Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
GO VOTE - 1st Tues in November (not as big as last year)[Elections]
Posts
Civil Unions aren't good enough because they're not the same thing. Civil Unions, by and large, do not offer the exact same benefits and legal rights that marriage offers.
Add to this, a handful of states have outright banned civil unions as well, leaving gay couples completely out in the cold.
There are a couple things wrong with that, like Adam and Eve having children after Abel* and the Lot's wife thing just being silly in an out of character way, but overall pretty good.
*Have these people never played Command and Conquer? Where do they think the name Seth came from?
This is pretty much my stance, let them call it whatever they want. The government will solely recognize civil unions, which will be between any two consenting adults who wish to form a long term relationship.
No, this is the fight some Libertarians wish was the real fight.
For everyone else marriage is simply the regular social institution and the real issue is whether gays can join it.
Aside from gay people marrying, there is no real controversy about the current arrangement.
I could live with this being the argument, and it has a certain appeal to it on a philosophical and tactical level.
Well, other than the fact that 'marriage' is a word with religious connotations, and that you can get married in a church. I mean, if the church was willing to call their thing something else instead then that would be even better, but I figure we should throw the babies a bone.
Besides, in reality marriage is already currently a civil issue. That's why courts and legislatures and referendums are defining its scope rather than synods.
Yeah, see that's where I stand.
Marriage is a religious term and a priest can do it....
Ok fine. I'll give them that marriage is a religious term, and thus can be defined and is subject to religious law. But on the other hand by separation of church and state religion has now power in the legal sense.
So religion can wed only who they want and not recognize anything else. But the state doesn't recognize them and let's any two people "kabooza" that want to and recognizes that.
It works on so many levels.
What the fuck?
What?
Any justice of the peace can marry two people. Any person of any religion or no religion can currently contract a straight marriage if they aren't already in one.
In what why is that subject to any religious law?
It's easier to become a justice of the peace than a notary for godsake.
That's like saying you'll grant that marriage is a nautical term governed by naval regulations because ship's captains can marry people.
Pro-choice.
Waka waka.
There's also something about how at one point someone just goes to another village and finds a wife with no explanation as to how the other villages got there
My theory is that God basically had a bunch of Gardens sort of like Vaults, and just did different combinations of people to see what would work out.
This theory was formulated during a run of "Children of Eden" with the gay actor playing God.
Khavall's Beginner's Guide to Music Everything(Theory Blog)
This is pretty much my stance on it. I'm fine with marriage being a strictly religious ceremony dictated by religious law as long as all legal perks that go along with being married are completely removed. This will most certainly never happen though.
But this will probably never happen and I'm pretty sure people on both sides would object for whatever reason
You made me drag out my Bible to look this up!
Then I realized I could just google it. Apparently they only had one kid after that, named Seth, so it's still mommy porking just not with a fratricidal son. Of course, women could have been born during this time and nobody cared to record them, I don't know.
If the religious right cooperated, you might have a chance, but they'd fight it tooth and nail. More obvious separation of church and state is the opposite of what they want.
There were a people who the Hebrews called the Cainites who were nomadic, so the latter explanation is more likely a creation story for these nomads.
On the other hand, it's not unusual for biblical names to be applied to random stuff, such as calling Christians Edomites and Spain Sepharad.
I never meant to say it was the easiest option, I just think it is the obvious final destination. Because, you've gotta believe that after this fight is won (which it will be) in whatever way it is, that the next step is to get religion out of the issue entirely. Civil Unions are the government recognising the societal and long term tax benefits to them of stable couples, whether homo or heterosexual, God should have nothing to do with it.
Treat people equally in the eyes of the law, though, and society will slowly change around it.
Steam: DigitalArcanist | XBoxLive: DigitalArcanist | PSN: DigitalArcanist | Backloggery: Houn
Marriage predates religion, so there's not conflict of church and state for the government to use the word "Marriage."
