There was a time when I opposed same-sex marriage, but now I support it. To me, life is way too short, and if marrying somebody of the same sex makes you happy, go for it. I understand that religions who claim marriage was a concept derived from religion are offended over the idea of members of the same sex marrying each other, but why can't we just give it another name and make it the same thing?
I am in the same boat. I used to think it would lessen the sanctity of marriage. Now, I really don't care. My marriage, if i ever get married, won't be lessened because two women do the same thing or two guys do either.
In a related note, yesterday the preacher was talking about how it takes every stone (people/followers) to build a church and with one less stone, that Church is weakend. And, the Church needs all of its stones to be the best it can be. And, it can't be a great church if its missing a group of stones..... I wanted to point out the irony of this statement (that you need everybody) while completely alienating homosexuals. To me, it made less than zero sense.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:I've never heard anyone refer to me as beerstrike, but i kind of see it.
I'm surprised how many people don't get your name.
Until this very moment I didn't get it. But to be honest I often read the message of a post without even bothering to see who posted it. In other words, I don't notice alot of stuff. There are people I literally never heard of that with one post, I look at the name, and see that they have literally thousands of posts.
My first thought was that it had something to do with beer too. It was awhile before I came to the realization of what the name meant. It was quite a moment.
ghostrunner wrote:
It's not insulting to suggest that voters may not have thought through the implications of their vote. It's pretty common for people to not even know about ballot propositions until they walk in the booth. So they see the question as do you want to ban gay marriage or not?
Exactly. They saw it for what it was. A ban on homosexual marriage. And, they voted to ban it at a clip of 7-3. Don't blame that on someone else. Don't say they didn't know what they were doing.
I think we're splitting hairs, but why don't we just say that those against the ban need to do a better job of convincing people to join them? I think that's what she meant. Nowhere is she saying they didn't know what they were doing.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:So, and this is part of my point, how does a lady in New Jersey know the logic behind the AA vote in California? I don't believe she does. She just says something that, in America's mind, makes them look less bigoted. Forget that it makes them look foolish and duped.
Well, what did you think of her point concerning the language of statutes struck down by Loving v. Virginia? Or is she allowed to make the comparison?
lukethedrifter wrote:On a side note, Barbara Young is now my Favorite Mormon as well as one of my Favorite Political Activists and right near if not at the top of my Favorite MILF list.
I can't find a picture of this lady. But I did find a sweet halloween costume:
She's Steve Young's wife, so that might help you in your search.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote: I used to think it would lessen the sanctity of marriage. Now, I really don't care. My marriage, if i ever get married, won't be lessened because two women do the same thing or two guys do either.
I'm not married, but I think seeing this would lessen the sanctity of it.
cards2468 wrote:
There was a time when I opposed same-sex marriage, but now I support it. To me, life is way too short, and if marrying somebody of the same sex makes you happy, go for it.
This is my thinking, although I was never opposed to it. It's so hard to find someone in this world to truly love and if you finally find that person and they just so happen to be the same sex as yourself, what a waste it would be to pass that up. I don't think people should be concerned with what kind of sex life other people have (unless OF COURSE it involves children), it's really no one elses business.
On a side note, I was talking to a really good friend of mine this weekend. I knew she was an ultra-conservative republican, but she started spouting off all these hateful anti-gay comments and now I'm having a hard time thinking of her the same way. I'm fine with her having her own beliefs and ideas, but it's really the first time I have heard so much hate from someone directed toward a group of people who really have no effect on her life. I don't understand and I guess we will just have to agree to disagree - if that is possible. I don't know, should I quit the friendship over this when really it doesn't effect either one of us directly. I guess it would be different if I were gay, but I don't want to hear anything like that again. It makes me sad.
ghostrunner wrote:
It's not insulting to suggest that voters may not have thought through the implications of their vote. It's pretty common for people to not even know about ballot propositions until they walk in the booth. So they see the question as do you want to ban gay marriage or not?
Exactly. They saw it for what it was. A ban on homosexual marriage. And, they voted to ban it at a clip of 7-3. Don't blame that on someone else. Don't say they didn't know what they were doing.
I think we're splitting hairs, but why don't we just say that those against the ban need to do a better job of convincing people to join them? I think that's what she meant. Nowhere is she saying they didn't know what they were doing.
I totally thought that's what I was saying. Props to you if you made your point understood b/c I know I didn't make mine.
