May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

May 24, 2012 -- 6:27PM, solfeggio wrote:

Because they are human beings, gay people deserve the same rights and privileges as other human beings...

This kind of reasoning is stupid.

In what way?

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

Marriage is not a human right

The US Supreme Court has - on 14 separate occasions - called marriage a right. It is a CIVIL right, and it is governemd by civil laws.

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

getting tax breaks is not a human right.

When the married 'betterosexuals' give them up, married gay people will too.

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

What about property rights?

"Property rights" are covered under the "effects that flow from marriage". They have to do with inheriting/dividing up such property. Would you deny them to heterosexuals?

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

And the disenfranchisements from being poor are MUCH MORE RELEVANT than the disenfranchisements from not being able to marry, if you would like to put things into perspective just a little bit!

Last time I checked, even POOR people were allowed to get married. So long as they're heterosexual. (Get it yet?)

DO BETTER.

May 28, 2012 -- 11:42AM, Do_unto_others wrote:

DO BETTER.

Okay, next try.

Those who think that out of all the possible issues we face on this planet, getting married is an important one, they have no truly important issues.

Yes, I see how marriage can be a cheap package deal to solve all sorts of real problems, and yes, it would be unfair to offer the package deal only to heterosexuals.

Nonetheless, marriage remains a pointlessness. The way in which the marriage contract differs from separate contracts on all the important issues that were mentioned, is only by money (it's cheaper) and by emotional delusion (it's less sober).

The essence of marriage therefore, IMO, is cheap intoxication.

May 28, 2012 -- 1:15PM, CharikIeia wrote:

May 28, 2012 -- 11:42AM, Do_unto_others wrote:

DO BETTER.

Okay, next try.

Those who think that out of all the possible issues we face on this planet, getting married is an important one, they have no truly important issues.

You don't seem to get it. It isn't JUST getting married that's important. It's being treated equally before the laws - ALL of them.

Besides the marriage inequality (and ALL that accompanies that one institution - some 1,176 Federal "effects that flow from marrriage" - from pensions, inheritances, child-custody, spousal immigration sponsorship, health-care and end-of-life decision-making, alimony/support-payments, not being required to testify against your [legal] spouse in a court of law,etc. that touch ALL parts of our lives), there's also employment inequality. In 30 States, it is still legal to fire someone (or not hire them) just for being gay, and in some states, for being believed to be gay. One Oklahoma heterosexual lost her job because whe was supportive of a lesbian co-worker which she showed by - GASP!!! - going to a bar with the woman.

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

Yes, I see how marriage can be a cheap package deal to solve all sorts of real problems, and yes, it would be unfair to offer the package deal only to heterosexuals.

Apart from the un-necessary smarm, your conclusion is correct: it IS unfair (per the 14th Amendment's guarantee of "equal protections" of the law to ALL citizens) to "offer the package deal only to heterosexuals".

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

Nonetheless, marriage remains a pointlessness.

That's merely your opinion. You're welcome to it, but you only get to decide that for yourself, not others.

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

 The way in which the marriage contract differs from separate contracts on all the important issues that were mentioned, is only by money (it's cheaper) and by emotional delusion (it's less sober).

The only legal purpose of marriage is to establish legal kinship where none previously existed. As concerns "the effects that flow from marriage", such kinship would normally take legal precedent before any other parties in any other separate contracts.

May 25, 2012 -- 3:27AM, CharikIeia wrote:

The essence of marriage therefore, IMO, is cheap intoxication.

As you state, it's in YOUR opinion, and there only. Your opinion has no (and should have no) legal bearing on OTHER PEOPLE'S marriages/marriage contracts. Plus, your conclusion is not supported in your defense of it, since your defense was likewise based on opinions.

Come to me with a valid marriage license and I shall be delighted to tie the knot.

May 28, 2012 -- 5:45PM, CharikIeia wrote:

 I'd believe you if at face value, people weren't campaigning pro marriage as if that were the prime and important topic...

Marriage is being promotes since it is the most visible thing being denied. It is through that, that other rights shall be won. Rights, not special right just equal rights.

That and some people like to be married, nothing wrong with that. You may not realise how many rights go with marriage and how many personal protections for the couple.

But they are all important. If marriage rights are shown to be for everyone. It will be harder to discriminate again equal housing, medical care, jobs, etc.... The fight is NOT just for marriage equality. Although even if it were, it would be a worthy cause. No one should have the right to deny two consenting adults to marry. Ever.