Keep fighting for same-sex marriage

I’m het-single. But civil union v. marriage? All this blather over words? To fund political wars?

Please. I’ve got friends in Iraq and Afganistan.

The day the churches accept gay marriage v. civil unions, Hell will have frozen over.

Churches don’t have to recognize it as marriage. That’s their own ceremonial distinction. However, in terms of legal rights, gay and lesbian couples should be able to get “married”. There isn’t a single good reason to deny them that right.

Again, I could care less what people in California do – so long as they keep their nose out of my business in Texas. I know that’s asking a lot of them. Contrary to popular belief, I don’t care about proposals like this on their face. I am glad this one passed only because of the manner in which gay marriage was brought about in California.

The fact is that there is no federal constitutional or common law right permitting homosexuals to marry. That means that the issue is, appropriately, left to the states. Had the people, through the California legislature, decided to legalize gay marriage – I would not care. The same would go if they passed a ballot initiative for legalization. I wouldn’t care. If I practiced law in California I would vote for it just because it would increase my client base.

I am glad Prop 8 passed because of the manner in which gay marriage was brought about in California: by judicial decree. Judges need to realize that they have no right to rule by decree, and hopefully, this was a hard slap in the face to every judge who voted with the majority in that case. The purpose of the judicial branch of government is not to bring about change, progress, or other such things. They are to leave that to the Barack Obamas of this world and follow the law. Nothing else.

WAit, is the Church synonymous with Government? Maybe in different countries at different times, but we’re not in Medieval Europe! How can such outdated concepts have such a baring on contemporary politics? Oh yeah, ignorance and bigotry! The staples of intolerance! I don’t see the logic behind arguments against allowing gay marriage or civil unions or whatever the NAME you want to use for the act of a government-recognized FORMAL UNION, but ANY denial of these rights has roots in intolerance, not logic, but pure irrationality.

Wow…for once JVD sounds somewhat logical. I want to puke for even saying that as I usually find what you have to say sickening.

I am a lesbian, with a girlfriend of 10 years, whom I have 2 adopted children with. I must say, I personally don’t care about “marriage.” I respect the fact that it is a biblical term. I just want the right to legally pick my children up from school, take them to the doctor, approve needed medical treatment, open a savings account for them, and be their LEGAL parent. I want the right to have my girlfriend on my health insurance, visit her in the hospital, claim her on my taxes…etc etc. All the things that heterosexuals take for granted. I don’t care if it is all justified and legal under the title of marriage, civil union, or living in sin. Call it what you want, but I just want my relationship recognized. I think everyone should be afforded that right. Straight or gay. There are agnostic and atheist straight and gay couples out there that may not want to be recognized by the term “marriage” anyway.

As for BLAH BLAH BLAH…what is your point? You have friends in Iraq and Afganistan? Who doesn’t? It is possible that your friends are homosexual or serving next to someone that is. There are over 30,000 homosexuals in the US military!! Don’t you think they may want to get married? The problem with civil unions, at this point, is they are not recognized the same as marriage; therefore, they don’t afford the same rights (as listed above).

Hey JVD…you better be careful. Your state is-a-changin!

All this political gas over a word — “marriage.” With bigger issues in the world (Afganistan.)

“ .. I want the right to have my girlfriend on my health insurance ..”

Whoa. That’s up to you, your insurer, and if you need a boss to tell you what to do — your employer. That’s not anyone’s issue but yours. If your employer and customers want to fund that — that’s up to them. The insurers only care that SOMEONE pays — like trial lawyers.

“ .. claim her on my taxes ..”

See IRS rules on gifting and employing domestic help. Do some work.

“ .. approve needed medical treatment ..”

Set up guardianship — just do the paperwork

“I just want the right to legally pick my children up from school ..”

do the paperwork

“ .. take them to the doctor ..”

do the paperwork

“open a savings account for them”

do the paperwork

“and be their LEGAL parent.”

do the paperwork

“visit her in the hospital”

do the paperwork

This article does a distasteful disservice to the gay rights movement, and I find its humor to be more insulting to homosexuals than to the purported “hateful, homophobic new racists.” Your format for this article clearly shows your lack of skills as a writer and lack of intelligence to effectively discuss such a sensitive topic, as you use lame humor and cheap shots at the other side to hide behind.
The topic of homosexual marriage is quite sensitive, and I would hope those who favor sodomy to consider the reasons why there is an opposition. Actually, it has nothing to do with hate or bigotry – surprise! – but more out of reverence for the sanctity of marriage itself. Many people, like myself, believe that homosexuality is a result of negative childhood experiences or developed mental conditions, and it would not be beneficial to society and to our posterity to think that such behavior is in concordance with the laws of nature and for the advance of humanity in general.

p.s. I am friends with gay people. And black people! But I used to tell bullies in elementary school that I had a black belt in Karate.

