legalize gay marraige?

[skier1]

They just stayed with eachother and thought why do they need to get married.

Money. You're kidding yourself if you think this is about anything else. Married couples get tax benefits, while unmarried couples do not. so really, it doesn't matter if it's 'natural' or not, the fact is gays don't want to give as much money to the Man, which is a fairly universal desire.

And honestly, we don't need any more people. The world's getting overpopulated as it is. Go to India or China, walk through any major intersection in any city in those countries, and try to tell me with a straight face that the world needs more people. The fact is, the more people there are, the more quality of life decreases for the entire population. So in a way, gays are doing humanity a favor by not making more people, and adopting the people no one else wants.

[earlthekevin]

skier1 said:

They just stayed with eachother and thought why do they need to get married.

Money. You're kidding yourself if you think this is about anything else. Married couples get tax benefits, while unmarried couples do not. so really, it doesn't matter if it's 'natural' or not, the fact is gays don't want to give as much money to the Man, which is a fairly universal desire.

And honestly, we don't need any more people. The world's getting overpopulated as it is. Go to India or China, walk through any major intersection in any city in those countries, and try to tell me with a straight face that the world needs more people. The fact is, the more people there are, the more quality of life decreases for the entire population. So in a way, gays are doing humanity a favor by not making more people, and adopting the people no one else wants.

[dannyboy]

earlthekevin said:

so then gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children?

Not the same thing.



Next, I'd like to believe that the married population, straight or otherwise aren't only getting married for no reason other than to receive tax benefits.

For that matter the lower life population, you know, the ones who look for handouts at whatever turns there are possible to avoid buttering their own toast. The ones that have basically 100 or more dollars a week deducted from my pay to support, those people.

Well they usually don't get married because social services are more beneficial to single parents or 2 single people than to a married couple.

That doesn't have much to do with the topic at hand and that being whether or not gay couples should have the right to get married.

But I would leave them alone if they were neighbors I would not harass or bother them in any way.

[earlthekevin]

The point is that every person should be treated equally no matter their sexual preferance. It is just discrimination to not let homosexuals to get the same treatment as straight couples.

Also my statement was the same thing because you have said that you don't support gay marraige because they don't produce children, so according to your logic elderly and impotent people shouldn't get married either.

Also the point about it being against christianity shouldn't deal with the government's policy. Sepperation of church and state. I really don't think religion should influence gov. policy because if that was true according to islam women should conseal their faces from veiw. and you need to pray to Mecca three times a day.

[Marty]

Married couples should be required by law to produce a child within the first 3 years, and one within every 7 years following for a minimum of 3 children.

When that law is passed then all the "No" votes will be justified.

Anyways, there's lots of cute gay couples that have opted to adopt children, there's no reason to ban gay marriage other than to make you feel better since it literally does not effect you, even as Christians. If God truly does not want something to happen leave it to him. He will send him to hell, it makes just as much sense as killing in the name of God.

[Blastgirl]

flamingstallion said:

Married couples should be required by law to produce a child within the first 3 years, and one within every 7 years following for a minimum of 3 children.

When that law is passed then all the "No" votes will be justified.

While my next comment is not really relevant, the Married Members of this board have just about done that.

Classic and I had a child just after our fourth Anniversary and we had another two years and three months later.

Phil's Daughter marks their third child. Phil will have to tell us how long they have been Married but a few weeks ago Jason's tenth Birthday got mentioned so there's no more than seven years between the kids in that Family.

That has no real relevance but Marty's post made me think about that.

[Blix]

earlthekevin said:

so then gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children?

Why would you argue on this point? You know what I mean.

Old people had a chance once, infertile couples can't because of their "illness" (i couldnt find a better word) and gay ppl are... gay. it's not freakin natural >< I can't see why they would have their sexual preference like that anyways. it's just weird. I know it's not their choice, but still.

People get married according to religion. I'd say gay marriages could be legalized as in getting married in a court house or whatev, but not in church.

EDIT: I can't believe I said that I'm not even religious at all xD

[Kevin]

I heard KFC was having a special deal on right wings.

[Blix]

err, what?

[GetZ]

In america politics is binary: You're either left wing, like Bill Clinton; or you're right wing, like George Bush. In short: Right wingers are gungho religious people and are considered 'conservative', while lefties are more free spirited and are considered 'liberal'. At least, that's the traditional stereotypical view of the US political machine. There are, of course, many people in the middle - lots of shades of grey... But not much colour ;D


I'm still mulling this over to come up with a post that expresses my ideas clearly...

[Phil]

In capitol it's even said that the right side of the room are the Republicans and the left side is the Democrats.

I'm definately right wing. My union has several times expressed that my being a Republican is not really appreciated.

In other politics Democrats are more pro union and Republicans aren't anti-union but they're not friends with the unions by tradition although there are labor unions that are Republican based.

In the last 2 decades the Democratic party has supported a number of practices that are traditionally considered immoral.

In older times Democrats and Republicans disagreed about financial issues but socially they wre more similar.

[roflstunts]

Why is it up to non-gay people to decide whether gay people can get married?

[earlthekevin]

roflstunts said:

Why is it up to non-gay people to decide whether gay people can get married?

Because people fear what they don't understand

[Captain Awesome]

roflstunts said:

Why is it up to non-gay people to decide whether gay people can get married?

Good point, but you have to remember that straight people are the overwhelming majority.

[earlthekevin]

littleguy29 said:

roflstunts said:

Why is it up to non-gay people to decide whether gay people can get married?

Good point, but you have to remember that straight people are the overwhelming majority.

Does that matter? Just because the majority isn't gay doesn't mean they are against it.

[Captain Awesome]

No... It's just that being straight has been the norm for socitey for pretty much all of history, and still is. Personally, I'm all for gay marriage. But I'm just saying that realistically, it IS up to straight people to decide, since the majority of the population and the legal system are straight.

[Blastgirl]

I don't think anybody is saying that the majority is necessarily right every time.

[Marty]