Marriage Equality? My experience

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Bad news: people are. Look at the first two links in my first post and you will find instances of people forcing bakers and florists to provide for marriage, then ruining the shopkeeper's lives for denying service because of religious objections.

The bakers and florists are somehow "involved in the ceremony"? Well, okay, with that exceedingly broad definition, fair enough. But according to that definition, I have no problem with that. Your flower shop is not a religious institution. Your bakery is not "The Holy Church of Makin' Bread". If you have personal objections, that's nice, but you serve the public. And if your personal religious beliefs would stop you from doing so (say, maybe your religious beliefs have a problem with interracial marriage), then that is your problem.

 

[Spak]

The bakers and florists are somehow "involved in the ceremony"? Well, okay, with that exceedingly broad definition, fair enough. But according to that definition, I have no problem with that. Your flower shop is not a religious institution. Your bakery is not "The Holy Church of Makin' Bread". If you have personal objections, that's nice, but you serve the public. And if your personal religious beliefs would stop you from doing so (say, maybe your religious beliefs have a problem with interracial marriage), then that is your problem.

They provide their services for the ceremony, such as arranging flowers or making the wedding cake. I personally believe that if you own a company, you get to choose how it is run. If you are serving a larger company and are merely a branch, I can see how it would be unlawful to deny the larger corporation from a sale on the basis of discrimination. Your business practices may cause less customers to come your way, but that's the person's choice as a shopkeeper.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

They provide their services for the ceremony, such as arranging flowers or making the wedding cake. I personally believe that if you own a company, you get to choose how it is run. If you are serving a larger company and are merely a branch, I can see how it would be unlawful to deny the larger corporation from a sale on the basis of discrimination. Your business practices may cause less customers to come your way, but that's the person's choice as a shopkeeper.

Well, that's a consistent opinion that I simply cannot share given the history behind such antidiscrimination laws.

 

[Sucumbio]

Any business that promotes segregation deserves to be ostracized.

 

[Spak]

Well, that's a consistent opinion that I simply cannot share given the history behind such antidiscrimination laws.

Fine, you follow your line of reasoning and I'll follow mine. We don't seem to be budging on either of our opinions, so unless you have more points to bring up, I see no reason to talk in circles.

 

[sovereigntea]

(also wanna point out that being gay isn't a choice but you picked your wording well so w/e)

I posit that it is absolutely irrelevant if being gay is natural or a choice. Consenting adults should be able to live as they choose.

Fun fact: that passage is based upon forgiveness, despite your cherry picking verses out-of-context. If that passage were meant as you are using it, anyone would be able to kill thousands and go completely unpunished in a Christian society. I don't have the rights to make gay marriage illegal because of separation of Church and State, but I can inform others about its sin nature and its consequences.

Also, I failed to make this clear earlier when referencing 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, but like any sin, homosexuality is a sin that you can be forgiven of.

Fun fact: the passage can be interpreted in multiple ways.

I could just as easily accuse you of "cherry picking" for opting for Christianity over Buddhism or Islam. Its all based on interpretation, upbringing, culture, and personal taste. Not unlike homosexuality actually. Any "free" society that values the individual and accepts diversity should legalize gay marriage for the same reasons that freedom of worship is legalized: its a matter of personal identity

Furthermore are you comparing homosexuality and adultery (the "sin" listed in the passage) to mass murder? I would reject any system of judgment that so carelessly equates innocuous life decisions with true crime

At the very least I DO believe that businesses should be able to discriminate as they wish although I refuse to do business with any vendor who would discriminate based on identity.

 

[Infinite901]

I posit that it is absolutely irrelevant if being gay is natural or a choice. Consenting adults should be able to live as they choose.

That's why I mentioned it as a side thing and not my main point.


Also I just want to clarify that I'm not okay with stores and such turning people down, but that religious institutes have the right to turn someone away.

 

[Sucumbio]

This is especially true if the business is unique. For instance if an extermination service refuses to go to a household because they're a gay couple, and they're the only exterminators in a 100 mile radius, how fair is that? This is why laws were passed years ago preventing this type of thing regarding blacks in the south. Theirs was a hard fight for equality. Lgbt have to fight now, and it's a shame it's taken this long.

 

[Lichi]

This is especially true if the business is unique. For instance if an extermination service refuses to go to a household because they're a gay couple, and they're the only exterminators in a 100 mile radius, how fair is that? This is why laws were passed years ago preventing this type of thing regarding blacks in the south. Theirs was a hard fight for equality. Lgbt have to fight now, and it's a shame it's taken this long.

