California high court set to rule on same-sex marriage case - Page 3 - Truckers' Trucking Forum | Message Board

Roadmedic · **^ Top** #21 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by caraldo

Road, i agree with you. However, this wouldn't be a discussion if it werent for liberal politics. I just find it so pathetic that so much money gets wasted on this issue that effects so few. I know 6 gay people(at least ones that I know are gay, could have a larry craig out there). in those 6 are 2 couples. None of them are interested in getting married, including my in-law in Massachusettes.

People out of work, uninsured children, on-going war....some pole smoker not able to get a marriage license..the big issues of our day.

There are many things to consider here.

Lifetime companions, even if not same sex have problems with the final arrangements and assets upon one's death. The intentions have legal implications that sometimes restrict how the assets can be transferred. Such as tax free issues. They can be transferred tax free to spouses, but not to companions.

People out of work, etc....
This will only continue to become a large problem. The government seems to have no interest in the common people.

caraldo · **^ Top** #22 05.15.2008

got to agree with ya road. Fact is I don't like the courts stepping on the legislative process, and also, though relatively young, I guess I'm and old fuddy-duddy.

Kalamity Jane · **^ Top** #23 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobW

Therin lies the problem... You fail to understand, until the court today made it so, there was no right to marry... For anyone, gay or straight... Gay rights were not being restricted any more than heterosexuals... Neither had that right... Today, gays have that right...

And it took the Supreme Court to ensure they did have their rights, as citizens, respected. How is this different from the civil rights movement? Are we a country that is going to decide if YOU have the SAME rights as other citizens depending on Race, Religion, Gender or Orientation? We have been remiss in my view..more concentrated on exporting OUR brand of Democracy than protecting it at home.

KJ

GuysLady · **^ Top** #24 05.15.2008

IMHO...

Marriage is a RELIGIOUS ceremony and relationship. And is therefore under the dictates of religion.

Yes, it can be a civil ceremony, but marriage itself has it's basis in the Holy Books. Be it the Bible, the Quran, or the Talmut. (sp?) And should therefore remain based in those books.

A LEGAL domestic partnership SHOULD be allowed for those who chose to live outside the qualifications of those books, with the same rights and responsibilities as a marriage. But do NOT call it a marriage! Tom and Larry simply DO NOT have the same kind of relationship that I have with my husband, and could NEVER have that kind of relationship!

Roadmedic · **^ Top** #25 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuysLady (Weather Lady)

IMHO...

Marriage is a RELIGIOUS ceremony and relationship. And is therefore under the dictates of religion.

Yes, it can be a civil ceremony, but marriage itself has it's basis in the Holy Books. Be it the Bible, the Quran, or the Talmut. (sp?) And should therefore remain based in those books.

A LEGAL domestic partnership SHOULD be allowed for those who chose to live outside the qualifications of those books, with the same rights and responsibilities as a marriage. But do NOT call it a marriage! Tom and Larry simply DO NOT have the same kind of relationship that I have with my husband, and could NEVER have that kind of relationship!

Not all marriages occur in a church. Many are at the court house in front of a judge. Therefore, they are not really based under the religion.

Being married in a church does not equate to a legal marriage without the government confirming that the union meets the laws of the state. This again is not in agreement with religion.

caraldo · **^ Top** #26 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalamity Jane

And it took the Supreme Court to ensure they did have their rights, as citizens, respected. How is this different from the civil rights movement? Are we a country that is going to decide if YOU have the SAME rights as other citizens depending on Race, Religion, Gender or Orientation? We have been remiss in my view..more concentrated on exporting OUR brand of Democracy than protecting it at home.

KJ

kj, you are missing his point. man and women didn't have the "right to get married". They had to meet the requirements set by the state. Now, gay couples have a right, where none existed before for straight couples. The fact is, that all citizens were treated equally under the law, previously. Everybody had the same right. Homo and Hetro sexuality is behavior. Now the court in California has decreed that engaging in one of those behaviors places you above the law.

