Those of us who do not support the term GAY MARRAIGE

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2012 5:09 AM GMT
    We are not preventing you from having what our parents and grandparents "may" of had. I for one am in a 20+ year homosexual relationship, and feel not only do I have what my parents and grand parents had; but more.

    We are not saying you can not publicly declare your love for another, and live happily ever after.

    Many of us see the term Gay Marriage already a name change from just marriage. Thus let the change be complete, and support Civil Unions, not only can we make this our own, but also make it all inclusive for all; something the Term Marriage is not. As it's a hetrosexual institution; albeit one our half brother the bisexuals have long enjoyed too.

    So if we do not support a thing called Gay Marriage, please stop accusing us of holding "you back" from having what straights and bi's have, from making a public declaration of your love for another, as we are not doing that! We just don't support the term Gay Marriage and have the insight of those who are fighting for that term are in fact the ones holding you back.

    Love and be loved, and may you find the long term happiness I have, because even without gay marriage, We have made a public declaration of our love, of living together for over 20 years and will be together until death do us part.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2012 5:26 AM GMT
    For once, I actually agree with you. Almost.

    I do agree with claiming the term "civil union" for our own, but at the same time getting government completely out of "marriage."

    In other words, it seems more plausible to have a "marriage license" renamed to "civil union," and let the term "marriage" (or 'gay marriage') be where it belongs - between the people who wish to call it that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2012 7:59 PM GMT
    Interesting... totally overlooked the civil union aspect of being with a man... but in the long run will it be easier for people say their married or civilly united? People tend to go for the easier options... and I think Gay Marriage should only be the term used in so long as we're still fighting for the Rights afforded us as US Citizens. After that, we can just use the everyday true terms of marriage or civil union.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2012 8:22 PM GMT
    I feel so blessed in my 20+ relationship. I can see not only do we have what many straight couples have, we have way more than what my parents and grandparents ever had; we do not see ourselves as victims by not having access to the hetrosexual institution of marriage. because we are able to love and be loved and accepted too.

    If I wanted to get upset it would not be as a Bona Fide Homosexual, it would be as a true Blue Aussie, many many generations born to Oz. Were newcomers get rights I as a True Blue Aussie do not!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:20 AM GMT
    Vatican City was to release over the past week that it will start to back off on it's fight against Civil Marriage/ Unions. But it will not back off on the fight against gay marriage.


    It has been pointed out here at RJ a number of time, that if those fight for Gay Marriage, are in fact holding you back. Were if they put that energy and fight towards Civil Unions, they would of found less resistance.

    lets face it, the diffrence between Gay Marriage and civil Unions is do small what does it matter, also may members of the gay community to to a lot of troble to show that gay's are not the same as straights; so what does this wee difference make.

    So those of you who are fighting for gay marriage you need to face up to the fact you are contributing, to holding back advancement; you need to change you tactic. because it's not just the catholics who have declared war on the concept of gay marriage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:24 AM GMT
    TrueBlueAussie saidVatican City was to release over the past week that it will start to back off on it's fight against Civil Marriage/ Unions. But it will not back off on the fight against gay marriage.


    It has been pointed out here at RJ a number of time, that if those fight for Gay Marriage, are in fact holding you back. Were if they put that energy and fight towards Civil Unions, they would of found less resistance.

    lets face it, the diffrence between Gay Marriage and civil Unions is do small what does it matter, also may members of the gay community to to a lot of troble to show that gay's are not the same as straights; so what does this wee difference make.

    So those of you who are fighting for gay marriage you need to face up to the fact you are contributing, to holding back advancement; you need to change you tactic. because it's not just the catholics who have declared war on the concept of gay marriage.


    Can we all agree that TrueBlueAussie belongs in the Zoo's whale exhibit and not on realjock posting opinions?

    There are over 1000 different rights, privileges and benefits that come with marriage and hardly any that come with "civil unions" (or, for the fucking sake of it, lets call it butt buddies for gays [thank you SouthPark] and muff divers for lesbians, since, you know, dividing is good and all.). Is Congress really going to write those 1000 different rights, privileges and benefits for butt buddies and muff divers so that there is equality? Probably not.

    As it has all ready been decided in court rulings before, we cannot have separate but equal, therefore this stupid idea of having us called butt buddies or muff divers or civil unions is really fucking retarded. I dont care if it takes longer, the government's balls need to drop and finally say "Yes, 2 men or 2 women are JUST AS EQUAL IN OUR EYES as a man and a woman together, and their communities deserve the same rights as those."

