ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:50 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Just out of curiosity, which option did you vote for?
I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions" 7%  7%  [ 3 ]
I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 58%  58%  [ 26 ]
I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for the name 36%  36%  [ 16 ]
Total votes : 45
Author Message
 Post subject: "Pro-Family" poll that's anything but
PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:17 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1214
Location: Royal Court of Unfounded Speculation
I noticed a link to this poll on DaiDreamer5's LiveJournal, and... heck, lemme just quote.

DaiDreamer5 wrote:
This is a poll on a "pro-family" website about whether gay marriages should be legal. Obviously the results are slightly NOT in favor of gay marriages. I wondering if they are planning on using this in a publication?

Yevaud333 wrote:
Not a publication... they're taking it to Congress. >_<'

Dammit... we need to get a buttload of non-bigots over into that poll and tip the scales. (Of course, it would take a butt of a buttload of non-bigots to tip those scales... but you gotta start somewhere, ya?)

So yeah; tell your friends, family, anyone with an internet connection who you think would be sympathetic. We only need, what, 80K participants to break even? Sounds bad, I know, but hey, among the lot of us I suspect we probably have connections to a significant fraction of that number, and you know what they say about six degrees... I will be watching the tally and would love to see it start swinging in the opposite direction from the way it's going now.

That URL, for easy passing on, is: http://www.afa.net/petitions/MarriagePoll.asp

_________________
Only try to realize the truth...
There is no spoon. Then you will realize
that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.


"Only he who attempts the absurd
is capable of achieving the impossible."
 - Miguel de Unamuno


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:31 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 4:10 pm
Posts: 1035
Location: New York City
I favor legalization of homosexual marriage. It's a natural right for human beings to choose who they want to love regardless of gender, race, or religion. By oppressing this bill, the American government would be pulling back civil rights a few decades. As the homosexual preference is increasing in the United States, the government needs to be prepared to allow same sex marriages to take place.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:32 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: The Murky depths of Northern Virginia
*see's site*

GULP....

...great, mom's gonna have a fit about THAT...

_________________
BDM was here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Fucking lack of sleep. I think I'm becoming and insomniac
PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:48 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
First off, I must say that the idea of marraige in this country is based off the Christian idea of marriage in particular. Now, it is unarguable that homosexuality is seen as a sin in Christianity. Certain parts of the Bible can clearly be picked out that show this, namely one in particular which comdemns laying down with another man as you would a woman. Also, we cannot forget the whole Sodom and Gomorrah incident. The Christian definition of a marriage is a holy bond between a man and a woman under God that is inseperable and eternal.

So, with that said, homosexuals should not be married. Now, I do think that a civil union would be more than adequate. If some provision was set up as such, that would most likely be the method that I would wed my future wife assuming she's non-Christian as am I. If it has the exact same benifits, though, then what is a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 1:45 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1674
Location: The deep, dark corners of my mind
Ah, I voted on the poll here for being in favor, but when I got over to the site I found out it seems you have to live in the US to vote. (It had a field for US state, and all fields required.)

_________________
Insanity is your friend. It keeps that pesky Real World at a distance.

Godless Socialist Pedant


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 1:45 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:40 am
Posts: 1400
Location: Right Behind You
Well, if we're going to be quoting plays then, consider John Proctor's speech at the end of The Crucible (the "because it is my name!" one that they cut from the movie. I would dig it up if I weren't way overdue for sleep). Words hold strong feelings within them, especially if they carry an emotional and symbolic meaning. Civil union takes the feeling out of the act, and there is a high likelyhood that some couples aren't just doing it for the benifits.

_________________
Official punta' of the CoI


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 5:31 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 5:00 pm
Posts: 1391
Location: SourSveg, Horrible Härjedalen
Off course homosexuals must have same rights as hetrosexuals! They are >6% of the worlds population for starters. The "this is unnatural" of "not christian/religios right" is just bullcrap!

