Gay Marriage

[Keyser Soze]

1. grow a thicker skin, you know how it is around here.

2. you are learning, this thread is chock full of educational information about the reality of society and government.

3. your quest for knowledge is admirable. admitting you dont know, which you have, is the hardest and most important step. i sure as hell didnt know much of the information posted in this thread before i opened it. dont get so wrapped up in what the goverment is supposed to do and realize how the system actually works.

[GonzoStyle]

Fine you are not a reagan lover I am sorry.

I admire the fact you are actually interested in learning but you are not asking questions you are arguing a point thats quite naive.

I apologize if I offended you.

[The Jays]

Fine you are not a reagan lover I am sorry.

I admire the fact you are actually interested in learning but you are not asking questions you are arguing a point thats quite naive.

I apologize if I offended you.

1) Thank you.



2) I've been asking questions, and then comparing answers against what I have learned prior to and what I know.

Did I phrase my question wrong? What rights does a marriage provide a couple that a civil union doesnt? Is that not relevant to the discussion? I've never been married, I've never been in a civil union, I never bothered to ask my parents what benefits my parents get for being married. Can I not ask this question? What's the problem?

So, there's no difference in the rights, it's just that there's two different institutions for basically the same thing, and there's only civil unions in Vermont as of right now?

One side says that the purpose of marriage is for the procreation of and raising of children. And the other says...?

So why is there a problem with calling one a marriage and one a civil union, if both of them are A-OK, and both of them carry the same benefits?

How exactly can they be viewed as inferior if they have been given the same rights as the other?

I mean, what ever happened to the idea of celebrating the differences of one another?

How can the government do it? The Constitution says you can't make laws that infrige upon the rights of others.

Do you believe that the government has the right to tell people who is inferior and who is not?

What do you mean by this?

Is it a bad thing that they are gay?

In those two sentences, where does it say that a marriage is better than a civil union?

Can the federal government force the Catholic Church to recognize gay marrriage?

3) Apology accepted.

I posted in the Personality thread that I took the test a few monthes ago, and I came up and INTJ.

Black Laz posted...

Be willing to back up your statements with facts - or at least some pretty sound reasoning.


Don't expect them to respect you or your viewpoints just because you say so. INTJ respect must be earned.


Be willing to concede when you are wrong. The average INTJ respects the truth over being "right". Withdraw your erroneous comment and admit your mistake and they will see you as a very reasonable person. Stick to erroneous comments and they will think you are an irrational idiot and treat everything you say as being questionable.


Try not to be repetitive. It annoys them.


Do not feed them a line of bull.


Expect debate. INTJs like to tear ideas apart and prove their worthiness. They will even argue a point they don't actually support for the sake of argument.


Do not mistake the strength of your conviction with the strength of your argument. INTJs do not need to believe in a position to argue it or argue it well. Therefore, it will take more than fervor to sway them.


Do not be surprised at sarcasm.


Remember that INTJs believe in workable solutions. They are extremely open-minded to possibilities, but they will quickly discard any idea that is unfeasible. INTJ open-mindedness means that they are willing to have a go at an idea by trying to pull it apart. This horrifies people who expect oohs and ahhs and reverence. The ultimate INTJ insult to an idea is to ignore it, because that means it's not even interesting enough to deconstruct.

This also means that they will not just accept any viewpoint that is presented to them. The bottom line is "Does it work?" - end discussion.

One last thing, you said this.

It's the same in legal terms but they cant have it in a church, synagouge, mosque or whatever their place of worship is. It's only recognized in VT. Thats how its segragational and how its not the same.

But even if it was gay marriage, they still can't have it in a church, synagouge, or mosque. Doesn't that point out that the problem is with those religions and with society, rather than with government itself?

[The Sleeper]

yes, separation of church and state is a very slippery slope when it comes to this issue, and i go back to my original stance that marriage itself is archaic because of it.

[Black Lazerus]

But even if it was gay marriage, they still can't have it in a church, synagouge, or mosque. Doesn't that point out that the problem is with those religions and with society, rather than with government itself?

You act like all churches call gays amoral. Gays go to church and they have places of worship. It might not fall under the major religions. But that doesn’t mean that they are no less devout than if they fell under the major ones. The problem lies in the fact that, just because the Christian conservative people don’t like it. It is made illegal. They can’t get married in the places that accept them for who they are because the government won’t allow them to do so.

[The Sleeper]

I think Jays brings up a good point though, that for marriage to truly be equal for everyone, it has to be completely disassociated from any religion.

[The Jays]

The problem lies in the fact that, just because the Christian conservative people don’t like it. It is made illegal.

