Even more frustrated now...

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

alongman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
2
Location
Minnesota
With the untimely closure of my last post, I am starting another so we can discuss the issue that was originally posted regarding gay marriage legality. I want to preface this topic by asking if you are not man (or woman) enough to support your opinion with you name, please refrain from ridiculing those of us brave enough to have an opinion AND stand behind it.

Let the topic continue.....
 
I completely respect your decision to shut down the topic. I would urge you to look into the matter, however, as we should all be adults and able to have a conversation. The miniature horse industry is full of opinions and a variety of people - that's what I love about it.

Adam, when I clicked the link, it just goes to a page about Bachmann.
HMMM......I'll look into it..
 
Personally, I am glad that we have started a new thread. The other was getting a bit annoying...
default_unsure.png
default_rolleyes.gif


The problem now is unless we get new people to comment, this thread won't go anywhere. Most of us have said what we wanted to say for the most part and generally agree that gay marriage and adoption should be legal (notice I said "most").

I do welcome more comments and different points of view, so let's hear from you...
default_poke.gif
default_pantiesbig.gif
 
Adam, a bit off topic, but I wonder what you think about the on, off, on again of "don't ask, don't tell" that has gone on?

And to everyone: what about my questions about medicaid, unemployment, welfare, disability, etc.? Should gays be denied those rights? And why?
 
Okay, I will jump in against my better judgement. I read part of the posts from the other thread. I don't have any strong opinions on this, but have noticed the only argument against it is based on religion. I guess a marraige ceremony is based on religion, but a marraige license is what makes it legal and is not based on religion.

Religious beliefs seem to be the cause of almost every war in history. It is only natural that it will cause a conflict with a group of people from a public forum.

It does seem odd that this is such an issue in the 21st century.

A little off topic, but I did see some posts regarding teaching gay history in schools. I may as well drag this up again too. I have thought a lot about this. I think back when I was in school and in History class. It was little more than a fairy tale. A very boring one at that. I learned very little about the true life of the people we were studying. I could have retained so much more of it had I known as much as I do now about who they really were. I think the details make them real. Why hide facts. To me that is not real history. It may take a little longer, but I have a right to know the whole truth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I missed this topic. Everyone has an opinion but sometimes people say things in the wrong way that can be hurtful. I have my opinions on it. My opinion is if they want to marry fine. Its not hurting me or my family. Do i think its right? Personally its not for me but I wont judge. I have gay friends and they know my feelings on it. I just feel who am I to say they shouldnt be together. There is only one person they have to answer to and that god. I leave it to him. I refuse to treat someone bad due to who they feel they want there life partner to be. As for them being able to adopt children I have mixed feeling on it. Every child deserves a loving family/parents regardless. People are so very cruel. It would effect the children of these marriages also. Its just hard for me to just firmly say No they shouldnt adopt. If your a true good person and loving parent then everyone should not have that taken away. I hope this makes sense.
 
Adam, a bit off topic, but I wonder what you think about the on, off, on again of "don't ask, don't tell" that has gone on?

And to everyone: what about my questions about medicaid, unemployment, welfare, disability, etc.? Should gays be denied those rights? And why?

No they shouldnt be denied of these rights. They are no different other then they love different then I do. That doesnt make them less of a person. I think the welfare/medicaid system in a whole needs to be reevaled. If you are struggleing and need help then yes EVERYONE should be able to obtain this help. Its the ones who abuse it and the drug users that obtain this to sale for more drugs. That is what bothers me.
 
Personally, I am glad that we have started a new thread. The other was getting a bit annoying...
default_unsure.png
default_rolleyes.gif


The problem now is unless we get new people to comment, this thread won't go anywhere. Most of us have said what we wanted to say for the most part and generally agree that gay marriage and adoption should be legal (notice I said "most").

I do welcome more comments and different points of view, so let's hear from you...
default_poke.gif
default_pantiesbig.gif
Ok, I personally do not agree with most who have posted. So you can welcome my comments or not. I will be mum on this topic after this anyway. I do not judge, that job is already taken. I am a Christian whether anyone likes it or not. It is my conviction (not opinion or belief) that makes me anti-gay. But I am also an American so therefore I respect the laws of our individual states because afterall we are the United States of America. If gay marriage is legal in a particular state then the couple should have all benefits and rights afforded to any other couple. Wherever you stand on the issue, if you don't like your state's laws then you can move. Yes, easier said than done more often than not. Take community property states, for instance. If you live in a community property state and you start accumulating wealth and you are married but you are into something that might cause you to get a divorce (adultery for instance). You might want to move to a non-community property state and stand less chance of having to split a lot of money with your future ex-spouse. Take capital punishment states as another example. Not a good place to lose your temper and kill. You will be judged in Texas before you meet your maker if you get convicted. That is just the law. Growing medical marijuana is legal in some states but not in others. I could go on and on. The legality/non-legality of gay marriage is at this time a state issue. I have a cousin who is gay. He knows I love him and it does not come with a seal of approval just as it does not come with a lecture. Going mum now.
 
Adam, a bit off topic, but I wonder what you think about the on, off, on again of "don't ask, don't tell" that has gone on?

And to everyone: what about my questions about medicaid, unemployment, welfare, disability, etc.? Should gays be denied those rights? And why?
I hate that don't ask, don't tell policy - I have several friends who chose not to reveal their sexuality simply for fear of a closed-minded general public. However, my feeling is, for those who are brave enough to ask, as opposed to simply presume, I will openly answer.

I absolutely think that EVERYONE should be entitled to the same "financial" topics that you mentioned even though the government chooses not to acknowledge my marriage.
 
