Originally posted by Sandman333: No, not really. Everyone is prohibited from same-sex marriage also. This includes hetero and homosexuals.
IMO the introduction of the qualification "same sex," by definition continues to introduce a discriminatory function.
We simply have differing opinions then...
Quote:
Originally posted by Sandman333:Again, it depends on your point of view. Homosexuals (moreso today than at any other time) seem to insist that we change our long-held values and definitions by beating us over the head again and again that they are somehow being victimized. I don't buy it.
Are they really? I'm not so sure. And if they are, is it really any different than accepting that there are religions that have over time come to this continent that don't adhere to our long-held [Christian] values and definitions?
So, then, we should accept certain Satanist sects that believe in the practice of animal/human torture and murder, among other socially unacceptable behavior?
Quote:
Originally posted by Sandman333:No one is preventing homosexuals from making a will (living or otherwise), or making a host of other legal documents that would give their partner the same rights and responsibilities as married couples. They would actually pay a penalty come April, as any married couple who files taxes can attest to.
With respect I don't believe this is relevant. If it were, then you could equally argue that there is no longer any need for heterosexuals to get married. The tax penalty for married couples should be addressed through tax reform, and does not really, IMO, have any relevance to the issue of gay marriage.
I was trying to make the point that they are attempting to get something that could potentially cause them financial harm, and hence from that aspect it is not logical if there is an alternative, which there is.
Quote:
Originally posted by Sandman333:The conclusion, then, is that homosexuals want to change our societal values and norms. They want a legal requirement that we respect them. Sorry, it's not going to happen. The opposite is more likely, that their fight for legal respect will in turn spur social backlash and violence, neither of which I advocate. They are trying to force their beliefs and values on society.
Again, I really don't see this. I see that they are trying to have discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation banned.
IMO you are not being asked to adopt their lifestyle or any element of it, you are not being asked to respect any one individual or group, and you are not being asked to approve of their values ... just the same as no one can be compelled to adopt or approve of yours.
Originally posted by Sandman333:Sorry, but they are far, far in the minority, and unless we want to start making ridiculous applications of the law similar to what I hinted to in a previous post, we really don't want to go there.
Universal application of a law threatens no one's rights, universal application of a right, threatens no one's values, IMO.
Unless, of course, the vast majority hold values contrary to the supposed "right".
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
