The "traditional form of marriage" will still exist. Another form of marriage will also exist.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Nationwide protest against Proposition 8 tomorrow.
Collapse
X
-
Why would this change be a bad thing?Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
Marriage has traditionally been reserved for one man and one woman. If you allow homosexuals to marry each other, the traditional form of marriage has been replaced with something else.
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.
Comment
-
I didn't say they were separate. I said the form of marriage you are referencing as "traditional" will still exist. A man and woman will still be able to marry each other. That form will persist.Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
They aren't separate institutions. The whole reason the gay community is pushing so hard for marriage instead of settling for civil unions is that they won't accept "separate but equal."
Comment
-
Equal protection under law regardless of sexuality.Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
Why would it be a good thing? If you're going to ask people to change a venerable social institution, you should be able to come up with some good reasons for doing so. It seems like all you have is "We love each other!" and "You're a bigot if you don't!"
(My preferred "equal" being having government have nothing to do with "marriage". Take the legal aspects of it, put some mundane terms to describe them, and leave "marriage" up to the couple involved and their spiritual/community leaders to define for themselves.)
Comment
-
If you want to go with that definition, it's ok with me. It's just a word. (Like "marriage"... should be.) The "value" (or lack thereof) of being a "bigot" would simply be in regards to the target and specific nature of the "bigotry". (Which it already is.)Originally posted by Lancer
So if you hate republicans you're a bigot. If you hate the KKK you're a bigot. If you hate the Nazis, you're a bigot. So we're all bigots in one way or another.
I personally would reserve it for use in regards to subject matter that I feel deserves the negative connotation generally associated with it though.
Comment
-
The form isn't the only defining characteristic of traditional marriage. The definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and the widespread social acceptance of that definition are just as important, if not more so. Both will be lost once homosexuals are allowed to marry.That form will persist.
Comment
-
Eh...he sees marriage as on a road to another place because of the people's behavior in the marriages and the laws that tried to correct that behavior. I see it as a gift from God. Facts and faith. Sometimes you just gotta smile and enjoy your friends, and realize that it is us that are on the road.Long time member @ Apolyton
Civilization player since the dawn of time
Comment
-
I am sorry (mostly towards your potential mate) if you are so weak willed that your (hypothetical) marriage would lose it's value due to 2 guys or 2 girls marrying each other.Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
The form isn't the only defining characteristic of traditional marriage. The definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and the widespread social acceptance of that definition are just as important, if not more so. Both will be lost once homosexuals are allowed to marry.
I myself would not see any reason to modify my approach to my own (hypothetical) relationship.
Comment

Comment