Yup, this pretty much is the deal. If you run a fast food restaurant in Manhatten and don't want to serve a variety of possible customers based on their decisions in life, looks or clothing they wear, that's your way of doing things. It might not be beneficial, you might even be a total ass, but you do not deny some crucial services.
But if you run a business and denying your service to some customers means they have no other way of getting it, you are stretching the borders of what is good and right. And even though a cake is not essential for people to live or even to have a wedding, if there's no easy other way of getting one, you just make life harder for others because, in this case, you think an ancient books tells you to. And that is not acceptable.

Back in the days when I went to church and was an 'active part of Christianity', the pastor would always mention that Christianity is the religion of benevolence and charity. There's also bible passages that outright tell you to love your enemy. So, even if homosexual people are sinners, and even if sinning makes you an enemy of the church (though, as far as I've heard it, they become rather misguided ones or so that you should not condemn but offer help), why do you have to go as far as discriminating these people? I mean, your God already stripped them from their rights to enter heaven. At that point, this should be enough for the Christian. They sin (in a way that is harmless to everyone else) and won't seek absulution, so there's no eternal life in happiness for them after death. Now why does the religion of benevolence behave so non-benevolent when it just comes to not ****ing up people's plans for weddings? Why do you add even more punishment to the verdict of God?

Well, I've always been the one to say that people who do not want to contribute to society should be excluded from society. Even the US are not a Christian-only society, and if you want to segregate, you should be expelled. Go and create your own state somewhere else, but as long as you are part of a society, you better show that you are not only there to receive.

 

[the.tok]

A bakery is not a private club. You have no right to deny any customer your services.
What would you think of a muslim bakery that would deny bread to non-muslim women, because dressing casually is a sin ?
The case you show is quite similar to me : the baker's religion is his private life. If it interferes with his job, then he shouldn't be a baker.

 

[sovereigntea]

A bakery is not a private club. You have no right to deny any customer your services.
What would you think of a muslim bakery that would deny bread to non-muslim women, because dressing casually is a sin ?
The case you show is quite similar to me : the baker's religion is his private life. If it interferes with his job, then he shouldn't be a baker.

But how much can you really take religion completely out of the public sphere? Can you stop the pulpit from passing down recommendations on voting and policy? Can you enforce a world where no one is allowed to wear a cross or the hijab?
France tried to achieve this through its policy of Laicite. While it was successful for integrating Jews and Christians it is increasingly questionable at a time where 15% of the population are Muslim. Muslims, and certain other faiths, do not perceive a separation of church and state let alone a segregation of religion from public life because they developed in different contexts and directions from Europe. To say that everyone needs to conform and keep their heads down is intolerant and ignorant of this fact.

I would think that any business which turns down the business of someone based on differences in beliefs is stupid and I would not go there. Ultimately though businesses deny services to customers all the time. "Sorry you weren't approved for credit and we can't extend it to you." "Sorry ma'am but maybe we aren't the store for you." "Whats that you are a responsible 18 year old and you want a hotel room? Sorry the age limit for signing off on a room in 21." Where do you draw the line for any of this?

What about businesses like Chik-Fil-A which offer service to everyone and then use their funds to support anti-gay agendas? Selling pancakes to everyone does not make you a righteous, just, and egalitarian business owner. Some pasta brand came out as anti-gay and all of their competitors immediately just said "ANYONE CAN EAT OUR PASTA." At what point does this involve the issue and at one point is it just distorting the issue for advertising purposes. Furthermore do people really need the government to stand up for their rights? While government is the most important vehicle for rights, I feel that we can only build legitimacy and acceptance for equality on a local, grassroots level. Boycotts seem like a logical option here. The Supreme Court ruling is appropriate because the states opposing gay marriages did so using legal means which gives the court the ability to grant writ for appeals. I am not sure if government has sovereignty over business owner's rights here. I say that government shouldn't interfere but then when it comes to birth control I believe that gov. should force all businesses and religious organizations to include it on insurance policies.

To some extent though we can come back to advertising. If I lived in a state with no exterminator for 300 miles I would be happy to take up the profession and be much less selective with my clientele. Eventually I would subsume my competitors in a vast corporate empire as Bug-Mart and fill my coffers from the pockets of dejected minorities in pursuit of the bug services that have been so long denied to them die to ill-founded and poorly articulated prejudices.

In response to Lichi: We should not expel people who are knuckleheads. This raises all sorts of questions and grey areas that are absolutely untenable. Who gets to decide who gets sent to Siberia?

