Gay Rights - Page 15
   

       The Horse Forum > Life Beyond Horses > General Off Topic Discussion

Gay Rights

This is a discussion on Gay Rights within the General Off Topic Discussion forums, part of the Life Beyond Horses category

    Like Tree214Likes

     
    LinkBack Thread Tools
        07-03-2012, 10:41 AM
      #141
    Trained
    Faceman, I think that the states should (and probably do) only have the right to issue what is a civil contract. Only a religious organization has the moral and legal right to call the marriage "holy". That being said, what is wrong with the states issuing legal marriage certificates to any consenting adults that want them? The churches or religious groups can then decide if they are "holy" or not.

    For the record, all these concepts are new to me. I never even considered gay marriage until recently as a legitimate concept. Also for the record, I have been in a stable heterosexual marriage for 31 years.
         
    Sponsored Links
    Advertisement
     
        07-03-2012, 11:05 AM
      #142
    Showing
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Faceman    
    No, that is not a definition limited to Canada. There is nothing wrong with a courthouse marriage, but that is a civil ceremony here in the US, just as anywhere else. Depending upon one's personal definition, a courthouse marriage is actually a civil union - it is not a holy marriage performed in the presence of, and with the blessing of, God. That is why so many people initially get married at the courthouse and then subsequently have a church marriage. While a civil marriage still encompasses all the "rights" of any marriage, and formalizes the committment of two partners, it does not have the same meaning as a church marriage - assuming of course that one believes in a God to begin with. To the Godless, they of course are one and the same.

    There seems to be an attitude here (not necessarily by you - just in general) that "marriage" is nothing more than a legal contract. I feel very sorry for people that view it as nothing more than that. The relationship I have with Mrs. Face is far more than a mere legal contract, and it saddens me that people today are so shallow and limited in their committments that they will never enjoy what a true marriage is. The lack of a full committment, body and soul, is perhaps why the divorce rate is so high and so many people never get married to begin with. It is like haveing a cake without any icing, but I suppose if you have never had icing to begin with, or don't even know what icing is, it really doesn't matter because you don't know what you are missing...
    Thanks for explaining, FM!

    P.S. I don't think one should marry just to have benefits or "legal contract" (especially these days when people can work and achieve a lot independently of the gender or race). Marriage is much more than that in my eyes, and I do believe one can have a full commitment whether both people are religious or not.
         
        07-03-2012, 11:32 AM
      #143
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Celeste    
    Faceman, I think that the states should (and probably do) only have the right to issue what is a civil contract. Only a religious organization has the moral and legal right to call the marriage "holy". That being said, what is wrong with the states issuing legal marriage certificates to any consenting adults that want them? The churches or religious groups can then decide if they are "holy" or not.

    For the record, all these concepts are new to me. I never even considered gay marriage until recently as a legitimate concept. Also for the record, I have been in a stable heterosexual marriage for 31 years.
    The problem is, if it is left up to the states, I'm not sure they all would go ahead and institute civil unions for homosexuals. Many of the more conservative states have passed laws that are quite frankly anti-homosexual - particularly in the area of the adoption of children by homosexuals. I would have nothing against a federal discriminatory law that mandates civil unions between homosexuals, and requires the same BASIC rights enjoyed by heterosexual marriages. I would, though, oppose using the term "marriage".

    As to your last paragraph, homosexual unions should be a concept we all endorse - there may be disagreement on the "marriage" issue, but there is no justification for withholding rights from a homosexual couple that are enjoyed by a heterosexual couple. The fact that I, and others, consider homosexuality morally wrong should not be an issue when it comes to people's rights. I consider adultery and promiscuity morally wrong too, but that doesn't meanpeople that engage in those vices should be treated like second class citizens.

    As a sidebar, I will repeat an opinion I stated earlier - whether it is homosexuals or heterosexuals, it is all the same to me - I do not support certain rights, such as insurance and social security, to couples that are not formally and legally bound, and that includes unmarried heterosexual couples, no matter how long they have lived together. I do not believe it is right to grant a couple the benefits associated with a legal committment if they have not made that committment. Just my little quirk...
         
        07-03-2012, 11:33 AM
      #144
    Trained
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kitten_Val    
    Benefits as a spouse (insurance, tax return, etc.).

    I do support all-states-wide civil union, because in case of "divorce" or death the partner should have same rights as spouse IMO, and be protected. (inaclick, gay couples can adopt kids here in US as well as be together on loan, etc.)

