New Jersey embraces civil rights for all couples - Page 26 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-30-2006, 10:22 PM   #376
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Adhering to traditional values is seen as bigotry in your eyes? The sacred right of marriage has stayed essentially the same throughout the course of history, I simply don't like the idea of it being embellished by various groups demanding entry into a club which they don't meet the criteria for which has been laid out over thousands of years. Is that really bigotry?


so only white men who own property should be able to vote?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:22 PM   #377
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Adhering to traditional values is seen as bigotry in your eyes? The sacred right of marriage has stayed essentially the same throughout the course of history, I simply don't like the idea of it being embellished by various groups demanding entry into a club which they don't meet the criteria for which has been laid out over thousands of years. Is that really bigotry?
Is it really bigotry? Yes.

What does history have to do with it, history also supported slavery for a long time, should we have kept that as well?

The problem is, you don't have any logical reasoning for your stance. For someone who talks about evolution, you would think you'd be aware that there is social evolution as well.

Why are you so hardline with the criteria that one needs a penis and the other a vagina? Because your parents said so?
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:24 PM   #378
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Adhering to traditional values is seen as bigotry in your eyes? The sacred right of marriage has stayed essentially the same throughout the course of history, I simply don't like the idea of it being embellished by various groups demanding entry into a club which they don't meet the criteria for which has been laid out over thousands of years. Is that really bigotry?
Yes, it is.

And I think your phrase "I simply don't like" hits directly to the heart of your opposition to gay marriage.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:26 PM   #379
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:13 AM
Right now taking scripture out of context and trying to push for theocratic law seems so much more logical...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:28 PM   #380
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Adhering to traditional values is seen as bigotry in your eyes? The sacred right of marriage has stayed essentially the same throughout the course of history, I simply don't like the idea of it being embellished by various groups demanding entry into a club which they don't meet the criteria for which has been laid out over thousands of years. Is that really bigotry?
Damn straight it's bigotry.

Was it bigotry to not allow women to vote? Was it bigotry to not allow women to own property? Was it bigotry to treat blacks like second class citizens? Was it bigotry to set up the apartheid system? Was it bigotry to set up imperial regimes and subjugate local populations to their rule?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

And would you question any of those things today?
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:37 PM   #381
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 01:43 AM
There are a million clubs which discriminate against various groups and I see marriage as one of those clubs, not everyone should be allowed entry. Many others like me see marriage purely as a sacred bonding between a man and a woman, which is an exclusive club. I wouldn't demand entry to a pregnant woman's club. Would that make them bigots? Once again, it's how you define marriage, I don't want it changed beacuse this tradtional value is perhaps the ONLY thing we've done right throught humaities discourse. Slavery is wrong, misogyny is wrong etc. etc.
__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:39 PM   #382
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
TI don't want it changed beacuse this tradtional value is perhaps the ONLY thing we've done right throught humaities discourse. Slavery is wrong, misogyny is wrong etc. etc.
And you don't think racists felt equally as strongly as you do that segregation was the right thing to do?
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:42 PM   #383
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
Adhering to traditional values is seen as bigotry in your eyes? The sacred right of marriage has stayed essentially the same throughout the course of history, I simply don't like the idea of it being embellished by various groups demanding entry into a club which they don't meet the criteria for which has been laid out over thousands of years. Is that really bigotry?
When those "traditional values" have no basis in logic, reason, or scientific fact, then yes, it's bigotry.

But we're not talking about "religious marriage." If that is the case, then gays can get married already in certain denominations. All marriages, ultimately, boil down to "civil marriage," which is the one that bestows all the property, financial, etc. rights.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:42 PM   #384
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
There are a million clubs which discriminate against various groups and I see marriage as one of those clubs, not everyone should be allowed entry. Many others like me see marriage purely as a sacred bonding between a man and a woman, which is an exclusive club. I wouldn't demand entry to a pregnant woman's club. Would that make them bigots? Once again, it's how you define marriage, I don't want it changed beacuse this tradtional value is perhaps the ONLY thing we've done right throught humaities discourse. Slavery is wrong, misogyny is wrong etc. etc.
Marriage isn't a club. Book club is a club, a fraternity is a club, poker night is a club... you know what all of these have in common, absolutely nothing to do with the government.

