General

[quote=TheSupaHobo]Wow, I didn't see that one coming at all. Well, however you wanna live your life man, I'm supporting you, haha.[/quote]

Im prolly going to have a wedding and stuff and sign a bajillion papers, but who really cares what you call it. I don't need someone to give in and hatefully except calling my union a marriage. It is just a definition. If they want to keep it with a guy and a girl. Eh. I will prolly just tell people Im "married." Just thought the straight people had it first.

[quote=TrueAtheist]Something about how different races werent used to be accepted[/quote]

Never heard Christianity go on about not having two different races in a marriage. Maybe if you showed me a quote someplace. I just dont understand the big deal I guess....

I came to this thread because I was mildly interested in the topic. Stayed because of @assumptions

[quote=TheSupaHobo]Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you like that. It's just that people who normally makes post like don't put much thought into it and is solely based on views set by parents/peers. I used to be very religious and homophobic, whether those two are related is another story. Then I went to college and thought more about it and now I'm more open to controversial topics such as gay marriage.

But why not look at it this way: Imagine if you were in the same position in which you are attractive to the same sex and you are bound by such laws and discriminated by people who think it's not morally right to be married as a gay couple, let alone even being together. Why allow the wedding of a man and woman when the feelings a man with another man would feel are practically mutual? I remember watching a documentary in which a tribe would hunt down albino versions of their kinds because those who were genetically born as such were thought to be cursed. This is pretty much the same thing, except to a lesser degree because we have a system in place. It's unfortunate how we spend so much time trying to figure out why people are gay because religious fanatics(not singling them out exclusively) make gay marriage an issue when it really isn't even a problem.[/quote]

Im a homosexual.

All I can say is wow. It doesn't concern you if 2 men or 2 women want to get married. Love is love and who are you to judge if 2 people who love each other should get married or not. I agree with @trueatheist since he has a good outlook of things.

@br333 So you're defending traditional marriage? So you think blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry whites? Your defending the traditional meaning right?

[quote=br333]I didn't say we should keep it based solely on tradition. I meant it was a long, very traditional word that is well defined. Why would we change a definition of a word. That is like a group of people pushing to include hitting old people in the definition of slavery. I didnt say gays shouldnt have rights, infact I pushed for more equal rights, but it shouldnt be under the same word as marriage. Plus, I have thought this over. It wasn't a random thought.[/quote]

You mention that the fact that marriage being defined as between a man and a woman is a tradition, as if it holds some sort of significance however it does not. And like I said, we would change a definition belonging to a world to make it more inclusive in the legal sphere. The reasoning behind that is that it undermines certain individuals rights, and in the legal sphere we wish to promote equality under the law. Henceforth, giving two separate words to things which should be equal creates an unnecessary distinction that leads to hairsplitting and inequality. What you are pushing for is a bias.

[quote=MrPebbles]You're comparing SLAVERY to the prohibition of gay marriage?

REALLY?[/quote]

No, I'm comparing denial and devaluing marriage between a gay couple to a denial of rights. And there is no such thing as gay marriage. When two people of the same gender get married they don't gay marry each other. They simply get married. Even your usage of terms tells me where your mind is on these issues.

[quote=br333]That was mean... Such an offensive term too, but yes I did... I assumed you meant the parenthesized 2? The Bolded 2 didnt really prove anything... >__>

1
a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law[b] (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>[/b]
b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock
c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities[/quote]

THE DICTIONARY DONT LIE BOY...

[quote=bumblexxxbee]... did you even read the second one? no? coz your to[/quote]

That was mean... Such an offensive term too, but yes I did... I assumed you meant the parenthesized 2? The Bolded 2 didnt really prove anything... >__>

1
a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock
c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities

... did you even read the second one? no? coz your to dam retarded..

[quote=bumblexxxbee]Merriam-Webster would like to prove you wrong...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage
read the 2nd one.[/quote]

Right, it specifies same sex marriage... which is a thing now because it has successfully been redefined in some areas.

@Greenf00t: Seee. You put it very nicely. I liked it! Thumbs up.

Gender and sexual orientation aren't as black and white as people make it out to be. Social norms dictate what's masculine and what's feminine, and society expects people to follow those roles. As long as two people love each other and are happy, they should have the same right as anyone else to get married and have a family

Also, your ice cream/chair analogy wasn't very well thought out. If marriage equals ice cream, why does gay marriage equal chair? What's different from two gay people getting married as opposed to a man and woman getting married? They'd still love each other, share ownership of their belongings, and be able to raise a family just like any strait couple would. The only difference is they're the same gender. A more appropriate comparison would be to say marriage between a man and a woman is like chocolate ice cream, and marriage between a man/man or woman/woman is vanilla ice cream. They're both ice cream, just different flavors

[quote=br333]Probably. But like I wrote a post ago, I think it is silly that two groups are clashing over a definition in a dictionary. Seems silly to me. It was between a man and a woman first, at least as far as I have seen. So why not just let them keep it like that.

@above: Your link does nothing...[/quote]

Fixed the link.

I personally don't care what you guys would call it, i personally just want to have someone to love. But what pisses me off is when people say oh i don't like gay people. You never know that a new person you meet is gay and you might become great friends with them and then find out they are gay. It doesn't change the person or how they act just who they love, don't judge someone because they are, give them a chance cause most of them are really great. Others not so much, they are still a person and deserve the same respect as everyone else.

