The Gay Marriage Debate Thread

[Robert]

So Grover has a place to vent, this thread is needed.
Hey Grover, the mean old United States does pretty good on this list!
Legal recognition of
same-sex relationships
Same-sex marriage
Belgium
Canada
Netherlands

South Africa
Spain



Recognized in some regions
United States (MA)


Foreign marriages recognized
Aruba
Israel
Neth. Antilles
United States (NM, NY, RI)



Civil unions and
registered partnerships
Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary (eff. 1/1/2009)
Iceland

Luxembourg
New Zealand
Norway
Slovenia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay



Recognized in some regions
Argentina (C, R, VCP)
Australia (TAS; VIC and ACT both eff. 1/12/2008)
Brazil (RS)
Mexico (Coah., DF)
United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)


Unregistered co-habitation
Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia

Croatia
Israel
Portugal



Recognition debated
Argentina
Austria
Australia
Brazil
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Estonia
Ecuador
Faroe Islands

Greece
Ireland
Italy
Jersey
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Taiwan
United States
(IA, IL, MD, NM, NY, RI)



Recognition granted,
same-sex marriage debated
Czech Republic
Denmark
France
Hungary
Iceland
New Zealand

Norway
Portugal
Sweden
United Kingdom

United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)

[Mr. Electricity]

Originally Posted by Robert

So Grover has a place to vent, this thread is needed.
Hey Grover, the mean old United States does pretty good on this list!
Legal recognition of
same-sex relationships
Same-sex marriage
Belgium
Canada
Netherlands

South Africa
Spain



Recognized in some regions
United States (MA)


Foreign marriages recognized
Aruba
Israel
Neth. Antilles
United States (NM, NY, RI)



Civil unions and
registered partnerships
Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary (eff. 1/1/2009)
Iceland

Luxembourg
New Zealand
Norway
Slovenia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay



Recognized in some regions
Argentina (C, R, VCP)
Australia (TAS; VIC and ACT both eff. 1/12/2008)
Brazil (RS)
Mexico (Coah., DF)
United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)


Unregistered co-habitation
Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia

Croatia
Israel
Portugal



Recognition debated
Argentina
Austria
Australia
Brazil
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Estonia
Ecuador
Faroe Islands

Greece
Ireland
Italy
Jersey
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Taiwan
United States
(IA, IL, MD, NM, NY, RI)



Recognition granted,
same-sex marriage debated
Czech Republic
Denmark
France
Hungary
Iceland
New Zealand

Norway
Portugal
Sweden
United Kingdom

United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)

there is no muslim nations
on the list, why is that?

[FailingEnterpriseAdmin]

Originally Posted by Mr. Electricity

there is no muslim nations
on the list, why is that?

Because the Muslim nations are trying to piss you off. The fact that you noticed means the terrorists have won again!

Sucker.

[Mr. Electricity]

Originally Posted by FailingEnterpriseAdmin

Because the Muslim nations are trying to piss you off. The fact that you noticed means the terrorists have won again!

Sucker.

i guess muslims are not as
progressive

[Robert]

Gay marriage opponents vow to fight Calif. ruling

How can 7 judges undermine the will of the people? Why did the good folks of Cali even vote on the proposition if judges can just shitcan it?

[Sportin' Ravenwood]

In my opinion, marriage should be between a man and a woman. I think once you go to same sex marriages, you open up the law to alot of manipulation from pedophiles and other criminally deviant groups. Some people believe that there should be no age of consent either for sexual relations, the law can get twisted if this is not nipped in the bud right now. I'm OK with civil unions so gay partners can receive health benefits but not all the way to marriage. Just my opinion on the issue.

[contracheck]

Originally Posted by Sportin' Ravenwood

In my opinion, marriage should be between a man and a woman. I think once you go to same sex marriages, you open up the law to alot of manipulation from pedophiles and other criminally deviant groups. Some people believe that there should be no age of consent either for sexual relations, the law can get twisted if this is not nipped in the bud right now. I'm OK with civil unions so gay partners can receive health benefits but not all the way to marriage. Just my opinion on the issue.

Absolutely correct .... it is GOD who ordained marriage for one man, one woman, one lifetime, this is what the Bible teaches, the Bible which is the Word of God and the Final Authority for ALL OF US. God had a specific purpose for ordaining marriage on these HIS terms and the wide masses who are dimissing this will pay a high price for this as well as those who INSIST they were "born" gay ... it is not so ! because God does not make junk and would, if gays were "born" that way, offer some explanation why there are 'gays' ... homosexuality is a choosen lifestyle as one chooses to smoke or not to ... simple as that ...