You're really gonna have to try harder.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:43 PM   #385
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 01:43 AM
Why can't we let a brother and sister marry asuming they love eachother very much and they don't have kids (let's say ones infertile). Or better yet maybe a brother and brother? Give me a hardline reason why. I fail to see any reasons apart from it's tradionally seen as 'wrong' in the eyes of society.
__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:44 PM   #386
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




no. you are dead wrong here, and the NJSC ruling profoundly disagrees with this.

yes, a homosexual can marry a heterosexual, but in most cases, this constitutes what might be known as "fraud" -- or whatever reason Rene Zelwegger gave when she divorced Kenny Chesney.

if the point of marriage is love, stability, and to create an area for adult sexuality, then allowing hetero to marry homo accomplishes none of this. a marriage cannot be "authentic" unless both participants are of the same gender.

if you want to *really* redefine marriage, let's encourage all those David Guests out there to marry his own Liza Minelli

ETA: it occured to me when i was just taking out my contacts that this is precisely the same argument against interracial marriage. after all, white people could marry other white people, why did they have to marry a black person?
Kenny Chesney is gay?

So you want to compare gays to blacks under Jim Crow.
Point 1
The despicable laws that forbid marriage across color lines were intended to foster segregation and advance racial subordination and economic inferiority. Yes, as I've said, issues that you raise regarding benefits, taxes and insurance need to be addressed, but do you seriously think my objection to same-sex marriage is to keep you economically oppressed? Must not be working as the homosexual population as a whole has a higher than average standard of living does it not?

Point 2
If this were true, wouldn't black Americans, above all others, be sympathetic to your "fight for equality under the law." Yet this isn't the case. Support for same-sex marriage is LOWER among blacks and other minorities than the national average. Why is this?

Point 3
Race is immaterial to wedlock, but sex--the duality of genders--has always been the basis for marriage and family structure.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:47 PM   #387
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
There are a million clubs which discriminate against various groups and I see marriage as one of those clubs, not everyone should be allowed entry. Many others like me see marriage purely as a sacred bonding between a man and a woman, which is an exclusive club. I wouldn't demand entry to a pregnant woman's club. Would that make them bigots? Once again, it's how you define marriage, I don't want it changed beacuse this tradtional value is perhaps the ONLY thing we've done right throught humaities discourse. Slavery is wrong, misogyny is wrong etc. etc.


That's about all I have to say about this nonsense.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:47 PM   #388
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,645
Local Time: 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
Why can't we let a brother and sister marry asuming they love eachother very much and they don't have kids (let's say ones infertile). Or better yet maybe a brother and brother? Give me a hardline reason why. I fail to see any reasons apart from it's tradionally seen as 'wrong' in the eyes of society.
Now you're really reaching. So there's a long line of brothers and sisters wanting to get married in your hometown?

Most incest relationships aren't truly consentual, there's usually some power trip occuring in the relationship.

Plus family already has legal rights in financial and medical needs.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:48 PM   #389
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
redhotswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Waiting for this madness to end.
Posts: 5,846
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
I don't want it changed beacuse this tradtional value is perhaps the ONLY thing we've done right throught humaities discourse. Slavery is wrong, misogyny is wrong etc. etc.
I don't think it is something done right throughout the course of history. It has been used and abused by heterosexual couples for ages. People can even get married while completely inebriated.

Brittney Spears in Vegas.

I say, instead of focusing on WHO is getting married, why not consider WHY? People wanna marry out of love, whats so wrong with that? I don't understand why there is such a backlash against gay marriage but not one against the 10 minute quick-and-easy marriages that go down in the casinos. It happens all the time. Some people get drunk, get married, and wake up the next day not even remembering it all. Whats the traditional value in that? Why is that being ignored?
__________________
redhotswami is offline  
Old 10-30-2006, 10:48 PM   #390
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman
Why can't we let a brother and sister marry asuming they love eachother very much and they don't have kids (let's say ones infertile). Or better yet maybe a brother and brother? Give me a hardline reason why. I fail to see any reasons apart from it's tradionally seen as 'wrong' in the eyes of society.
If you're really into marrying your sister, go for it. Who am I to stand in the way of your true love?

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com