Marriage is a civil right in the US

I agree that marriage is a right, not a privilege. /nodIf this thread is only about whether or not marriage is a right or privilege, then allow me to be off topic.The excerpts you quoted are all about race and men, can we substitute gay or women in there?This is a good example of the problem I have with gay marriages. When the laws, or statutes etc, including marriage were written, they didn’t have gay marriages in mind. Some of them, like your quotes exemplify, didn’t even have race (or women) in mind.This, I believe, was solved by including race and women in to the laws, or statutes etc.Now, we have more laws, or statutes etc, and the gay group that wants to be included. Should we just include them into the laws, or statutes etc, like we did with race and women?I’d say no.I think we should do it different. Some new word for gay marriages that can be added to the laws, or statutes etc, where its needed and then other adjustments can be made that need to be.I find it plausible that guys will have fake marriages for health insurance or other benefits.These issues need to be dealt with before gay marriages are included (for prevention) not afterwards when they are exploited. I think that just including gay marriages as marriages opens the laws, or statutes etc, up for exploitation because gay marriages weren’t in mind when they were written. For race and women it worked fine, but for gay I think it’s different because with the way the insurance is now, I’d marry a guy so we’d both have cheaper health insurance. This, for me, has nothing to do with religion.

quote:

---

the laws, or statutes etc

---

There's gotta be a better way to type this.Also, I only read the OP of this thread so excuse me if I’ve missed anything.

I don't know exactly how it is different but for me, I'd marry a guy for benefits and I wouldn't a girl. Why?, I haven't really put my finger on it yet but prolly something to do with it being easier to get a long with guys and the lack of the possibility of a sexual relationship.I think its more likely because I wouldn't do it with a girl but I'd do it with a guy. Wow, that sounded really gay. I hope I don't get miss quoted on that one!

so one wrong word and the whole rest of the post isn't worth replying too?

Well, like I typed, I find it plausible. Mr. Jack said he's seen it happen. Simply dismissing the whole argument by calling one line a fallacy seems like a waste of time to me. I'm not interested in discussing whether or not its a fallacy so if thats all you have to say then whatever.

Because I think its gonna make things worse.

If it was worth it. I think it'd be easier with a male friend. I don't really care about a few free shags. Sure it happens in hetero marriages. I know a guy from England who was proposing to all kinds of girls 'cause his visa was unning out, or something. I just think that including gay marriages as marriages is gonna make it a lot more frequent and for exploitng different benefits. I don't think they should have nothing, as in no unions at all, I just don't think we should lump them into the already defined marriages that are affected by laws-n-stuff that did't have gay marriages in mind when they were written. Thats why I think we should call them something other than marriages.

You remember incorrectly.

Are you just being a smartass?You're just wasting thread space.

I disagree. We have laws that limit some marriages. A lot of people say this but a good enough pre-nup could solve any issues that would come up when the fake marriage is terminated. I don't see how that makes my argument bogus, but anyways its not important. I'm not convinced. Because when many of the laws that were written concerning marriages, they had a sex exclusive marriage in mind. And as Schraf exemplified, some of them had race exclusive marriage in mind. Now, simply including all races into marriages solved the problem. I think simply including gay into marriages will make it worse. It only my opinion and my reason for not supporting gay marriage. I'm not fighting to stop them from getting married, I'm just not fighting to include it.The only problem I really had was when Jar said that if you don't fight FOR it then your a hateful bigot. I'm not fighting FOR it, for the reasons I've given, and I'm not a hateful bigot. If you think my reasons are moot then whatever. If you want to try to convince me to fight for them then I'll listen, and possible change my mind. I'm not really trying to convince you that gay marriage should be stopped, I just don't think the way its going about is the best way to do it.

Its not fear and I don't think its ridiculous. I think its plausible and worth avoiding. Yes, in my opinion gay marriages would be abused. I find that a valid reason for not supporting the idea of including gay into the already defined marriage. Its not like I'm fighting against it, I'm just don't agree with the way they're going about it.

How's that?I was saying that we should call it something else and then include it into the laws as needed rather than include it into all the laws and remove it from or change the ones that get exploited.I realise the possibility that nothing bad is gonna happen and there won't be fake marriages screwing anything up and then I'd be totally wrong. Thats fine, I'm not doing anything wrong by not supporting gay marriages becuase I think its a bad idea to lump it in with marriages. Well, I don't want to limit it purely because its same sex relationships so I maintain that I'm not a hateful bigot, nor discriminatory.

I don't think the system can be perfect. I don't see heteros ripping it off that much but when it happens I don't think its ok. I don't have a solution for those problems. I think including gay in marriages opens the system up for more ripping off. Ripping off that I, personally, would be more inclined to do (the health care thing). This inclination is most likely the source of my opposition to gay marriage. I never considered marrying a girl purely for health care benefits. It wasn't until after all this gay marriage hype that I thought about marrying a guy purely for health care benefits. If I'm thinking of ways that this will allow me to rip off the system, then there are a lot of other people thinking up a lot of other ways to rip it off. I think we should try to prevent the system from getting ripped off not open it up for it. I don't think we should deny gay people rights, I just don't agree with the way its going down by simply including gay into marriage.

nope.I'm sure my position isn't flawless and if you're going to be throwing puddles out in front of it then I'll prolly step in a few. I tried to summarize it in Message 189.

Yes but still an argument. I originally brought it up because Jar said that the only reasons for not supporting gay marriages were from hate and bigotry. I can accept that its not a good argument. It mostly comes from personal opinion, which I consider a valid reason for not supporting something. Because of my personal feelings that I'd be more inclined to enter a fake marriage with a guy than with a girl and that I think there are other people that are like me. No.

Yes, it is because of this potential for mockery that I don't support gay marriage as it is being pushed. Yup, which is why I'm not actively against gay marriages. I think they should have some kind of marriage, I just don't like they way its going down.