 

[Lichi]

In response to Lichi: We should not expel people who are knuckleheads. This raises all sorts of questions and grey areas that are absolutely untenable. Who gets to decide who gets sent to Siberia?

Who decides whom to send to prison or even sentence to death? Excommunication would just be another form of punishment to be used by the legislative power of a country. The only real problem I see with this is that there is nothing left of the earth you could send them to as there is no 'free' land mass available. Sending them into the oceans or antarctica would just be a death sentence.

 

[the.tok]

But how much can you really take religion completely out of the public sphere? Can you stop the pulpit from passing down recommendations on voting and policy? Can you enforce a world where no one is allowed to wear a cross or the hijab?
France tried to achieve this through its policy of Laicite. While it was successful for integrating Jews and Christians it is increasingly questionable at a time where 15% of the population are Muslim. Muslims, and certain other faiths, do not perceive a separation of church and state let alone a segregation of religion from public life because they developed in different contexts and directions from Europe. To say that everyone needs to conform and keep their heads down is intolerant and ignorant of this fact.

I would think that any business which turns down the business of someone based on differences in beliefs is stupid and I would not go there. Ultimately though businesses deny services to customers all the time. "Sorry you weren't approved for credit and we can't extend it to you." "Sorry ma'am but maybe we aren't the store for you." "Whats that you are a responsible 18 year old and you want a hotel room? Sorry the age limit for signing off on a room in 21." Where do you draw the line for any of this?

What about businesses like Chik-Fil-A which offer service to everyone and then use their funds to support anti-gay agendas? Selling pancakes to everyone does not make you a righteous, just, and egalitarian business owner. Some pasta brand came out as anti-gay and all of their competitors immediately just said "ANYONE CAN EAT OUR PASTA." At what point does this involve the issue and at one point is it just distorting the issue for advertising purposes. Furthermore do people really need the government to stand up for their rights? While government is the most important vehicle for rights, I feel that we can only build legitimacy and acceptance for equality on a local, grassroots level. Boycotts seem like a logical option here. The Supreme Court ruling is appropriate because the states opposing gay marriages did so using legal means which gives the court the ability to grant writ for appeals. I am not sure if government has sovereignty over business owner's rights here. I say that government shouldn't interfere but then when it comes to birth control I believe that gov. should force all businesses and religious organizations to include it on insurance policies.

To some extent though we can come back to advertising. If I lived in a state with no exterminator for 300 miles I would be happy to take up the profession and be much less selective with my clientele. Eventually I would subsume my competitors in a vast corporate empire as Bug-Mart and fill my coffers from the pockets of dejected minorities in pursuit of the bug services that have been so long denied to them die to ill-founded and poorly articulated prejudices.

Being born and raised in France, I don't think the laicité principle is a bad one. We went a little bit over the top lately, but basic principle is good IMO. You shouldn't bother others with your own religion.
The vast majority of muslims / christians / hindus / buddhists comply just fine with it. The problem is when this principle is used liberally to discriminate, with tolerance towards some religions and hostility towards another. But overall, it's all fine.

The other cases of service denial you bring are quite different. Age, height limits are perfectly legal as long as they are justified. For example roller coasters usually don't take you if you're under 1.20 m tall, but that is because of your own security, there is a logical reason. Not being able to pay is one.
Age limit below the majority is understandable. To me the line is "is there a logical or legal reason to deny this service". Not selling a cake because you're gay has no logical ground. Business owner have rights, but that doesn't include to discriminate their customers. I do agree that this is only enforceable to a degree though.


Now what the company does with the money it earns is another business. I don't know what is Chik-Fil-A, but if they serve anyone and want to fund anti-gay looneys then I morally strongly disagree, think we should shame them in public for it, but legally it is their money, they can do whatever they want. The solution is making anti-gay groups illegal, then they would be financing an illegal group and then we can sue them.

And the last thing about being happy to propose an alternative, sometimes the market just isn't big enough in rural areas. You are not going to survive with only the gay market as an exterminator :-)

 

[Lichi]

The best solution to this 'not serving gay customers' business would naturally be all the people who claim to be pro-gay-marriage to actually show some spine and never order again at those stores. But asking people to actually stand up for ideas they proclaim is often asking too much.

 

[sovereigntea]

Who decides whom to send to prison or even sentence to death? Excommunication would just be another form of punishment to be used by the legislative power of a country. The only real problem I see with this is that there is nothing left of the earth you could send them to as there is no 'free' land mass available. Sending them into the oceans or antarctica would just be a death sentence.

