<p>I don’t have to be “careful” in bringing up the black community example, thanks very much, and am as entitled to so as much as people here feel entitled to speak for the gay community.</p>
<p>I resent the bullying tactics used by gay activists to achieve their end of gay marriage, which people on here are prone to use as well in support of that cause. Period.</p>
<p>Is that really the only message you got out of my whole post? Who here is speaking for the gay community? I’m saying that you don’t know how the majority of blacks feel about the matter - if you have some sort of evidence to suggest they are against it, feel free to provide it. Until then, it is an empty statement.</p>
<p>Have you read this whole thread? You are going over things discussed long ago on here. The black community issue was already pointed out on here, as well as being common knowledge. People have the right to work against having gay marriage legalized as much as people have the right to work for legalizing it. Live with it. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I haven’t. So what about the women example then?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s fine, and I never said anything to the contrary. What makes you think I believe it should be so one-sided? Again, I am asking you why people are so against it. I can see why people are for it: some people just want to get married.</p>
<p>I can see, from a religious perspective, why people are against it: it’s against their religion.</p>
<p>But is that the only argument you can provide? Last I looked, women weren’t supposed to speak in church or assume an equal role to their husband in the household either.</p>
<p>brand_182: You need to go back and read the thread–your questions were already discussed (ad nauseum as a matter of fact!) ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did now. Wow…while I see some of the points being made by anti-gay marriage people, I am a bit shocked that some of you think that way (and at some of the insane arguments brought up, such as polygamy and that gay marriage would somehow compete with heterosexual marriage). </p>
<p>I guess we’ll see what happens, but as of now, I think those against gay marriage should regroup and try to find some better arguments. In my opinion: As the points now stand, I don’t think your case will be strong enough.</p>
<p>Hereshoping, you accuse others of bullying, and then emit claptrap like this:
First point: of course you don’t “buy” the gays as victims analogy: you are defending the viewpoint of the victimizers. Next: The “black community” - if there is such a monolythic beast - has no more right to “own” the lessons of the civil rights struggle than do those who actually actively have participated in it - of all races. Facts are facts, parallels are parallels. No one "owns’ the truth, no one has the right to withhold “permission” to learn lessons from the past. Your nouveau “PC” - “you can’t say that because I think black people disagree with you” is repellant, to say the least.</p>
<p>Thank you kluge. Glad to see somebody else sees the problem with someone speaking for the black community and saying that history can only be used according to a group’s discretion.</p>
<p>why are u trying to force me and others to recognize the marriage of two men, because allowing gay marriage would legally force me to recognize them as married</p>
<p>Turn the other way Golani, and you won’t find your life affected in the slightest.</p>
<p>This is insane, golani. Do you seriously think everyone here is trying to force you to recognize gay marriage? Like someone said earlier, it doesn’t matter what you think! It is a governmental decision. As I’ve said before, I have no opinion on the matter of gay marriage. I do care though, when people are opposed to something and cannot provide justified reasons. The mere fact that you are playing the victim now:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…and not instead offering a rational defense, shows the weakness of your argument.</p>
<p>There is a difference between TOLERANCE and ACCEPTANCE.</p>
<p>I just did give you a reason, why should I have to recognize the marriage of 2 dudes? Marriage means a guy and girl, so why should the government force me to recognize that form of union as a marriage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a question, not a reason. If this is as far as we’re going to get, I’m done here.</p>
<p>brand_182 - golani retreated to tautology a long time ago. There’s no point in trying to discuss things with people who simply define their opinion as the truth.</p>
<p>find if thats the question here is the answer: i do not think its fair for the government to force me to recognize the marriage of two homosexual individuals because marriage means the union of a man and woman, and it is against my social principles to have that definition changed and then forced on me by the government</p>
<p>^^^Now we are getting somewhere. I’d like you to realize that same-sex marriage is also against the social principles of my family, but I am not sure I will agree with them. The next question to ask is: why is same-sex marriage against your social principles? Because you’ve been taught that way? These are rhetorical questions - you need not provide an answer on here (unless you want to), only answer them to yourself.</p>
<p>Whatever your opinion, I believe it is best that we all study ourselves and find out why our principles are what they are. If you can develop support for them (outside of merely saying these are my social principles), you will be ready to argue your case when the time comes.</p>
<p>Edit: And I’d also like to reiterate that what the government recognizes and what you recognize are two different things. If you look back at the many social movements in this country, you’ll see that there was ALWAYS a group of people (sometimes large in number) that disagreed with the government’s decisions. There remains a difference between tolerating something and accepting something. </p>
<p>I implore you to look at Massachusetts. It is doubtful that every single citizen in that state is for gay marriage, but the bill passed. What has happened? People continue to live peaceful lives. Those that disagree with the action had their chance to stop it, but their arguments were not strong enough in that situation. Still, they can continue to disagree with it (meaning they do not ACCEPT it) and yet also be tolerant of it, as it is not harming them.</p>
<p>Because the definition of marriage historically and religious, with special consideration that marriage is essentially originally a religious thing which incourages real family life, is between male and female. Anything else is not called marriage.</p>
<p>Now, its not fair for a minority to force a new idea or def onto a majority without that majority accepting it. For example, marriage will mean less to ME if two guys can do it. Another example, if my job requires me to make decisions or dealings for 2 gays as a married couple then that would force me to recognize something that should not be recognized.</p>
<p>The only way to reconcile this is an ammendment. If most people do not want the ideas of a minority forced on them, then gays should not be able to get married, if the majority cedes and wishes to recognize a new def for marriage then fine. </p>
<p>If that is not an argument than idk what is</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is where I and history disagree with you. Some of the best decisions, IMO, have been in favor of the minority. The majority, it seems, is not always right.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s a pretty good one. If you feel that strongly, religiously, about the issue, then you have a voice. Make your voice heard. But also realize that you are going to be up against people that feel it is their right to marry. Their argument will be political - they feel they have the fundamental right to marriage. Your argument will be religious - you do not want them to marry because it is against your definition of marriage. </p>
<p>From what I’ve seen in history, arguments based on the religious/cultural norm are becoming weaker against political rights activists.</p>
<p>Now, its not fair for a minority to force a new idea or def onto a majority without that majority accepting it. For example, marriage will mean less to ME if two guys can do it.</p>
<p>That is * your problem* and something that you will have to come to terms with.
Does marriage mean less to you if people can get married and divorced in a matter of days? If members of a certain religious group that doesn’t allow for divorce are able to get previous marriages annulled even with children so they can remarry?
Those things don’t change your views of marriage but two people of the same sex who love each other and want to be married does?</p>
<p>* Another example, if my job requires me to make decisions or dealings for 2 gays as a married couple then that would force me to recognize something that should not be recognized.*
Again your problem.
Sounds like you are in the wrong profession, just as a pharmacist who chooses not to dispense legally prescribed medication by a liscensed physician because they don’t approve of the medication to be used or who it is prescribed to, is also in the wrong line of work.</p>
<p>Golani is not in any profession.</p>
<p>He is a 17 year old with a lot of growing up to do. </p>
<p>During these growing up years, one would hope that he will lose some of his bigotry, closemindedness and xenophobia.</p>