Dude sounds like a Nazi to me. Glad it was politics unchained and not regular politics so i could point that out. Basically NeilS and bigots like him agree that as long as gays (and blacks before them) were seen and not heard, and don't expect to be treated like straights (white people) they would tolerate them.

But if you bring up the notion that you won't be party to it they are deeply injured and can't understand why you would discriminate against them, your preaching acceptance right? Hilarious inherent hypocrisy

DOMA was just ruled to be unconstitutional. There are no gender requirements or restrictions to getting married.

You support equal legal rights but you don't support legalizing gay marriage?

What does that have to do with anything?

Hey I'm a *** too Mat, I can post!!!

I'll help you get up

Me wanting to marry a guy at some point is not an impossibility.

Unlike the editing in your reply it makes sense if you read it in the context in which it was written.

That's why we are discussing this.

That's the position we had in the UK. The civil partnerships offered equal rights to married couples. I don't care if these unions are called gay marriage I just want a differentiation to be made between heterosexual marriages and gay ones to recognise the gender difference.

It's pretty lame to actually care whether the government recognizes your man-love imo.

That said it's just crazy to care whether they recognize OTHER peoples' man-love.

I know that the Orthodox Jews are generally against gay marriage, and Leviticus is in the Old Testament, so nothing you're saying is actually news to me. But what I said was that my religion never seemed anti-gay -- between the rabbi and other members, a more accepting vibe was always given off. I haven't heard of anyone going to some Jewish pray-the-gay-away camp.

So for me personally, my religion was never a source of homophobia as it is for many Christians in the US.

No, this is clearly stupid. It is the same thing as the government is recognizing it as the same (even if we accept your claim for the moment that a gay marriage and a straight marriage are different, my point was that the government was treating them the same and so in that was we are sharing in the same institution).

Now, as to your claim that our relationships are different, that is also stupid. I refer you to this post:

I get that the genders are different. I don't get why you think that is meaningful.

Why is it important to you that the differentiation be made? That is, even if we again accept that our relationships are different, why do you care if we get called something different or not? Especially when it's clear to see (? at least to me) how important it is to us that we not be given some separate but equal institution to use.

You go on and on about being a moral person, and here is a very easy way to help a lot of people feel better about themselves with no effort required on your part. But you resist it instead. Why would you possibly want to do that?

Thanks, good work.

Not at all. The government already recognizes other people's love, and we already feel marginalized by society. This would be a very important source of validation.

I'm breaking my own rules by participating, but I can't help it. I'm thoroughly confused by the opposition to gay marriage. If gay marriage was the law of the land 5 years ago, what are the ill effects upon society that we would be seeing today?

Who would suffer? And this is a real question for those who believe real harm would be caused. You should feel free to answer honestly in this thread and you won't be punished or harassed by people like me. You will only be asked to speak directly with people like gangstaman, who not only disagree with you, but also feel personally harmed by the existing status of gay marriage laws.

From my own observations I don't think gay men are the same as heterosexual men (I dunno about gay women). That's the underlying claim made by those who want to unify gay and heterosexual marriages. Here's a study which appears to support my own observations.

"Gay Men, Straight Women Have Similar Brains"

http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk...gay-brain.html

How do you think that's an answer to Mat's question?

You need to read between the lines.

"If gay marriage was the law of the land 5 years ago, what are the ill effects upon society that we would be seeing today?

Who would suffer?"

Everyone suffers if they are being denied their true identities.

If I'm allowed to marry, it denies me my true identity?

Apparently, though, I have always been allowed to marry. But if I married then, that wouldn't deny my true identity?

Look, guys, clearly cwoccwoc is just trying to look out for us.

1) How does this lead to suffering?

2) Who is being denied their true identity by this, the gays or the straights?

If gay men have to compromise they suffer and if heterosexual men have to compromise they suffer. Let gay people be gay people and heteros hetero. You know it makes sense.

You're not making sense. How is anyone compromising here, and what is the actual suffering you are so afraid of? Give us something more concrete if you're not just making up garbage again.

Always. I hate unfairness.

what do you think this entails?

I was asked about changes to society not about people getting punched on the hooter or kicked in the nadgers. Any sort of sophisticated argument just seems to whoosh over your head.

I have linked to a study which indicates that gay men have brains similar to straight women and this manifests itself in different preferences. I am not the same as a gay man and you shouldn't want to be like a hetero man. On a personal note straight women and gay men have always fancied me. Now I know why. It's because I'm an alpha male.