This implies that a portion of society has a problem with gay marriage, thus the government responds. But if they did approve of gay marriage, then would not the government approve as well?

But even if it was gay marriage, they still can't have it in a church, synagouge, or mosque. Doesn't that point out that the problem is with those religions and with society, rather than with government itself?

You act like all churches call gays amoral. Gays go to church and they have places of worship. It might not fall under the major religions. But that doesn’t mean that they are no less devout than if they fell under the major ones. The problem lies in the fact that, just because the Christian conservative people don’t like it. It is made illegal. They can’t get married in the places that accept them for who they are because the government won’t allow them to do so.

Hypothetically...

Gay Marriage is legal. New York State makes it so.

There is a gay Catholic couple. They want to get married in a Catholic Church. The Catholic Church will not allow it.

Who's fault is it that they cannot marry in the church?

[HedCold]

that was my point before. the church shouldn't have to be forced to.

[The Sleeper]

well I think the church should be forced to. The fact that they probably won't like it shows the inherent problem with marriage and religion.

[HedCold]

why should they be forced to? what benefits do they recieve from the government for being legally allowed to perform weddings? if i sign up over the internet and go through all the stuff to be legally allowed to do that, i have to marry anyone that comes to me?

[The Jays]

well I think the church should be forced to. The fact that they probably won't like it shows the inherent problem with marriage and religion.

Why should the government tell a religion what they are suppose to believe?

[The Sleeper]

who cares what government benefits you get? When you marry 2 people, THEY get government benefits. And because of that fact, you simply can't discriminate people based on race, religion, or sexual preference. And if you were running a chapel and refused someone based on the fact that they were black or gay, to me that is the same as the church doing that.

[The Sleeper]

well I think the church should be forced to. The fact that they probably won't like it shows the inherent problem with marriage and religion.

Why should the government tell a religion what they are suppose to believe?

huh? I'm saying the concept of marriage is a problem because it is deeply rooted in religion, yet has governmental function. It's a simple violation of church and state. what does that have to do with goverments telling religions what to believe?

[The Jays]

The Catholic Church believes that homosexuality is sinful and wrong. To marry two gay people in a Catholic Church would go against the beliefs of the Catholic religion. Why should the government be allowed to force the Catholic religion to go against their beliefs?

[HedCold]

if the church recieves money from the gov't, or gets extra tax benefits because they perform weddings, then there's a govt involvement there and they could threated to take those away if they don't allow gay weddings.
now i don't believe there is, but if there is then the gov't would have a right to say something. but since they don't, they have no right to tell the church who to marry

[Black Lazerus]

The problem lies in the fact that, just because the Christian conservative people don’t like it. It is made illegal.

This implies that a portion of society has a problem with gay marriage, thus the government responds. But if they did approve of gay marriage, then would not the government approve as well?

But even if it was gay marriage, they still can't have it in a church, synagouge, or mosque. Doesn't that point out that the problem is with those religions and with society, rather than with government itself?

You act like all churches call gays amoral. Gays go to church and they have places of worship. It might not fall under the major religions. But that doesn’t mean that they are no less devout than if they fell under the major ones. The problem lies in the fact that, just because the Christian conservative people don’t like it. It is made illegal. They can’t get married in the places that accept them for who they are because the government won’t allow them to do so.

Hypothetically...

Gay Marriage is legal. New York State makes it so.

There is a gay Catholic couple. They want to get married in a Catholic Church. The Catholic Church will not allow it.

Who's fault is it that they cannot marry in the church?

Religions have there own standard on whom they marry and who they don’t.
You can’t get married in a catholic church if you don’t complete your communion.
They have Tents they must follow in accordance to the pope or who ever the fuck they answer to.
it's doesn’t make it wrong or right that is that paticular religions belief.
They can go get married at another church.



Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.



Edited By Black Lazerus on 1077322563

[The Sleeper]

MY POINT IS THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SHOULDNT BE ABLE TO MARRY PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE! JESUS!

[PlasticMan]

Of course a church wouldn't be forced to marry a gay couple. Just the fact that you're not Roman Catholic will keep you from getting married in a Roman Catholic church. Church's are private institutions that have the right to exclude any people they don't want.

[HedCold]

why? if you can sign up to marry people why shouldn't a priest be allowed to?

[The Sleeper]

if the church recieves money from the gov't, or gets extra tax benefits because they perform weddings, then there's a govt involvement there and they could threated to take those away if they don't allow gay weddings.
now i don't believe there is, but if there is then the gov't would have a right to say something. but since they don't, they have no right to tell the church who to marry

Ok, so a store that doesn't get benefits from the government can refuse service to black people because since they are privately owned, they can do whatever they want?