Before you make your summer plans to visit the Outerbanks ofNC

[Anonymous]

I don't want to encourage homosexuality as I don't consider it a healthy lifestyle or a good example for kids. I don't think it is normal. My opinions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

Oh - and some people do choose their gender baby!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't want to encourage homosexuality as I don't consider it a healthy lifestyle or a good example for kids. I don't think it is normal. My opinions.

I feel the same way about republicans. Can we outlaw them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

In a nutshell, yes.

I believe that marriage is a religious ceremony that forms a union before God (or that person's "God").
Civil unions are for those who are non-believers and/or those forming a union outside of "the church".

First, while you may have been right 500 years ago, marriage today is much more than a religious ceremony - it's a civil contract that provides rights and responsibilities. You can't separate the secular and religious aspects - they're too closely intertwined. As I said earlier, I'd be fine changing the naming convention for ALL legal marriages to "civil unions" and leaving marriage to the church. But if the government continues to recognize "marriage" as the legal contract it currently is, sorry, gay people have just as much right to it as anyone else.

I agree with this, which is why if it comes to a vote today, I would support gay marriage. While I don't agree with it, I realize that equal rights trumps personal feelings and/or beliefs.

Anonymous wrote:On a related note, one of your brethren, a few pages ago, chastised another poster for not debating "real issues." The issue s/he didn't think was real was what the gay rights movement was called - it other words, the name wasn't important, just the substance behind it. So I guess i'm confused - if the name isn't important, what's the big deal calign a gay union "marriage?"

One of my brethren? Oh boy....

But to answer your question, one size does not fit all. Those who oppose gay marriage do so for a variety of reasons, so it stands to reason that folks will have differing opinions about why *they* are anti-gay marriage.

Anonymous wrote:And finally, the only reason you've articulated against gay marriage is a religious one - you want the government to (continue to) enshrine a religions definition of marriage in secular law. That seems . . . problematic.

Where do I say anything about religion in my post? Please use caution before you jump so eagerly on the anti-religion bandwagon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

yes

Even if it were true, so what? You're choosing to be ignorant, and that's your right, right? What if we started limiting your rights just because you're ignorant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, 15:15. Sadly, not agreeing with homosexuality equals being a bigot and/or hate-filled. It's a very juvenile argument, but it works for some.

I, too, am against gay marriage, but would be in full support of a civil law that grants same-sex couples full rights under federal and state law. Of course, as this country stands, allowing gay marriage seems like the easiest way to grant gays their rights, so if taken to a vote, I would support gay marriage.

Though I have certain beliefs, I would not want those beliefs to trample on the liberty and happiness of others.

So all of this quibbling is about the use of the word "marriage," but you think gays should be afforded the same federal and state rights as married heterosexuals?

In a nutshell, yes.

I believe that marriage is a religious ceremony that forms a union before God (or that person's "God").
Civil unions are for those who are non-believers and/or those forming a union outside of "the church".

So now all of us who don't get married in a church, have a civil ceremony, and pretty much are atheists (or Jews or Muslims or Buddists) now don't get to be married either? Because you believe that the word "marriage" is a "religious ceremony"??

I'm sorry, but please go check out a dictionary before you post such nonsense. Marriage isn't defined by the Christian church.

What the Flock are you talking about? Where do I say that marriage is for Christians only? You take offense at my calling marriage a religious ceremony, yet you seem to conclude that this excludes Jews, Muslims and Buddhists. Last time I checked, those were religions. Looks like you should be the one checking the dictionary. Or, at the very least, some reading comprehension courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, 15:15. Sadly, not agreeing with homosexuality equals being a bigot and/or hate-filled. It's a very juvenile argument, but it works for some.

Could you please explain how it isn't bigotry? For example, if I believe that Jews are abnormal and dysfunctional based on their religion, how is that not anti-semitism?

Bigotry and anti-semitism suggest (and usually consist of) hatred. Being in disagreement with something doesn't mean you hate those who participate.

Do you need to hate something for you to disagree with it?

