Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KMA-628
Don't have the time to give you a full answer now, I will try later.
Short answer, marriage is sacred to me. I married my wife in front of God. Obviously, I don't need to go into any detail about any particular church's feelings towards homosexuality, you should know it already.
That said, I don't care what people do sexually, I really don't. I don't condemn anyone for being gay. I have had many, many friends that were gay and I treated them as what they were, my friends.
I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I never thought there would need to be a law needed to define it, but it seems we have moved in that direction.
As I mentioned, I have no problems with equal legal rights, property rights, etc. I have no problem with calling it something else (i.e. a civil union). So, in my mind, there is no hate. All I ask is that you let me keep the word marriage to stay exactly what it has been for centuries.
I don't see any rights being denied (that I am aware of). I just want to keep the word, if you know what I mean.
Did these states offer up any alternatives, i.e. civil unions?
|
Well, the hate amendments varied - some outlawed any type of union, some outlawed gay marriage only.
I understand that marriage is a sacred thing to you, as well as your religious beliefs. Marriage is sacred to me too, as are my religious beliefs. And I realize that you don't hate gays, nor do you wish to deny them visitation rights, tax breaks, the right to raise a family, etc.
But I still see no reasoning behind the statement, "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman." Why? Is it religious? Why should it not be between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman? Why is tradition so important as to make a whole swath of people feel like second-class citizens?
Look, if its religious, well, a wise man once said that "you can't reason someone out of a position they haven't been reasoned into." I'm not going to argue against religious beliefs. But if it isn't a religious thing, I'd truly like to know what reasoned logic leads one to opposing gay marriage.
As for the not being hateful thing, well, I respectfully disagree. Civil unions are a step, but they are seperate-but-equal. Which is not the same thing as equal. It is demeaning, degrading, and insulting to say that a gay couple can have a union, but not a marriage. That is why I don't think that civil unions are acceptable.