well, my argument is: why have gay marriage when domestic partnership confers every single last right and protection? I say nothing about god or jeebus or allah or whatever. It is my contention and long held personal view that marriage is between a man and a woman. that's all. that's all the law states, there is no discrimination or stripping of rights of any kind whatsoever in any capacity.
Perhaps they call you a bigot or hateful because you're calling homosexuals and protesters for homosexual rights dumbasses and bitches. Did you really expect protests not to happen? Did you not expect people to be upset, hurt and offended when they're told "well, you can have equal rights but I don't really want you having the same name on it as it is for me." Do you understand how that sounds and makes people feel? It's like treating gays as a disease that will taint the name of marriage if they're allowed to use it.
Again, all protesters are lame, especially when they're in front of my fucking car fucking traffic up. I personally find no difference between marriage and a domestic partnership. I prefer the term marriage for a man and a woman.
Sounds to me like you do . . . wait, I have an idea: Why don't we call a union between two gays "marriage," and one between two htereosexuals, a "domestic union?" That would be kind of cool. Then whenever I moved to another state, I'd have to get unioned all over again! Think of all the dishes I'd own! Score!
Why stop there? Why not have a black-marriage and a white-marriage and an asian-marriage and a xerix-only-marriage? It's a word. Let go of it.
Its what I believe, I am not just going to "let go of it". I have always personally considered a married couple to be a man and a woman.
thanks stomp. you should have heard marv albert and the Czar laughing at me Tuesday night. What I don't get is why the onus should be on gays and their supporters to provide an adequate reason why they should NOT be discriminated against. That is so assbackwards it is like an ass . . . walking backwards. In the rain. Holding hoofs with a horse. A MALE horse.
Again, there is no discrimination. All rights, across the board, top to bottom, left to right, start to finish remain the same. Its the use of the term that is the only difference. That is not a right, its just the term for the structure.
I don't know; I think I was funnier in the thread on the Lakers forum. It's hard to keep track of all the anti-gay threads these days.
It's a matter of putting yourself in their shoes. It doesn't make sense when heterosexuals have to settle for unions.
