This popped up in my buddhism feed.
Taiwan holds first same-sex Buddhist wedding.
I have a serious question. Please read the whole post before trying to formulate an opinion.
Please understand that I'm not trying to be insulting to anyone with the above.
I think it's sad that there are people who marry for convienence rather than love. There are women and men, straight mind you, that marry because he wants a nice piece and she wants money. No love at all and both are fine with it.
How is that a marriage? If you marry some one that doesn't love you what's the point? If its "just a word" to you and a reminder to me that I am less of a human being than you are, why are you allowed to marry who ever you feel like but I'm not?
No hostility is intentional on my part btw.
Equal Marriage NowWhat is marriage?
Marriage is a unique legal status conferred by and recognized by governments all over the world. It brings with it a host of reciprocal obligations, rights and protections. It is also a cultural institution. No other word has that power and no other status can provide that protection.
Married couples have 1,138 federal rights, protections and responsibilities such as:
Social Security benefits upon death, disability or retirement of spouse, as well as benefits for minor children.
Family and Medical Leave protections to care for a new child or a sick or injured family member
Workers' Compensation protections for the family of a worker injured on the job
Access to COBRA insurance benefits so the family doesn't lose health insurance when one spouse is laid off
ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act) protections such as the ability to leave a pension, other than Social Security, to your spouse
Exemptions from penalties on IRA and pension rollovers
Exemptions from estate taxes when a spouse dies
Exemptions from federal income taxes on spouse's health insurance
The right to visit a sick or injured loved one, have a say in life and death matters during hospitalization.
What is a civil union?
A civil union is a legal status granted by a state. The State of Vermont created civil unions in 2000. It provides legal protection to couples at the state law level, but omits federal protections, as well as the dignity, clarity, security and power of the word "marriage".
Civil unions are different from civil marriage and that difference has wide-ranging implications that make the two institutions unequal, such as:
Marriages are respected state to state for all purposes but questions remain as to how civil unions will be treated in other states. The two appellate courts that have addressed the issue in Connecticut and Georgia have disregarded them based on the fact that their own states do not grant civil unions.
According to a 1997 General Accounting Office report, civil marriage brings with it at least 1,049 legal protections and responsibilities from the federal government alone. Civil unions bring none of these critical legal protections.
Filling Out Forms:
Every day we fill out forms that ask us whether we are married, single, divorced or widowed. People joined in a civil union do not fit in any of those categories. People with civil unions should be able to identify themselves as a single family unit yet misrepresenting oneself on official documents can be considered fraud and can carry potential serious criminal penalties.
Separate and Unequal—Second Class Status:
Even if there were no substantive differences in the way the law treated marriages and civil unions, the fact that a civil union remains a separate status only for gay people represents real and powerful inequality. The United States Constitution requires legal equality for all. Including lesbian and gay couples within existing marriage laws in is the fairest and simplest thing to do.
Ending a Civil Union:
If you are married, you can get divorced in any state in which you are a resident. But if states continue to disregard civil unions, there is no way to end the relationship other than establishing residency in Vermont and filing for dissolution there. This has already created problems for couples who now have no way to terminate their legal agreement.
So yes it's a simple matter of getting married but what person would want it that way?
It's like being forced into an arranged marriage.
No, I'm not talking about using Civil Unions, I'm saying why not propose a new term in which the only difference is that it's a homosexual relationship rather than a heterosexual one?
Because its still making lgbtq people second class citizens. We want the same rights not special ones. If it means the same as a marriage then why not use the word marriage?
It's not the word that matters it'd the rights privileges and responsibilities it represents that we want but we are being denied.
Even if it was called an Asscracker they wouldn't want us to have it because two people of the same gender with the same rights as everyone else is disgusting and unnatural to the religious world.
There is no need to make a connection between the word marriage and any church because no marriage is legal in te united states without a certificate from the state. No religious connection or intervention is needed but 90% of the argument against same sex marriage is religious based.
Which is why it's flawed. Ether marriage should be decided by whichever religion is marrying the couple(or if not then the judge, captain, or other person who can marry people), or the government should define marriage in a concrete way and go off that.There is no need to make a connection between the word marriage and any church because no marriage is legal in te united states without a certificate from the state. No religious connection or intervention is needed but 90% of the argument against same sex marriage is religious based.
Really what I'm saying is why not just let bigoted people say "marriage is only betwwen two people of the opposite gender", and "(insert new [respectful] term here) is betwwen two people of the same sex." both would have equal rights and privileges, but just different legal terms.
