Again, that's where we disagree. I think marriage is a facet of religion.

 

I am all for tax benefits, health insurance benefits, etc for two gay people. Just don't call it marriage. That's my point of view.

 

Call it wrong, close minded, homophobic, or whatever (many of you have already). But at least UKMustangFan will civilly discuss it with me.

 

So am I understanding you correctly, that marriage cannot occur outside of religion?? Two atheists cannot get married?? Or what about a marriage performed under a non-christian religion?? Are they not to be recognized?? What about a marriage performed outside of a church?? And if both of those scenario's are ok with you, why the difficulty with calling a same sex union a marriage??

Okay, so one day white men just decided to give women and blacks the right to vote? No. Obviously looking back you and me know that women and blacks have always deserved the right to vote, but the selfish, controlling white men of the 20th century needed to be convinced that women and blacks deserved the same right. How did women and blacks earn the right? They showed the white men that they [women/blacks] were just as smart as the men.

 

I'm amazed you think that it's OK.

Maybe this belongs in a different thread, and maybe this anecdote is more a product of my age, but it wasn't until about 10 years ago that it ever even crossed my mind that gays might want to get married, yet they weren't allowed. The purpose of me relaying my experience isn't to somehow say I have suddenly been enlightened and know it all, but rather to offer perspective.

 

At that time I held the belief that I was all for allowing civil unions but that we shouldn't call these unions "marriage". I'm not sure when my opinion changed, but to be honest, I'm embarrassed that I ever felt that way. Somehow I felt that whenever I would get married, it would be such a grand event in my life that it would cheapen it by letting other people call their union the same thing.

 

This line of thinking seriously makes me cringe. Who was I to think that some relationship I hadn't even entered into was more important than anyone else? I'm Catholic and recognize the Church's teachings, but honestly this doesn't even concern that. I've been to weddings at different churches, been to cermonies outside, and even once acted as a photographer with an iPhone to a ceremony at a court house. Never for a second did I ever consider any of those couples not married. InIttoWinIt, I hope you don't think I am attacking you. I recognize the religious arguments, and disagree but understand if you think SCOTUS got it wrong. At the same time, maybe I'm the one that's wrong, but arguing against using the term "marriage" in a legal sense comes across as ignorant at best and condescending at worst.

Is it possible, that someone in the US will see this article and say, "Hey, I can't find unconditional love from another person. And if this Dutch lady found it by marrying her dog, why can't I?"

 

Is it possible?

 

Oh it's a definite possibility in America, look at how many idiots we have here, not to mention the politicians and SCOTUS, who have made America morally corrupt.

 

Some guy will marry a kitty cat so he can have some

Maybe this belongs in a different thread, and maybe this anecdote is more a product of my age, but it wasn't until about 10 years ago that it ever even crossed my mind that gays might want to get married, yet they weren't allowed. The purpose of me relaying my experience isn't to somehow say I have suddenly been enlightened and know it all, but rather to offer perspective.

 

At that time I held the belief that I was all for allowing civil unions but that we shouldn't call these unions "marriage". I'm not sure when my opinion changed, but to be honest, I'm embarrassed that I ever felt that way. Somehow I felt that whenever I would get married, it would be such a grand event in my life that it would cheapen it by letting other people call their union the same thing.

 

This line of thinking seriously makes me cringe. Who was I to think that some relationship I hadn't even entered into was more important than anyone else? I'm Catholic and recognize the Church's teachings, but honestly this doesn't even concern that. I've been to weddings at different churches, been to cermonies outside, and even once acted as a photographer with an iPhone to a ceremony at a court house. Never for a second did I ever consider any of those couples not married. InIttoWinIt, I hope you don't think I am attacking you. I recognize the religious arguments, and disagree but understand if you think SCOTUS got it wrong. At the same time, maybe I'm the one that's wrong, but arguing against using the term "marriage" in a legal sense comes across as ignorant at best and condescending at worst.

 

Well said. :thumb:

My wife married an anaconda ...Just sayin

Oh it's a definite possibility in America, look at how many idiots we have here, not to mention the politicians and SCOTUS, who have made America morally corrupt.

 

Some guy will marry a kitty cat so he can have some

 

I don't know for certain, but I'm guessing folks like that already exist, and they've likely existed for a long time. And there is zero chance that their "marriage" is ever recognized or legalized. The recent decision won't fill up marriage application lines with people that suddenly want to marry their pet, coffee table, car or any other non human life form/object, nor will it make any of those "relationships" socially acceptable.

My wife married an anaconda ...Just sayin

 

Because you've squeezed the life out of her?

My wife married an anaconda ...Just sayin

 

So...you're saying you are her second husband?

So...you're saying you are her second husband?

Good one, but I was waiting for someone to say I was a snake in the grass lol

Good one, but I was waiting for someone to say I was a snake in the grass lol

 

I think mine is much more evil.

Y

 

I have no problem with that. Just don't call it marriage.

I cannot procreate. I guess that I have no business being married.

I cannot procreate. I guess that I have to business being married.

 

My daughter can't either. Thankfully her fiancee loves her anyway and feels thankful he found a woman like her and having kids doesn't matter to him...He isn't marrying her for her uterus.

I have a friend who has 3 Boston Terriers, (used to be 4 but the oldest one died).

 

One is the Mommy of the other 2, and the Daddy is the one that died.

 

The 3 that are still living are nearly 12 years old if not more, so technically since he's had them their whole lives, he's in a common-law marriage with 3 dogs, and a polygamist at that.

 

In fact I think that they all crash out in bed with him at night when it's time to call it a day.

 

He refers to them as his babies, so I might have this all wrong and they're his kids...not sure. Well, obviously the 2 are the kids of the Mommy, so they're not actually his kids...

 

It's all so confusing...:idunno:

Again, that's where we disagree. I think marriage is a facet of religion.

 

I am all for tax benefits, health insurance benefits, etc for two gay people. Just don't call it marriage. That's my point of view.

 

Are they allowed to sit in front of the bus?