couple, in love, can be a beautiful thing. I'm not gay, I see no problem, or difference than my love for my wife to say, the two lesbians living next door to me. It's time we evolved & stopped bringing 1000 year old texts to stop us growing the mental version of opposable thumbs.
That's very nice. :) I'm glad to see that more and more places are allowing that.
There are something like 1,071 benefits to marriage in the U.S., so people who say that gay people aren't missing out on anything for not being able to marry are full of it. I'm pleased to hear this news, and only wish people here would just get with the times already.
Viva la diversidad! Or something...
Seriously, gay marriage should be legal throughout the entire world. There's no reason for anything else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiegrahf42
Canada's House of Commons passed legislation Tuesday that would legalize gay marriage by the end of July as long as the Senate also passes the bill.
The Netherlands and Belgium recognize gay marriages nationwide aswell.
As has been said, the only factions that are against it are of the religious nature. To let a specific religion have a major say in the decisions of a country would state that the nation as a whole follows that religion, taking away the freedoms of the citizens to choose. Most countries wouldn't let religious officials have a say in many other decisions, so why let them have a say in this matter?
Good for them. I hope this becomes more widespread and puts pressure on the U.S. to follow suit. It's not like priests and rabbis and such and such don't get to pick and choose who they're willing to marry in any situation anyway.
Gays can marry in one state, I think Arkansas (can't remember), but it isn't recognized in any other state. Widespread acceptance in every state won't happen anytime soon. At least not while Bush is in the White House. He's trying to push a law stating that marriage is defined by a man and woman ONLY. If it passes, it could take a decade, maybe much more, before it could get retracted.. Thankfully, it's been rejected several times, but it keeps getting rewritten and brought up again and again.
Massachusetts, I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Autumn Rain
I knew it was one of those crazy-ass named states. :p
I think Bush needs to be impeached on the grounds that he is letting his religion control his judgement.
I think Bush needs to be impeached on a number of grounds, but we all know it's not going to happen. :mad2:
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuchulainn
True enough. -_-Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
I think that's the LAST place it will ever happen. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Autumn Rain
But yeah, good for Spain...I'll have to go to the God Hates Fags site now and read the new section on Spain once they've made it up and be amazed.
www.godhatesspain.comQuote:
Originally Posted by DMKA
Boy, doesn't take them long to get a domain, eh? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by The Man
I dunno.. Some hicks will screw anything. xDQuote:
Originally Posted by DMKA
I don't see how gay marriage "destroys the sanctity of marriage" or whatever. If anything, divorce destroys the sanctity of marriage yet that's legal and extremely common. What bothers me is Bush won't just come out and say he hates gay people because that's obviously the reason.
its just so sad that this nation [the US] the birthplace of modern demochracy and freedom wont keep up with the times...
its 2005 people not 1805!
Freedom isn't politcally correct or something... It offends someone, so it isn't allowed anymore...
i love my homosexuality... I just want the same benefits my heterosexual counterparts have. Tax benefits, insurance, and ER rights. I mean, really, who cares who I'm screwing and who I love?
I think we can all agree on that.
That explains all of America's problems right there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyraniel
That's what I'm saying. If anything could destroy the "sanctity" of marriage, I'd think it'd beQuote:
Originally Posted by Cyraniel
like Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriages.
This thread is way over due for a closed minded, but true statement. Allowing Homosexuals to marry is the only morally acceptable solution, and anyone who disagree's with me is both wrong, and an idiot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansem
Waaaaaayyyy ahead of you, nik0tine.
That's how I think too. I think two people loving each other is infinitely better than Anna Nicole golddigging some 90 year old.Quote:
Originally Posted by DMKAThat's what I'm saying. If anything could destroy the "sanctity" of marriage, I'd think it'd beQuote:
Originally Posted by Cyraniel
A couple of months ago, in the mail, the MP of my area sent this "brochure" *forgets the bill's name (C-38?)*. It starts off by saying that "Your MP is uncertain how to vote on this bill" Then when I turned it around it said stuff like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Endless
"Gay marriage is not about minority rights it is about a tradition"
"Marriage is on eof the things that make Canada wonderful"
"It is a 6000 year old tradition"
Basically it went on on this whole anti-gay marriage thing, it really pissed me off for 2 reasons: a) I thought he was uncertain, not homophobic b) I am for gay marriages and this seemed a step backwards. It really pissed me off cuz half there points did not seem valid to me. My friend did a thing on gay marriages in Canada. She told me it has been legalized in 7 provinces (marriage is a provincial power not a federal power in Canada).