[QUOTE=AlmanacnamedTime;111353]I'm trying to talk about the rights and privileges. Truthfully I couldn't care less if two girls decided they wanted to live together forever. It just seems that it's the darn word that everyone gets hung up on in the end.[quote]
People should not need to compromise to appease the unreasonable issues of bigots.
It's not aversion to new things. Just to the lessening of privilege. Anything that adds to the privilege of heterosexual people is fine.Really it seems that humanity's aversion to whatever they see that's new is getting in the way of just living peacefully.
Marriage is a non-religious institution these days. If it was otherwise, then the government should not recognize any marriages.Which is why it's flawed. Ether marriage should be decided by whichever religion is marrying the couple(or if not then the judge, captain, or other person who can marry people), or the government should define marriage in a concrete way and go off that.
Because bigoted people need to be dragged kicking and screaming out of the dark ages. Society should not be held back by them. Compromise is something that should be done when there are two reasonable but incompatible proposals for how to deal with a situation, not when one position is completely incorrect and no ground to stand on.Really what I'm saying is why not just let bigoted people say "marriage is only betwwen two people of the opposite gender", and "(insert new [respectful] term here) is betwwen two people of the same sex." both would have equal rights and privileges, but just different legal terms.
Compromise is for adults. You don't compromise with unreasonable children.
Last edited by Kodos; 09-06-2012 at 06:25 PM.
Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!
^This made the most sense.
What I was saying was either religion should control it, or it should be secular in all but ceremony.Marriage is a non-religious institution these days. If it was otherwise, then the government should not recognize any marriages.
That's right I'm at it again.
Article sourceOriginally Posted by TheHuffingtonPost.com
Instead of putting your pocket change in the kettle outside the mall, why don’t you give one of these inclusive organizations a try:
Goodwill – doing much of the same work the Salvation Army does, but also focusing on the disabled and unemployed.
The Ali Forney Center - providing shelter for homeless LGBT youth in New York City
True Colors Residence – Cyndi Lauper’s new shelter for homeless LGBT Youth
Doctors Without Borders – providing medical and emergency relief all over the world
Urban Peaks – assistance for homeless LGBT youth in Colorado.
Last edited by Psy; 12-04-2012 at 10:07 AM.
Anyone ever notice how many anti gay statements are made by people playing video games? You hear everything from "fag" to "dick sucker" being yelled out.
I watch some people play online through twitch and even YouTube and found a few favorites to watch. I've started to notice that most of them continuously use these statements when angry to express disgust at losing, to another player, or to lord their greatness over other players/the game. So now I'm not sure I want to keep watching any of them.
It's just a word. Just about everyone says that! That's not the point!
If you called some one a "mother fucker" 9/10 people would get mad about it even if you said it was just what people say and that's not what it actually means. You can call some one a "bitch" and mean it very lighthearted and funny. Not everyone will know that though. It doesn't change the original meaning just because that's not how you meant it.
"Everyone says shit like that." WRONG! I try and refrain from saying things that I know are under most circumstances insults. It's not me trying to be super nice or overly PC. I just want what I say to have a clear meaning to it. I don't want people to sit there and second guess what I say.
It was said in anger. So gay people make you angry?
Just because I said fag doesn't mean I think they are gay. So what are you calling them then because "fag" is something that is associated with gays.
Fag is like an asshole or someone you don't like or think is a piece of shit. I . . . . Wow.
It doesn't mean anything. So why say it then? You can't think of something else scathingly witty to insult them with?
Words are MEANT to have power and meaning! Otherwise there would be no point in them! The words faggot and gay are used to describe people as undesirable and disgusting. Bitch and cunt are often used in the same manner. so society is saying that the two most disgusting things to possibly be is a woman or some one of the LGBTQ community. its not just guys who say it either. there are plenty of women out there saying these things and I have to wonder if they realize how much intolerance they are spreading.
Would it be accepted if I were to go around saying that things I think are boring and lame are "straight"? No it wouldn't because its placing all other sexualities above the straight one and saying it is inferior in some way. Of course I of all people would see that this is a problem but I don't know how there are so many people out there that don't or even encourage this hate by actively using derogatory statements.
Is it to much to ask for people to step back and evaluate what they are ACTUALLY saying and putting out there? Why try tearing everyone else down? Are these people so unhappy that they feel no one else deserves a chance at happiness and a little bit of peace?
Again it's not that it's every single gamer or person out there saying these things it just seems to be a habit that a lot of them have with no real reason as for why.