(Closed) Definition of Marriage – how do you respond?

posted 8 years ago in LGBTQ
Post # 17
Member
551 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

@oracle:  Tell them our society is evolving for the better 🙂 Or just say segregation and women’s voting rights and walk away.

View original reply
@fishbone:  YES! Completely agree with you. 

Post # 18
Member
7199 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: October 2015

@oracle:  The definition of marriage has changed over time. It no longer means a man owns his wife. In this country, it no longer means a man can have more than one wife. The definition changes based on people’s advanced view of human rights. 

That said, I generally turn it back on them. If a civil union is fine & dandy and same gender couples should be happy with that, why not make all legal unions “civil unions” and let church weddings be called “marriages” with no legal standing? You get a birth certificate from the state, but a baptismal certificate from the church. You turn 18 & are considered “legal” by the state, but when you have your confirmation in the Catholic church, you are considered an “adult” (this could happen in 8th grade or 11th or anywhere in between). 

Post # 19
Member
7199 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: October 2015

View original reply
@Chrysoberyl:  LOOOOOVE this!

Post # 20
Member
1540 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2015

I’ve seen so many posts on social media about how gay marriage is ruining the “traditonal marriage” blah blah. And then these people go on and say that they’ve had sex before marriage- that is not traditional either. What about divorce? IMO heterosexuals have “ruined” the traditional marriage definition. And statistically, homosexual marriages have a smaller divorce rate than heterosexual marriages.

Marriage should be between two PEOPLE who are in love and want to commit their lives together. Simple as that. Now, if they wanted to get married in a catholic church, I could see there being more of an issue.

This is partially why I am proud to be Canadian, where gay marriage is accepted.

Post # 24
Member
3884 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: September 2011

Here’s a FANTASTIC example on why civil union isn’t enough, and why it has to be marriage (not fantastic for the couple, of course, just a fantastic illustration of why the current laws are so pathetic in their discrimination):

 Carolyn Compton is in a three year-old relationship with a woman. According to Compton’s partner Page Price, Compton’s ex-husband rarely sees their two children and was also once charged with stalking Compton, a felony, although he eventually plead to a misdemeanor charge of criminal trespassing.

And yet, thanks to a Texas judge, Compton could lose custody of her children because she has the audacity to live with the woman she loves.

According to Price, Judge John Roach, a Republican who presides over a state trial court in McKinney, Texas, placed a so-called “morality clause” in Compton’s divorce papers. This clause forbids Compton having a person that she is not related to “by blood or marriage” at her home past 9pm when her children are present. Since Texas will not allow Compton to marry her partner, this means that she effectively cannot live with her partner so long as she retains custody over her children. Invoking the “morality clause,” Judge Roach gave Price 30 days to move out of Compton’s home.

 http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/17/2029361/texas-judge-forbids-lesbian-woman-from-living-with-her-partner/

Morality clauses are not all that uncommon in cases of divorce where kids are involved, and that wording “related by blood or marriage” is kind of boilerplate. If you had a civil union, you would be just the same as unmarried in this regard.  All the more reason that marriage discrimination needs to end NOW.

 

FWIW I believe Texas will not recognize a same-sex marriage performed outside of Texas the same way that it recognizes a heterosexual marriage, and lord knows it will be a long time before Texas joins the 21st Century and extends marriage rights to all. 

 

Post # 25
Member
5538 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: December 2011

To me, there are two seperate issues, my own moral beliefs and what should be legally defined as marriage. As as a Christian,  I believe marriage is for one man and one woman. However,  my religious views to not have a trump on secular government and I cannot understand why legal marriage has anything to do with my religious marriage. I fully accept hetro marriages from other religions that I don’t agree with,  and conservatives as a whole seem to not have a problem with other religion having legally binding marriage so why is it any different for a homosexual couple? My marriage isnt threatened by anyone elses and since I can guess most same sex couples aren’t clamoring for spaces is conservative churches to get married in,  I say live and let live. 

Marriage and traditional families have been totally trashed by a listers and the fact that divorce rates are no different inside the church than out of it. Definen it for what it is to the general population,  a legally binding agreement between consenting adults. Let the church deal with it’s logs while everuone else deals with theie specks. 

Post # 26
Member
2266 posts
Buzzing bee

View original reply
@bebero:  Oh God I can see the instagrams now.

Woohoo got paid!

#payday #justgotmysalarium #partytonight #thankgoditsfridaynightandijustgotpaid

Post # 27
Member
1528 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: February 2012

@oracle:  I respond quite simply. 

If two people marry, they are married, which leads me to believe it’s also a marriage.

Wink

Post # 28
Member
3051 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: February 2015

http://theweek.com/article/index/228541/how-marriage-has-changed-over-centuries

interesting and quick history lesson on marriages

I would definitely respond by saying “what is your basis that it is one man and one woman? is it based on the fact that the government defines it that way? because that is a law that is not even 20 years old. is it based on religion? yes? well what about the athiests, buddhists, agnostics, jews, etc that are allowed to be “married”? they do not follow YOUR religion but their commitment to one another is known as a MARRIAGE even though their beliefs are completely against your bible. it turns out that what you are actually referring to is more than likely “holy matrimony” but you are too niave and uneducated to realize that you are actually following the law of the land not the law of your God by calling your “holy matrimony” a “marriage”. if you still have a problem with same sex marriage due to the terminology, I hope this helps you understand that YOU are in fact, in the wrong here every time you refer to your relationship as a marriage. Start calling it a “holy matrimony” and your problem is solved. Meanwhile, get the fuck out of other peoples lives.

Post # 30
Member
2266 posts
Buzzing bee

View original reply
@oracle:  Wait.. so… my grandma shouldn’t get married? My cousin can’t have kids. I guess she shouldn’t either. The whore.

The topic ‘Definition of Marriage – how do you respond?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors