What if straight people had civil unions?

That is easy enough to "say"... but the fact is that the government IS involved with "marriage".
And as long as that is so, then it is clear enough that homosexual people should not be discriminated against by law.

 

you understand well.

 

There is no law that discriminates against homosexuals. ANY two people of the same sex are prohibited from marrying, regardless of their sexuality.

 

Like I said, your info doesnt even contradict his assertion. Your info doesnt even measure the percentage of marriages that end in divorce.

 

What's in a name?

In a way they already do. A marriage license is a State issued license for a contract between the couple and the State. If you do not get a marriage license (and you don't have too) you are married by the church in a true marriage.

So if States decide to change their own laws allowing same sex marriages they will really only be civil unions performed by civic workers if Churches won't marry them.

 

completely destroys is.

read the link

 

Imagine that....human beings wanting social acceptance..................inconcievable!!!!!

They're not breaking any laws, and they're not trying to screw you, and you just can't stand the idea that they exist.

Well....they'll stil be having gay sex, and gays will be a part of human existance till we're all gone.

Too bad you're so negatively preoccupied with gay sex....hmmm......

 

People aren't legally entitled to "be liked" or "approved of", that's what liberals don't get, whether it be gays, the NAACP, etc - they have a victim complex and want the govt to try to "eradicate racism/sexism/homophobia/etc" rather than just grow a thicker skin like the rest of us. It's lame...

 

I did, it doesnt. Why dont you just draq your mouse over the portion of your link you think best contradicts the assertion and copy it here. Instead of merely making vague references to it 10 times.

 

Nobody faults them for wanting acceptance. Their mistake is believing that they can achieve that acdeptance through legislation.

 

Sounds better than legalizing gay marriage - less regulation is generally better than more. Deregulate marriage, don't create a new form of marriage.

Plus then we'd get to see whether or not the gay rights movement is really interested in equal treatment, or whether or not they just want the govt. to call them "married" in order to impose their lifestyle on the rest of us.

 

Why does your avatar expose his rectum?

 

it's in the link I provided. read it

 

I don't get that.

They'll be gay just the same, whether or not you accept them, or whether or not they have a marriage license stuffed away in the file cabinet in the garage.

Telling gays they can't marry, doesn't change thier lifestyles, or yours.

 

I did, it records total marriages and divorces in a given year and makes no mention of any percentage of all marriages, that end in divorce. What dont you understand

 

No one is stopping them from marrying. We simply choose not to regulate them when they choose someone of the same sex. Without the issues of paternity and child custody, there really isnt any point in doing so, other than it helps the gays feel better about being gay. .

 

The gay marriage issue is motivated by political correctness as much (if not moreso) as actual rights. This is why many gays demand for gay marriage over civil unions, even if both gays and straights have civil unions many would not be content.

 

Oh yes, it's only liberals who do that...

 

here we go with the "normal" thing again

I prefer Arepas with maple syrup; that's not normal

I dunk chicken nuggets, french fries and even McD's burgers into milk shakes; that's not normal

it is the norm or normal to eat arepas with cheese or stuff cheese and meat in between

most people dunk fries into ketchup which is the norm or normal

So I'm abnormal (which is an understatement btw)

most women have sex with men which is the norm or normal thus it would be abnormal for a woman to have sex with another woman

 

How do you know this? Where is your evidence? Where are the facts to support your contentions?

What "more" do you think they'd want if they already had everything everybody else has?

 

So what?.........how does any gay marriage affect you?

 

It doesn't affect me directly no.

 

Gay marriage bans like the ones in North Carolina certainly do stop them from getting married

You shouldn't even want to regulate the behaviors of people you will never have any contact. It doesn't affect you in any significant way.

You shouldn't want to put gays in an inferior state, that's sadistic.

Same sex parents have not demonstrated any inferiority in regards to parenting, when compared to opposite sex parents.

If you peel away the layers of your intent tp put gays in an inferior state......the only thing left is your opinion that you don't want gays to have sex.

It's got nothing to do with being PC, because an emotionally healthy individual is not often compelled to put other people in an inferior state...unless...they are affected by the behaviors that cause someone to want to put them in an inferior state, or, they were possibly chronically put in inferior states themselves, and are acting out.

At any rate...if you are against gay marriage, you are against it because:

1. The American "right" is your team, and they are against it.

2. Your religion says it's wrong.

3. Thinking about gays holding hands, or kissing, makes you feel icky.

or 4. Somebody against gays abused you in the past...like a macho Father calling you sissy because you liked Barbies.

 

Nope, you wont any where find the word gay or homosexual anywhere in the marriage laws. If a gay man and woman were to seek a marriage license, their sexuality is irrelevant. If two platonic friends of the same sex were t seek a marriage license, their heterosexuality would be irrelevant. They would still not be given a marriage license. Their gayness is irrelevant.
As well, nothing stops them from going down to the local church of christ or other progressive modern denomination, look lovingly into your boyfriends eyes, and the preacher man will declare you anything you like.

Wow, are you confused. We DONT want to license and regulate gay relationships while you and the gays insist that we do.

 

5. The US constitution that requires that ANY distinction drawn in the law that discriminates between people MUST at a minimum be rationally related to serving some legitimate governmental interest.
Marriage limited to heterosexual couples is rationally related to serving the legitimate governmental interest in the government reducing the # of single mothers on their own struggling to provide and care for their children and more children with the benefit of both their mother and father in the home to provide and care for them.
Now what legitimate interest is only served in the case of heterosexual and homosexual couples? That wouldnt be equally served in the case of ANY TWO CONSENTING ADULTS who might desire to marry.