_________________
<a href="http://www.di.fm">Electronic Dance music with highly addictive elements</a><br>
"If you lie down immedeately after eating, you will become a cow."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 6:16 am 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 2115
Location: Lair of the Internet Anti-Hero
Shinjiro wrote:
Civil union takes the feeling out of the act, and there is a high likelyhood that some couples aren't just doing it for the benifits.


Allrighty.. fine, fine... they need their own word then... Hmm

Okay.. Marriage.. represents the cornerstone of an *ideal* hetrosexual marriage... you know.. Mom, Dad, 2.4 children, 2 cats, a dog, a house (With a nice hardwood floor) car and cuban cigars.

Soo..... whats the corner stone of an Ideal Homosexual relationship..

errmmm..

Well, Lets turn to that great educator of the western (And coming soon to the easteren, IN COLOR) world, Television.

Okay... Sex... doubling your wardrobe as your parner wears the same clothes... sex... high pitched voices and sex...

So... sex, squeaky voices, and extravigant clothing...

Sounds like... a PARTY

Hell, hawiian shirts are worn to both situations!

From now one, all loving homosexual couples will be joined in holy PARTY, may they PARTY HARD through sickness and in heath, good times and bad.

LET THEM REMAIN PARTYING FOR LIFE!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:09 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3706
I voted for a civil union rather than marriage, and the reason for this is simple; marriage is by nature a religious ceremony and most religions* are totally against homosexuality. But I do think that such a civil union should confer all the rights of a marriage with all but the name (Automatic next-of-kin status, tax benefits, adoption etc).

I doubt that poll will do jack shit when brought to congresss, by the very nature of the site it is on it is baised and I can only hope that the Senators (Or whater they're referred to as) have the intellegence to realise this and disregard it. The only type of poll that could ever be remotely un-biased would be some kind of national refferendum where every voter had one vote and the results were tabulated by an independant source for the government.

PTLIS

* Primerrily I am reffering to Christianity - I have no real in-depth knowledge of other religions (although I have been led to believe that most are just as homophobic) plus christianity is the prevalent one in both America and Britain so is pertinant to most boardies. (Sorry Canadians and Ausses but once again I don't know enough to make an informed judgement, plus I beleive Canada is in the process of something similar to what is being discussed.

_________________
There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies
within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:38 am 
Offline
Local

Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 293
What really needs to be done is to change the governments "marriage license" to a "civil union contract" that provides said legal benifits. This would remove "marriage" from the government side of the equation and make it purely a religious matter.

Yes, lots of religious fanatics would still object but it would help some people overcome their prejudices.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:01 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
PTLIS hit it on the head. Civil union.

Ama is also correct.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:03 am 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 8:27 am
Posts: 611
Location: Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
From my understanding the religious right has two reasons why they oppose Gay marriages:

1. It is morally wrong. I guess they feel that if the government legalizes these marriages, then it sort of like putting a stamp of approval on sin. However, it does say in the constition that there is a separation of church and state. This is why you have to get a separate marriage license from the courthouse before/after you get married in a church.

2. They don't want these people adopting children (can unmarried gay couples adopt now?) This one I really don't know much about and thus have no agreement against. I know there are studies about children living in a home lacking a father or mother figure. However, most of these studies are for single parents, i believe. Thus, based on my limited knowledge, if they are to keep gay marriages illegal for this reason, then they should start taking children away from "troubled and immoral" single parent families and heck lets through in those who lost thier spouse too.

Are there any other reasons why they might be against gay marriages? I'm actually quite curious. If they come up with a good reason they I might change my mind about them.

But it better be a good reason.

