Same sex marriage legalized nationwide (US)

  • Welcome to Skyrim Forums! Register now to participate using the 'Sign Up' button on the right. You may now register with your Facebook or Steam account!

Dabiene Caristiana

Your friendly neighborhood weirdo
That's what I'm talking about, Nyo (in regards to the history books).

Washington is mostly classified as Democratic. In fact, most of them are classified as either Democratic or Democratic/Independent. Not just Independent. Lincoln was supposedly the first Republican since that's around the time when the Republican party was born.

However, others state otherwise (which is fine). I mean, it's not like we can dig them up, resurrect them, and ask them kindly, "Hey, are you guys Republican or Democrat?"

"You just brought us up from the ground for this?!"

"Pretty much... Yup."

"What has America become?" *facepalm*

Now I'm getting off topic... Whoopsi! :oops: Point is, in America we learn about the past differently. Some schools do it differently than others. Overall, we have no definite clue what happened or who is who or who did what. You see it all the time in the comments on youtube and facebook >_>

Anyway, in regards to religion and 'moral compass', what I meant was, you don't need to be religious to be a good person. I'm one such person. (I'd like to think so anyway...)

However, bad people (I like to think of them that way) such as politicians that use religion as a tool to get the people to vote for them is... disgusting and manipulative. If you rip off all the political areas and views, rip down all the competition and just get a man/woman telling another to support them in a job position because they agree with their religious views, then slowly manipulate them and then when they are elected, completely turn around and do something else? It's like promising something to a random stranger, like saying you'll buy a homeless man a fresh apple. Then you buy, turn around, then eat it in his face.

I don't know. Ranting right now. I'm just tired of manipulative people that run for an equally manipulative party for President just to lie to people for the hell of it. I talked to my dad one time about it. He said that it's just that feeling of power. The top lion. It's addicting and make you feel like your worth something. Then all that power turns you into something else.


Anyway, good job for America, good job for LGBT and other that want to be happy, awesome for equality, yay!

And I think I'll drop and walk away from this subject lol. I gave my two cents. I'm done. Unless people want me in this thread. Kind of a bad idea though. :p
 

Mighty Pecan Pie

The secret American
Anyway, in regards to religion and 'moral compass', what I meant was, you don't need to be religious to be a good person. I'm one such person. (I'd like to think so anyway...)

However, bad people (I like to think of them that way) such as politicians that use religion as a tool to get the people to vote for them is... disgusting and manipulative. If you rip off all the political areas and views, rip down all the competition and just get a man/woman telling another to support them in a job position because they agree with their religious views, then slowly manipulate them and then when they are elected, completely turn around and do something else? It's like promising something to a random stranger, like saying you'll buy a homeless man a fresh apple. Then you buy, turn around, then eat it in his face.

Well, I think you, Ice-Queen and me all meant the same thing, just said it different lol.

Religion is a tool in my view. Most people use it good and become better people. Some however use it badly. For example the politicians Dabi mentioned. Or those ISIS people to muster people.

Well, time for me to go to sleep now.
 

The Honorable Gidian Diva of Sass

Sahrot Vahlok Spaan. Bahnahgaar. Minion #88!
Staff member
I'm not happy about the whole violation of that one right I vaguely remember from history class about States being in charge of everything else such as marriage and yadda yadda. Overstepping their boundaries. I would be displeased under any circumstances for any law that was passed under similar circumstances which fall under jurisdiction of state powers, however. And as for people being sued for refusing to marry a couple... dude, if they don't want to marry a HETEROSEXUAL couple, they don't even have to. It's always been voluntary.


It just boggles my mind how the government can pull a fast one on us and set up a precedent for overriding rights, but since it is such a popular social issue everyone accepts the gift wrapped punch to our face.
 

Bruynzeel

*ー* SHEW *ー*
I don't agree with states rights in certain cases and discrimination is one of them. you don't want to tax your citizens at point of sale... fine, you don't want to let free citizens enjoy the same freedoms as everyone else that is wrong. You cannot say one person has a right and not another. Race, color, or sexual persuasion. Think of it this way if the other side of the argument was the majority would you want them acting that way to you.
 

-The Ice Queen-

Rightful Queen of Skyrim
Woah, man! Just because someone isn't Christian, doesn't mean they're a bad person. Are all sociopaths bad people, just because they are lacking of a conscience (don't get sociopath confused with psychopath)?

That was what I meant to say. I'm an Atheist myself, and I like to think I'm a good person. (Somewhere, deep down.. lol)

I was making an example of why it was false, a bit sarcastic. I meant to say that being a religious person doesn't automatically makes one good. Or a non-religious person bad.

I might have had to word it better..
Ah, I see. Derp.
 

-The Ice Queen-

Rightful Queen of Skyrim
That's what I'm talking about, Nyo (in regards to the history books).

Washington is mostly classified as Democratic. In fact, most of them are classified as either Democratic or Democratic/Independent. Not just Independent. Lincoln was supposedly the first Republican since that's around the time when the Republican party was born.

However, others state otherwise (which is fine). I mean, it's not like we can dig them up, resurrect them, and ask them kindly, "Hey, are you guys Republican or Democrat?"

"You just brought us up from the ground for this?!"

"Pretty much... Yup."

