Judge: Same-sex couples can wed in Iowa

[Sheriff Uling 3]

What's unsubstantiated is gay marriage... Hello!!!

[almaty 19]

No one is writing that people can't be homosexual. Nobody is suggesting to limit the feelings or desires of Americans who are or want to be homosexual. We're just against homosexuals being able to legally marry in America. It's a pathway with ramifications that nobody has been willing to discuss or the conversation becomes dismissed by gay rights activist and/or supporters for their own selfish gains. This is Pandora’s Box! Don't open it!!!

What ramifications are these?

Peejay eluded to some of them. Read his post...

You mean the one about nudists running rampant in the streets, and people losing all sense of perspective and engaging in multiple marriages? That seems a tad hysterical to me...

Anything that does not go in-line with your perspective would. That's just human nature... To accept just anything opens the door to almost everything. I'm not here to convince you otherwise. I'm just expressing my opinion not to accept alternative lifestyles in the form of marriage.

There's no proof of that. That's why I find the arguments about incest and polygamy to be ludicrous. To suddenly assume that because a gay consenting adult, in their own right mind and of their own free will decides to marry (again the semantic distinctions are irrelevant) another like-minded individual that suddenly all these 'deviant' people will suddenly crawl out of the woodwork demanding that the authorities allow them to marry siblings and livestock.

Its totally unsubstantiated.

of course, i am shocked by the narrow minded views of folks here..what are they afraid of?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's unsubstantiated is gay marriage... Hello!!!

You mean it alternately is and isn't legal (per the OP post and the subsequent follow-up article Gary posted).

[peejay 327]

No one is writing that people can't be homosexual. Nobody is suggesting to limit the feelings or desires of Americans who are or want to be homosexual. We're just against homosexuals being able to legally marry in America. It's a pathway with ramifications that nobody has been willing to discuss or the conversation becomes dismissed by gay rights activist and/or supporters for their own selfish gains. This is Pandora’s Box! Don't open it!!!

What ramifications are these?

Peejay eluded to some of them. Read his post...

You mean the one about nudists running rampant in the streets, and people losing all sense of perspective and engaging in multiple marriages? That seems a tad hysterical to me...

Anything that does not go in-line with your perspective would. That's just human nature... To accept just anything opens the door to almost everything. I'm not here to convince you otherwise. I'm just expressing my opinion not to accept alternative lifestyles in the form of marriage.

There's no proof of that. That's why I find the arguments about incest and polygamy to be ludicrous. To suddenly assume that because a gay consenting adult, in their own right mind and of their own free will decides to marry (again the semantic distinctions are irrelevant) another like-minded individual that suddenly all these 'deviant' people will suddenly crawl out of the woodwork demanding that the authorities allow them to marry siblings and livestock.

Its totally unsubstantiated.

Give 'em an inch...and they'll take a mile.

But I harken back. There is no compelling societal need to expand the definition of traditional American marriage that has traditionally been between one man and one woman. I could care less if homosexuals wish to cohabitate and commit homosexual acts. It's none of my business what people do in the privacy of their own homes. Don't force society to validate it or to give it the state seal of approval. 'Nuff said. That's my position and I'm sticking to it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There's a national debate over gay marriage with various states trying to make it legal - so why would you say there is 'no need' to change the definition when there already seems to be a fairly large group of people trying to do just that.

As I say, I think we can do justice to this topic without bringing in incest and polygamy as a reason to not do it.

[eric&gen 0]

What are the moderators doing when this kind of ####### goes on they are aways asleep at the wheel , playing world of warcraft? watching porn flicks they need to get a grip on this site or shut it down its so full of hate and very raciest people on here. Now making fun of others family is a new thing on here i guess and does the moderators allow it yes this site sucks.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What are the moderators doing when this kind of ####### goes on they are aways asleep at the wheel , playing world of warcraft? watching porn flicks they need to get a grip on this site or shut it down its so full of hate and very raciest people on here. Now making fun of others family is a new thing on here i guess and does the moderators allow it yes this site sucks.