There was once a man named Socrates...http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/apology.html

Being born and raised in France, I don't think the laicité principle is a bad one. We went a little bit over the top lately, but basic principle is good IMO. You shouldn't bother others with your own religion.
The vast majority of muslims / christians / hindus / buddhists comply just fine with it. The problem is when this principle is used liberally to discriminate, with tolerance towards some religions and hostility towards another. But overall, it's all fine.

The other cases of service denial you bring are quite different. Age, height limits are perfectly legal as long as they are justified. For example roller coasters usually don't take you if you're under 1.20 m tall, but that is because of your own security, there is a logical reason. Not being able to pay is one.
Age limit below the majority is understandable. To me the line is "is there a logical or legal reason to deny this service". Not selling a cake because you're gay has no logical ground. Business owner have rights, but that doesn't include to discriminate their customers. I do agree that this is only enforceable to a degree though.


Now what the company does with the money it earns is another business. I don't know what is Chik-Fil-A, but if they serve anyone and want to fund anti-gay looneys then I morally strongly disagree, think we should shame them in public for it, but legally it is their money, they can do whatever they want. The solution is making anti-gay groups illegal, then they would be financing an illegal group and then we can sue them.

And the last thing about being happy to propose an alternative, sometimes the market just isn't big enough in rural areas. You are not going to survive with only the gay market as an exterminator :-)

I don't understand how people can do with they want with their money but they can decide how they wish to make their money. It reminds me of what Infinite said earlier, that businesses shouldn't be allowed to discriminate but religious institutions should be. There is no difference: in both cases people are acting on their beliefs. While yes I generally agree that no business should discriminate and yes I generally agree that businesses shouldn't be allowed to fund anti-gay movements I also recognize that there is no way to enforce either of these without abridging on liberty excessively.

Personally I kind of like that we have liberals and conservatives. Aside from giving comedy central good material their fighting also ensures that any and all progress is slow and argued to death. This is how the american democracy was made to function.

 

[Murlough]

Discrimination is discrimination. It doesn't matter how many religions think discrimination is ok, it never is nor will be.

Gay marriages should never have been illegal in the first place. Besides, if you think about it for 5 seconds, there supposedly is a passage in the Bible that states God destroyed a city because there were homosexuals there. If God really was against it now then why isn't he stopping it? His all powerful, all seeing self is just gonna let something slide now even though a few thousand years ago he nuked people for? Yeah, ok.

I'm not against Christianity at all. I am against discrimination and suppression. Everyone is equal. Everyone. Take a page from your own book and love thy neighboor already.

 

[sovereigntea]

Discrimination is discrimination. It doesn't matter how many religions think discrimination is ok, it never is nor will be.

Gay marriages should never have been illegal in the first place. Besides, if you think about it for 5 seconds, there supposedly is a passage in the Bible that states God destroyed a city because there were homosexuals there. If God really was against it now then why isn't he stopping it? His all powerful, all seeing self is just gonna let something slide now even though a few thousand years ago he nuked people for? Yeah, ok.

I'm not against Christianity at all. I am against discrimination and suppression. Everyone is equal. Everyone. Take a page from your own book and love thy neighboor already.

Yeah I'm still bewildered over how Christians reconcile Romans 1 (which states that homosexuals "deserve to die") with the whole "Thou Shalt Not Kill" Thing.

 

[Wilty]

Gurl, in this little big universe have 3 important truths, and there is only one, that we really know, in fact the three truths are releated one each other, people build ther passions on ideas, and think "the idea is synonym of truth" and thats why i hate the most of the human beings, most people belive they are so free to say anything... the irony here is, at the very first moment you speak, you are the prisioner of your own words, idea and reason are the same thing but is not the same as the truth...

1.- First truth
We don't know any truth
2.- Ironic truth
composed by two oposite reasons... (like the first one)
3.- Relative truth
like the second one, the diference is... there is infinite reasons, ideas... point of view... there will be always a oposite reason...

A guy like me, always find the opposite reason. Why? becuase i see the things of what they really are, not as i want to see... people dont't think, just feel, and i always hurt the feelings of the passionated people, the consecuenses dealing with stupid people is rejection, and that's my life, im dealing with discrimination all time. There is no power in lenguage. If the lenguage really have power, the chapter 11 of the genesis had never written, Pepole does not hear, they listen to what they want to hear. Why? beacuase they are afraid of the first truth, the first one causses the chains of fate... Our birth, life and death is on the void, dark, cold and Alone, no matter how many beings are around of us...

