I am saying that once marriages would be out, instating a similar philosophy for all who wish to be joined wouldn't be impossible. Marriage is a term used by Christianity. If people want to be joined AND married, they can do a church service separately from that performed by the justice of the peace.

Basically, what you said.

Abolishing marriage does not mean abolishing civil unions. Marriage is religion-based. Civil unions are not. In fact, many heterosexual couples already get both. They get a license for the union and a church ceremony for the marriage. Being married in a religious ceremony doesn't bring any extra benefits. Two people can be joined in a civil union at the courthouse and have the same rights as two people married in a place of worship.

So, since that eliminates the religious issue, are there any objections to homosexual civil unions alongside heterosexual civil unions? They would both carry with them they same privileges and rights, and is completely secular, so I don't see why that would be a problem to either side.

Marriage is a religious philosophy, and I don't believe in organized religion in politics. However, a theory similar to civil unions would be more than agreeable, and so that should answer your question.

I may not like it personally, it may disgust me but people should be allowed to make their own decisions. The choices people make are what I would be disapproving of, not the individuals.

quote:

Originally posted by Bushsupporter:

quote:

How about we abolish marriage altogether?

I have heard this argument from some of my conservative friends and I am not totally against it. However, how would we deal with divorce (seperation of joint property) and custody issues?

So you would be infavor of incestual polygamy?

Hydrock, the argument does make sense. And claiming that things have need change in the past, doesn't mean that all things need to be changed.

As society requests change there needs to be room to make that change. It is not the job of the government to govern our morals.

quote:

How about we abolish marriage altogether?

I have heard this argument from some of my conservative friends and I am not totally against it. However, how would we deal with divorce (seperation of joint property) and custody issues?

So you would be infavor of incestual polygamy?

Hydrock, the argument does make sense. And claiming that things have need change in the past, doesn't mean that all things need to be changed.

Ok, but the intellectual dishonesty was right on the money, so again your hypothosis holds no water.

The thing your missing here in all your "neo-conness" is that society is, by nature, progressive. If you stem that particular aspect of society then you invite the same abuses that we had back when there were Jim Crow laws.

How about we abolish marriage altogether?

And I had posted a response, did you read it?

Listen, gay marriage is something that I have not totally made up my mind about. Part of me thinks that if that is what they want to do let them, it doesn't really affect me all that much. But part of me also thinks that opening the doors to gays would open it up for others. And I think that society has a resposibility to uphold some sort of moral code and if a group that I find to be morally wrong and disgusting uses the same argument that the homosexual agenda used to allow gay marriage they should also get what they want. Can we not agree that there has to be a line drawn somewhere?

I also started a hypothetical below that has yet to be answered by anyone. Calling me a fuck up isn't an argument.

While I might not personally disagree with something doesn't mean someone should be restricted of equal rights.

quote:

Originally posted by Bushsupporter:

quote:

English just doesn't cut it when we're talking about the word love. Semantics are impossible.

I agree, but let us assume for one moment that a man loves his two sister like he would love a wife. Is it odd, sure. But is it possible and has it ever occured, yes. SHould that man get the same rights of marriage as a single man and women?

Comparing incest to homosexuality is what I would call intellectual dishonesty. It's taking two very different things with a much different result and trying to compare them as if they were the same... in other words, your a fuck up.

quote:

English just doesn't cut it when we're talking about the word love. Semantics are impossible.

I agree, but let us assume for one moment that a man loves his two sister like he would love a wife. Is it odd, sure. But is it possible and has it ever occured, yes. SHould that man get the same rights of marriage as a single man and women?

However, we use love to describe many, many variations of love. I can love my mom's homemade death-by-chocolate truffle, but with the same word I can say I love my mom, and my the same word again I can say I love my friend, and yet again I can say I love my boyfriend. All have different meanings and types of the same exact word. English just doesn't cut it when we're talking about the word love. Semantics are impossible.

Oddly enough I agree with Bush. I mean as far as incest is concerned that is just scientifically a bad idea because you eventually wind up producing bad genes. That being said, if you wanna gang bang your sister more power to ya. As far as polygamy, it isn't my cup of tea but I don't see anything wrong with it. Marrying your pets though...come one...someone said it best. They can't sign a marriage license.

But the argument is that love should be the only factor. I know they are different, but if that is the argument, as it is, then what is your refutation.

quote:

My point here is that there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and just because the polygamist lobby or incest lobby don't have as much power as the gay lobby doesn't make those issues just go away.

There are large differences between gay marriage and incest or polygamy. Gay marriage is between two people, obviously not the same as polygamy. And neither one is related so it's not the same as incest either.

Yes I will passionatly make love to my sister, and while we are at it, both of my sisters. Incest and polygamy.

My point here is that there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and just because the polygamist lobby or incest lobby don't have as much power as the gay lobby doesn't make those issues just go away. It would be insanity.

quote:

I agree, I am going to San Fran with my hamster and sister. We all love eachother you know. I can't wait to get them on my health insurance. It is all about love.

Are you going to passionately make love to your sister or your hamster? If your not then its a total different story.

In reality you can't marry your pets because they cannot sign a marriage license.

quote:

you should be able to get mrried to who ever you love. its love and their should be no boundries to it.

I agree, I am going to San Fran with my hamster and sister. We all love eachother you know. I can't wait to get them on my health insurance. It is all about love.

*sing song voice* Says youuuu.

God's an enabler.