Government Drops Defense Of Anti-gay-marriage Law

METAL.

Marriage is a tax subsidized union. Many of the conservatives who oppose this are not opposed to gay rights per se. What they are opposed to lies in the fact that we have decided as a society, for whatever reason (usually creating an environment to effectively rear children is sited), that marriage is beneficial to society and should be subsidized with our tax dollars; thus many who, though not opposed to gay rights, have no desire to pay taxes to subsidize their lifestyle either.

IE when they think about paying taxes for gay marriage their mind instantly leads to perverse fantasies of gay sex.

In summary:
I like Starr. He is one angry christian dude!

Maybe some of you guys evolved from a monkey but as for me I was created in a lab via the Genetic Organism Development program. Christ was put here and after he told us what was up he got beamed back to the mothership.

As for the big bang its just as likely that all of this is an illusion caused by time being warped at the edge of a blackhole. We probably will never know how or why we are here.

True christians dont judge.

Can't force a church to marry a gay couple just as you cant force the government to bend to a chruches will.

Spicyran, but from where did he run and what is he heading toward.

So wait...what are you summarizing?
:S

yep and if they repealed bushs tax cuts we'd have a more plausible government budget.
but our government not really doing their jobs has been apparent for years.

it'll be the same *** republican/democrat back and forths as usual.
Unless either part works on strong arming for seats.
senates going to be completely different on their next term supposedly, 27 some senators are decided to not run for re-election all that lol.
i'd honestly say our election system needs some sort of overhaul to work on quashing these large political groups so that state representatives....actually represent the state for once in Washington.
i guess that's my general message when it comes to washington though...they need to be accountable for their actions or we need to force em to be accountable.
but i guess things haven't escalated to that point yet.
but i guess we'll have to deal with our government being a game for years to come as we have already for decades.

i just hate that it's been put to choosing between a rock and a hard place when it comes to the government.

last tidbit on party politics in general:
it's easy to slip a little bit of BS in frequently while band wagoning if your general public isn't paying full attention at the *** slung.
united we stand divided we fall?
i find party politics to be in complete contradiction with that.
not that a motto like that is pliable in reality.
but the rhetoric is contradictory none-the less.

??

Sorry to drop in randomly, but I thought I remember hearing in school or something, (I don't really remember) that marriage was to help the women and children so that they were taken care of in the event of a divorce or if the man died or something? I guess since women couldn't own their own property/etcetc, therefore not having the necessary resources to take care of the children? I'm not saying gay marriage is wrong or anything, just that it wasn't purely a religious ceremony therefore religion shouldn't dictate who can/can't marry. :\

Trump can't win because when laws were lax he claimed bankruptcy multiple times. Not an option for an entire country. Obama is reelected just like Bush was. Low approval but incumbents are hard to beat.

The party system creates a division of the people. Its like one team vs another instead of one team called America.

Glad to see my thread sparked such a lively debate. I know, some think it's just rehashing the same stuff over and over...well, as my mom used to say, there's nothing new under the sun, and frankly, this is an issue that needs to be debated. Most minds won't change, but some do.

I find it interesting that when pressed for an answer to the question, "Why should the rest of the us be subjected to laws based on your personal religious beliefs?", none of the religious people were willing to answer with anything other than a variation of, "It's God's will". The fact is, when it comes to civil rights, we shouldn't be subjected to laws based on religious outrage. Civil rights should be based on equality, and I still believe this is a step in the right direction.

In any case, thanks to everyone for their input. 8)

@ OP I'm so happy to hear this it's a step in the right direction !

Ya, my favorite part of the argument is that people always say "It's a preference to be gay." Nobody ever claims that in turn, it's just a preference then to be straight.

Likes and desires are, by nature, genetic. Sequences in your genetic code are what gives us feelings of pleasure, repulsion, arousal, etc. It's no different than how Girl A can be attractive to you while Girl B isn't. One has a combination of looks that causes receptors in the brain to experience pleasure, one doesn't. One cannot just decide to like Girl B by choice.

^this