How big of an issue is same sex marriage to you?

As opposed to by contract.

Doesn't relieve their parental obligations

 

They don't. They only prohibit incestuous marriages.

 

OMG - don't tell me that you have no understanding of contracts? I should have realized that because you don't seem to grasp that marriage is a contract that exists with or without a marriage license. Two people just living together, if they merge their finances, have established a contractual relationship with each other.

When the parent(s) forfeit guardianship of their child they no longer have any parential obligations. A woman that puts her child up for adoption has no obligations to provide for that child in the future.

Of note not even child support is a financial obligation by a parent to the child. It is a financial obligation to the parent raising the child and not to the child.

 

it wouldn't mean a thing to me if it weren't for the concentrated effort to make sure it doesn't happen.

 

I'd gladly agree to legalizing it in all 50 states as long as they stop trying to eradicate religion from every aspect of our lives. If there's a Christmas tree in the mall, just look the other way like we are expected to when we see gays embracing. It's called compromise.

 

Really? Marriage for religious tyranny ? Who are "they" ? Are gays responsible for the imagined war on Christmas? Would you hold their right to marriage equality hostage until the part of the first amendment that deals with religion is repealed or reinterpreted? Any more brilliant comments to make?

- - - Updated - - -

The opposition to same sex marriage is just moronic

 

Thats nice. Still not contracting parental obligations and rights

Thats nice, the marriage contract still isnt eliminating or creating parental rights and obligations. Got anything relevant to the topic of discussion or are you scrambling around looking for the next strawman.

 

Absolute dittoes!!!

 

There are those that would claim that the parent has certain inherent obligations related to the child but any involuntary obigation is a fundamental violation of the Inalienable Rights of the Person. That is why we allow a woman to abandon a child at the hospital immediately after birth without any obligations. Upon removing the child from the hospital the woman does establish a voluntary obligation to provide for the welfare of the child which is not a violation of her Inalienable Rights. The mother can also be relieved of her obligations to the child by another person voluntarily accepting those obligations.

The father's obligation is really to the mother of the child as opposed to an obligation directly to the child unless the father voluntarily accepts an obligation directly to the child.

Of course to understand this a person must understand the Inalienable Rights of the Person which few actually understand.

All voluntary obligations of the person are established by contract.

 

???? No, even if the father rejects the obligation, the law imposes it upon him. The mother could die and the obligation to the child continues. All, of course having nothing to do with contracts.

 

What part of all voluntary obligations are a matter of contract and all involuntary obligations are a violation of the Inalienable Rights of the Person was missed?

 

You are contradicting yourself when you claimed

"parental rights and obligations" are dictated by contract. .

 

There is no contradiction because the voluntary obligation establishes the contract and any involuntary obligations (which we avoid by law) would be a violation of the Inalienable Rights of the Person because no contract exists.

 

It mean a lot in my case because I don't see why some people in town that are not gay should pay more for more kids and have more kids in the women body.

If the gays have kids than I don't care but in case that they don't I could be against the gay marriage.

 

Yeah, parental obligations aren't dictated by contract. Like I said and you deny. Marriage only imposes parental obligations upon fathers married to women. Gays want all the tax breaks and governmental entitlements of marriage with none of the parental obligations.

 

I believe anyone can experience love and commitment at the same time certain boundaries has to be enforce less we have social moral disorder and chaos. Don't you agree?

Nope marriage is about a man and a woman anything between one's legs is a private matter.

Yes, marriage was once included polygamist between a man and many woman and that has change and now same sex people wanted to expand that with multiple same sex partners through marriage.

Medical reason was one of the reason banning incest marriages social standard and morality is the other.

Same sex marriage will give polygamy and incest the key to open their doors.

Do same sex couples have house rules if so why?

 

Gays were part of the wars wars that were fought to preserve humanity unless you are saying there were no gays back then. Marriage is between a man and a woman if same sex people wants to be married they ask the government the same government that they are complaining about for meddling too much into people's lives to enact a law just for them. Religion is separate from secularism it is called separation of church and state. If the government start forcing religious institution to recognize and perform same sex marriages that is a sign of the start of tyranny remember what the government gives they can take away as well.

The push for same sex marriage is NUTS.

 

The left does it when it's convenient. If they really believed in separation of Church and state, why do kids get Christmas week off? I'll believe they really believe in in separation of Church and state as a principle, when they push to end that religious holiday vacation and the kids go to school on Dec 25th.

The left has twisted this, into this............

In November 2010, the word "Christmas" on two signs at Philadelphia's Christmas Village was removed by the organizers after complaints, but restored three days later after the mayor intervened.[101]

Stuff like this goes on all the time. Did anyone ever think that if the Religousophobes were a little more tolerant of things like the word "Christmas" on a sign, maybe the religious people would me more tolerant of gays getting married? The hypocrisy is breath taking.

 

Don't blame the left for government recognizing Xmas as a legal holiday. I believe that there was a SCOTUS case ( sorry can't cite it off hand) that ruled that it could be a gov. holiday because it had become more secular than religious in nature. Not sure who brought that case bit it was probably some secular lefty. If you think that's bad, here in NJ x mass AND freakin good Friday are paid state holidays.

- - - Updated - - -

I seriously doubt it!

 

I don't blame the Government, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of folks that scream about a Manger or a Christmas tree yet expect everyone else to accept a gay marriage on a Rose Parade float.

My Church has a number of gay members as do most of the Church's in my area. They won't gain acceptance by trying to erase us from the public. it's just human nature when you shove somebody, they shove back.

 

I agree with you that there is nothing wrong with Christmas trees . . .which, by the way, are "Christian" in name only, and didn't even exist 200 years ago!
And, I believe that that "war" on Christmas is just in the mind of the extreme Christians who INSIST to link Christmas trees to "Jesus birth," when there is absolutely NO relation except in some people's mind!
In addition, if you look around you and see the sheer NUMBER of Christmas trees in public place, including malls, squares, etc. . .around Christmas, you would have some difficulty proving that there "is a war on Christmas" anywhere! After all, the Christmas tree is a LOT MORE a symbol of capitalism (as in the unbridled spending on "Christmas" gifts) than of "Jesus in a manger!"

So, if you look at it this way, the "CHRISTMAS" trees and all things religious are MUCH MORE "in your face" than any gay behavior! I bet I have seen 1000 Christmas tree for every "gay kissing!"

By the way, who is "THEY" who "try to eradicate religion?" Aren't you mixing apples and oranges? There are probably as many gay who follow a religion of one flavor or another, than there are straights. . .One has NOTHING to do with the other!

 

Religious expression and gay rights are two entirely different issues. To put them together is a logical fallacy intended to derail the debate.

 

Look, you may think/believe that there will be "social moral disorder and chaos", but we know that is about fear, speculation and highly unlikely.

In fact, far more damage has been done to humanity by those seeking and acting to prevent same-sex couples from marrying.

There is EXPONENTIALLY MORE disorder and chaos stemming from DIVORCE in traditional marriages. The ignorance, arrogance and hypocrisy of those seeking to deny homosexuals 'marriage', is both astounding and generally intolerable at this juncture.

 

Regrets always comes after not before.

Same sex advocates has resulted in the increase of gay, religious and secular extremism.

Since the legalization of same sex marriages in some regions the DIVORCE rate between same sex couples is starting to increase and this does not include infidelity between same sex people.

Do you consider gays to be male and lesbians female or not?

 

Really. Where? Can you provide some evidence, some statistics? I guess if you have more people getting married you'll have more getting divorced, but how were gays getting divorced before they could get married? ( You said divorce is increasing since legalization)