Romans 1:24-30

[Dom182]

Originally Posted by contracheck

Absolutely correct .... it is GOD who ordained marriage for one man, one woman, one lifetime, this is what the Bible teaches, the Bible which is the Word of God and the Final Authority for ALL OF US. God had a specific purpose for ordaining marriage on these HIS terms and the wide masses who are dimissing this will pay a high price for this as well as those who INSIST they were "born" gay ... it is not so ! because God does not make junk and would, if gays were "born" that way, offer some explanation why there are 'gays' ... homosexuality is a choosen lifestyle as one chooses to smoke or not to ... simple as that ...

Romans 1:24-30

Ok, so which god? Allah, Yaweh, the god of protestants, of mormons, or that of Catholics, how about the Hindu version of a personal god. Each of these has distinct aspects based on the interpretation of their religion. 3 of them condone polygamy.

I don't agree that marriage is an institution ordained by god. Marriage has been around since before recorded history. It goes back at least to babylonians who came before the Bible or any singular god. The greeks also practiced marriage and again they had a polytheistic culture.

One reason for it was the creation of offspring. But a far more important reason for marriage was the cementing of alliances. Difficulties abounded in the ancient world, and the more allies you had the safer you were. Marriages were the prefered method for sealing alliances between families, clans, tribes, and ultimately nations.

The idea of marriage based on romantic love is actually a relatively recent innovation. Which I am all for considering I am married (wife is looking over the shoulder) The true purpose of marriage throughout the ages was advancement of family (clan, national -- whatever) interest. That's why throughout history most marriages were arranged. There was no romance or love involved -- this was business

So what does the bible which immerged over 2300 years after marriage have to do with it.

I would go more for Ravenwood's point except that I do not believe what any two other people do does anything to reduce the value or sanctity of my mariage.

[FailingEnterpriseAdmin]

Originally Posted by contracheck

Absolutely correct .... it is GOD who ordained marriage for one man, one woman, one lifetime, this is what the Bible teaches, the Bible which is the Word of God and the Final Authority for ALL OF US. God had a specific purpose for ordaining marriage on these HIS terms and the wide masses who are dimissing this will pay a high price for this as well as those who INSIST they were "born" gay ... it is not so ! because God does not make junk and would, if gays were "born" that way, offer some explanation why there are 'gays' ... homosexuality is a choosen lifestyle as one chooses to smoke or not to ... simple as that ...

Romans 1:24-30

There are about 1,000 different religious denominations here in the U.S. It sounds like you believe strongly in one of them and reject the other 999. Some of us go just a little bit further and reject all of them.

[contracheck]

I now understand much better WHY erac hires the people that it does ..... its because they are all BRAINDEAD ...

which God ?? The God that created YOU and the God one day you will be standing before and whose wrath and judgement you will not escape with "smart" talk .. and the God who sent his son who died for YOUR sins so that your ass has a chance to be saved .. THAT GOD .. stupid !

Originally Posted by Dom182

Ok, so which god? Allah, Yaweh, the god of protestants, of mormons, or that of Catholics, how about the Hindu version of a personal god. Each of these has distinct aspects based on the interpretation of their religion. 3 of them condone polygamy.

I don't agree that marriage is an institution ordained by god. Marriage has been around since before recorded history. It goes back at least to babylonians who came before the Bible or any singular god. The greeks also practiced marriage and again they had a polytheistic culture.

One reason for it was the creation of offspring. But a far more important reason for marriage was the cementing of alliances. Difficulties abounded in the ancient world, and the more allies you had the safer you were. Marriages were the prefered method for sealing alliances between families, clans, tribes, and ultimately nations.

The idea of marriage based on romantic love is actually a relatively recent innovation. Which I am all for considering I am married (wife is looking over the shoulder) The true purpose of marriage throughout the ages was advancement of family (clan, national -- whatever) interest. That's why throughout history most marriages were arranged. There was no romance or love involved -- this was business

So what does the bible which immerged over 2300 years after marriage have to do with it.

I would go more for Ravenwood's point except that I do not believe what any two other people do does anything to reduce the value or sanctity of my mariage.