    However I have double feeling about the benefits (unless the company is willing to provide insurance as its policy). For example, if I live with my mom (we both work, both on loan, pay for utilities, in principle I can adopt a kid if I want etc.). So everything is the same as I'd live with the same-sex partner (besides the sex of course), then why can't I put her on my tax return or get medical insurance through my company as well? How different is it from living with the partner?
    Good point, Kitten!

    I can't really find a "right" in the US that a gay man or woman is denied. Wanting "special rights" is not that same as being denied rights.
         
        07-03-2012, 11:36 AM
      #145
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Missy May    
    Good point, Kitten!

    I can't really find a "right" in the US that a gay man or woman is denied. Wanting "special rights" is not that same as being denied rights.
    Well, I will give you two (which I mentioned above) - insurance, and social security...I am speaking of couples here, of course.

    As far as basic rights, I agree with you 100%. In fact, due to homosexuals being included in the "protected groups", homosexuals in many cases have far more rights than I do as a white, anglo saxon protestant male...
         
        07-03-2012, 12:40 PM
      #146
    Showing
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Faceman    
    In fact, due to homosexuals being included in the "protected groups", homosexuals in many cases have far more rights than I do as a white, anglo saxon protestant male...
    Not to open a can of worms, but what do you mean by "protected groups"? I know if you are a minority (by race or gender) you can have some privileges, but I've never heard the sexual orientation is also the "minority" thing now.

    I do agree about insurance etc. though. I know several people who are "married" just to have insurance through wife or husband, don't even live together. But then how would you prove you have a real marriage, not a fake one (can't imagine a process like the one in immigration ).
         
        07-03-2012, 12:47 PM
      #147
    Yearling
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Faceman    
    The problem is, if it is left up to the states, I'm not sure they all would go ahead and institute civil unions for homosexuals. Many of the more conservative states have passed laws that are quite frankly anti-homosexual - particularly in the area of the adoption of children by homosexuals. I would have nothing against a federal discriminatory law that mandates civil unions between homosexuals, and requires the same BASIC rights enjoyed by heterosexual marriages. I would, though, oppose using the term "marriage".

    As to your last paragraph, homosexual unions should be a concept we all endorse - there may be disagreement on the "marriage" issue, but there is no justification for withholding rights from a homosexual couple that are enjoyed by a heterosexual couple. The fact that I, and others, consider homosexuality morally wrong should not be an issue when it comes to people's rights. I consider adultery and promiscuity morally wrong too, but that doesn't meanpeople that engage in those vices should be treated like second class citizens.

    As a sidebar, I will repeat an opinion I stated earlier - whether it is homosexuals or heterosexuals, it is all the same to me - I do not support certain rights, such as insurance and social security, to couples that are not formally and legally bound, and that includes unmarried heterosexual couples, no matter how long they have lived together. I do not believe it is right to grant a couple the benefits associated with a legal committment if they have not made that committment. Just my little quirk...

    Faceman it seems like you and I are on the same page.

    Marriage to me IS more than just legal rights. To take it down to that level, to me, is offensive. I consider my marriage to my husband to be much more than a tax write off and social security (which we probably won't ever see the benefit of anyways). My marriage is much deeper than that.

    However, I do not think withholding those rights to tax write offs and other benefits to gay couples, who have professed their relationship, is right. It is wrong to do so. Your right to things provided by the government shouldn't be based on your orientation.

    I truly believe the reason religions so strongly oppose the "marriage" or gays is because it goes directly against what THEIR beliefs are. To them, marriage is more than a tax write off, or other benefits. They aren't debating benefits, they are debating MORALS. The Catholic church doesn't recognize courthouse marriages between heterosexuals either, unless the couple gets a go ahead and does an extensive marriage counseling course first, and has a good, legit reason for doing so. I had to get a variance of sorts for my marriage, since my husband is Catholic and I wanted to get married in my protestant church. We had to do the Catholic prep to be recognized in the Catholic church as a married couple. They have a way of doing things, it is completely separate from the legal system. Keep in mind the Catholic church is not only in America, but everywhere, and they aren't going to change around American laws. Even if the gay "marriage" is passed, they still won't recognize those marriages.

    And while we are on the topic of marriage, to me it is bad enough when someone gets married just for benefits, or when they don't take it seriously, even when they are heterosexual. Look at the celebrities for goodness sake. Marriage in this country has lost its meaning, and it has nothing to do with the gay movement. It has everything to do with people not knowing what commitment and love means.

