10 States Pass Ban on Gay Marriage

Anyone miss this headline? Just thought I'd throw it out there in case it wasn't noticed.

As Darko would say

One Love!

They banned interracial marrage before by popular vote and amendments to constitutions. Bigotry is not new in America.

Ohio also banned heterosexual civil unions.

Gay marriages are fine by my book. They love eachother just as straight people do. They can adopt kids and live their lives happily ever after.... I know a few couples that have gotten married here in canada and i am happy for them. so..it doesnt bother me..whatever makes them happy then good for them

People are silly.


I couldn't care less if some guy wants to marry a guy. Let him. How is it any of my business?

Just leave them alone and let them live their lives.

Remember that this is "compassionate conservatism".

*blinkblink* What? Twas a joke, right?

It's 11 actually
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137424,00.html

Not a joke.


The Ohio measure, considered the broadest of the 11 because it barred any legal status that "intends to approximate marriage," gathered equal support from men and women, blacks and whites.

For anyone interested in maintaining the separation of church and state, this is a very good web site:

http://www.au.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_churchelectioneering

Because in reality, this is what the issue boils down to.

When I was a child learning about the civil-rights movement, I was shocked to see that there was a time when there were "black" and "white" drinking fountains. I imagined myself drinking rebelliously from the "incorrect" fountain and swore that if there were ever a time in my life when such inequality existed, I would rebel against it.

I kept that promise. As a political statement to protest the lack of same-sex marriages, when I married two years ago, we eschewed the traditional religious ceremony and chose instead a secular civil union and ceremony with a judge at the state capitol in San Francisco. We flew in from out of state and married alone (it was just the two of us and the judge). It was profoundly gratifying to see a year later the wave of same-sex marriages take place in San Francisco (same ceremony and location as ourselves).

We will not be able to call ourselves a free society until all people can drink from the same fountain. We will not be able to call ourselves a free society until all people can join in civil unions.

~Ulrika~

THE REVOLUTION WILL BE INWORLD.

Best Regards,
EO

Interesting point. If you can't do it real world because democracy, tolerance, and respect -- not to mention intelligence -- doesn't exist in the United States, then does Linden Labs have a "partnership" deal for you!

Not allowing something like gay marriages shows why the conservative right-wingers are closed minded, bible-thumping, moral-loving bigots. Morals. BAH! What are morals? They are different to different people. And who are they to force their definition of morals on anyone?

Live and let live. If we all thought this way, the world would be a better place. There is simply no reason why a same-sex marriage should threaten anyone. How does it affect anyone in any real sense? It doesn't. If you don't like it, ignore it.

It is a sad day today in America when a mediocre man of below average intelligence that touts religion and spews crap about family values can become President of the United States. Especially when he tries to COMBINE church and state...a concept that has NO PLACE in the U.S. We are given the freedom in this country to believe what we want to believe, worship whatever we want to worship, and live how we want to live. For anyone to question the way we decide to carry out those freedoms, is tantamount to communism...or worse yet, dictatorship. It goes against what this country is SUPPOSED to stand for.

People who know me here in SL know that I am a decent member of the community. Very helpful, friendly, and happy. Should my religious or political beliefs skew the way people view me? No. I am still the same person. Some of you may be surprised to hear that I do NOT believe in god, and that I did NOT vote because choosing "the lesser of two evils" just doesn't feel right to me. And also, I feel the time has come for a reform of the "electoral college" system that only tries to approximate a true democracy. The fact that I didn't vote changes nothing. My vote doesn't really count. I'll vote when the President is decided by 51% of the entire population's votes. Now that is a true democracy.

Anyway, I hesitated posting this since I really don't want anyone to think of me differently. I usually try not to discuss religion and politics with friends, but for some reason, I felt like I needed to get that off my chest.

Bottom line: Gay marriages should be legal. The election process in the U.S. needs rethinking. Religion should have no part in politics. Bush or Kerry...neither in my book.

P.S. Let's just ignore I said all that and keep having fun in SL

I'm just mad that it will now take me even longer to rip apart the moral fabric of the country.

Never fear though, if there's one thing we homosexuals do well, it manipulate fabric.

I predict Laura Bush's hair will not improve anytime in the near future. You just wait, we will get our revenge. I'm thinking orange for her inauguration gown. A really hideous orange. The gay mafia is on the prowl.

In the meantime I will just slink away into the dark alleyways and watch the breeders dump their babies into the garbage cans.

I really hate straight people today.

The very idea of marriage is religious in nature.

I'm having a hard time understanding why the anti-religious crowd is so pro-gay-marriage, instead of simply being opposed to all government control of and interference in marriage in general.

Anybody got a good answer for that one?

It's not about being pro-gay-marriage. It is recognizing that partnerships afford certain basic right that should be available to all couples.

Not that it matters. It won't be an issue soon.

Marriage is not only a religious spectacle. It is a business merger. Those who want marriage rights are fighting for the right to merge themselves in a business partnership.
To have the ability to share insurance, homes, bank accounts and estates. If you think that marriage is 100 percent religious then why do I have to get a state lisence to become married? That is the answer. It is not a religious union it is a state union founded in antiquated religious ideals.

No, Grim, it is not. You do *not* have to be married by a religious representative in order for it to be recognized by the government.

That is my point exactly. Why not remove the government interference instead of fighting over who has the right to have their lives interfered with that way?

Juro, the concept of marriage is religious in origin. It's adoption by the government doesn't make it any less so. It simply makes it a matter of improper religious interference in government, or improper government interference in religion.

The very idea of marriage is actually a transfer of property. The woman (similar to a bushel of vegetables or a cow) is sold by her father, with a dowery, to her husband.

Oddly enough, no one seems to concerned about the corruption of this particular ideal.

So, you'd be willing to give up all of the protections/rights/responsibilites that come with a marriage certificate?



Actually, the *concept* was more inline with what Kairi mentioned: the transfer of property and to guarantee that the children were indeed the offspring of the husband. Religion started to play a role in marriage when the Roman Church came up in power.

I agree with you, Grim. Let's stop recognizing the institution of marriage altogether -- take it out of the civil court and administrative systems, out of contract and property law, separate it from the legal and social ethics of having and nurturing children, take it out of the adoption racket, stop giving it the social and corporate status it presently commands. Make it into an obscure and materially-irrelevant religious ritual, and relegate it to a similar status as snake-handling.

No marriage will solve the problem of gay marriage very nicely. And it will be one further step in solving the problem of religious interference with civil rights in this country.