Cable Forum - In Defense of the Marriage

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - In Defense of the Marriage (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=7273)

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

Bush calls for constitutional ammendment to prevent gay marriage
video
Fox news article
BBC article

well, I had Radio 4 on in the car coming home and I was wondering how long it'd be before this thread got bumped ... :D

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by towny

well, I had Radio 4 on in the car coming home and I was wondering how long it'd be before this thread got bumped ... :D

Well the issue doesn't go away just because we get bored talking about it :rofl:

If you listen to him he was using the same arguments as Jerrek i.e. children are better off with hetro parents etc.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Truely excellent. That will score him some points with the conservatives, who are annoyed with his spending spree.

For those of you that don't know, in order to amend the Constitution, you need to get 2/3 of the votes in both the House and the Senate, and then it is sent out to the States. At least 75% [38] of the States need to ratify it in their governments. Once that happens, the president sign it and it becomes part of the Constitution.

Since 38 states already passed laws declaring marriage as a union between a man and a woman, I don't really see problem there. The House will probably be not a big problem either... The Senate will be a little harder though. However, at least 2/3 of American support this, so I give it an above average chance of success.

Very good indeed.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Jerrek, has anything been stricken from the constitution before?

I wish he would just comprimise and put civil unions with all the rights of marriage in federal law.

It pains me to say this but 'democracy must prevail' :shocking:

A bit of comic relief

I found this on the subject, needless to say it's a satire so don't take it too seriously. I don't want to find a counter argument to each point in the morning.

Quote:

12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriages Will "Ruin" Society:

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid becasue they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs more children.

3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorece is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by people not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire counrty. That's why we have only one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

10. Children can never suceed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents (widows, divorcees, underaged sluts) are legally forbidden to raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "seperate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Seperate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as seperate marriages for gays and lesbians will.

Re: A bit of comic relief

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

I found this on the subject, needless to say it's a satire so don't take it too seriously. I don't want to find a counter argument to each point in the morning.

:LOL:

I think that for all the huff and puff (from both your friendly president and your friendly "terminator") I believe that in the future people will find this situation as distasteful as we do that Blacks used to be unable to marry whites :rolleyes:

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

Jerrek, has anything been stricken from the constitution before?

Yes. You can remove something from the Constitution by adding a new amendment, like the 21st:

"Amendment XXI

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. "

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

I've just heard on Sky news that the US senate have just refused to cooperate in the banning of gay marriages in the US. I wonder how long until we follow suit?

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

The tradition of marrage is from Religion and states what it is between a man and a women.

The state should not get invloved with the chruch and the other way around. DO what the french do, keep church and state seprate.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

I thought it amusing that Bush claimed that marriage between a man and a woman was the "most fundamental aspect of civilisation." I would have thought that things like not killing each other would be more important, but what do I know?

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Well i dont know about that.

I do think that the french are right on the ball with keeping chruch and state seprate though.....

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Marriage isn't just a religious thing though Damion, it allows couples benefits that unmarried people just can't get. The sooner its all sorted out the better.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellwear

Marriage isn't just a religious thing though Damion, it allows couples benefits that unmarried people just can't get. The sooner its all sorted out the better.

It used to - please tell me what they are now though?

Re: In Defense of the Marriage

Quote:

Originally Posted by dellwear

Marriage isn't just a religious thing though Damion, it allows couples benefits that unmarried people just can't get. The sooner its all sorted out the better.

'Marriage' is at least two things in our society today. In part, it is a binding legal contract under which two people form a partnership that brings certain legal privileges and responsibilities. But there are all kinds of legal partnership that have a similar effect and none of them is known as 'marriage'. That term arises from the religious aspect of it, which stresses both the spiritual and physical side of the union - two bodies, one male, one female, literally joined together to make a whole (in Christianity at least).

This is why there are always religious objections when the subject of 'gay marriage' comes up - according to the Christian notion of what marriage is, it is simply not possible for two people of the same sex to be married. Our society has now (sadly IMO) gone beyond being Christian, or religious at all in any traditional sense, so it is a little anachronistic to allow legal privileges to one group of people but not another. What is required is a legal framework that allows same-sex civil partnerships but which does not attempt to dress itself up in quasi-religious terminology.