Gay marriage, should it be outlawed?

[Taymelo]

Damn!!!

Look at Gecko getting all sensitive over nothing, almost like the stereotype of a... dare I say... homosexual... and look at Glenn caving like a bitch for no reason.

I think this thread needs some testosterone.

PS: Gecko hurts my feelings every time he asks sarcastically if Al Franken is still on the air. I'm going to cry until he apologizes to me and all the rest of the polygamists.

Welcome back TM, it seemed like weeks since you last posted without talking about Bush. Where were we?

You were in the middle of hurting my feelings by asking if Al Franken is still on the air, when you know darn well that Al Franken is still on the air, you insensitive bastard.

[Gecko]

Damn!!!

Look at Gecko getting all sensitive over nothing, almost like the stereotype of a... dare I say... homosexual... and look at Glenn caving like a bitch for no reason.

I think this thread needs some testosterone.

PS: Gecko hurts my feelings every time he asks sarcastically if Al Franken is still on the air. I'm going to cry until he apologizes to me and all the rest of the polygamists.

Welcome back TM, it seemed like weeks since you last posted without talking about Bush. Where were we?

You were in the middle of hurting my feelings by asking if Al Franken is still on the air, when you know darn well that Al Franken is still on the air, you insensitive bastard.

In all fairness that Franken questions was posted a few weeks back. I must say that I think it's a worthy question in light of Air America's financial problems. Maybe we should start a thread titled "Air America - the Countdown". Ya know you and I can go in there and discuss these final days. That would be a hoot.

[Glenn]

Jerry Springer's show on AA is surpisingly good, IMO.

[geerussell]

The bad thing about being late to the thread is that all the arguments in favor of a ban have been burned to the ground before I even get to reach for a box of matches.

[WTFchris]

I dont care what 2 guys or 2 girls do behind closed doors
or if they really "love" each other or whatever

Marriage by definition is between a man and a woman

so thats the way it should be

however if the bum buddies want to become a "union" or whatever you want to call it and have a ceremony and exchange O-rings and get the benefits they so desire then go right ahead

but Gay Marriage is an oxymoron

Agree %100. I have no problems with people being gay, or rasing kids, etc. They can be joined legally in a union. Just don't call it a marraige, because it's not. I consider marraige to be a sacrament. I have nothing against their lifestyle, just don't call it what it is not (a sacred union between man and women).

[Taymelo]

Here's the funny thing I bet Gecko is clueless to.

Can anyone tell me what George W. Bush's republican party's position was on gay marriage in the last election?

Can anyone tell me what John Kerry's democratic party's position was on gay marriage in the last election?

Give up?

They held the EXACT same position:

Both AGAINST gay marriage.

Both IN FAVOR OF civil unions providing government (benefits) but not religious recognition to gay couples.

The funny thing is the typical voting republican middle american redneck was fooled by republican ad campaigns, and by their church leaders preaching partisan politics from the pulpit, into thinking the republicans have a different policy on gay marriage than democrats, and that it was important to elect republicans to "preserve the sanctity of marriage".

Of course, they also thought it would be good to vote for the party that took their jobs and healthcare and left them broke and sick, but that's another issue.

[Glenn]

Well, most of us have a had a chance to say our piece on this topic, so I'll offer a different angle to try and continue the good discussion.

I stated earlier in this thread that there were two pretty common demographic factors amongst our poster base that I could easily identify. 1. Youth (I would guess that 98% are under 35) 2. Technical savvy- At least compared to the general populus for sure.

Gecko added that it was his opinion that we are an "overwhelmingly left leaning" group. That may also be true.

Looking at the results of this poll so far, it is 17 against the ban (74%), 4 are for it (17%) and 2 are unsure (9%). Basically, 10% of our poster base has logged a vote in this poll, which is a pretty good turnout for us.

So here are some new discussion questions
1. What other "common denomenators" does our poster base share, demographically/psychographically speaking?

2. If you think, in fact, that our group here is overwhelmingly left leaning, why is that so?

3. Specific to the issue of gay marriage, in your opinion, how much does age factor into our poll results? (i.e. are younger people more opposed to the ban? Maybe the ABC poll broke things out by age group, I'll have to investigate that.)

4. Do you believe in the theory that people "develop" conservative ideology as they age? (i.e. Is it true in your opinion that oftentimes people that consider themselves as liberal at a younger age find themselves becoming conservative as they age? Moreso than vice versa?) Do you think this will apply to you?

[Uncle Mxy]

Agree %100. I have no problems with people being gay, or rasing kids, etc. They can be joined legally in a union. Just don't call it a marraige, because it's not. I consider marraige to be a sacrament. I have nothing against their lifestyle, just don't call it what it is not (a sacred union between man and women).

I see that a polygamist is in da house!

Seriously, the problem is that marriage isn't -just- a "sacred union", but a ton of other things in our societal systems. It's a tax status, license, de facto estate planning, social security and other financial aid programs, etc. and that's just at the government end of things -- nevermind those pesky little privatized things in life like banking and insurance. It's perfectly ok in our society's infrastructure to discriminate on the basis of married status. Should it be?

[Fool]

But that is easily overcome by giving whatever alternative title a homosexual couple might go by (should that be the end outcome) the same privileges as a married couple. The tough sell is societal acceptance. Legal acceptance is just a matter of ink and paper.

[Taymelo]

As I stated: Both democrats and republicans are against gay marriage, and both democrats and republicans are FOR civil unions, which is what Mxy is talking about.

So why are we debating this in Congress and/or on this board?

Because the republicans raised the issue as a means of doing NOTHING MORE than pandering to their conservative christian base in an election year.