ES Gay Marriage Poll

[Symbol]

Ok. let me get this straight. So if a straight couple get's married in a church, then they are officially married. What happens if they(straight couple) don't want a church wedding, but still want the term "married" to apply to them? Can they still go to the Justice of the Peace and get "married" or will they just be "civil unionized"?

I guess my question is, how would this affect straight couples who want to be "married", but not necessarily in a church?

Would be civil unionized or whatever they would like to call it. Before anyone believes I'm a religious person, that is far from the facts. I'm not Christian, I won't go into my religious beliefs, those that know me already know, those that don't, guess or ask me in PM.

My statement of the marriage as church only goes with the principle that before legality came into question over marriage, it was a religious practice. My personal belief is and always has been that church and state should be separate in all forms. If the church wants the "sanctity" of marriage to be upheld, then "marriage" should be church.

I don't believe there should be any difference other than a title and who fills the paper work out.

[Major Harris]

Is there an echo in here?

more than one.

churches can still perform marriages, and the church can even keep the term "marriage." call the government part of it something else, for everybody.

that's just too simple.

[Symbol]

Sorry Major, didn't see that post of yours. Just got lazy and didn't feel like reading 12 pages. At least I admit to my laziness.

[Cherick]

Of course it should be legalized. Everyone has the right to fall in love with whoever the **** they want! And there should not be any obstructions for two persons to get married.

There are other things happening in the world that actually affect us directly, but instead, we choose to discriminate 2 individuals who love each other regardless of gender and that all they want is to get married so they can say their relationship is complete.

This is one of the reasons I hate religions! It is disgusting the way they manipulate. And I've been in Catholic religion, my whole family is catholic, I've tried evangelic. I've read and heard a little about other religions, and they all come down to the same ****, manipulate your life based on what a book says.

Me and my wife got married thru the catholic religion, and it was even kinda funny how the priest had no idea what was going on, he was misreading stuff from the bible, and skipping steps, at one point we were guiding him on what was next. There was not much sacred about it, lol.

[brandymac27]

Would be civil unionized or whatever they would like to call it. Before anyone believes I'm a religious person, that is far from the facts. I'm not Christian, I won't go into my religious beliefs, those that know me already know, those that don't, guess or ask me in PM.

My statement of the marriage as church only goes with the principle that before legality came into question over marriage, it was a religious practice. My personal belief is and always has been that church and state should be separate in all forms. If the church wants the "sanctity" of marriage to be upheld, then "marriage" should be church.

I don't believe there should be any difference other than a title and who fills the paper work out.

Ok. I think I understand now. But I still don't know how that would fly based solely on the question that I just asked. I think there will be a lot of non religious (or for other reasons) straight couples that do want to be married and have the term "married" apply to them without having to get married in an actual church. How would the state deal with this issue? Would the J.O.P. give straight couples a marriage certificate, but give gay couples a civil union certificate? If this is the case, then you could run into more problems.

I'm just trying to figure out how this would work.

[Major Harris]

Ok. I think I understand now. But I still don't know how that would fly based solely on the question that I just asked. I think there will be a lot of non religious (or for other reasons) straight couples that do want to be married and have the term "married" apply to them without having to get married in an actual church. How would the state deal with this issue? Would the J.O.P. give straight couple a marriage certificate, but give gay couples a civil union certificate? If this is the case, then you could run into more problems.

I'm just trying to figure out how this would work.

easy...

get a marriage license from the state for legal / tax purposes. hetero and homo alike.

if you want the religious version, go to the priest. but his has nothing to do w/ legal issues / taxes.

it's not hard.

[laurent]

I don't have irrational fear. I am not anti gay and could accept a gay child. Thats where you are wrong. You are making implications to prove your point.

I know from raising children that children need male and female role models. If you have kids you would know the same.

You're mistaking perception and first hand experience as knowledge that you can draw from when in fact it's just an opinion.

I also think children of divorce have different struggles than children from a 2 parent home. Male and female.

I agree, and I am not sure why you'd bring it up in the context of gay marriage unless you're attempting to imply that homosexuals lead a more promiscuous lifestyle that will eventually lead to divorce.

If you want to imply no issues would exist from being raised in a same sex home. Well thats just silly.

I've neither said nor implied that issues wouldn't exist, I'm simply disputing that the inevitable issues that these children will be confronted with disqualify same sex couples from being good, nurturing parents that can raise children.

My guess is you either don't have children of your own.

