Marriage was cicivl, well before religion got involved.
Bearing in mind the bible has about 20 "definitions" of marriage, very few between just oen man and one woman where theyre both consenting, perhaps you should fuck off and understand a little about history FIRST, before spouting crap?
Ah, apparently you are not intelligent enough to understand that an analogous situation is not the same situation.
In both cases a basic legal right is being denied to a section of people based on bigotry. Difference in degrees of deprivation, yes, but no difference in situation.
No, it does not. Talk about a fucking unsupported leap
Understand a basic, simple fact: equal rights for LGBT to marry the person they love does not destroy the family. It does not stop heterosxuals form marrying, raising children, etc. It does not "encourage" homosexual behaviour - only someoen who has same sex atraction would even raise that as a possibility.
Grow up. If your own relationship is so unstable and fragile that someone else being able to be married affects you, then you have aproblem - not the others who just want equal treatement under the law
and I am ENTITLED to express my disatisfaction with their views by my unwillingness to use / purchase / otherwise endorse the product they are head of.
They deliberately hid - by issuing neither a safety advisory to dealerships, a recall OR by using a different frigging part number, indicating to everyone that this new part was different in some way - that this initial part had known issues.
Yes, people die. When youc ould have made reasonable efforts to prevent those deaths, when notified of the issue, that is when culpability starts
Countries whcih actually DO rehabilitate, which the US and UK systems make terrible and poor attempts at, respectively, show a clear improvement in crime rates, reoffending, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Marriage was cicivl, well before religion got involved.
Bearing in mind the bible has about 20 "definitions" of marriage, very few between just oen man and one woman where theyre both consenting, perhaps you should fuck off and understand a little about history FIRST, before spouting crap?
The UK prior to the middle ages.
Your knowledge is appalling. Stop spouting off on this topic as you apparently have little understanding of it.
You do not have the same abilty to marry the consenting adult you love, meaning those rights have been denied.
Oh, and it isnt a preference, as preference implies choice. Or did you choose to be straight? If so, how?
No, it is wrong to impose your bigoted views on others
Other people being granted the equal rights required under your constitution does not impact YOUR rights, life at all.
If the thought of same sex marriage is uncomfrotable to you, dont have one.
...which do not have the same civil rights as marriage, so no, that isnt a suitable alternative.
Separate but equal isnt actual equality, tool
So you are happily intolerant and against equal rights to marry the consenting adult you love?
Bigot.
You chose to be straight? After all, we know you chose to be a bigot...
Ah, apparently you are not intelligent enough to understand that an analogous situation is not the same situation.
In both cases a basic legal right is being denied to a section of people based on bigotry. Difference in degrees of deprivation, yes, but no difference in situation.
Which definition of marriage are ou using?
Not a biblical one, for sure. Civil one? Again, that has included same sex union in the past....
No, it does not. Talk about a fucking unsupported leap
Understand a basic, simple fact: equal rights for LGBT to marry the person they love does not destroy the family. It does not stop heterosxuals form marrying, raising children, etc. It does not "encourage" homosexual behaviour - only someoen who has same sex atraction would even raise that as a possibility.
Grow up. If your own relationship is so unstable and fragile that someone else being able to be married affects you, then you have aproblem - not the others who just want equal treatement under the law
When did you choose to be straight?
ERm, try reading *any* history* books on teh topic. Marriage as 1 man 1 woman is an incredibly recent concept.
Marriage was secular originally, and is not yours to own
Fuck off.
So equal protection for ALL, under the law, doesnt mean "equal" or "for all", but "unequal" or "for some"?
Orientation is not a lifestyle, it is not a preference (indicating choice), it is *innate*,
No, no it doesnt.
But then you are taking as credible a book written, rewritten, edited, translated and mistranslated over centuries.
Your credibility in debte is flawed
Odd, as the large (>30) moderateblack people I know fully understood the civil rights equivalency. Stop spouting shit,
and I am ENTITLED to express my disatisfaction with their views by my unwillingness to use / purchase / otherwise endorse the product they are head of.
The right to marry the consenting adult you love isnt "special", but equal.
No, there arent.
APA et all all agre that "conversion therapy" etc is actively harmful, and cannot do what its aim is.
Being gay is not a choice. Yes, I willingly choose to have a harder life for myself. Of course I did! Silly me.
(And homosexuality in animals, we'll just ignore that - they CHOSE to be gay! THose rational thinking lions, penguins, ......
INteresting idea on "promotion" there - equal rights, g'teed under your constitution !="promotion"
They deliberately hid - by issuing neither a safety advisory to dealerships, a recall OR by using a different frigging part number, indicating to everyone that this new part was different in some way - that this initial part had known issues.
Yes, people die. When youc ould have made reasonable efforts to prevent those deaths, when notified of the issue, that is when culpability starts
Countries whcih actually DO rehabilitate, which the US and UK systems make terrible and poor attempts at, respectively, show a clear improvement in crime rates, reoffending, etc.
Probability of getting caught has been shown to have a greater effect on deterrering the crime than the punishment.
Single payer sorts that out.
Civilised countries manage it, so give the US another 10 years of paying double for a system half as good, and you might wake up.