Thanks for insulting us military guys who, you know, joined the army so they'd get the direction and/or GI Bill in order to be able to go to college
You're quite the dick, do you know that?
*rubs temples*
Okay, man, I agree with you to a certain extent. I believe homosexuality is a sin. I'm Catholic. I believe that, yes, if we're a democratic country we have to live with the decisions the people of that country make as long as it's legal (meaning, we have to hold ourselves to the "You have representation, it's just not the type you like" we hold Pubbies to)
However
Why the fuck do you even care if gays get married, man? What does it affect you at all? You're married, right? So if you know Tom is cornholing Steve legally and can now enjoy the full rights that comes with marrying Steve, does it make you more gay? Are you saying that having the knowledge that somewhere in Maine there's a wedding cakes with two dudes on top somehow compels you to take it in the ass?
If no, then, why do you care? Really? I mean, you'd agree gay people have rights, right? And it says in the Declaration of Independence that all citizens of the US have the rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", right? Therefore, wouldn't restricting them from getting married violate at least two of those tenets? And, before you ask, it doesn't excuse say, pedophilia or beastiality because both of those are a violation of liberty (obviously children aren't mature enough to objectively determine whether they want to get married, doubly so for animals) and a restriction on one of the involved parties' pursuit of happiness.
I mean, I just don't get it. Why even care? I'm in the military and I swore to defend the people of the United States. I already knew that meant defending people I don't agree with. I mean, for Chrissakes I joined when Bush was prez and even though I personally hated the man I was willing to be subordinate to him as he was my duly elected commander in chief. Shouldn't we as a people be more willing to defend the rights of people we disagree with?
Shouldn't we?
If you asked most voters around here "So what do you think about Chris Christies stance on abortion now that hes elected?" You'd either get "I don't care" or "Whats Chris Christies stance on abortion?" more often then not.
No. Fuck the gays.
Metaphorically, of course.
What a shock eastern washington voted largely against gay rights. Also ref 71 shows that even when we try and do seperate but equeal measures the religious right screams about sanctity of marriage and homo queers raping your children with immunity. Ahh progress.
Wonder what's up with Pierce County...is Tacoma just that backwards, or is that the Army/Air Force influence down there?
Every state seems to have an asshole, or in this case an ass crack. I live in the Big Bend of Florida, which is just to the east of Florida's asshole, the Panhandle. I'm sure the people that live there would get on just fine with the eastern Washingtonians.
Pierce is pretty conservatard as well, the futher your get from seattle the more likely you are to be one.
Just odd to me because the mud-flap quotient seems higher up here (Kitsap) than down there. But I haven't been here that long.
Pierce doesn't tend to have as many "get'r done" type conservatives as the "Fiscal" type.
And don't forget washington voters ref 71 is just round 1 of this bullshit the no on 71 fucks already are planning for next year and the year after etc etc.
...except in Olympia [Thurston County]. For future reference, Spokane is the asshole of Washington.
Nah the asshole is vancouver, spokane is just the part that takes meth all the time.
But then the situation arises where it's actually harder to get gay marriage because the gays already have their civil unions, why do they want to destroy marriage?!
Civil unions are a stepping stone in the right direction in theory, but it'll make the final step harder to achieve.
Also, calling everything a civil union and making marriage only a church thing would be so much harder than getting gay marriage. Now the gays just want to destroy the sanctity and tradition of marriage, if they started going after marriage in general there'd be hell to pay. It's a good solution, but it's less likely to happen then just getting the gays to marry.
By the way, do we have any age breakdown from exit polls for people who voted against gay marriage? I'd imagine the older people are the only ones who are opposing it. And the crazy younger people.
Khavall's Beginner's Guide to Music Everything(Theory Blog)
Woo looks like its official r71 got by.
This isn't a religion thread, this is off-topic, and doesn't really matter, but Adam and Eve, according to Genesis, did have other kids, including daughters. It's like five sentences after the birth of Seth. Your Google-fu has failed you miserably.