You're right I do not have children. I've had for a long time however a keen interest in early childhood development and psychology.

[AsburySkinsFan]

easy...

get a marriage license from the state for legal / tax purposes. hetero and homo alike.

if you want the religious version, go to the priest. but his has nothing to do w/ legal issues / taxes.

it's not hard.

HELLO....Hello....hello....hello......

Yep, I knew I heard an echo....:applause:

[laurent]

fixed it

Thanks, I wrote the complete opposite of what I meant to...

I'm with you a 100%.

[brandymac27]

easy...

get a marriage license from the state for legal / tax purposes. hetero and homo alike.

if you want the religious version, go to the priest. but his has nothing to do w/ legal issues / taxes.

it's not hard.

So the religious ceremony is just for personal reasons, etc. and not to be called "married" in a legal sense? In this case, I guess I could see this working.

[Gibbsisgod2006]

I dont understand if a gay couple were able to get a civil union and have the same rights of a married couple what is the big deal?

[Major Harris]

So the religious ceremony is just for personal reasons, etc. and not to be called "married" in a legal sense? In this case, I guess I could see this working.

well, i think personally that religion should get to keep the word marriage.

call the legal thing something else. but i am biased in this, maybe we could flip a coin.

[Major Harris]

I'm with you a 100%.

told ya'.

i think asbury and you pretty much see eye to eye, your semantics don't quite match yet.

but he doesn't think churches should be forced to perform marriages for gays. and he's right.

[laurent]

told ya'.

Never said I wasn't dense.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Omigoodness, does anyone realize how close we are to a consensus here?!

Quick somebody get a poster from the Stadium to screw this up!

We have a reputation PEOPLE!!!!

[brandymac27]

well, i think personally that religion should get to keep the word marriage.

call the legal thing something else. but i am biased in this, maybe we could flip a coin.

really though, what's the difference b/w a civil union and marriage? Since they're technically the same thing, what's the big hoorah about gay's getting married? I mean, they will get all the benefits ( and crap that goes along with it) of marriage, so basically they are in fact married. So why not just give them a legal marriage certificate and call them "married"?

[AsburySkinsFan]

really though, what's the difference b/w a civil union and marriage? Since they're technically the same thing, what's the big hoorah about gay's getting married? I mean, they will get all the benefits ( and crap that goes along with it) of marriage, so basically they are in fact married. So why not just give them a legal marriage certificate and call them "married"?

Because for too many people "marriage" has direct religious overtones.

[Major Harris]

Because for too many people "marriage" has direct religious overtones.

right, and some people (lots actually) want to profess their commitment before god. let them have that. but let's not tie government to it.

[chipwhich]

You're mistaking perception and first hand experience as knowledge that you can draw from when in fact it's just an opinion.

No, I think experience in a situation provides more knowledge than a simple opinion. I am drawing from real life experience not opinionated thoughts.

I agree, and I am not sure why you'd bring it up in the context of gay marriage unless you're attempting to imply that homosexuals lead a more promiscuous lifestyle that will eventually lead to divorce.

Again you are bringing in the extreme to make a point rather than bringing in real facts.

I've neither said nor implied that issues wouldn't exist, I'm simply disputing that the inevitable issues that these children will be confronted with disqualify same sex couples from being good, nurturing parents that can raise children.

You're right I do not have children. I've had for a long time however a keen interest in early childhood development and psychology.

Look child rearing is the toughest thing that you will ever do in your life.

Don't trivialize the issue. Thats all I am saying.

[AsburySkinsFan]

right, and some people (lots actually) want to profess their commitment before god. let them have that. but let's not tie government to it.

Bingo

[brianm23]

Where did I say a child would be confused? I think that a kid being raised by gay people would turn out gay aporoximently the same percentage as kids being raised by straight parents. The kids sexual orientation isn't why im agianst it.

Its the stigma and cruelty at a young age by kids and adults. I also think growing up with a society that says one thing and in a gay household would be confusing and tough on a young persons mind. I suppose those are my main reasons. I think that kids should have a mom and dad healthy development. I don't think that makes me a bigot at all.

I'd love to see any statistics on kids who have grown up with gay parents. No one has still answered, are gays are allowed to adopt?

I have no idea on whether or not gay couples can legally adopt. 1) never tried to adopt 2) not gay 3) never researched gay couples and adopting

There again, you are using the old "growing up with angst" as your defense, but the same can be said with black kids or kids with parents that are fat or ugly. Them having gay parents isn't going to affect them any more than those I mentioned above.

