First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Marriage Equality wins.
7069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/26/15
how can one confuse Tour Guide Barbie for a german?
48419 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / AZ
Offline
Posted 6/26/15
in my conservative years I would have been like


7069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/26/15

nooneinparticular wrote:


TourGuideBarbie wrote:

well no, hear me out.
i dont want those that are physically unable to preform a task given the right to do so
children shouldnt have the right to preform in the olympics with lion trainers
that shouldnt be anyones right


I think you've confused the Olympics for the Circus. Also, physically unable to perform what task, having children?
If that's the case I'd point out there are plenty of heterosexual couples not having children for various reasons. Anyway, It's not like we are teetering on the brink of extinction, if any thing we are over populated.


ive yet to confuse the two.
i was saying, a child shouldnt have the rights an adult has
i said nothing about having a child
17181 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 6/26/15

SurvivingHorror wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:

The rapture is fast approaching soon Jesus will return and destroy this godless nation.


Yeah... Why would Jesus return just because we legalized gay marriage? I mean other countries have done it before we did, other countries have treated homosexuals a lot better, a lot sooner, than we did. So why now?
The sun revolves around America.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/26/15 , edited 6/26/15
Although this seems great, I am of the opinion that the government should not have any influence here. Don't get me wrong, it is good that the court is trying to be fair.

Marriages are ceremonies, often religious ones. The people performing the rites should be able to choose who they are willing to perform the rites for without the looming specter of "discrimination" waiting to eviscerate them through media if they refuse. Right to refuse service, pretty much. There are definitely enough people willing to perform the rites for gay couples, so I see no real problem in that regard. The problem is that the government is overstepping its bounds and reaching into personal affairs too much, IMO.

Meh, I guess this is too late to change now. I just don't think governments should regulate marriages at all, just as they should not regulate what is required for two people to be considered a dating couple.
8433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Worcester, Massac...
Offline
Posted 6/26/15

LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

It has been a bad week for conservatives. Up next, legalized weed.


Bad? More like abysmal.


8772 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / ATL - GA
Offline
Posted 6/26/15 , edited 6/26/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

Although this seems great, I am of the opinion that the government should not have any influence here. Don't get me wrong, it is good that the court is trying to be fair.

Marriages are ceremonies, often religious ones. The people performing them should be able to choose who they are willing to perform the rites for without the looming specter of "discrimination" waiting to eviscerate them through media if they refuse. There are definitely enough people willing to perform the rites for gay couples, so I see no real problem in that regard. The problem is that the government is overstepping its bounds and reaching into personal affairs too much, IMO.

Meh, I guess this is too late to change now. I just don't think governments should regulate marriages at all, just as they should not regulate what is required for two people to be considered a dating couple.

I think you're misinterpreting what this ruling means. Marriage has been legalized nationwide in the sense that same sex marriages must be recognized by every state as a legit, legally binding partnership. Nothing in this ruling says religious institutions are obligated to marry gay couples. If your church doesn't want to marry a gay couple that's on them. The government has no authority to tell them otherwise. As for the gay couple in question, they're free to find another institution that will accept their partnership, or just get a courthouse marriage.

Posted 6/26/15 , edited 6/26/15
its fucking hilarious that people are cancelling their crunchyroll subscriptions because they support gay marriage.

do these people watch anime?
8433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Worcester, Massac...
Offline
Posted 6/26/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

Although this seems great, I am of the opinion that the government should not have any influence here. Don't get me wrong, it is good that the court is trying to be fair.

Marriages are ceremonies, often religious ones. The people performing them should be able to choose who they are willing to perform the rites for without the looming specter of "discrimination" waiting to eviscerate them through media if they refuse. There are definitely enough people willing to perform the rites for gay couples, so I see no real problem in that regard. The problem is that the government is overstepping its bounds and reaching into personal affairs too much, IMO.

Meh, I guess this is too late to change now. I just don't think governments should regulate marriages at all, just as they should not regulate what is required for two people to be considered a dating couple.


I second that argument.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/26/15 , edited 6/26/15

Valarasha wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Although this seems great, I am of the opinion that the government should not have any influence here. Don't get me wrong, it is good that the court is trying to be fair.

Marriages are ceremonies, often religious ones. The people performing them should be able to choose who they are willing to perform the rites for without the looming specter of "discrimination" waiting to eviscerate them through media if they refuse. There are definitely enough people willing to perform the rites for gay couples, so I see no real problem in that regard. The problem is that the government is overstepping its bounds and reaching into personal affairs too much, IMO.

Meh, I guess this is too late to change now. I just don't think governments should regulate marriages at all, just as they should not regulate what is required for two people to be considered a dating couple.

I think you're misinterpreting what this ruling means. Marriage has been legalized nationwide in the sense that same sex marriages must be recognized by every state as a legit, legally binding partnership. Nothing in this ruling says religious institutions are obligated to marry gay couples. If your church doesn't want to marry a gay couple that's on them. The government has no authority to tell them otherwise. As for the gay couple in question, they're free to find another institution that will accept their partnership, or just get a courthouse marriage.



The looming stigma against straight-only priests and such was intense because of the lack of legal recognition of the legitimacy of gay marriage. Now, the pressure has increased against those who refuse, especially since people will be quicker to cry discrimination. It's a matter of social repercussions, not legal ones.

I still think the undertaking should depend completely on the chapel and the performer of the rites.

To be honest, marriage is just a ritual to me. You don't need a paper and a priest to tell you that you two are lifelong partners. The proof is only necessary to gain certain benefits for the married. The government shouldn't be deciding whether the combinations of genders on the papers are legitimate.
8433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Worcester, Massac...
Offline
Posted 6/26/15

kimchino wrote:

its fucking hilarious that people are cancelling their crunchyroll subscriptions because they support gay marriage.

do these people watch anime?


I guess they can't separate their politics from anime.

Posted 6/26/15

kimchino wrote:

its fucking hilarious that people are cancelling their crunchyroll subscriptions because they support gay marriage.

do these people watch anime?


Wait where do you see they're doing this?

8433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Worcester, Massac...
Offline
Posted 6/26/15 , edited 6/26/15

AiYumega wrote:


kimchino wrote:

its fucking hilarious that people are cancelling their crunchyroll subscriptions because they support gay marriage.

do these people watch anime?


Wait where do you see they're doing this?



Go on Crunchyroll's Facebook page, and take a good look at some of the comments people are writing. You'll see what I mean.

How's Bernie doing?
Posted 6/26/15

Michformer wrote:


AiYumega wrote:


kimchino wrote:

its fucking hilarious that people are cancelling their crunchyroll subscriptions because they support gay marriage.

do these people watch anime?


Wait where do you see they're doing this?



Go on Crunchyroll's Facebook page, and take a good look at some of the comments people are writing. You'll see what I mean.

How's Bernie doing?


miles tweeted about it. thats how i know
67408 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / F / 5280 feet above s...
Offline
Posted 6/26/15
We already have legal weed in Colorado and in Washington. The world has not ended, though we have had a few issues with users being dumb about their pot privileges, in much the same way we have to deal with the stupidity enacted by those who abuse prescription painkillers and alcohol. Every time we progress as a people, there are recalcitrant folks that mope about and declare that 'The End Is Here!" with bullhorns and sour, elderly and middle-aged frumpy faces.

And yet... the earth keeps turning.


First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.