Because there is no non-religious reason not to allow it. I don't think that "tradition" is a valid argument.

Well, thats your opinion as well. A lot of people in this country value traditions, and the things we hold dear. Unfortunately much of that is under attack from groups on a certain side on the political spectrum.

Some traditions are discriminatory and our country has a long history of moving towards MORE equal rights, not less. Liberty and justice and equal protection under the law for ALL is a tradition a lot of people in this country also value.

I wouldnt say its unfair to gays. Seeing as marriage is between a man and woman, they simply don't fit the bill. In addition, I'm going to start another thread regarding Conservative v. Liberal policy, because this completely idiotic and unfounded political correctness that exists on this board is starting to get to me, and I need to vent.

Hear! Hear! I agree... damn those neo-conservatives and their corruption or subversion of many tradtional rights and values.

Well, as cute as that was, it is pretty inaccurate.

Using that same line of thinking, let's bring back segregation. Marriage should be between blacks and blacks or whites and whites. It's not unfair. If someone happens to fall in love with someone of a different race, well too bad.

Or you could just go back to Fratty.

I could, I know how liberals hate opposition. You'd much rather everything be from your slant. Ironic then, that people on this site are open-minded, unless of course, you have an opinion like mine. By the way, Moveon.org called, and they want their talking points back.

Yes, what an incredibly valid argument regarding interracial marriage. Please note, when I say incredibly valid, I mean incredibly stupid. The original definition of marriage was the joining of two members of the opposite sex. It should remain as such.

You can't back up your opinion, that's the problem. You can't give logical arguments to things, and you can't have a discussion without name calling and insulting people. You can't handle people questioning your reason, which is a part of any decent debate or discussion. No one takes you seriously.

In what way? Traditionally if you look at the Left and the Right in US politics... and further back in British Parliamentary politics it was the left that was almost always the ones that pulled the "faith" or "emotion" card when it came to political wrangling... now instead it seems to be the new tactic of the conservatives - abandoning academia, intellectualism, and rationalism in favour of taking the left's traditional avenue of political attack.

To bad I'm not a Liberal (party or platform), but rather a Conservative - and I for one support Gay Marriage (and will continue to if Bush's sock puppet challenges it in Parliament).

We went through the arguement up here a few years back, and we pretty much heard it all in the arguement for and against... the Liberals argued Civil & Human Rights, while Harper and co. argued "God & the Bible" ~ needless to say the "conservative" platform lost because the fundies kept shooting themselves in the foot, while the Liberals fell back on the rule of law.

Well suffice to say, Canada hasn't been plunged into hellfire and the heavens haven't rained brimstone down on us... in fact everything is pretty much the same as before except in the minds of the far right up here. I don't know, I guess it's because there are a hell of lot more important issues in the world than stopping two people who love each other from getting married...

Well for one, I don't think putting academia and rationality in the same group is wise. What do you consider to be traditionally conservative? It obviously isn't George W. Bush, and I agree. By your reasoning it obviously isn't Bush Sr. or Reagan either. So how far back do we need to go to achieve what you consider to be true conservatism? Additionally, how are the neo-cons destroying the traditions of America? By attempting to preserve marriage? By protecting the right to bear arms and to worship freely? I believe that the marriage and flag burning issues are mostly to rally the troops and discourage the opposition, just as the left often does on issues involving gun control or seperation of church and state. Those issues are generally only of the highest concern within the very extremes of both parties. However, both parties use them as battle cries, and to strike blows against their most dedicated opposition. For the liberals, they go after the Christian right and southern voters, while the right often aims for academia. This being said, I remain opposed to gay marriage, but I don't think it is among the most important issues facing America.

As a follow up to your second section of that post, you're right there are more important things. However, I don't think comments that "Canada is just fine" are very reassuring. We are very distinct countries, and I think we value things differently.

Amen sister (or brother, pardon the apparent gender goof!)
RACooper
Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada (home of the largest phallic symbol on Earth.)
Posts: 2,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by shinerbock
I could, I know how liberals hate opposition. You'd much rather everything be from your slant. Ironic then, that people on this site are open-minded, unless of course, you have an opinion like mine. By the way, Moveon.org called, and they want their talking points back.
To bad I'm not a Liberal (party or platform), but rather a Conservative - and I for one support Gay Marriage (and will continue to if Bush's sock puppet challenges it in Parliament).
We went through the arguement up here a few years back, and we pretty much heard it all in the arguement for and against... the Liberals argued Civil & Human Rights, while Harper and co. argued "God & the Bible" ~ needless to say the "conservative" platform lost because the fundies kept shooting themselves in the foot, while the Liberals fell back on the rule of law.
Well suffice to say, Canada hasn't been plunged into hellfire and the heavens haven't rained brimstone down on us... in fact everything is pretty much the same as before except in the minds of the far right up here. I don't know, I guess it's because there are a hell of lot more important issues in the world than stopping two people who love each other from getting married...

I'm glad to see that at least one country seems to have its head on!! As a minister of the Universal Life Church, I personally oppose any form of government sanctioned prejudice, hatred, discrimination and divisive behaviours. Not only do I support gay marriage, I have already told certain friends that when the time comes I will go to their city or state and perform the service. I really disapprove of any religious group that would jeopardize the health and safety of any group by sanctioning them, unless they are doing something that threatens impending harm to another. Marriage is not something that threatens or harms anyone, unless one member of the arrangement is abusive. Marriage is something that has long been mandated and controlled by the state, especially since there are groups that believe it is God's will that a man should have fifty wives, whether those women are legally old enough to wed or not. It is right that the state should decide, but unfortunately, my state happens to be among those lost in the Dark Ages and is proposing legislature to ban gay marriage. I would gladly hang those who are proposing this, were it not "morally wrong" to harm others.
What a stimulating convert!! (my shorthand for conversation)
Well, anyway, blessed be and merry meet to all, even those who are misguided.:p