Besides ya'll that say it helps with taxes either are not married or don't pay attention to your taxes. Ever hear of the "marriage penalty tax"? It's not an official penalty but if both people work your income is added, most times you hit a higher income bracket and end up paying at a higher rate than if you were single. Trust me this applied to me while my wife was working but it's not as bad since she went back to school. This was one of things that President Bush was fighting in his tax reforms but I don't believe it was permantly resolved and the Democrats are trying to roll back the taxes to the way they were. http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POSITIONS/marriage.html So all ya'll think that marriage helps with your taxes, sorry nice try, but no dice.

for people who are against, other than the moral or religious reasons, why not allow gay marriage?

for one thing is just gross. Sorry but the thought of two guys together just makes my stomach queasy. yuck...

As far as what the bible says, the bible actually calls it an abomination and in the days before Jesus was born people were to be put to death for being gay.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

In the new testament Jesus died for these sins and you have the right to change your ways. We can only tell you its wrong and let you make the choice. We do not have to accept the choice but we can not condemn you for that choice either.

As it says in John 8:7 "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone"

I don't think the bible should have any bearing on the way laws are formed. Not everybody follows the same religion, and why should any one religion be deemed as correct. I think there is no good reason to ban gay marriages except for just plain discrimination. People take for granted the rights you receive when you marry someone. Why shouldn't a gay person be allowed to visit their "partner" in hospital? There are a number of things that people aren't taking into account and that is one of them. Also banning marriage isn't going to turn people straight. Propig- Don't be so closed minded. I bet the the thought of a dominatrix forcing her toes into a guy's mouth isn't too appealing either, but that's legal. Gays being married doesn't hurt anybody and I really think that the government has bigger things to worry about than taking away people's rights.

btw can you tell this topic really annoys me?

oh and if marriage means worse taxes.. then why not allow it and bring in more $?!

what?

since this is an issue that cannot be agreed on by everyone, lets just not say anything for now and just vote

nothing against others' views anyways

i'm not looking for agreement, i just want to know the legal ramifications if i were to vote on it.

Why do you have such a problem with it? Thats what I'm wondering.... why is it such a big deal, why are people so against it?

i don't have such a problem with it where do you get this?

i want to know why i should vote for it, and how it helps gay couples.

by voting i mean filling out a ballot that determines what the state will do about gay marriages.

its a dumb thing to argue about. i'm not "so against it" just tell me why i should vote for it.

guys just give up he wants us to spoonfeed him info because he doesn't want to look it up himself.. :shake:

because they deserve the same rights as the rest of society?

CBC radio just had a commercial
saying... (not exactly quoting)
what is the definition of a marriage

-A union of a couple
-A religious ceremony
-A union of a man and a woman
....bluh bluh

i dont believe there is a true definition but i do know that true love has to be involved and no insest nor inter-species
lol

lame commercial... those people really need something else to worry about..

you didnt hear the whole thing so dont bother commenting on it

its a radio that talks about world issues btw
and since it is current event, it will be talked about just like we are doing here

well if you're going to say i should vote for gay marraige you should tell me the reasons or get the hell out of my face. and quit patronizing me.

fine but how does it benefit gay people? which taxes and legal benefits do they get?

how does marriage benefit any couples?

well some people see marriage as a long term bond of love and it symbolizes their wills to spend the rest of their lifes together

same thing for both gay and straight people

And folks this is a reminder, these are all opinions. We don't have to agree we don't have to think like each other, and quite frankly that's a good thing. We don't all want to have the same ideas otherwise this would be a bland board of yes men (and women). It's good to discuss why be believe the way we do but we shouldn't make others think the way they do. If we explain ourselves and they agree let them change their own mind.



Game On.

As I previously mentioned.......they would get to have the same rights as most people take for granted.... hospital visits, they can share medical insurance (if one has a company that offers it and the other doesn't for example) don't forget about things such as buying a house.....if you're married both people's income gets taken into consideration..... uhm.... thats all i can think of at this very moment

i know i said i was only going to chime in once, but I've gotten a few emails asking me to chime in and another saying that it's bastardly of me to those who disagree with me to just say one thing and then ignore them for the rest of the time. So, I'll say a bit more.

To those asking for the benefits of gay marriage: That's basically like asking what are the benefits of racial integration. There's a long list of things, from social/cultural benefits to legal ramifications that can be listed, but those are really beside the point and only make up a tangent to the argument. The BENEFIT to allowing same-sex marriages is that you end a form of _clear_ discrimination that is designed to subordinate an entire class of people just b/c of who they are. How is that possibly not enough? Do you not believe in human rights and basic human dignity whatsoever?