You are entitled to your opinion. However, you can not compare this to the civil rights movements. Being black isn't a behavior, except for upper class white kids from the suburbs.

caraldo · **^ Top** #27 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadmedic

Not all marriages occur in a church. Many are at the court house in front of a judge. Therefore, they are not really based under the religion.

Being married in a church does not equate to a legal marriage without the government confirming that the union meets the laws of the state. This again is not in agreement with religion.

I think that is what should now be done. End civil marriage for civil unions. That way homo's can have their certification from the gov't for their lifestyle. And those of the religious ilk can protect marriage for what it should be, a promise between the couple and God. And when the Gay guys go to the unity church to get hitched, they can call it what they want.

Kalamity Jane · **^ Top** #28 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuysLady (Weather Lady)

IMHO...

Marriage is a RELIGIOUS ceremony and relationship. And is therefore under the dictates of religion.

Yes, it can be a civil ceremony, but marriage itself has it's basis in the Holy Books. Be it the Bible, the Quran, or the Talmut. (sp?) And should therefore remain based in those books.

A LEGAL domestic partnership SHOULD be allowed for those who chose to live outside the qualifications of those books, with the same rights and responsibilities as a marriage. But do NOT call it a marriage! Tom and Larry simply DO NOT have the same kind of relationship that I have with my husband, and could NEVER have that kind of relationship!

There are plenty of Gay people who are religious, and plenty of church's that welcome them openly. They DO have the right to a religious ceremony if they choose.

KJ

Kalamity Jane · **^ Top** #29 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by caraldo

kj, you are missing his point. man and women didn't have the "right to get married". They had to meet the requirements set by the state. Now, gay couples have a right, where none existed before for straight couples. The fact is, that all citizens were treated equally under the law, previously. Everybody had the same right. Homo and Hetro sexuality is behavior. Now the court in California has decreed that engaging in one of those behaviors places you above the law.

You are entitled to your opinion. However, you can not compare this to the civil rights movements. Being black isn't a behavior, except for upper class white kids from the suburbs.

I'm not missing the point, I think you're argument is incorrect. While men and women may not have had the right (I think we're parsing here) they were NOT excluded by arbitrary, religious and conventional 'common views'...there are many other examples in our history where this same thing was done to other groups, and corrected.

Yes, I can compare it to civil rights because that is exactly what we are talking about. Blacks, Browns, Yellow etc. is a matter of birth...your problem is that you don't recognize that GLBT is as well.

KJ

Kalamity Jane · **^ Top** #30 05.15.2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by caraldo

I think that is what should now be done. End civil marriage for civil unions. That way homo's can have their certification from the gov't for their lifestyle. And those of the religious ilk can protect marriage for what it should be, a promise between the couple and God. And when the Gay guys go to the unity church to get hitched, they can call it what they want.

This is a huge part of the problem...you are misinformed about what being gay is...based on religion...you have a right to believe as you do but you don't have the right to impose your religious view on others.

KJ

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Trucker Forum	Replies	Last Post
Supreme Court Gets Gun Rights Case Right!!!	Big Duker	Politics	25	06.28.2008 08.15 PM
California Residents to Vote on Gay Marriage Ban Come November	WiseOne	Politics	4	06.03.2008 11.55 AM
10 States Urge Calif. Court to Delay Finalizing Gay Marriage Ruling	Cybergal	Politics	33	06.01.2008 09.30 AM
Truckers’ attorney argues Landstar case in federal appeals court	Cybergal	Teamsters, OOIDA, NAFTA	0	01.17.2008 09.30 AM
Supreme Court to hear case involving state regulation of trucking	Cybergal	Truckers News	0	06.27.2007 08.16 AM

Truckers' Trucking Forum/Message Board - The Premiere Truck Driver Forum
Sponsored Links

The Following User Says Thank You to caraldo For This Useful Post:
goin2fast10 (1 Week Ago)

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)