Fredrick – There is nothing relevant about intolerance, bigotry, other favorite political buzzwords of the left. The Supreme Court of California overstepped its bounds.

Quite frankly, I don’t care about the cause of the denial of any so-called civil rights. It doesn’t make a bit of difference to me. And words like bigotry and intolerance are so overused these days that, quite frankly, I am not sure what they mean anymore. I know they are generally applied towards conservatives winning arguments with liberals, but aside from that the words have been rendered meaningless.

If all you tolerant folks are going to start pointing fingers and calling names about “homophobes” and “bigots” then the first place you need to look is at the people you will be attending inauguration-watching parties with. The marriage protection amendment passed in Michigan in 2004 obviously got a lot of support from Kerry voters, and similar measures in California and Florida this year would not have topped 50 percent without support from Obama voters.

“Many people, like myself, believe that homosexuality is a result of negative childhood experiences or developed mental conditions, and it would not be beneficial to society and to our posterity to think that such behavior is in concordance with the laws of nature and for the advance of humanity in general.”

Dan, seriously??? Negative childhood experiences and mental conditions? If people are, they are gay — not demented, retarded, schizophrenic, etc. making them gay- and for those of you who aregue that they are, grow up and get a life! In fact, all major mental health organizations, including the American Psychiatric Association has stated “homosexuality is not a mental disorder.”

http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/children/teens/sexuality/739.html

Gay people tend to offer more stability in any child’s life as well as having a longer lasting relationship. If it means that an adopted child grows up with two loving parents and doesn’t spend his youth growing up in a foster home, fantastic. I’d rather see a loving, gay couple taking care of a child, than a straight married couple who has multiple problems together involve a child into their issues (such as alcoholism, domestic abuse, etc.). As someone who has seen the differences in gay and straight couples raising children in similar environments, the gay couples’ kids did so much better. And you know what?? Their children didn’t turn out gay!!!!

And honestly, the sanctity of marriage?? I didn’t realize that 2 teenagers forced to get married due to a pregnancy was considered sacred- I give it 2 to 3 years before divorce or somebody starts having an affair. Or how about Las Vegas marriages that last a total of, oh, let’s say…. 55 hours??? Or how about men marrying a woman and then getting divorced once a younger and better looking woman comes into play. Yes, there are plenty of successful straight married couples, but not enough to make me believe that gay couples getting married will jeopordize this so called “sanctity.”

^ Meant to say, if people are gay, they are gay.

Todd- Nobody is saying that Obama supporters are infallible. Apparently 69% of black voters in California voted in favor of the proposal and most of them, based on exit polls, voted for Obama. So you are right. The issue of gay marriage is a republican and democrat issue, Obama was against gay marriage as was McCain.

Dan- Have you recommended that your gay friend seek counseling for his/her mental disorder or traumatic childhood? If you have, did the counseling not “fix” them? I’m not sure how you claim that this isn’t about hatred or bigotry then claim that homosexuals would damage the sanctity of marriage. Whatever that means.

Blah Blah- I forgot trial lawyers are the only group of professionals concerned about getting paid.

Studies have increasingly shown that homosexuality has a genetic and prenatal environmental cause. There isn’t any evidence to suggest that homosexuality is a choice, mental disorder, or caused by social environment. People are born straight, gay, or bi.

While discriminating against a choice is legitimate, discriminating against a part of the population based on how they were born is pretty much the definition of bigotry.

The struggle of homosexuals bears striking resemblance to racist bigotry, though not nearly as severe.

There isn’t any evidence to suggest that homosexuality is a choice, mental disorder, or caused by social environment. People are born straight, gay, or bi.

I am completely for equal rights and gay marriage, but that is a phony argument. There are lots of mental disorders that people may have been born with. By your definition many mental disorders are not mental disorders. I think I would rewrite that sentence without the term “mental disorder”.

