View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently April 18th, 2014, 1:51 am



Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 NY passes marriage equality 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
UK Lion wrote:
In what way is having it called something different "equal". How about we say that whites can have weddings and blacks can have civil unions. Equal?


I propose the gov't call them all civil unions making their gov't rights 100% equal and named the same.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


July 21st, 2011, 1:46 pm
Profile
League MVP
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3634
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
UK Lion wrote:
regularjoe12 wrote:
if one side OR THE OTHER would just get off that one word

Only one side is claiming exclusivity for the word. The other side is happy to share.


but heres the point...one side isnt sharing. Fair or not, they arnt! so do you keep bashin your head againt the same wall? or change a STUPID WORD, and get your equal rights. seems like a no brainer to me, but i must be msissing something cuz it has yet to be done.


July 21st, 2011, 2:06 pm
Profile
League MVP
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3634
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
steensn wrote:
UK Lion wrote:
In what way is having it called something different "equal". How about we say that whites can have weddings and blacks can have civil unions. Equal?


I propose the gov't call them all civil unions making their gov't rights 100% equal and named the same.



TADAAAA! and in the eyes of the law, all is fair and equal! let there be peace!


July 21st, 2011, 2:07 pm
Profile
3rd Round Selection

Joined: October 19th, 2005, 1:24 pm
Posts: 1112
Location: Nottingham, England
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
regularjoe12 wrote:
UK Lion wrote:
regularjoe12 wrote:
if one side OR THE OTHER would just get off that one word

Only one side is claiming exclusivity for the word. The other side is happy to share.


but heres the point...one side isnt sharing. Fair or not, they arnt! so do you keep bashin your head againt the same wall? or change a STUPID WORD, and get your equal rights. seems like a no brainer to me, but i must be msissing something cuz it has yet to be done.

Of course it seems like a no brainer because you don't miss out on anything. One second you're fine with one side being possessive over a word, the next it's just a "stupid word". Which one is it? Are they important or not? If they're important, frankly the side refusing to share are being unreasonable. If they're not important, the side refusing to share are still being unreasonable.

For what it's worth, I happen to think they are important.

regularjoe12 wrote:
steensn wrote:
UK Lion wrote:
In what way is having it called something different "equal". How about we say that whites can have weddings and blacks can have civil unions. Equal?


I propose the gov't call them all civil unions making their gov't rights 100% equal and named the same.



TADAAAA! and in the eyes of the law, all is fair and equal! let there be peace!

Yes, fair and equal. But it deprives people who have civil marriages the option to call their unions marriages. For example, I quite like saying i got married to my wife on my wedding. This is an important thing to me, even though it wasn't a religious ceremony I still see myself as being married etc. The word holds importance to the non-religious just as much as the religious.

Why should I have that word taken away?

Incidentally, steensn: given your opinion is that the English word "marriage" has its origins in exclusively Christian unions (a position I would dispute, given it's entymology, but ignoring that for now) - do you consider that Muslim marriages should also be called "unions"? Jewish ones? etc


July 21st, 2011, 2:16 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
UK Lion wrote:
Yes, fair and equal. But it deprives people who have civil marriages the option to call their unions marriages. For example, I quite like saying i got married to my wife on my wedding. This is an important thing to me, even though it wasn't a religious ceremony I still see myself as being married etc. The word holds importance to the non-religious just as much as the religious.

Why should I have that word taken away?


Who's taking it away? Go ahead and call your civil union whatever you want. Marriage, Wedding, Jello Pudding Shot Day, it is now no longer in the courts hands to worry about what someone wants to call their relationship. The courts are not the place to figure out what Websters dictionary or wikipedia should say about what a word is. Any gay couple can then call it ANYTHING they want at that point... it GIVES, not TAKETH away.

UK Lion wrote:
Incidentally, steensn: given your opinion is that the English word "marriage" has its origins in exclusively Christian unions (a position I would dispute, given it's entymology, but ignoring that for now) - do you consider that Muslim marriages should also be called "unions"? Jewish ones? etc


Muslims can call it what they want and I then have a right to consider it whatever I want. Just make it legally a generic term that leaves the gov't and the courts out of it. We can even predefine it so that we never have this issue again:

A legal contract between individuals recognized by the government.

Ends all legal issues and allows the gov't without any issues of "words/definition" to later change in it's law what is or isn;t a civil union. Ends this whole discussion...

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


July 21st, 2011, 3:06 pm
Profile
League MVP
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3634
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: NY passes marriage equality
Im not hung up on a word! I know lotsa words! I could care less....im one of those who beileives yer married WELL BEFORE you say "I do". what I am is a realist. I accept things for what they are. I think you are mistaking me for taking sides in this, and Im not. Im just suggesting the easiest (by far) solution to what i consider an ignorant problem.

and if the verbage is changed..what exactly is anyone out of? I dont get it..is there some kinda Christmas bonus that married people get that those with civil unions wouldn't?? why is a word so GD important?? i just dont understand..it's the UNITY that matters, not what you call it. you my friend are way too caught up on the labeling..and THAT is why a copmprimise hasn't been met, and why gays still are having trouble. too many people stuck on a dang word....it's just a freakin word..you give it too much power with the way you think about it. change the word, remove it's power and everyone can live happier lives


July 21st, 2011, 3:13 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.