To be fair - I think he clarified that he referred to you by mistake.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

What are the moderators doing when this kind of ####### goes on they are aways asleep at the wheel , playing world of warcraft? watching porn flicks they need to get a grip on this site or shut it down its so full of hate and very raciest people on here. Now making fun of others family is a new thing on here i guess and does the moderators allow it yes this site sucks.

To be fair - I think he clarified that he referred to you by mistake.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What are the moderators doing when this kind of ####### goes on they are aways asleep at the wheel , playing world of warcraft? watching porn flicks they need to get a grip on this site or shut it down its so full of hate and very raciest people on here. Now making fun of others family is a new thing on here i guess and does the moderators allow it yes this site sucks.

Eric,

I know the sheriff personally and he is a good man and would never purposely insult somebody's family here, trust me. He mistakenly adressed a reply to you that was meant for novutal (sp). Go back and look at the posts - that person mentioned they have a grown son who is gay, and the sheriff was responding to that post. Relax.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What's unsubstantiated is gay marriage... Hello!!!

Equal protection under the law - is why the state of Virginia's long standing law that banned interracial marriage was struck down as unconstitutional, which incidentally was only 40 years ago. As long as our state and federal governments recognize marriage as a legal contract, then ultimately any interference of two gay people wanting that same legal recognition is unconstitutional. So either government changes it to only recognizing civil unions and remove the word marriage from any legal context or allow gays to marry. There's really no getting around the notion of equal protection under the law.

Am I understanding you that you don't have a problem with affording the same legal rights to gay couples that heterosexual couples have? Would allowing civil unions be acceptable to you?

Edited September 2, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's unsubstantiated is gay marriage... Hello!!!

Equal protection under the law - is why the state of Virginia's long standing law that banned interracial marriage was struck down as unconstitutional, which incidentally was only 40 years ago. As long as our state and federal governments recognize marriage as a legal contract, then ultimately any interference of two gay people wanting that same legal recognition is unconstitutional. So either government changes it to only recognizing civil unions and remove the word marriage from any legal context or allow gays to marry. There's really no getting around the notion of equal protection under the law.

Am I understanding you that you don't have a problem with affording the same legal rights to gay couples that heterosexual couples have? Would allowing civil unions be acceptable to you?

Personally I don't see why they don't call it 'marriage'. The idea that Christianity somehow 'owns' marriage to be able to lay claim to who should receive it is nothing more than bull$hit semantics . Given that we have secular 'marriages', which can be conducted in the total absence of God or religious paraphenalia - why is there this big quandary over what to call it?

The issue is equality under the law. What we call it is merely window dressing, and really the least important part of the argument by far.

[Jason-Sasha 1]

You know, I look at it this way....abortion- a woman's body is a woman's body and I have no right to say what she can or can't do with it. It doesn't affect me(unless I'm the father, then it's a whole different story). Just as gay marriage involves two people who love each other.... it doesn't affect me. I don't see how giving gay people the same right as we have, would affect my life at all. Wait.. ...now that I think about it, WE are probably the only people who WOULD be affected!! #######. Can you imagine the wait time at USCIS if they were filing also?

Either way, I dont think we have any right to tell 2 people they cannot be married. If anyone in the world knows this....it should be all of us! By the way, how do other countries deal with this? Is gay marriage perfectly legal and common in other countries? Just curious...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is gay marriage perfectly legal and common in other countries? Just curious...

Gay Marriage. Check out the box on the right of the page.

[bszoom42 0]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:World_h...uality_laws.svg

So if I read this chart correctly, the penalty for gay marriage in Saudi Arabia is death?

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

Is gay marriage perfectly legal and common in other countries? Just curious...

Gay Marriage. Check out the box on the right of the page.

rather sparse in listings. mostly european countries.