Homosexuals are not IPSO FACTO lesser to heterosexuals.

Your argument rests entirerly on the premise that a civil union between a gay couple is not given the legal equality of a marriage between a man and a woman.

Back to my point, the fight and argument should be focused on those states or federal laws (if any) that fail to recognize a civil union and/or fail to provide the same legal rights and protections.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

I personally don’t want to marry, but the possibility is necessary in order to have legal equality.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

We agree (I think).

The real fight for the GLBT community rests with the RIGHTS. If civilized unions are given the same legal status, rights, priviledges, protections etc… given to couples who are legally married would the GLBT be happy?

Given the arguments and the purposeful mischaracterization of Prop 8 I doubt that is the case.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

I dont’ think either that there’s a huge difference between growing up with a married straight couple or a “cilvil unioned” gay couple. At least not as long as those two mean EXACTLY the same when it comes to rights (which has not been the case). I don’t think religious definition should overcloud those civil rights.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

Hello.

Let me say that what pediatricians have to say about children raised by a straight or gay couple has ZERO to do with Prop 8 and the definition of the word marriage.

The same pediatricians can do a study on the impact of children being raised by a MARRIED couple vs. a gay couple joined by a civil union. I’m sure the results would be the same.

Many are attempting to cloud the issue, but don’t focus on what Prop 8 truelly was. At least the majority of California voters and the California Supreme Court paid attention and got it right.

“Why would anyone want to take that away?” – Prop 8 and the California Supreme Court Ruling takes nothing away.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

Like or Dislike: 0 0

They fought for marriage only so that they would afforded the same legal rights granted to married couples, but if this can be achieved under a civil union, what is all the contentious debate about? Is the concept of “equal rights” no longer the objective? And if it isn’t, they need to go sit down. I understand that right now, they would not be granted the same rights under a “civil union”, but THIS is where the fight should be focused, not on being classified under the term “marriage” and thereby, passively inheriting all those rights. If they wanted to call it “soue*7dhd##@”, that would be fine, as long as “soue*7dhd##@”, meant they could have the same rights! Seriously, if I were a sensible lesbian, I would recognize this.

I’m not even a Christian, or a religious fanatic, but I do understand the religious foundation of what a traditional “marriage” is all about, and I wouldn’t agree to the obliteration of that sanctity just so that a minority group could feel “included.” I fully understand why people want to protect it…anyone should, whether they agree or not. You just cannot shut your eyes, cock your ears and refuse to accept why people have objected to this…you won’t get anywhere by doing that. The sooner the GBLT community realizes this, the better off they will be. Focus on what is most important, your RIGHTS, and NOT under what term your union is being established and recognized by law. They would be amazed by how much more support they would have!

Like or Dislike: 0 0

Happy April Fools Day.

Enjoy The Company Of Your Significant Other, Man, Woman, Or Peanut Butter and Jelly.

And no—just because I happen to be Christian (oh by the way…there are plenty of gay Christians SURPRISE) do I think being openly gay should be against the law.

Stay on subject, and don’t pretend to know me.

Enjoy the Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich if that is what you are into.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

Like or Dislike: 0 0

Like or Dislike: 0 0