Also, mental disorders are mental disorders because some guys got together and decided to call them that. If 51% of the people (doctors) got together and decided to call homosexuality a mental disorder, it would become one… as it was in the past.

Except it’s not a mental disorder.

Tolerance is not acceptance.

Except it’s not a mental disorder.

Unless it is defined as such.

Typically the only points with which I can agree with JVD are legal ones. In this case however, he is ignoring the single most important Supreme Court case concerning marraige – Loving v. Virginia. Very simply, the Court said that the Constitution (capital “C”) provides a right to marry. More to JVD’s point, the Court overturned a state law concerning marraige. So, no, it is not entirely a state issue.

As for his “hard slap” in the face of judges: get over yourself you hypocrite. If you were still in Michigan, you would know that our Supreme Court has been consistently rated as the most conservative and the most activist. The neo-cons never talk about the later element. Hell, a few years ago Scalia himself overturned a rule of law that had been a part of Western civilization for one thousand years. The truth is that it is the responsibility of the courts to protect the minority from laws that violate the Constitution. In fact, providing those checks is one of only two purposes of the judicial system.

While the current state of gay marrage in this country is frustrating, especially to those like my lesbian sister who is serving in the Army (think about that one for a few minutes), it is merely a matter of time before the barriers break down. The same happened with African Americans, the same happened with women. All the willfully ignorant like Dan have to cling to is this notion that homosexuality is a behavioral choice. If nothing else, science will eventually prove them wrong. At that point, those that cling to prejudiced beliefs will be relegated to the fringe of society with the likes of the intelligent design nutters. I only hope our society is wise enough to accept homosexuals before we are forced to.

“The topic of homosexual marriage is quite sensitive, and I would hope those who favor sodomy to consider the reasons why there is an opposition.”

And how is the other, uninvolved parties see themselves fit to essentially meddle in what people, heterosexual or homosexual, do to experience consensual sexual pleasure in their personal privacy?

“Actually, it has nothing to do with hate or bigotry – surprise! – but more out of reverence for the sanctity of marriage itself.”

You imply that only a heterosexual marriage is a sanctified one, and any and all others cannot be. It would be great if you showed how this supposed sanctity was derived.

“Many people, like myself, believe that homosexuality is a result of negative childhood experiences or developed mental conditions, and it would not be beneficial to society and to our posterity to think that such behavior is in concordance with the laws of nature and for the advance of humanity in general.”

While it may be well and good to have your personal beliefs, there is no reason that others should discard theirs and adopt yours. Further, it would be great if you could provide these “laws of nature” for all to see, and show how homosexuality is neither “in concordance with it”, nor “beneficial for the advance of humanity in general”.

Unless it is defined as such.

But it isn’t defined as a mental disorder. The experts rejected that notion over 30 years ago.

If nothing else, science will eventually prove them wrong.

It already has. We know it isn’t a choice or caused by social environment. The reason that the scientifically illiterate still claim that “science hasn’t proven anything” is because we don’t know how much of the cause is genetic, and how much of it is caused by the prenatal environment. Studies show it is probably a combination of the two.

“ .. While the current state of gay marrage (SIC) in this country is frustrating, especially to those like ..”

everyone tired of listening to debates on abortion and gay weddings that will NEVER be resolved in our lifetimes.

And TIRED of Democrat IDIOT-LIARS like multi-millionaire Nancy Pelosi who claimed superior knowledge about Catholic theology regarding abortion, than the U.S. Catholic bishops.

Right — and socialists in France out-perform Americans. Utter crap.

I hope that the same people fighting for gay marriage rights will also be on the streets fighting for cousins and siblings to marry as well, since their love is just as justified.

I would like to point out, the debate is framed in the wrong way from a civil rights perspective.

A homosexual person has exactly the same rights as a heterosexual person. They are allowed by law to marry someone of the opposite sex. A gay man is allowed to marry a woman, a straight man is allowed to marry a woman. A gay man is not allowed to marry a man, and a straight man is not allowed to marry a man. — no discrimination based on sexual preference.

However, it would be a sexual discrimination issue. A man is allowed to marry a woman, but a woman is not allowed to marry a woman. Regardless of sexual preference, that is discrimination based on gender.

I hope that the same people fighting for gay marriage rights will also be on the streets fighting for cousins and siblings to marry as well, since their love is just as justified.

The difference being that procreation by cousins or siblings have a much increased chance of producing children with harmful genetic diseases or birth defects.