But you are disagreeing with who someone is -- who they love, who they are sexually attracted to, who they want to spend their lives with. There are tons of examples of "benevolent bigotry" -- people who just wanted to "civilize" American Indians, slave owners who just wanted to take care of their slaves, people who thought women shouldn't vote for their own good. I'm sure the anti-sufferagists didn't hate women. They just thought they weren't equiped to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, 15:15. Sadly, not agreeing with homosexuality equals being a bigot and/or hate-filled. It's a very juvenile argument, but it works for some.

I, too, am against gay marriage, but would be in full support of a civil law that grants same-sex couples full rights under federal and state law. Of course, as this country stands, allowing gay marriage seems like the easiest way to grant gays their rights, so if taken to a vote, I would support gay marriage.

Though I have certain beliefs, I would not want those beliefs to trample on the liberty and happiness of others.

So all of this quibbling is about the use of the word "marriage," but you think gays should be afforded the same federal and state rights as married heterosexuals?

In a nutshell, yes.

I believe that marriage is a religious ceremony that forms a union before God (or that person's "God").
Civil unions are for those who are non-believers and/or those forming a union outside of "the church".

No, they're not. Marriage, as defined by law, is a legal status. Marriage as a religious rite, sacrament, or whatever you want to call it is determined by your religious affiliation. If you have a religious marital ceremony but never obtain a marriage license issued by your state, you're not legally married, and you are not protected by state or federal marital laws. PP, I respect your right to an opinion, but your understanding of the legality of marriage is incorrect. You have to recognize that the church does not grant you federal and state rights. They are two different entities. I was not married in a church, and I have zero affiliation with any religion, and yet, I am legally married. The majority of gays are not fighting to have marriage recognized by "the church," rather, they're fighting to have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples.

The person asked for *my opinion* not the interpretation of marriage under the law. Please go back and reread because you go off on your next tangent. Not to mention, you're preaching to the choir because I married my husband at the Courthouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

yes

So you've chosen to be straight? Can you tell me more about when you made that choice? How you felt before you decided to be straight? You obviously were not straight before if you had to choose that lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

yes

Even if it were true, so what? You're choosing to be ignorant, and that's your right, right? What if we started limiting your rights just because you're ignorant?

I don't agree that I am ignorant. I could choose to be gay tomorrow. Many people go from men to women back to men as its now accepted to do so. Perhaps a small percent of the population are 100% gay or 100% straight, but the vast majority are somewhere else along the spectrum. So if it is a choice, why do we need to bend over backwards to legitimize it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, 15:15. Sadly, not agreeing with homosexuality equals being a bigot and/or hate-filled. It's a very juvenile argument, but it works for some.

Could you please explain how it isn't bigotry? For example, if I believe that Jews are abnormal and dysfunctional based on their religion, how is that not anti-semitism?

Bigotry and anti-semitism suggest (and usually consist of) hatred. Being in disagreement with something doesn't mean you hate those who participate.

Do you need to hate something for you to disagree with it?

But you are disagreeing with who someone is -- who they love, who they are sexually attracted to, who they want to spend their lives with. There are tons of examples of "benevolent bigotry" -- people who just wanted to "civilize" American Indians, slave owners who just wanted to take care of their slaves, people who thought women shouldn't vote for their own good. I'm sure the anti-sufferagists didn't hate women. They just thought they weren't equiped to vote.

Your analogies aren't logical. I will repeat that being in disagreement with something does not rise to the level of hatred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

You think people choose to be gay?

yes

Even if it were true, so what? You're choosing to be ignorant, and that's your right, right? What if we started limiting your rights just because you're ignorant?

I wish we could do that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many of you actually read past the headlines?

They voted on the definition of the word marriage-between a man and a women. The entire gay marriage thing is not about the word marriage it is about not being afforded the same benefits as a marriad couple.

+1

"Marriage" = Man + woman
"Civil union" = man + man, or woman + woman.

I believe civil unions should be legal in all 50 states, but I do not consider that to be "marriage." I believe in the Christian definition of marriage.