Merriam-Webster would like to prove you wrong...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage
read the 2nd one.

[quote=EquineBM]@br333: They could change the name but I think most of the gay community would be highly offended.[/quote]

Probably. But like I wrote a post ago, I think it is silly that two groups are clashing over a definition in a dictionary. Seems silly to me. It was between a man and a woman first, at least as far as I have seen. So why not just let them keep it like that.

@above: Your link does nothing...

[quote=br333]Marriage is between a man and a woman and it is a long lasting tradition.[/quote]

I have been waiting for this
www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-0u9Ad886M

[quote=metaghost4]@misoh0rny: are you really that ignorant to assume the TS is American? Last I checked the majority of the world doesn't tolerate homosexuality, even a lot less compared to general America.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure mostly Americans and Canadians use this site, some Australians as well.

So it's not that big of a stretch to assume he's American.

[quote=TheSupaHobo]Give it a few years, the world will have less people like the topic starter.[/quote]

T___T Less people like me? What does that even mean.... I said gays should have more rights.... -sad-

Edit: Oh and I see how you could see having a different word, would mirror the old, "Separate but equal" out. Which, I dont think everything should just be separate and equal. I think it is just silly to redefine a word. I just imagine two groups clashing over a definition in a dictionary.

[quote=MrPebbles]You're comparing SLAVERY to the prohibition of gay marriage?

REALLY?[/quote]

Well, both are a discrimination and a limitation of rights, so yes they are comparable.

Not calling it marriage promotes discrimination.

[quote=EquineBM]I respect your opinion, but I disagree.

I believe gays should have all the rights a man and woman would have together, meaning they have the right to be labelled as married in a marriage.[/quote]

First off, may I say this is the nicest group of basilers I have ever seen before in one place.

Secondly, it isn't a right to change the English language just because a group pushes for it. We have half of the people who want to keep a word meaning one definition, and half of the people want to change the definition. It isn't about someones rights. I don't see what all the big deal is I guess. It is just a word. If they made it just as easy for two gay people to have the same rights, but didnt call it marriage, I think that would be fine.

@Echleon: That wasn't marriage. That was a same sex union.

Screw tradition.
Words have had their definition changed before, so why not marriage?

[quote=br333]I didn't say we should keep it based solely on tradition. I meant it was a long, very traditional word that is well defined. Why would we change a definition of a word. That is like a group of people pushing to include hitting old people in the definition of slavery. I didnt say gays shouldnt have rights, infact I pushed for more equal rights, but it shouldnt be under the same word as marriage. Plus, I have thought this over. It wasn't a random thought.[/quote]

Greeks and Romans allowed gay marriage. That was 1000's of years ago. No one is changing it but people like you.

[quote=SirJayGatsby]Who defines marriage as something only between a man and a woman? Why should we abide by a long standing tradition? Slavery was a long standing tradition for over 500 years yet we clearly see that was a mistake.

People are trying to redefine the world "Marriage" as it relates to the legal sphere because it discriminates based off sexual orientation as it currently stands. Gay rights are not just wrapped up into one word called "Marriage." They extend beyond that as do the efforts to expand them. That's like calling all the rights of American Citizens something like Education. They extend beyond that and are not the same thing.

Overall I just think you haven't even thought out the issue. You just have feelings on it and as we know, most of the time feelings do not serve as a replacement for rational thought.[/quote]

I didn't say we should keep it based solely on tradition. I meant it was a long, very traditional word that is well defined. Why would we change a definition of a word. That is like a group of people pushing to include hitting old people in the definition of slavery. I didnt say gays shouldnt have rights, infact I pushed for more equal rights, but it shouldnt be under the same word as marriage. Plus, I have thought this over. It wasn't a random thought.

[quote=metaghost4]inb4 butthurt LGBT supporters

I can't really say anything, my run with Lisa & Co. has kinda been changing my perspective on all of this.[/quote]

I am unsure what that means? Idk what Lisa & Co. even is though... >___>

[quote=br333]It isn't even a religious debate for me. I believe that the system should be easier for gays to get the same rights as a married couple, but just be called something different. That would be like me wanting to call icecream a chair from now on. The icecream isn't a chair, so why are you trying to pretend it's the same thing. Marriage is between a man and a woman and it is a long lasting tradition. Why are people trying to redefine a word. Should gays have the same rights? Yes but stop trying to call it marriage.[/quote]

Who defines marriage as something only between a man and a woman? Why should we abide by a long standing tradition? Slavery was a long standing tradition for over 500 years yet we clearly see that was a mistake.

People are trying to redefine the world "Marriage" as it relates to the legal sphere because it discriminates based off sexual orientation as it currently stands. Gay rights are not just wrapped up into one word called "Marriage." They extend beyond that as do the efforts to expand them. That's like calling all the rights of American Citizens something like Education. They extend beyond that and are not the same thing.

Overall I just think you haven't even thought out the issue. You just have feelings on it and as we know, most of the time feelings do not serve as a replacement for rational thought.

[quote=TinyH]I don't support your face
it should be called something different
that's like calling a pile of turd a face[/quote]

Classy...

[quote=MrAhri]SuperRainbowShortShorts[/quote]

MY GOD! I LOVE IT! You gots nasa smarts!

[quote=ZombieOverlord]I respect your opinion.[/quote]

Thanks.

I respect your opinion.

uh civil union