Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Marriage?

SD PokéMom said:
if 'protecting marriage' is really the point of it all (and not 'protecting marriage [del]from teh gheyz!!!1![/del]'), then why aren't the people screaming the most about it working to outlaw DIVORCE?

after all, every 'problem' with marriage these days can be laid directly at the feet of the heterosexual marrieds, since they're the only ones allowed that privilege historically...

:rolleyes:

'mom
Click to expand...

'Protecting' Marriage has nothing to do with the denial of homosexual marriages or unions as we are all quite aware of. Rather it's the protection of religious tendencies that have been eroding away overtime; I'm not saying Religion is 'dying' but it is having the tables turned on it. In the Past the Society and spirit of laws reflected the predominant religion of the land now that shift is changing to where religion is feeling forced to better reflect the society. Organized-Religion is an institution plain and simple and as one are afraid to lose their power of suggestion over what they think is right or wrong. It has nothing to do with morality it has nothing to do with the fear of having this some how bring forth 'End-Times' or even money, plainly put it has to do for the fear of the loss of power.
 
Yes, I am for it, seeing as my mother is married to another woman.

Most people who are against it are scared of *** becoming a "disease", and then them becoming ***, because for some odd reason, some people, mainly Christians, see being *** as a "disease" and "immoral", and then they make the excuse of God saying that *** marriage is an "abomination".
 
SD PokéMom said:
if 'protecting marriage' is really the point of it all (and not 'protecting marriage [del]from teh gheyz!!!1![/del]'), then why aren't the people screaming the most about it working to outlaw DIVORCE?

after all, every 'problem' with marriage these days can be laid directly at the feet of the heterosexual marrieds, since they're the only ones allowed that privilege historically...

:rolleyes:

'mom
Click to expand...

Great point.

You don't read much about homosexual marriages breaking up. What was it, 75% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce?

This country, and possibly world makes a fool of marriage. People get married for bad reasons and divorced a lot. People have kids, and the kids end up growing up with only one parent. I feel like the whole idea of marriage and commitment is not taken seriously by the majority of the country (possibly world).

People worry about homosexual marriage ruining the idea of marriage, but people in general are doing that all around us.
 
Divorce is yet another reason why we should take more pride in our traditions and try to up hold them. This country is going through a transition, and I'm not convinced all those who want to progress will be happy with the results once they are completed.
 
Yah, but if *** couples are already living together and making commitments toward each other without the little piece of paper that says they do so, I'd say the transition is already done. If the next step is signing a little slip of paper that says they're commited, that's fine.
 
Yeah, while you take pride in keeping other people under your thumb to make you feel better about dying, I'm going to take pride in actually helping people and not pretend that somewhere up in the sky, the magic man will take care of me if I die.

No matter what you say--you can't change the fact that your opinion supresses people from performing acts which cause you no physical harm. It is supression, it is evil in the eyes of your own God, one of those funny contradictions, and it is something that our country was founded to prevent.

Your only defense has been that you don't think it is right, and that it 'may lead to other bad things'.

Which means you categorizing homosexuality as a bad thing. WHICH STILL MEANS YOU ARE PUTTING THEM DOWN.

No matter how you try to disguise it, it is oppression, pure and simple. This, you cannot deny.
Oh and TRADITION TRADITION TRADITION

There's a real prizewinner. Didn't it used to be tradition to burn witches? Kill non believers? It used to be tradition to do alot of things, but thankfully humanity has at least grown up a little.
 
DJGigabyte said:
Chirstianity/religion in general seems to be one of the main reasons why some places are reluctant to legalise it.

And why same-sex couples have to have a "civil partnership" as opposed to a real marriage which is an utter farce. They have the same rights as married couples in places that allow it so why can't they have a real marriage?


Religion thats why.
Click to expand...

LOL I hate when people say it's solely because of religion. I'm not a Christian & I'm not really sure if there is a "higher being" but I do not support homosexual marriage. Obama is a Christian and he is FOR stem-cell research but against same-sex marriage.... stop fitting everyone into the "oh he's against it because of religion" box. Just a suggestion/keep it in mind. :)

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

PokePockets said:
So now we are going to blame religion for all of our problems as a country? I don't think that is quite fair.

My personal view on it is that homosexuals can have a "legal partnership" (or whatever the technical term is) but I think we should keep the tradition of marriage among heterosexual couples

Just my opinion
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.
I'm pretty liberal but marriage is something I think should be kept between men and women.
 