Yeah gays can get married here in MA. It should be legalized everywhere. Gay people are people too, and therefor they should have rights. I dont mind gay people unless there touching me. But oh well. Bush is catholic and thats why theres only a few states with same sex marriage.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man
Why do people think Bush is Catholic? There's only ever been one Catholic at the White House...and he was shot.
Bush is part of a sect of Christianity though. Southern Baptist.
If memory serves Baptists are of an Evangelical denomination of Protestants.
Yeah, Bush isn't Catholic. There are other heavily-prejudiced, fundamentalist religious sects, y'know.
Oh no, Bush is most certainly not Catholic. Kerry was Catholic, as was JFK. Catholics have actually had a good deal of predjudice directed at them over the years, during the time when the Irish and the Germans were being openly opressed, that was one of the "reasons".
And with regards to the topic at hand, I am glad to see that. Eventually the world will move in that direction, and America will either catch up or be left far behind to be ridiculed by the world.
Its sort of weird, because Spain used to be famous with their strict catholic views and their horrible inquisition. They even started a war with England in the Middle Ages because England had ditched catholics.
Now that 3(4?) countries have gay marriages legalized it wont be a long time before more come, in the EU especially.
Yes, exactly because of that, the Church dosen't have as much power as it used to. To say it another way, a big section of the Spanish population is against the Church and the fact this institution may attempt to get into political affairs. And the current goverment (PSOE) isn't exactly friends with the cleric.Quote:
Its sort of weird, because Spain used to be famous with their strict catholic views and their horrible inquisition.
I'm preety happy this law is being passed, for once in history my country is making a decision not 40 years later than the rest of Europe :D In fact, we are the first mediterranean country to allow homosexual marriage in recent history, and well, that's preety good. However, I am amazed at the fact 700.000 people actually went to a demonstration claiming this was an attack against "the family". Yeah, I am sure the platonic idea of the Family is preety offended, I can see the children crying, oh, oh, oh, the pain!
By the way, it's good to see people here agree with this. I still can't see the real reasons against it, I can understand religious oposing for religious reasons, but religion and political affairs are something to be kept apart, and most people should realise that.
Oh, I can't wait till godhatesspain.com is up. I bet he does, it would explain the 8 years of Aznar in power.
Edit: Oh, by the way, aparently the president of the Asossiation of the Family, who is so cool cause he is the president of the platonic ideas of Family, wants a referendum for the people to vote wether this marriage should or not be legalized. Am I the only one who believes it's completly stupid to make a referndum on the rights of a minority? The majority is not to decide over the minorities, that's not a democracy, it's a majority tyranny.
I don't have anything against gay marriage. What people want to do with their lives is their business, not mine.
Woah, really? Sucks he didn't win even more knowing that. I know the Kerry family has quite a bit of support for homosexuals, but opposes gay marriage none the less. They aren't out to get the constitution amended over preventing it though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Behold the Void
oooooh gayness is icky bad, it has men doing stuff to each other eeewwwwww........ god's gonna burn em for it i tell ya.
yeah in all seriousness. why the hell not? who does it harm? it basicly changes nothing for the rest of us straight peple. so why care? "frankly my dear i don't give a damn" why should anyone else?
Well, I mind gay marriage. The only object I'd have to it is if a Catholic or other religion was forbidden to keep the church rules against marrying gays or had to change their teachings. Gays can do as they please, but so can Catholics and Jews and Muslims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
i'm confuzzled. you mind gay marriage? or you don't mind?
Bush is a Methodist, and who are any of you to call someone else an idiot for what they believe? Yeah, morality is a very subjective thing, but a lot, and I mean a LOT of the attitudes I see demonstrated in this thread are the last thing anyone needs to be shoved at them in the process of promoting tolerance.