    Oh and another thing, I know someone mentioned being persecuted or made fun of for being homosexual. I do believe that is wrong. It is not right. But keep in mind that it is not exclusive. Heterosexuals get made fun of, or are given dirty looks as well. Maybe not for the same things, but for other things. Me, I'm pregnant,and young. I'm married, sure, but that still doesn't stop the weird looks and comments I get. I'm treated like an alien sometimes on my campus, even if people don't mean to. Heck one of my doctors (who I don't see anymore) wouldn't even acknowledge my husband when I went for a prenatal appointment, I assume it is because she, like other, believes I got "knocked up" and then married the guy to save face. That stuff isn't true, but people judge me because I got married, and wanted a family a lot earlier than others do.

    My point being, people judge. If you think that your alone in this, your not. Somebody, somewhere, will always find something to not like about you. How YOU respond and react is what really matters. When I get those looks, I simply remember who I am and what I stand for, knowing I have someone who loves me to support me. That should be good enough, regardless of what others think.
    Ray MacDonald likes this.
         
        07-03-2012, 12:53 PM
      #148
    Green Broke
    Just to throw in my own thoughts..

    I'm okay with homosexual couples making a union. I think said union should have all the legal perks and pitfalls of marriage. I don't think it should be called marriage. To me, marriage is 1 man and 1 woman. A homosexual couple is not that - so the jar can look the same but just stick a different label on it.

    Everyone has a mother and a father. Gender defined terms. One is no less than the other. However, we don't call all parents mother.

    The only problem I have with the gay lifestyle is when it's very overtly sexual. But you know what? I don't like it when heterosexual couples are overtly sexual either. It all screams "haha look at me I'm racy and special and there's nothing you can do about it! Neener neener!"
    Posted via Mobile Device
    kitten_Val likes this.
         
        07-03-2012, 12:59 PM
      #149
    Trained
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Faceman    
    Well, I will give you two (which I mentioned above) - insurance, and social security...I am speaking of couples here, of course.

    As far as basic rights, I agree with you 100%. In fact, due to homosexuals being included in the "protected groups", homosexuals in many cases have far more rights than I do as a white, anglo saxon protestant male...
    Well, I see it slightly differently. A gay man can't be put under his gay partner's insurance, and a heterosexual man can't be put under his roomie's, either. Same, same. Ditto, SS. It is rights in addition to those that other's have that they are after.

    What two consenting adult's sexual habits or preferences are - I could care a less....so long as I, or anyone, am not adversely affected by or have to hear about any of it. But, to bad for me...I don't have the right to not be offended (unlike gays) b/c - I, like you, am not a member of the "more equal" group.
         
        07-03-2012, 01:56 PM
      #150
    Trained
    Minorities including homosexuals are not asking for special rights.
    They are asking for equal rights and protection under the law.
    Until the Federal Government passes the ENDA that will protect Gays from being fired soley because they are Gay. They lack this protection.
    I cannot fire an employee for being an ethnic or religous mionority.
    Not only is it immoral it is illegal under Federal Law.
    If we continue to call unions cerified by the states marriage then we need to call all unions marriage.
    Same sex couples are denied the rights by State and Federal governments that stratight married couples are due.
    Same sex couples must navigate legal avenues to be afforded the same rights. That is the essence of discrimination. By doing so the state is saying certain relationships are Valid while others are not.
    Even then those legal matters may be challenged in court.
    I know of several Couples where one died of AIDS with a will awarding their partner the entire estate. Familiy members of the deceased then went to court and had that will thrown out.
    Lesbians have been denied visitation in emergency rooms as their partners lay dieing.
    If that happened to one straight couple the laws would be changed overnight.
    By the way if , I fully believe that Faceman and others would not allow anyone to be harrassed or threatened in their presence.
    Shalom
    Ray MacDonald likes this.
         

    Thread Tools

    Similar Threads
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    Inmates Rights in Prison? WesternBella General Off Topic Discussion 96 05-16-2012 11:54 PM
    what are my rights? what can I do? moderncowgirl Horse Law 47 02-19-2012 04:20 PM
    My rights? caligirl70 Horse Law 22 07-25-2011 09:22 PM
    Rights to sell? dmj1993 Horse Law 21 09-06-2010 11:50 AM
    Animal Rights Question whitetrashwarmblood General Off Topic Discussion 18 12-06-2008 03:02 PM



    All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:38 AM.


    Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
    Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0