Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Woah, and gay marriage is not equatable to marrying children, multiple partners, or animals!
|
Never said it was. I did say, however, that gays are not being "discriminated" against any more than a person in any of those other groups are.
Quote:
|
But is this really about rights, or is this more about a social denial of a legitimate form of romantic relationship?
|
What do you mean by "a legitimate form of romantic relationship"? It's not considered legitimate, otherwise it would be legal (In the U.S.).
Quote:
|
You mean like the married gays and lesbians here in Canada, or Ellen DeGeneres, Melissa Etheridge, and others in the U.S.? (Oh, wait, Prop 8 might quash those marriages. So sad.)
|
Nope. As far as I understand it, it's not retroactive so it wouldn't invalidate those couples who have already married. It simply won't allow for new couples to marry.
Quote:
|
The bottom line: this sends a message to homosexual couples that they aren't viewed as having a legitimate relationship.
|
I didn't know that "having a relationship" meant "being married". The only "message" this sends is that marriage is defined as one man and one woman, thus prohibiting persons who want to engage in a marriage outside of these parameters from doing so.
Quote:
|
To many (of either sexual orientation), marriage is viewed as a way to make a family "official."
|
I thought they were after marriage for the legal benefits.
Quote:
|
Times change, and so does marriage. For example, it isn't as acceptable anymore to marry off one's 12-year-old daughter. Now that many people are willing to accept the "normalcy" of homosexual relationships, they too should be afforded the right to marry. To continue to deny this right (or privilege or whatever) is to continue to deny the very existence of homosexuality.
|
I'm pretty sure this has been asked a gazillion times now, but why should they be allowed to marry?