I think there is underlining to your statements that makes me think you are a bigot. That said, I think that we are all bigots when it comes to something.

I said its my opinion that they probably shouldn't. I think it could confuse the child, not to mention all the ridicule he or she would go through. I think its important for kids to have a mom and a dad.

[laurent]

No, I think experience in a situation provides more knowledge than a simple opinion. I am drawing from real life experience not opinionated thoughts.

Real life experience from one isolated, small sample. The only thing you present me with is your opinion and you're asking me to accept just because "you know".

Is that your argument? You KNOW that children need male and female role models and that's why gay couples are unfit to raise children. Really, that's it?

Excuse me if I find that "argument" a bit hard to accept.

Again you are bringing in the extreme to make a point rather than bringing in real facts.

I've asked a simple question in response to a statement you made that seemingly had no relevance to the discussion we've had. I've made my own inference for lack of proper context. Heck, I went as far as agreeing with you.

Why not simply answer the question?

Look child rearing is the toughest thing that you will ever do in your life.

Don't trivialize the issue. Thats all I am saying.

As hard as it is for you to accept, the only one that's trivializing the issue is you.

Do you not realize how absurd it is to sit here and say that the only way to raise a child is with a male and female as parents with ample evidence to the contrary?

I have met plenty of kids that would have been better served with a caring same sex couple than the self absorbed deadbeats that raised them.

[SUSkinsFan]

Marriages can take place in other venues besides a church. Justice of the Peace can marry people.

My point was that I view what the state does, and what the church does, in regards to marriage as two very different things. Your union being recognized by the state means you get the benefits of being married, your union being recognized by the church means that you are married in the eyes of God.

I have no problem with a church telling a homosexual couple that they won't marry them (that is their right as a private institution), but the state has no right to refuse to give the same rights to homosexual couples as heterosexual couples.

[chipwhich]

Real life experience from one isolated, small sample. The only thing you present me with is your opinion and you're asking me to accept just because "you know".

Is that your argument? You KNOW that children need male and female role models and that's why gay couples are unfit to raise children. Really, that's it?

Excuse me if I find that "argument" a bit hard to accept

Listen if you have never been a parent, your knowledge of parenting is VERY limited. It's just a fact. It's kind of like someone who can't swim trying to give opinions on a swimmers techniques. The opinion carries little merit because you haven't had experience actually in day to day... year to year interactions with your children. Real experience leads to knowledge. That is a fact my friend. I find it amusing someone with no experience parenting is arguing with a parent and somehow implying I don't understand.

Do you not realize how absurd it is to sit here and say that the only way to raise a child is with a male and female as parents with ample evidence to the contrary?

I have met plenty of kids that would have been better served with a caring same sex couple than the self absorbed deadbeats that raised them.

You implying all same sex couples are caring? You implying all hetero couples are deadbeats? Look you will have bad parenting in ANY combination of parents. Black/white, gay/straight, handicapped, asian. There are good parents and bad parents in the world.

I can't guarantee any child in this world will be born to good parents. What I CAN guarantee is that a child that is adopted by a gay couple WILL NOT have 1 of: Male influence or Female influence in their life.

Having both male and female influences in childrens lives is critical in their emotional development. Thats just the way it is my friend.

[bcl05]

Listen if you have never been a parent, your knowledge of parenting is VERY limited. It's just a fact. It's kind of like someone who can't swim trying to give opinions on a swimmers techniques. The opinion carries little merit because you haven't had experience actually in day to day... year to year interactions with your children. Real experience leads to knowledge. That is a fact my friend. I find it amusing someone with no experience parenting is arguing with a parent and somehow implying I don't understand.

You implying all same sex couples are caring? You implying all hetero couples are deadbeats? Look you will have bad parenting in ANY combination of parents. Black/white, gay/straight, handicapped, asian. There are good parents and bad parents in the world.

I can't guarantee any child in this world will be born to good parents. What I CAN guarantee is that a child that is adopted by a gay couple WILL NOT have 1 of: Male influence or Female influence in their life.

Having both male and female influences in childrens lives is critical in their emotional development. Thats just the way it is my friend.

So should we outlaw single parent households because there isn't both male and female influence? What if one parent dies? Should the kids be taken from the remaining parent and given to a hetero couple? Its a BS argument.

What is critical to kids is that they get good, consistent parenting that prepares them to be capable, independent adults. That can come from one or two parents, gay or straight.