One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Marriage and common sense
Page <prev 2 of 2
May 23, 2022 19:50:43   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
EmilyD wrote:
The license could make a difference legally if one of the spouses dies. If not legally married, inheritance of any assets would legally go to relatives - not a girlfriend or boyfriend - and anyone else who comes out of the woodwork. So if that kind of thing matters, best to sign that paper.


Well yes, in the absence of a civil agreement, that is true. A civil agreement should be established in partners. Marriage should be done in the church, separate and apart from the civil agreement.

Reply
May 23, 2022 20:44:12   #
EmilyD
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Well yes, in the absence of a civil agreement, that is true. A civil agreement should be established in partners. Marriage should be done in the church, separate and apart from the civil agreement.

πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Marriage is the one that matters in things beyond this life!

The civil agreement is for here.

Reply
May 23, 2022 22:55:09   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
EmilyD wrote:
πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Marriage is the one that matters in things beyond this life!

The civil agreement is for here.


Yes.

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2022 12:43:17   #
debeda
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
This is my response to another topic, Marriage and the Constitution. I thought it deserved its own topic


I have no problem with separate and equal of it includes different and equal.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Although unmarried myself, I will never accept as equal, a union between two men, two woman, or a man and a woman, as equal in that they are inherently different in why they were created and the real sex of the people involved. The Homosexual unions will never be what my Mother and Father had.

Marriage was a creation to join, formally, a union between a man and a woman whereby whose actions might create children. This union would take care of the raising of these children.

Homosexual Unions are not about creating children and raising them.

There is overlap of course. A Heterosexual Union might be childless by choice or other reasons, but within a norm of society. A Homosexual Union might have children from a former relationship or adoption. Those children need the protections of a Union of two that might be stronger or better able to care for them then a single individual. But they are still inherently different.

One type can deliberately or accidentally procreate and the other can't, deliberately or accidentally, with their partner through a natural act.

Two people living together, heterosexual or homosexual, share housing, food costs. love(?) and time with each other, often acting as one. Is there a Government interest in creating formal unions that protect each individual in these unions and any kids involved? Yes. Is it marriage? Yes and No. Is it separate unions based on the type and sexes of people involved? Yes. One type, Heterosexual is called marriage. The other type, Homosexual, is called (?).

If some wackoos can have 62 different pronouns and types of sexuality, we can have different types of Unions. One is Marriage for a man and a woman, with or without the intent or ability to have children. The other type is just some other damn form of union and called something else. And you are not two wifes or two husbands, or a man called a wife or a woman called a husband. Find some different names to go with your pronouns.

Just my take on things

Logically Right
This is my response to another topic, Marriage and... (show quote)


πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘ Well said.

Reply
May 24, 2022 12:44:09   #
debeda
 
pegw wrote:
Robert Reich said it best. The LGBT people only want what other people have. They want the same rights.


What rights are those? What rights do they not have?

Reply
May 24, 2022 12:45:02   #
debeda
 
Oscar louks wrote:
My belief is in the Bible the constitution is second i respect other peoples view but don’t change what the Bible says


FACT

Reply
May 24, 2022 14:15:06   #
WEBCO
 
Strycker wrote:
Marriage is a private agreement or religious union. A government legal union is a civil union and provides legal protections depending on the states. The word marriage should have been removed from all government regulations and replaced with civil union. Problem solved.


I fully agree

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2022 15:33:47   #
RandyBrian
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Calling same sex unions, marriage, is an insult to upright God seeking people.

That being said, I'm ok with civil unions, but don't pretend it is marriage.

That being said, I am in agreement.



Reply
May 24, 2022 15:35:11   #
RandyBrian
 
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
No...
They don't seek equal rights...
They seek special status...
Normal people don't hold parades displaying their sexuality to the world...
Or try to force their lifestyles into film and television...
Nor do they make their sexual proclivity the central point of their being...
If they did, society would ostracize them...
Imagine if a group of men started holding parades dedicated to how much they enjoy vaginal intercourse...
And insisted that all movies had characters that engaged in vaginal intercourse...
And made a point of telling everyone how important vaginal intercourse is to their identity...
Normal people keep their intimate lives private...
No... br They don't seek equal rights... br They ... (show quote)



Reply
May 24, 2022 16:07:29   #
Bevvy
 
pegw wrote:
Robert Reich said it best. The LGBT people only want what other people have. They want the same rights.


They already had the same rights .... They wanted and got special rights

Reply
May 24, 2022 16:38:55   #
Ron G
 
pegw wrote:
Robert Reich said it best. The LGBT people only want what other people have. They want the same rights.


They have the same rights. They want more rights.

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2022 16:39:39   #
Ron G
 
pegw wrote:
Robert Reich said it best. The LGBT people only want what other people have. They want the same rights.


Reich is a socialist don't listen to a word hecsays.

Reply
May 24, 2022 20:12:54   #
Bassman65
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
This is my response to another topic, Marriage and the Constitution. I thought it deserved its own topic


I have no problem with separate and equal of it includes different and equal.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Although unmarried myself, I will never accept as equal, a union between two men, two woman, or a man and a woman, as equal in that they are inherently different in why they were created and the real sex of the people involved. The Homosexual unions will never be what my Mother and Father had.

Marriage was a creation to join, formally, a union between a man and a woman whereby whose actions might create children. This union would take care of the raising of these children.

Homosexual Unions are not about creating children and raising them.

There is overlap of course. A Heterosexual Union might be childless by choice or other reasons, but within a norm of society. A Homosexual Union might have children from a former relationship or adoption. Those children need the protections of a Union of two that might be stronger or better able to care for them then a single individual. But they are still inherently different.

One type can deliberately or accidentally procreate and the other can't, deliberately or accidentally, with their partner through a natural act.

Two people living together, heterosexual or homosexual, share housing, food costs. love(?) and time with each other, often acting as one. Is there a Government interest in creating formal unions that protect each individual in these unions and any kids involved? Yes. Is it marriage? Yes and No. Is it separate unions based on the type and sexes of people involved? Yes. One type, Heterosexual is called marriage. The other type, Homosexual, is called (?).

If some wackoos can have 62 different pronouns and types of sexuality, we can have different types of Unions. One is Marriage for a man and a woman, with or without the intent or ability to have children. The other type is just some other damn form of union and called something else. And you are not two wifes or two husbands, or a man called a wife or a woman called a husband. Find some different names to go with your pronouns.

Just my take on things

Logically Right
This is my response to another topic, Marriage and... (show quote)

Call it a civil union,that’s what it was referred to before legalization.

Reply
May 24, 2022 21:52:42   #
AuntiE Loc: 46th Least Free State
 
pegw wrote:
Robert Reich said it best. The LGBT people only want what other people have. They want the same rights.


Mayhaps Γ  decade ago that was their mantra.

Reply
May 24, 2022 23:11:17   #
debeda
 
AuntiE wrote:
Mayhaps Γ  decade ago that was their mantra.


πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘And now they want preferential treatment. Somehow that seems to happen with EVERY group the Democrats groomπŸ˜³πŸ™„πŸ™„

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2022 IDF International Technologies, Inc.