Ok, I personally do not agree with most who have posted. So you can welcome my comments or not. I will be mum on this topic after this anyway. I do not judge, that job is already taken. I am a Christian whether anyone likes it or not. It is my conviction (not opinion or belief) that makes me anti-gay. But I am also an American so therefore I respect the laws of our individual states because afterall we are the United States of America. If gay marriage is legal in a particular state then the couple should have all benefits and rights afforded to any other couple. Wherever you stand on the issue, if you don't like your state's laws then you can move. Yes, easier said than done more often than not. Take community property states, for instance. If you live in a community property state and you start accumulating wealth and you are married but you are into something that might cause you to get a divorce (adultery for instance). You might want to move to a non-community property state and stand less chance of having to split a lot of money with your future ex-spouse. Take capital punishment states as another example. Not a good place to lose your temper and kill. You will be judged in Texas before you meet your maker if you get convicted. That is just the law. Growing medical marijuana is legal in some states but not in others. I could go on and on. The legality/non-legality of gay marriage is at this time a state issue. I have a cousin who is gay. He knows I love him and it does not come with a seal of approval just as it does not come with a lecture. Going mum now.
I respect your opinion, but have something to add as you commented on states and their particular rights. If every state has very different stances on a particular subject, then are we really the UNITED States of America or simply a bunch of people with similar ideas living in relative proximity to each other?
 
I'm throwing in my two cents because this comes close to home for me. My brother is gay. He spent most of his life trying NOT to be gay and came close to taking his very life because he didn't want to live in a world that hated him for what he was. Honestly, why do people insist this is a choice? Why would someone want to chose a life where they would be cursed and tortured, and even killed by those who fear them? With the emergence of new scientific research, it really frustrates me that many people still refuse to see.

I am optimistic though, since sympathies are growing in the younger generations and the gay rights movement is getting bigger. As more research uncovers the biological truth behind the mystery of sexual attraction, it will eventually release a tidal wave of demand for change that cannot be ignored. If a marriage is state-issued, then it should be a matter of the state. States do not allow marriages of those who cannot legally give consent or more than two individuals. But while it issues marriages for two consenting individuals, why does it exclude two consenting individuals of the same sex?

Allowing gay marriage is a step in the right direction for humanity, and for human civil rights. Come on now. Be fair. Either share state-issued marriage with every competent adult over 18, or else no one truly deserves to have the state recognize their union.
default_smile.png
 
I respect your opinion, but have something to add as you commented on states and their particular rights. If every state has very different stances on a particular subject, then are we really the UNITED States of America or simply a bunch of people with similar ideas living in relative proximity to each other?
There is a federal law that marriage in one state must be honored and recognized in another. This law extends to specific state-issued licenses, like marriage and drivers licenses, and is the reason why we don't have to get remarried when we move to the other side of the country or just across the state line, and why you are allowed to drive in other states with your out-of-state license. This is also the reason for the heated debate. Opponents don't like the idea of states issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples because this would open the door for the Fed to require other states to honor that license. This is why many states have been amending their constitutions to not allow - specifically - same-sex marriage. It is a shame, because much like prohibition was a black mark on the US Constitution, I believe any state that has passed this amendment or has it on their ballot and may pass it will find themselves with that same black mark on their governing papers.
 
One thing about the religious argument in that marriage is a religious institution... You couldn't prove it by me! Harvey and I were married at the Justice of the Peace's house and religion played no part. That's not to say we are not religious, but our marriage was a state affair, not a church one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The ritual of committing to each other is one thing. Being bound legaly is quite another. There are some good benefits, but also some things that aren't so great.

You are in a way giving up part of your own identity. If you allready have children you are putting the new person in your life ahead of them legaly. You give up certain rights as an individual. They are tied to your credit and ownership of everything.

The good things are that you can put them on your insurance, retirement, and social security. They are considered family if you become ill. You can claim them as a dependant on your tax return.

I think it would be great to be able to choose one adult person for these things in some way other than marraige.

I suppose there are other reasons that I have not thought of.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I said it on the other (now closed) thread, but I want to bring it into this thread as well... Something to ponder actually is why any marriage should be government sanctioned in the first place... or maybe flip that, why government should be the source of marriage validation. That is a little frightening when you look at it in a certain light.
 
If same sex marriage is legalized one day, how would you stop straight friends from marrying for medical/benefit reasons? How would you prove that two people aren't gay? I don't think the decision is a totally religious one. If everyone could marry/divorce anyone else at will, the pharmacutical and medical (not to mention others) companies would suffer, and the government can't have that.
 
If same sex marriage is legalized one day, how would you stop straight friends from marrying for medical/benefit reasons? How would you prove that two people aren't gay? I don't think the decision is a totally religious one. If everyone could marry/divorce anyone else at will, the pharmacutical and medical (not to mention others) companies would suffer, and the government can't have that.
I don't know. How do we currently stop male-female friends from doing this same thing? Or from marrying for citizenship reasons? ??? The law of averages tells me this happens more often with male-female unions than same sex unions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If same sex marriage is legalized one day, how would you stop straight friends from marrying for medical/benefit reasons? How would you prove that two people aren't gay? I don't think the decision is a totally religious one. If everyone could marry/divorce anyone else at will, the pharmacutical and medical (not to mention others) companies would suffer, and the government can't have that.
Would these places suffer from this? Maybe, maybe not. It is not really a two for one thing. Companies get group rates for people who are bound only by employment. most of the time when you add a spouse, you pay more money. Retirement seems to be phasing out anyway. If you paid into all of your life, why not be able to give it to someone you care about. Social Security is sort of the same way. it was created back when most of the time only one person worked. Now most of the time both people work and you can choose which one you draw from anyway.

It would be nice if people could partner up how they want.
 
Back
Top