Spoiler

“And i´m here again, alone in front of this universe, eternally alone, eternally doomed, by the forgotten death. I see people around me, but anyone knows what i´m thinking, my words wear in the air, if the air does not corrupt my words, the mind of the other people will do

Terrible is my pain, because i know, my eyes could hide the truth of what they see, if is not a lie, then is the Outlook the lie between me and the realities, the only hope i have is fate.

This is the chains of fate, this chain is the link of all people,who realize, they birth, life and death is on the void, dark, and cold, in fact, is not the same, die alone, as we are die alone… this is the most humblest comfort, that anyone ever tought…

This is the law of the chains of fate”

This truths, are the explanation of change, people are afraid to change, don't try ever to change someone because they need to find their own courage to face... to face the truth, in the end, the very end all the poeple change, time does that work, in the last minute of their life, on this last minute, most people live more in that minute than all of their life, they accept the change and they scream this fact, on words of regreat, wishing a opportunity to change, in the moment when they can't change...

Sad? that's the deal to be a human being

Just, love that being you love, forgot lisences, forgot politicians, forgot religion, forgot the rejection or acceptance, forgot all definition, focus always in the origin of your acts... the simplicity of your feelings and toughts, will gave ya powa!

Spoiler

 

[T8TO]

Sorry guys I've been really overwhelmed with work along with a plethora of other things in real life and haven't been able to get around to the SmashBoards. Once again I want to thank everyone for taking the time to express themselves, because ultimately that was the whole reason I posted. I have read what you guys have to say, I've seen a lot of good points, as well as bad ones.

There are plenty of issues I would like to get around to. Keep in mind I mean no ill-will to anyone and am simply stating my own opinion on the topic at hand. This will be a long post, but please bear with me.

1. The Bible:
Homosexuality is listed in the Bible as an abomination, however so are a number of other things (which might I add are still continuously ignored by most Christians). Also the word abomination that was used in the Bible; a book translated and interpreted more times than you can count, has a different definition than that of the English language. I also get incredibly irritated when Sodom and Gomorra is brought into the picture, because if you actually know what the story is about (most do not) it is about a lack of hospitality, not a matter of homosexuality. (Although the citizens threaten the guests with anal ****). If anything, what should bother you about Sodom and Gomorra is the fact that two young daughters had sex with their drunken father afterwards! I personally don't like how it is perfectly fine to say "well we don't sacrifice anymore, refrain from eating certain foods, refrain from tattoos, etc because we can interpret the word of God in modern times" however, they still hold other outdated practices such as anti-gay beliefs just because? Who gets to decide this?

2. Choosing to be gay.
I know a lot of people get aggravated, and downright insulted when homosexuals compare themselves to other groups. I.E. Gays=African Americans because, they were born black, you were born "straight". The best way I can describe it is this. Yes, if I had to hide it, say my life were on danger, theoretically I could impersonate a heterosexual. Whereas a person with physical features such as eye color, freckles, hair etc could not. No I don't think gays are as persecuted as African Americans were or are still today. Still, we are persecuted, and so many lives have been lost because of it. I can tell you, that I have been gay from the moment I was born. I didn't choose to lose half of my family. I didn't chose to be bullied socially in instances such as high-school and the workplace on a regular basis. I didn't chose to be a lower lass citizen without rights being denied the basic civil liberties most have simply from existing. I only chose to be the person I am and always have been. If you can imagine I used to wake up hating myself, hurting myself and wanting to die everyday. My best friend turned boyfriend at the time was gay as well, and we confided in one another as straight cover. We tried to be normal so badly. One day I finally just said no. I'm going to live my life and I don't care anymore. I went on to find support groups on the Internet, do research, and take the time to just breathe and realize that there was nothing wrong with me, and that I could actually be myself. Shortly after I met the love of my life, the woman I now call my wife and we've been inseparable for nearly a decade. I don't flaunt my lesbianism, I don't go through everyday and think "I'm gay!" In my mind. I just feel like a normal person in a normal relationship and I'm not hiding or forcing anything. People who want to say being gay is a choice are the same people who deny being straight is a choice. If you can't fathom being with the same sex, if it repulses you and goes against your being, then how can you still spit out logic of "it's a choice"? I've been attracted to women for as long as I can remember, I used to play "dad" during house just so I could have and kiss the wife, and I've always levitated more towards untraditional ideas of what it means to be a girl. (I personally am not transgendered, but sympathize with those who are.) because if you're anything but the cookie cutter idealized version of what society and or Christianity wants you to be, then you are bad or damaged.