    /thread over.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:28 AM GMT
    Agreed trueblue. I know many people who support gays having all the same rights as heteros in terms of the rights of marriage, but see it as supporting civil unions not marriage. Many feel "marriage" is a faith based term that govt has decided to get involved in. Gay marriage feels like a threat to that. But civil union is just giving people their fair rights.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Apr 02, 2012 3:32 AM GMT
    Chainers said

    Can we all agree that TrueBlueAussie belongs in the Zoo's whale exhibit and not on realjock posting opinions?



    No, because that exhibit is reserved for YOU.

    NOW the thread is over icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:38 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Chainers said

    Can we all agree that TrueBlueAussie belongs in the Zoo's whale exhibit and not on realjock posting opinions?



    No, because that exhibit is reserved for YOU.

    NOW the thread is over icon_lol.gif


    Awe Im so retarded yet you stole my insult. Why, old age slowing your brain down?

    Im surprised the retirement home even lets you on the computer pal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:38 AM GMT
    mizzouguy10 saidMarriage is a state-based institution. Should it be in it? Who knows, but it's so entrenched now I don't see it going away.

    So the question remains, should there be separate but equal distinctions for gay couples and straight couples? I say no, separate is not equal.

    What we should stop calling it is Gay Marriage, when it's really just Marriage.


    QFT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 3:52 AM GMT
    I do not think the terminology is the issue, but rather the rights that come along with it.

    If I remember correctly, when the Netherlands legalized gay-marriage all they did was simply make Civil unions have all the rights that heterosexual marriages had. As well, a new type of civil unions were put in place that granted greater rights and were open to heterosexual couples as well. What resulted was everyone went and got "civil-unioned' since it was easier to divorce from and had most of the same rights as the traditional marriage.

    Secondly, the reason we need to adopt the term 'marriage' is to prevent sexual segregation. If heterosexuals get marriage, and homosexuals get civil unions, there is a "separate but equal" notion to the whole thing. And if Plessy v. Ferguson has taught us anything is that legal segregation does tend to spiral into inequality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 4:04 AM GMT
    I would care about it a lot damn more, If I had a dude to marry.

    Its no use to you, like str8's marriage, if you got nobody to marry. icon_sad.gif
  • Generaleclect...

    Posts: 504

    Apr 02, 2012 4:35 AM GMT
    I can see the idea behind making all marriages into "civil unions," but it's unlikely that many people (even lawmakers) would be willing to change the centuries-old name for an institution they feel is rightfully theirs - all to make a minority group more comfortable.

    That would be a real uphill battle. (But of course, anything worth having is worth fighting for.)
  • waccamatt

    Posts: 1918

    Apr 02, 2012 4:55 AM GMT
    Our marriages can simply be called what they are - marriage - but civil unions do not equal full equality and I will settle for nothing less.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 5:01 AM GMT
    I don't think that there should be a "gay" before marriage; marriage is simply marriage, or a union between two people. Just because the union is between two men, or two women, does mean that people should label the marriage gay. Gay has become such a derogatory term... there are young people out there who try to commit suicide just because of the term "gay" and being called it, being teased by it.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 7:08 PM GMT
    Wow I made a thread somewhat similar to this to endless assault. Anyway, I totally agree with you because what some Christians really get annoyed by gay people for is the 'gay marriage' thing. If they weren't demanding that, a lot of heat would be off of them as they see it as marriage is an institution founded by God for man and woman; and gays are intruding on it.

    I'd love for civil unions to be pushed instead of gay marriage, it's nothing about being denied anything we're going to get the same things married men and women get while also losing a lot of heat from the Church/Christians.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 7:12 PM GMT
    MarkRoger saidWow I made a thread somewhat similar to this to endless assault. Anyway, I totally agree with you because what some Christians really get annoyed by gay people for is the 'gay marriage' thing. If they weren't demanding that, a lot of heat would be off of them as they see it as marriage is an institution founded by God for man and woman; and gays are intruding on it.

    I'd love for civil unions to be pushed instead of gay marriage, it's nothing about being denied anything we're going to get the same things married men and women get while also losing a lot of heat from the Church/Christians.


    I agree with the above. Because we are a Theocracy, we should engage our political decisions based on religious beliefs of SOME Americans.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 7:18 PM GMT

    Who cares what you call it. It's petty semantics (that TBA frequently gets himself caught up in). All it comes down it is the fight for marriage equality — two people of any race, gender, orientation, size, or color receiving the same benefits of a legal marriage as everyone else. Call it whatever you want, but to me you're just making the issue more complicated, and therefore more difficult to solve.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2012 7:48 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidHmmmm .... let me think

    When two people of a different race get married, it is referred to as "interracial marriage"

    So if 2 men get married that would be ... what is it??? Oh ya "gay marriage".


    and if a man and woman get married, it is referred to as "intersexual marriage?"