Last edited:
Ardoptres said:
The problem is the church isn't modernizing like it should.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'modernizing' because the religious institutions of the world are quite up to speed with the advent of technology and the affairs of politics. Your view is a secular one and fairly new at that not a sacred one that has been around for centuries, you can not possibly think that that a religion overnight will rewrite or more properly put reevaluate and reinterpret their primary scriptures and forgo the secondary commentaries of the 'champions' of their faith do you?
Religious laws or more properly put views do change however overtime; but they must change from within not from without; a primary example is what took place in certain Islamic communities about divorce/repudiation and how a divorce and its subsequent arbitration had to be bought forth to a Qadi or Judge after the stipulation of idda or waiting/cooling down period of disagreement between spouses and that it had to be conducted with fairness and reasoning and that either husband or wife could have the right to request a divorce. Now for along time and still prevalent but far less today as was in the past the husband was the only one to request divorce and to do so without reason, however a scholarly body of mujtahids (Scholars versed in Ijtahid or the striving of intellect pertaining to Shariah or the Law) changed this in Syria in 1957 I believe to include the above rights of both husband and wife to request the right of divorce, this one done primarily through the technique of reasoning from the scriptures which is the only way a Major religion such as Islam or Christianity can change its laws justly and anything else to bring forth change from without is to be considered in my view a direct assault and violation of religious-institutions. If homosexual-Marriage or homosexual-orientation for that matter is seen as permissible in Religious-precepts it must be done from within the Religion and in my opinion that isn't too far off.
 
Marriage is sooo traditional. And sociolegal officialdom is sooo wack. The best way to avoid divorce, marriage tax, etc. is to not get married in the first place... Shared healthcare benefits and hospital e-room visits for family members-only are just byproducts of our outdated system.
 
Same-sex marriage should be allowed.

Counters:

Legally speaking, separation of church and state suggests that you can't compel the government to superimpose your view of marriage upon homosexuals (or anyone, for that matter) because your religion dictates it be so.

Tradition is a silly argument for pretty much anything; longevity doesn't suggest validity: earth is flat, keep slaves, sacrifice human beings, etc. Face it, civilization isn't always right the first time.

Marriage being exclusive for reproduction is a bit naive...that's like saying until a woman is married, her ability to bear children is 'locked'. Yeah, right; many women get pregnant outside of marriage and many married couples choose to not have children. So what? Are you suggesting we ban sterile individuals from getting married because they too do not have the ability to produce children?

Homosexuality isn't a choice; race is another great example. You have to remember, just because you're not attracted to a specific sex/race/other factor doesn't mean other individuals aren't as well; banning marriage based on factors you find in a mate seems quite selfish and childish. "MY FAVORITE COLOR IS YELLOW I WANNA BAN PURPLE BECAUSE I DON'T FIND IT APPEALING". Please.
 
Poliwag92 said:
What's the point of being married?
Click to expand...
Tax benefits, being able to visit your significant other in the hospital, being considered your next of kin, Insurance Inclusion for Spouses....

A lot of benefits come from being married, benefits that currently are not offered to a part of our population.
 
DarkJake said:
Same-sex marriage should be allowed.

Counters:

Legally speaking, separation of church and state suggests that you can't compel the government to superimpose your view of marriage upon homosexuals (or anyone, for that matter) because your religion dictates it be so.

Tradition is a silly argument for pretty much anything; longevity doesn't suggest validity: earth is flat, keep slaves, sacrifice human beings, etc. Face it, civilization isn't always right the first time.

Marriage being exclusive for reproduction is a bit naive...that's like saying until a woman is married, her ability to bear children is 'locked'. Yeah, right; many women get pregnant outside of marriage and many married couples choose to not have children. So what? Are you suggesting we ban sterile individuals from getting married because they too do not have the ability to produce children?

Homosexuality isn't a choice; race is another great example. You have to remember, just because you're not attracted to a specific sex/race/other factor doesn't mean other individuals aren't as well; banning marriage based on factors you find in a mate seems quite selfish and childish.
Click to expand...
Great points. Totally agree.
DarkJake said:
"MY FAVORITE COLOR IS YELLOW I WANNA BAN PURPLE BECAUSE I DON'T FIND IT APPEALING". Please.
Click to expand...
The Supes made this same point earlier in the thread, point stealer! jk.

Overall, your post is right. People can't justify banning homosexual marriage. They just can't. But I LOVE to watch them try, it's better than TV.

And the disease point isn't valid either, heterosexuals contract them too, you know.
 
Last edited:
I am for homosexual marriges. Is it really fair that HETEROSEXUAL people make the decisions for HOMOSEXUAL people? I don't think that they are fairly represented in the part of the law-making process, which would explain why few states have legalized it. I know a homosexual guy who I work with, and he is very nice and intelligent. (The only thing that I don't like is that most of the nice, attractive, and intelligent guys are homosexual. :frown:) I believe that many religious people portray homosexuals as wrong, "diseased," or that they have a "mental disorder." That is SO WRONG! If two people love each other, I believe that they should be able to get married. I don't think that they should be discriminated against just because they are the same gender.
 
I see what the people saying they are protecting marriage are doing. They are not protecting marriage they are protecting them from it. All the trouble of divorce and cheating. It is better not to deal with it.
SEE HOW STUPID THAT SOUNDS
If you want to protect marriage make it from something like divorce. Something that virtually spits on the "holiness" of marriage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top