BellaOnline Forums Relationships Married No Kids No children, no marriage

Anyone see this one yet?

BellaOnline ALERT: Raw URLs are not allowed in these forums for security reasons. Please use UBB code. If you don't know how to do UBB code just post here for help - we will help out!

Horse-poopies I say!!!!

what about infertile, or physically disabled people that can't conceive? marriage and kids are two separate things. marriage is the union of a couple. kids are an extension of that union, but aren't necessary to a marriage. they are of course using the bible somehow to support this ridiculous concept. It's 2007, I just feel like I need to say that b/c people are acting so archaic.

I read about this before. The intention of this resolution was to get publicity for homosexual marriages, because by defintion, they can not have children. In which case, it did it's job.

I know people may disagree with me, but I feel that the definition of marriage should not be restricted to a man and a woman. Marriage has been given the legal defintion of a man and a woman based on the biblical definition -- for the purpose of having children. Our current legal system does not require the procreation -- but, note, that it does require consummation of the marriage between the two people. Thusly, you could get a marriage annulled if the two people do not "do it". Marriage, in today's society, is a civil matter, with a LEGAL definition that can be (and has been) changed by our system of laws.

If two people want to be married in the eyes of the law (note: not in the eyes of $deity), so be it. They can then be bound by the same divorce laws, the same property division laws, the same benefit regulations, etc -- being married is not all fun and games when it comes down to just 'breaking up'. If this makes the fundies out there start to have a heart attack, so be it! I've had disagreements with my christian friend about this -- ("Call it a civil union, not marriage! That is holy!") but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, it IS a duck. When I did end up marrying my wife (after just living with her for a long time), that is why I feel more complete, because we know that deep inside, we are "married" not just "living together" or "cohabitating." It is just different - in a good way.

I am not bound by certain definitions as stated by religious peoples thousands of years ago. A neighbor who is homosexual does not bother me, as long as any private activities are done behind closed doors. Heck, if a heterosexual couple wants to do anything behind closed doors, fine -- I don't want to see that stuff going on on the front lawn anyways. Their marriage does not threaten my marriage at all. Society has trained us to want to be married to the people we love -- it completes *something* inside us to feel connected.

Live and let live. Let people be happy with who they are. That includes CFers too!

I agree - let any two humans get married that want to. Unless they are blood relatives.

But then people will start marrying their dogs!!!

No, I'm kidding. I'm married to a man from Holland, and he can't believe that gay marriage is even an issue that has to be voted on and taken to courts! The gall of saying that Joe Schmo can tell me what I can and can't do in my personal life! I hate that we have to vote on these things. I love that they came up with this Initiative, to prove just how ridiculous those old rationales are, and to make some people realize "Hey, I don't want them dictating how I have to live my private life..." Of course, I'm not so naive to think it will actually make anyone see the irony.

I agree that same sex couples should be able to get married. We are close with a couple (two men) who have been together for 17 years. The majority of others we know have married, divorced and remarried in the time my husband and I have been together--12 years.

These men have dedicated their lives to one another. More so than many other couples. They deserve the same benefits.

I would also like to add that most people, the anti sames sex marriage folks, seem to overlook the fact that divorce is actually the biggest threat to their marriages. Now how come they don't make that illegal?

Ahhh...but we have to pander to religious fundamentalists in this country, Rogue! Other people's marriages have no effect on them at all (of, perhaps, might bother them because they perceive it as being an offense between the couple in question and their god). But first and foremost, religious fundamentalists must be treated like children. It's not enough for them not to do certain things that they perceive as controversial for themselves...they must not be permitted to even see or hear about such things.

I saw a GREAT bumper sticker awhile back...

"9 out of 10 Baptist divorcees are against gay marriage"