3. Denial of service.
I used to work at a used video game/DVD store in Texas. Texas is one of the few states (correct me if I'm wrong) that can deny service to anyone for any reason, or so I've been told. Of course, my manager liked to use this law like crazy when dealing with certain customers for differing reasons, but it was never a derogatory thing. Examples such as vulgar behavior, suspicion of theft, and others come to mind, but you could never do something like that because of race, appearance, beliefs, orientation, you name it. That's just common sense. History does repeat itself I guess because whatever fancy words you want to use to describe the issue, it's still just segregation, and discrimination. I'm also tired of hearing "that's my religious right!" Or "mans law can never beat Gods law!". So is your religious right more valid than my basic HUMAN rights? Also hate to inform everyone, but not all people are Christian. God himself says in the bible, follow mans law first, then gods law. But then again God said a lot of things that people conveniently forget...

Either way I know it seems like I am attacking people with an opposing viewpoint, but I'm not doing so on purpose. I've noticed that in debates like this it's always the response of "I'm being attacked! Since I disagree I'm considered wrong! I'm the victim." When sadly those people are attacking others who disagree with their viewpoint.

If I offended anyone I apologize, however this is something I feel needed to be said on my part. This is just a sore subject with me for personal reasons as you can all imagine, and I've had to argue my side of the story with countless friends, colleagues, family members, and strangers.

Lastly I know not all Christians are this way, and that most Christians can be very caring and compassionate people. When I loosely use the term Christian in this post I am merely using it as a catch all term for any person who abuses their religion/political view/or opinion against others.

 

[FairyLip]

I feel like this is a non-debate. It's bigoted to not accept LGBT people for who they are. The science backs it up, my personal experience backs it up, and marriage has become more of a symbol of love than a symbol of childbearing, especially because having children isn't societal mandated.

 

[Foxus]

I'm just curious in knowing the opinions of my fellow Smashers. Do you think the ruling given to us by the Supreme Court was just? Do you think your rights or freedoms have been taken away by this act? I've been having to hear a lot of negativity towards this subject since day one. I live in a very southern area, and the viewpoints here are as you can only imagine. On the 26th my wife and I literally had to travel just to get married, even though the law had changed. The courthouse where we live, along with several others in our state were refusing to give out licenses for WEEKS because they said it went against their beliefs. People were being outright denied marriage licenses because the employees didn't like same sex marriage. At one point when calling courthouses to ask before making the journey one woman said "we aren't issuing any, in fact we are seeking legal council." What the hell?! My point is that at this moment in time it is their job to do so, and it is also the LAW.

Either way this should be less about me groveling and more about your opinions.

I find the topic of marriage equality perplexing, and I praise the Supreme Court for its ruling. Those with religious convictions, mainly on the conservative spectrum, cry fowl that the ruling tramples on their beliefs. Sometimes in life, you have to put personal beliefs aside to conduct business, even if it means making a cake for a gay couple even though you have an issue with it. And this is coming from someone who is religious himself.

If anything, this has expanded our freedoms and rights as citizens. There will be objection, but there is objection to pretty much everything at one point or another. Change is good, and it should have honored, not criticized. As for your experience, that's absolutely ludicrous, and proves m y point there is objection and intolerance in our community. There's no excuse for denying a same sex couple a marriage license, its just about as bad as denying someone a marriage license for not liking their race.

 

[Claire Diviner]

As a rebuttal to the whole "homosexuality is a choice", brain scans show that homosexuality is something people are born with, and there is nothing that can "cure" someone of this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/23/GR2008062300060.html
http://www.advocate.com/health/2012...ntation-determined-brain-hemisphere-dominance
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html

Obviously, I fully support the LGBT community. That said, it doesn't matter now if someone agrees with the Supreme Court's ruling, same-sex marriage is here to stay. People hated it when African-Americans got their freedom, and now people are hating that the LGBT are having theirs. In time, more and more of the conservative bigots will disappear as society becomes more accepting of the ruling. Of course, bigotry will still exist in the same way racism still exist, but at least we have laws that will protect same-sex couples from discrimination. Discrimination is the true sin.

 

[Sehnsucht]

As a rebuttal to the whole "homosexuality is a choice", brain scans show that homosexuality is something people are born with, and there is nothing that can "cure" someone of this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/23/GR2008062300060.html
http://www.advocate.com/health/2012...ntation-determined-brain-hemisphere-dominance
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080616-gay-brain.html

Obviously, I fully support the LGBT community. That said, it doesn't matter now if someone agrees with the Supreme Court's ruling, same-sex marriage is here to stay. People hated it when African-Americans got their freedom, and now people are hating that the LGBT are having theirs. In time, more and more of the conservative bigots will disappear as society becomes more accepting of the ruling. Of course, bigotry will still exist in the same way racism still exist, but at least we have laws that will protect same-sex couples from discrimination. Discrimination is the true sin.

