harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Every explanation you've just typed has been torn to bits throughout this thread. You've just repeated what the bigots keep repeating. The argument isn't the difference but the discrimination because of it. Yeesh! even I'm starting to repeat myself. But my argument has not been torn to shreds. Others have not agreed with it and given their opinions. My reasons are not discriminate or bigotted and if you view them as if they were posted by an homosexual you may agree with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 So in a way you believe that by denying same sex couples the right to marry the state is celebrating their difference? They do not fit the criteria for marriage in my view. Isn't it the union of 2 people that is celebrated and not the name of the union ? If I understand you correctly the same sex couple are celebrating their difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 They do not fit the criteria for marriage in my view. Isn't it the union of 2 people that is celebrated and not the name of the union ? If I understand you correctly the same sex couple are celebrating their difference. Yea, that sounds a really romantic and loving celebration, "are you and your partner in a union?" Anyway, will any complaints that you have disappear when the government changes the criteria that allows same sex couples to marry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Yea, that sounds a really romantic and loving celebration, "are you and partner in a union?" Anyway, will any complaints that you have disappear when the government changes the criteria that allows same sex couples to marry? If the government change legislation, which seems probable, I will still have the same opinion for the same reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 If the government change legislation, which seems probable, I will still have the same opinion for the same reasons. But would you celebrate a union of a friend or family based on the changed legislation contaminating its perceived original concept? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 If the government change legislation, which seems probable, I will still have the same opinion. I think many people would prefer the established form of marriage to remain as it is and the change may lessen respect for marriage. I am unable to supply any references for this and state it as an opinion only. So if same sex people meet the criteria for marriage, you think that they shouldn't get married because they don't meet the criteria for marriage? Is this more Hogic? Also, can you explain how two people who are completly committed to each other marrying lessen the respect for marriage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 But would you celebrate a union of a friend or family based on the changed legislation contaminating its perceived original concept? I do not consider contaminating is appropriate to describe my view on changes to marriage. Inappropriate is how I see it. Yes I would celebrate a couple pledging themselves to each other in whatever form it took. Why do you consider a civil partnership something not to be proud of ? Do you consider a register office wedding inferior to a church wedding ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 So if same sex people meet the criteria for marriage, you think that they shouldn't get married because they don't meet the criteria for marriage? Is this more Hogic? As explained same sex couples cannot meet the established criteria but if legislation is changed so is the criteria. Also, can you explain how two people who are completly committed to each other marrying lessen the respect for marriage? Because many see marriage as the union between a man and woman and would prefer it to stay that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 If the government change legislation, which seems probable, I will still have the same opinion for the same reasons. Your argument is that "marriage is for a man and woman" so if the law changed, how would your argument/opinion be "right" any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Your argument is that "marriage is for a man and woman" so if the law changed, how would your argument/opinion be "right" any more? Legislation would change the criteria. Opinions do not necessarily change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.