Originally Posted by Redundant

For someone with the capability to read you don't seem to be able to use it very well.
Lets list a few arguements from him
• There is no official definition that defines ‘marriage’ as christian, straight institution.
• Gay people are not responsible for their genes nor their enviroment, rejecting the idea of them having equal rights would be ridiculous.
• Government and religion should be separated.
• Discrimination is not cool, yo.

In other words: You are an idiot who tries to denunciate opponents with set up fabrications.

Originally Posted by Mookiefish

You do realize that what you just posted had nothing to do with what I was yelling at him about, right? I said I'm entitled to my opinion, and you're sitting here sucking Boredpayne's dick whilst listing points that he has posted earlier in this thread. Way to go!

Correction: my Personal Opion For Gays. are they Shouldn't Be Married Gays Are Extremmly Faggets and there Fing gay Period...

Originally Posted by Mookiefish

You do realize that what you just posted had nothing to do with what I was yelling at him about, right? I said I'm entitled to my opinion, and you're sitting here sucking Boredpayne's dick whilst listing points that he has posted earlier in this thread. Way to go!

Originally Posted by Jim

Religious groups are allowed to be discriminatory, because well, it's their religion. Try telling a fundamental Jew and a Palestinian to get along; shit doesn't work, intense hatred etc.

Originally Posted by OrAclE

And that's where there's contradictory answers. If I ram a plane into a building because, say, my religious beliefs result in me believing that capitalism is evil, I know I won't escape punishment if caught.

If my religion states that I should have slaves (which the Bible does say), and I go out and kidnap somebody and put them into servitude, I will be arrested.

If I deny service to black people because I claim religiously I believe they are inferior, I'll get hit with legal action.

Yet now if I deny religious ceremony to a homosexual because I claim my religion doesn't tolerate them, I get away with it?

Religious rights get trampled in the face of equal rights almost universally.

Originally Posted by Redundant

Get your facts straight.
Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Kanada,, Norway, Sweden, a couple of US states etc are okay with gay marriage.
That started in 2001!
So, uhh, social structures are evolving and I don't see why there should not be more evolving in the future, as you say.

Originally Posted by Jim

That right there is why there will never be a consensus on this issue and why gays will never be able to marry under federal western countries law.

Originally Posted by OrAclE

And that's where there's contradictory answers. If I ram a plane into a building because, say, my religious beliefs result in me believing that capitalism is evil, I know I won't escape punishment if caught.

If my religion states that I should have slaves (which the Bible does say), and I go out and kidnap somebody and put them into servitude, I will be arrested.

If I deny service to black people because I claim religiously I believe they are inferior, I'll get hit with legal action.

Yet now if I deny religious ceremony to a homosexual because I claim my religion doesn't tolerate them, I get away with it?

Religious rights get trampled in the face of equal rights almost universally.

Originally Posted by Jim

The problem lies in that marriage, unlike jobs, is a fundamentally religious ceremony. I know that there will be a few 'revisionists' here that'll argue that it's not, but we all know that it is. Unfortunately, this fundamentally religious ceremony has been enforced by federal law. And since it's a religious ceremony, the religious are the celebrants. I know, it's shit, but that's the way it is. And because of the reasons I said in my other post, this will never change. I'm not disagreeing with you, I believe gays should be able to marry. I'm just explaining to everyone here the realities of the situation.
I, personally, believe that marriage should simply be a legal contract, ungoverned by the government, and enforced by the courts like all contracts (and applicable to the same requirements).

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

I'm not arguing that marriage has been historically and traditionally a religious process.
The point is that even if it's celebrated by a church, in a church, it is recognized legally. At the end of the day, even if the majority marry in a religious marriage, legally it is a secularized practice. It has to be, the separation of church and state demands it.