Even if it was a choice, what would it matter? Who would even care, save those whose choices it effects (i.e. the individual and their romantic and/or sexual partners)?

What consequences would there be if I, Sehnsucht, decided that starting tomorrow, I will pursue romantic and/or sexual relations with other males?

Basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ is what I suspect.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Even if it was a choice, what would it matter? Who would even care, save those whose choices it effects (i.e. the individual and their romantic and/or sexual partners)?

What consequences would there be if I, Sehnsucht, decided that starting tomorrow, I will pursue romantic and/or sexual relations with other males?

Basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ is what I suspect.

The answer is there would be no consequence for anyone. The only consequence suffered is at the hands of any bigots who act out in violence, because they hate seeing two people of the same gender showing affection for one another. Otherwise, being in a same-sex relationship has no effect on anyone.

 

[M15t3R E]

The backlash against same-sex marriages has never had any merit to it. Long ago, Popes declared that God is against same-sex unions giving no actual justification or sources. This bigotry spread like rapid fire and today, about half of protestant denominations are taught in church the same thing. The only passage in the ENTIRETY of the Bible is in Leviticus and states something to the extent of an abomination occurring if two men sleep together and that, therefore, they must be put to death. So why don't Christians go around putting them to death if this is their belief and it comes from the Bible...?

Nope.

Technically he's right, about homosexuals...

 

[Xandercosm]

Before this conversation goes any farther we should remember that the bible has no factual information in it and what one pope says doesn't change anything. We shouldn't base our morals on some crackpot book full of total BS information.

Honestly, I don't even understand why there was ever a debate in the first place. Obviously, people should be able to marry whoever they want. I think conservatives just like to be d***s and try to muck up the works whenever they can. You'd think if they were all about this country being free and having no laws they would be all for gay marriage but of course THATS being a sinner and not actual freedom. Logic peoples...

 

[Spak]

Before this conversation goes any farther we should remember that the bible has no factual information in it and what one pope says doesn't change anything. We shouldn't base our morals on some crackpot book full of total BS information.

1. Protestants don't have a pope
2. The Bible contains a LOT of events that are referenced by other ancient texts, so there is literally no ground to debate that there are no facts in it. People can debate how much of it is true, which I think it all is, but that's a different topic.

Honestly, I don't even understand why there was ever a debate in the first place. Obviously, people should be able to marry whoever they want. I think conservatives just like to be d***s and try to muck up the works whenever they can. You'd think if they were all about this country being free and having no laws they would be all for gay marriage but of course THATS being a sinner and not actual freedom. Logic peoples...

If you actually read my arguments, you would know that I'm not arguing for the banning of gay marriage; I'm arguing for people being able to avoid participating in what is a bastardization of what they believe to be marriage (which, by the way, was a concept introduced in the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible), so marriage is a religious concept.)

In addition, this conversation wasn't really going any farther... I kinda decided to unwatch the thread back in July and it's been one-sided since then. I've never found anyone else on the boards that shares the same opinion and everyone on this thread seemed pretty sure of themselves, so I figured I could be spending my energy more effectively fighting my friends in Melee rather than fighting 6 people I don't know over the concept of gay marriage. I'm actually glad I spoke up because If I didn't, it wouldn't be in "debate hall", it'd be in "mutual support hall".

Back to my blissful unwatching. Spak out.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

(which, by the way, was a concept introduced in the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible), so marriage is a religious concept.)

Wait, are you seriously claiming that marriage does not predate the bible?

 

[Spak]

Wait, are you seriously claiming that marriage does not predate the bible?

I'm saying that marriage doesn'r predate the Garden of Eden. I guess that predates the Bible because Moses recorded stuff a few hundred years after it happened, but it's still a concept created by God.

 

[Xandercosm]

I'm saying that marriage doesn'r predate the Garden of Eden. I guess that predates the Bible because Moses recorded stuff a few hundred years after it happened, but it's still a concept created by God.

This whole post is so LOL... Moses didn't exist, the Earth has been around for over 4,000,000,000 years, there never was any "garden of eden", and there is no god to create the concept of marriage. In fact, the only real reason for marriage is for the legal benefits that come with it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm saying that marriage doesn'r predate the Garden of Eden.