Also for more info about the poll, go here: http://www.livejournal.com/community/so ... .html?nc=7

_________________
Some people don't need drugs to act weird, crazy, or demented. They simply are.

Politics is about saving your ass in this life; Religion is about saving your ass in the next. It's no wonder that the two are connected now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:00 pm 
Offline
Local

Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 354
Location: Newton, ma
Im torn on this. Two opinions

A: No, because the Government shouldnt moderate something as inherently civil as marraige, period

B: Yes, because once we do this we are indeed on a slippery slope, that will either eventually cause the realization of (A), or at least allow polyamorous unions, either one is fine by me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:33 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3447
Location: New York
PTLIS wrote:
I* Primerrily I am reffering to Christianity - I have no real in-depth knowledge of other religions (although I have been led to believe that most are just as homophobic) plus christianity is the prevalent one in both America and Britain so is pertinant to most boardies. (Sorry Canadians and Ausses but once again I don't know enough to make an informed judgement, plus I beleive Canada is in the process of something similar to what is being discussed.


Religion!=homophobia. I know of quite a few religious denominations that are not anti-gay in the least. Most of the more liberal denominations of Christianity have no problem with homosexuality, and why the fuck should we be defining what Christianity "is" based on what the conservative fundamentalist wing of it preaches?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marv.htm wrote:
As of 2000-DEC, the following religious groups support marriage and/or civil unions for all adults, independent of sexual orientation:
  • Central Conference of American Rabbis
  • California Council of Churches
  • Pacific Congress of Quakers
  • Unitarian Universalist Association,
  • United Church of Religious Science
  • United Church of Christ
  • United Church of Canada
  • Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:42 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Christianity is against homosexuality if you go right to the text. Its in the book. Black and white as can be. Just because a group tolerates it, does not mean in any way that it is morally acceptable by thier code. If they say its not a Christian sin to be a homosexual, then they might as well ignore the rest of the Bible as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2038 9:00 pm
Posts: 3209
as long as the government issues MARRIAGE licenses, then fuck "civil unions," it is MARRIAGE. change the fucking terminology if you want, then, to avoid a disagreement with the religious right. but giving homosexuals the ability to apply for a marriage license, oddly enough, does not equal forcing religious institutions to recognize said marraiges.

WHOA! HOLY SHIT! REVELATION!

_________________
election results: still an op
Let me put it to you this way: I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it. It is my style.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:46 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3706
8 Christian denominations out of how many hundreds (more likely thousands) denominations that exist in total. I never said all religions or denominations, nor was it implied:

PTLIS wrote:
marriage is by nature a religious ceremony and most religions* are totally against homosexuality.


And kry is right, i have read the book and there are several parts that specifically denounce homosexuality, i believe the same it true for teh Qu'ran (or however you spell it). This means by their own holy-texts Christians, Jews (Old-Testament) and Muslims are told to be homophobic.

PTLIS

_________________
There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies
within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:52 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3447
Location: New York
krylex wrote:
Christianity is against homosexuality if you go right to the text. Its in the book. Black and white as can be. Just because a group tolerates it, does not mean in any way that it is morally acceptable by thier code. If they say its not a Christian sin to be a homosexual, then they might as well ignore the rest of the Bible as well.


Uhm, if you're talking about Leviticus, God condemns eating shellfish using the exact same terminology elsewhere in that book.

Leviticus 18:22 wrote:
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.


Leviticus 11:10-12 wrote:
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.


So Christianity can be considered against homosexuality only in the same way it can be considered against eating shellfish.


Last edited by IcyMonkey on Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:52 pm 
Offline
PostWhorePornStar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Posts: 7672
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Well, I would say that terminology would have to be modified. The definition of a marraige is: a : the state of being married b : the mutual relation of husband and wife : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby men and women are joined in a special kind of social and legal dependence for the purpose of founding and maintaining a family.


That means that according to the current terminology, its man and wife. Now, should we change that, then there's not a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 3:01 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
I am for marraige simply because I think it is a waste of effort to change everything from the word "married" to "civily unified" or whatever the fuck the adjective would be. I think the religious people just need to swallow their pride and let homosexuals say they are married. They act is if it actually does something more than make them uncomfortable around and suspicious of their fellow man.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group