Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alansmithee
Really? I'm sure the IRS would have something to say about that.
I disagree, I'm not asking to cut off a woman's arm, I want to have the same say in a child that I would be responsible for that the woman does. Are you saying discrimination against males is ok?
That's good to know, now I can pack heat when I go to the hospital. And gays can gain the same benefits, males just have to marry a woman, or women marry males.
It should if gender is inherent to purpose of the contract.
They can, all they have to do is marry the guy who got them pregnant.
Why would they die out? People can always chose to be gay. And many "fags" don't think they should be allowed to adopt. Also, I personally believe it lessens the value of a mother and father in raising a child.
Apparently many people think there is compelling reasons for denying them the ability to marry. Wouldn't it make sense that the "public" would define what is in their intrest? And it happened in at least 11 states this year. There are lots of things that are prohibited because people think they are "icky". Again, you are framing the question wrong. It's not "Why should these people be denied rights" its "Why should a particular behavior have prefered status over others?" and no gay marriage advocate has come up with a logical reason for that (at least that I have read or heard from someone, maybe there is one somewhere).
|
and in terms of the gay marriage argument, you're 'counter examples' still are irrelevant to the topic at hand.
1) the irs won't care if someone who works at mcdonalds spends every dime they make or if a football player does it. yes, they're paying different %'s of their income in taxes, but you can spend as much of the takehome income as you want. and there's nothing wrong with that. trying to argue that having to pay taxes is somehow related to gay marriage is assinine.
2) you do not get to same say as a woman because you do not have to carry it to term for 9 months. you will not get morning sickness. you will not get fat and feel bloated all the time. you will not risk getting pregnancy related diabetes. when you are equal partners in teh pregnancy, then you can have equal say. until then, you're nothing more than a gob of goo giving her a nine month headache. and no one's restricting your rights there. and the govt. isnt' restricting hers there. if anything, this would be an argument FOR gay marriage.
3) my impression from things you've posted are that you live in michigan. well, here in michigan, you can get a permit to carry a concealed weapon. you can pack heat at almost anytime anywhere. as long as you make sure you've got that permit on you, you can probalby carry it anywhere unless the location does not allow them on site. which would be not the govt. telling you what you can't do, but telling businesses and property owners that they can make those restrictions on their property. again, that would be an argument FOR gay marriage because the property owners have the freedom to do what they wish with thier land.
4) gender is not inherent in the purpose of the contract. many states do not have marriage as stated as being between a man and a woman. gender is not included. thats why massechusets allows gay marriage. because they don't define gender in teh contract. they arent' the only one.
5) a modern family is about love. it is about 2 people whom love each other raising a child (in the ideal form, non-ideal form being current 'broken homes' due to divorce). if two women love each other and either adopt or get sperm from the bank, or two men that love each other adopt, why should they not be allowed to get married? why should they not be allowed to share legal custody of the child, share all assets and have all the same inheretance priveliges that hetero couples have?
6) it's called sarcasm. that was dripping with it. nice umbrella. i think you'd have a hard time finding a enough gay people to fill a small room who think that gays should not be allowed to adopt. and if you want to do something about lessening the values of the mother and father rasising a child, do something about the current divorce rate and dead beat dads. go help get kids adopted so they aren't being raised by the system... oh wait... might accidently give 'em to one of them thar fags.
7) most people's compelling reason for denying gays the right to marry is religous. and since govt. should have no say in religion, and religion no say in govt., the govt. should, as long as it is in the business of marrying people, disregard the religious argument for it. part of the function of our govt. is to give voice to the minority and protect their rights. but that isn't happening now.
and no, i'm not framing the question wrong. my stance is that in order for something to be denied, there must be a compelling reason for the govt. to do it. and people thinking it's icky or morally (religiously) wrong are not compelling reasons.
but you are framing the question correctly. why are heterosexuals getting perferred status over homosexuals? and out side of religion and 'i think homosexuality is wrong', there is no reason. i have yet to hear one that doesn't involve god or bigotry.
if you haven't heard a logical reason for game marriage, i think you need to look into a hearing aid or glasses, cause their not hard to find.
i don't mean this next statement to be an insult, although it could be taken that way.
you sound like one of those christians who thinks that not getting preferential treatment (no 10 commandments in the courtroom, no prayer in school) over other religions is the same thing as being discriminated against.
you're not losing anything by having gays get married. but maybe you just like the fact that you can hold someone back.
/gays, the new blacks.