Concisely, talking about the stupidity of someone's religion or ethics is just as bigoted and narrowminded as someone finding homosexuality wrong. You can't fight fire with fire.
Other than that, good for Spain. I hope America soon follows suit in the interest of ascertaining what we pursue; equal rights for all people, regardless of age, sex, sexual preference, race or any other superficial classification, including intelligence, political preference, and morality.
...And the award goes to fire_of_avalon for being AWESOME.Quote:
Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon
I think Bush is an idiot, but not because of his religion... I think he's an idiot because he brings up his religious beliefs as if they have any legal bearing. I also think he's an idiot because he's cast America into an illegal war and has spent over $60,000,000 on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon
Also, speaking of the stupidity of someone ethics or religion isn't that close-minded... if you target the points that are close-minded. In example: if I were to say that the Bible is sexist and outdated, I'd be stating a flaw, which is hardly close-minded. If I were to say that Christians who are ignorant enough to use their religion as a mask for their own insecurities give their religion a bad name, I would not be being close-minded. If I were to say that religions that are selective in their salvation are no better than cults or Nazis... I would not be being close-minded.
See the pattern?
If you can't judge someone's ethics, what exactly do you judge?Quote:
Concisely, talking about the stupidity of someone's religion or ethics is just as bigoted and narrowminded as someone finding homosexuality wrong. You can't fight fire with fire.
I didn't say you couldn't do it. I said discounting something as stupid because it's not what one believes in is just as bigoted as people accuse the religious right of being.
I never said you shouldn't judge someone's ethics, I said discounting them as idiocy is just as wrong as someone discounting homosexuality as morally abhorrent.
There's investigation and discussion about why someone behaves the way they do, which I think is a good thing. Any opinions drawn after that fact are valid, I believe. Saying that all religion is awful, bad, narrowminded, bigoted, evil, etc. etc. without any reason behind it except for what mainstream, highly "celebrated" figures tell you it's about is wrong.
But you don't have to agree with me, I think a lot of you are just being meanies for no reason.
It's way, way, WAY more than that, my friend.Quote:
he's cast America into an illegal war and has spent over $60,000,000 on it.
I believe that murder is wrong. If someone suggested to me an ethics in which murder was right, I would discount it immediately. If someone suggested to me an ethics in which homosexuality is evil, I would discount it immediately. Some things are obviously abhorrent to any moral standard that values life.Quote:
Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon
So..."people are homosexual because they devil made them that way" is a valid point in a logical discussion?Quote:
There's investigation and discussion about why someone behaves the way they do, which I think is a good thing. Any opinions drawn after that fact are valid, I believe. Saying that all religion is awful, bad, narrowminded, bigoted, evil, etc. etc. without any reason behind it except for what mainstream, highly "celebrated" figures tell you it's about is wrong.
Yes - basing your opinion on the media or "celebrated figures" is wrong. By that logic, so is basing your opinion on any religion or "celebrated figures" of the church.
Probably. I haven't read most of the thread. :)Quote:
But you don't have to agree with me, I think a lot of you are just being meanies for no reason.
Wait... maybe it was $60,000,000,000Quote:
Originally Posted by nik0tine
Nope, it's still more, although your getting closer. I don't know what the exact number is at the moment, but it is quite a bit more than 87 billion dollars.Quote:
Wait... maybe it was $60,000,000,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raistlin
Alright, I'll concede. There are some things you CAN discount immediately as being out and out wrong based on any set of sane, logical moral standards, but that still only gives you the right to call it WRONG, it does not give anyone the right to call it stupid, because you have no idea how that person came to that conclusion.
And no, saying people are homosexual because the devil made them that way is not a valid, logical point of discussion. However, not all Christians use that argument.
And when I said celebrated figures, I was referring to both left and right extremes. You can't judge me as a Christian based on what the Pope says about Christianity, because faith runs far too deep in every individual to be summarily described by any other individual.
Basically what I'm saying is that I'm very tired of members here calling ideologies stupid and touting theirs as correct because it's insulting to both those of us with similar ideologies and those who have conflicting ideologies. I believe you can say "I think this is wrong, and here's why" and you can even say "I think this is stupid and here's why" but you can't justifiably say "This is stupid because I say so."