To those complaining about religion being brought into it: tough luck. Many of you are basing your arguments on religious texts and the validity of those texts as moral guidelines must then be questioned. If you want to base your argument on something other than religion, that's fine, do so. But don't think that the legitimacy of religion is a sacred topic and that you can whip it out whenever you please in your defense.

So, the legitimacy of religion aside, IF you are using religious arguments in this debate, you have clearly missed everything you were supposed to have learned in 4th grade civics. The state is meant to be separated from religion. The argument that the state forms many of its laws from religion is a bit weak. Sure, we outlaw murder, theft, etc.; which /is/ highly correlated with most religious beliefs. Nevertheless, the arguments for these bans are based in secular logic, normally based upon a right to life/property that cannot be denied by another person (or government, except under certain constraints).

(I have a feeling that many on this board don't entirely understand the concept of rights. I suggest to get a basic understanding of what rigths are that you read Henry Shue's Basic Rights or Ronald Dworkin's Taking Rights Seriously. You don't have to agree with what they say, but they will help you understand what I, and some other here, are actually saying when we say 'right')

Right on

Seperation of Church and state is too big a phrase for GW

bush might as well be one of those priests you hear about on the news...

yep I love you guys.

thats really sad jason


id say i love propig too but ive hardly talked with her :/

i've never talked to her.. so there ;)

No need for personel attacks. If were gonna discuss it we need to discuss the legitamacy of our ideals and reasons. Otherwise this will spirial into a mudslinging 3rd grade fight.

Seperations of church and state is needed. Although I am religious I can see that we need to respect other religions as well. And to base goverment on a particular religion could create chaos. It's a difficult subject for me to express and articulate properly.

As far as other reasons against homosexual marriage, no matter how far back in history homosexuality goes that doesn't make it right. Murder goes back to the beginning of time, that doesn't make it acceptable. I don't believe the human body is suited to the kinds of acts that homosexuals subject them to and I don't think it's natural or proper. That's my opinion, ya'll are entitled to yours. Just don't expect everyone to agree.

I want to end this, but I'm just going to add $.02 to it. Marriage is religious. It is before God, it's not of man. Marrage is fully based on the Bible and it's the same in many other religions. If one religion allows it, even though I don't know one that does, then that should be the only way that it should be allowed, if there was a religion that supported it. As far as all this "seperation of church and state" goes, that has nothing to do with anything other than the government not being able to step in on religion. Two ppl don't have to marry, how many ppl do you know that are just living together? I know a LOT, they are happy and I don't see why they have to be bothered, I may not agree with it, but someone else does. I may not agree with gay couples, but they technically can't be married because it's before GOD and man.

Many of you've said leave religion out of this, but that's wrong because as stated before, marrige IS religious, why do you think you have to have a Preacher, Rabbi, or Preist (etc...) do the ceremony? The only thing about it that is a law is the papers and license. God said that it is wrong, and if two gay guys or women get married, they aren't married in God's eyes, just on paper, so what good does it do?

not all marriage is religious. that's how it started. But that's not how it is today.

two people can get married in a quick non-religous ceremony, and get a little piece of paper (or whatever) from the state, giving them certain benifits that single people don't have.

I know, but I'm saying that marriage was founded on religion, and that's why you can't leave religion out of it. There is no seperation of church and state here.

true that u-235...
the there is no definite definition since things are always changing

these are exactly the benefits i want to know about. what makes it SO important that marriage _has to be for everyone_.

if marriage was a right then do i have the right to marry myself, my son, daughter? whats to stop that? how is this ANY different? where do you draw the line?

i can't find a solid example of why this should be illegal when gay marriage is legal.

you're a master of rhetorical bullshit statements.

have you been reading this thread at all? If you had read any of it you'd realise there is a strong arguement for it, obviously there are religious reasons against it, but also gay people are a prominant part of our society and there is no reason for them to not have the same rights (hospital visits and financial benefits) as straight married people. If this had been 50 years ago, would you be asking "well why should blacks have the right to vote? just tell me why i should really make it legal for them to vote"


btw, marriage is not just religious anymore, also there is marriage in many different cultures that do not have the same religion as us, so marriage means many things, and is not solely something that exists in the christian religion. As a result the practices of any one religion are not a valid arguement, because we live in a very multicultural society where many religions are practiced.

thats all for now :nod:

I just want GW to say the phrase Seperation Of Church and State.

Probably come out as gjgsdikjsd;sdkgsdIRAQf'lgkdjfg'dsfg

GW?

george w