You're saying that as if the garden of eden was a real thing that happened.

 

[Kaiduru Zeta]

Pretty decent discussion. I pretty much go with the majority with the belief of discrimination is discrimination. No matter what your religious belief is you can't deny people on something they can't control.

 

[Elin]

Let's just say I'm an atheist who supports the LGBT community and gets disrespect from my Christian family. (even though some support gay marriage)

I've also been told that I'm going to hell for my beliefs and support of said community by strangers on the Internet. It doesn't help I live in something quite redneckish even though I'm from Michigan.

What I'm saying is that the LGBT community should ignore the detractors and discrimination and go on living their lives.

 

[Xandercosm]

Let's just say I'm an atheist.

Yes! I was hoping there would be some on this forum. Not alone, baby.

 

[Elin]

Yes! I was hoping there would be some on this forum. Not alone, baby.

The only other atheist in my family was my grandpa, but he passed away this June. I miss him....

 

[Xandercosm]

The only other atheist in my family was my grandpa, but he passed away this June. I miss him....

Aw...

 

[2thesky]

In my personal opinion, legalizing gay marriage was something way overdue. It really gets under my skin that people have such a hard time accepting something that really isn't that trivial.

 

[Xandercosm]

In my personal opinion, legalizing gay marriage was something way overdue. It really gets under my skin that people have such a hard time accepting something that really isn't that trivial.

Especially if we're supposed to be country about making your own personal decisions.

 

[M15t3R E]

I've said it before and will say it again... The only arguments against gay marriage are religious ones which hold no merit for a variety of reasons. First of all, the arguments stand and fall on their own. No part of the bible forbids gay marriage, explicitly or even ambiguously. Leviticus contains the sole passage which commands to execute two men who sleep together for committing an "abomination". Nobody follows this anyway in the civilized world, fortunately. So why merely oppose gay marriage if you're not going to become the hitman this holy text compels you to become? Besides, stopping gay marriage doesn't preclude them from doing the do, if you catch my drift. And why people even spend a moment of their day concerning themselves with THAT, I'll never understand. Now, we also have this long-standing American principle of separation of church and state. When state workers such as that obese woman who is currently justly jailed for violating two court orders to do her job and issue marriage licenses to a gay couple despite being divorced multiple times herself and therefore requiring a marriage license multiple times, these people are spitting upon American values, interests, and citizens AND failing to represent their religion. Laughably, societal concerns have risen from deluded conservative minds such as economic implications in allowing gay marriage to occur but of course this is fluff and laughed at by actual economists.
TL;DR: Hence, if you are against gay marriage you are an inexcusable, un-American reprobate and a failure within your religion as well. End of story.

 

[Xandercosm]

I've said it before and will say it again... The only arguments against gay marriage are religious ones which hold no merit for a variety of reasons. First of all, the arguments stand and fall on their own. No part of the bible forbids gay marriage, explicitly or even ambiguously. Leviticus contains the sole passage which commands to execute two men who sleep together for committing an "abomination". Nobody follows this anyway in the civilized world, fortunately. So why merely oppose gay marriage if you're not going to become the hitman this holy text compels you to become? Besides, stopping gay marriage doesn't preclude them from doing the do, if you catch my drift. And why people even spend a moment of their day concerning themselves with THAT, I'll never understand. Now, we also have this long-standing American principle of separation of church and state. When state workers such as that obese woman who is currently justly jailed for violating two court orders to do her job and issue marriage licenses to a gay couple despite being divorced multiple times herself and therefore requiring a marriage license multiple times, these people are spitting upon American values, interests, and citizens AND failing to represent their religion. Laughably, societal concerns have risen from deluded conservative minds such as economic implications in allowing gay marriage to occur but of course this is fluff and laughed at by actual economists.
TL;DR: Hence, if you are against gay marriage you are an inexcusable, un-American reprobate and a failure within your religion as well. End of story.

Beautiful! Absolutely beautiful! I couldn't have said it better myself! I really do feel like we are slowly forgetting what America was all about. Making your own personal choices (unless they hurt other people), be they about belief, relationship or anything. The fact that it took till now for gay marriage to be legalized is beyond me. Unfortunately, whenever a step forward like this is in the process of being made, there is huge pushback. I think that's why our country moves so slowly. Eventually, we'll be so far behind the world's other preeminent countries that we will seem as third world as the countries we senselessly invade. It's really sad, the state of our country. We are in such desperate need of a shift in mindset if we want our country to move forward and become more civilized.