"What has America become?" *facepalm*

Now I'm getting off topic... Whoopsi! :oops: Point is, in America we learn about the past differently. Some schools do it differently than others. Overall, we have no definite clue what happened or who is who or who did what. You see it all the time in the comments on youtube and facebook >_>

Anyway, in regards to religion and 'moral compass', what I meant was, you don't need to be religious to be a good person. I'm one such person. (I'd like to think so anyway...)

However, bad people (I like to think of them that way) such as politicians that use religion as a tool to get the people to vote for them is... disgusting and manipulative. If you rip off all the political areas and views, rip down all the competition and just get a man/woman telling another to support them in a job position because they agree with their religious views, then slowly manipulate them and then when they are elected, completely turn around and do something else? It's like promising something to a random stranger, like saying you'll buy a homeless man a fresh apple. Then you buy, turn around, then eat it in his face.

I don't know. Ranting right now. I'm just tired of manipulative people that run for an equally manipulative party for President just to lie to people for the hell of it. I talked to my dad one time about it. He said that it's just that feeling of power. The top lion. It's addicting and make you feel like your worth something. Then all that power turns you into something else.


Anyway, good job for America, good job for LGBT and other that want to be happy, awesome for equality, yay!

And I think I'll drop and walk away from this subject lol. I gave my two cents. I'm done. Unless people want me in this thread. Kind of a bad idea though. :p
I think the whole Republican/Democrat thing was a bit different back then than what it is now.
 

Bruynzeel

*ー* SHEW *ー*
your correct, it used to be a three party system as well. With the whips being the third party. But Republicans were the party of republic, meaning federal powers. And Democrats were about true democracy as the greek ideal was, which is individual voices. Also, I need to correct someone on the religions of past presidents As Washington, Jefferson and even Benjamin Franklin were all Episcopalians.
 

Dabiene Caristiana

Your friendly neighborhood weirdo
I thought Benny Frank was Quaker? Or that could have been someone else... whoops. Again, my school taught shiz history. So... Sorry! :oops:
 

Bruynzeel

*ー* SHEW *ー*

Dabiene Caristiana

Your friendly neighborhood weirdo
Ah, my bad. Thanks for the info! :)
 

Rayven

Global Moderator
Staff member
I have a few thoughts on this and since I've not posted in a while, I'll indulge myself a bit here ;)

What is marriage?

This is the crux of it right here, isn't it? We can assign all sorts of "feelings" about what marriage should mean, but in the end, marriage is nothing more than a specialized business contract between two people to combine assets. It makes each party the inheritor of the other's estate if no other documents are filed stating otherwise. It allows one party to make medical decisions on behalf of the other if he or she is unable to make these decisions. It allows joint ownership of property amassed for the duration of the contract. It grants the parties the ability to file taxes as one combined entity and to receive "survivor benefits" if one of the participants dies before the other.

There can be other benefits as allowed by a variety of state and federal programs. But essentially, this is it.

Anything beyond the scope of a business contract is a matter of our own social standards.

The Supreme Court has removed the discriminatory barriers for entering into this contract.

We are free to assign moral and emotional gravity to this contract. Our religions can state their own restrictions on the contract. Our religions can dictate the requirements for entering the contract. Our clergy can refuse to conduct a marriage if it is felt that the participants so not fall in line with religious doctrine.

However, religion has no part in deciding whether a marriage is legal in the eyes of the law. No religious entity is forced to perform a ceremony of any kind. The right that the clergy has to conduct a legally binding marriage ceremony has been generously granted by the government. Otherwise, all the religious ceremonial trappings would mean absolutely nothing in the eyes of the law.

State-sanctioned discrimination cannot be tolerated federally. If a state wishes to benefit from being part of this nation (with federal funding for all manner of things, military support, etc.) then the state must adhere to the basic foundational liberties of the nation.

I have so much more to say on this topic but, alas, real life continues to thwart my efforts. Thank you guys for having such a fantastic discussion about this.
 

Swaggajack

Forum nooblet - PS3 Master race
As a bisexual, i could honestly care less. I dont have real relationships with other guys, just sex, i can only have romantic relationships with women. BUT, what i dont like is when homosexuals shut down entire city blocks with their special parades, and proceed to demand special rights and treatment from the rest of society, as if theyre somehow better than the rest of us. If you put on your pants one leg at a time, and poop like the rest of us - youre going to get treated like the rest of us, regardless of sexual orientation.

Let gay people get married, let them do what they want with their genitals, as long as they arent forcing you to marry them or have sex with them, there really is no problem to be had. At the same time though, im weary of teaching youngsters that being gay, or lesbian is something thats completely normal, because its not, thats just a fact. If it were normal, our species would be a lot let numerous. Its not normal, but at the same time, its nothing to be ashamed of.


BTW, Skyrim was the first nation to legalize gay marriage im pretty sure...on one of my characters, i married marcurio, purely for tax evasion
68747470733a2f2f7261772e6769746875622e636f6d2f64657374696e7967672f776562736974652f6d61737465722f736372697074732f656d6f7465732f656d6f7469636f6e732f4b617070612e706e67
 
As a bisexual, i could honestly care less. I dont have real relationships with other guys, just sex, i can only have romantic relationships with women. BUT, what i dont like is when homosexuals shut down entire city blocks with their special parades, and proceed to demand special rights and treatment from the rest of society, as if theyre somehow better than the rest of us. If you put on your pants one leg at a time, and poop like the rest of us - youre going to get treated like the rest of us, regardless of sexual orientation.

Let gay people get married, let them do what they want with their genitals, as long as they arent forcing you to marry them or have sex with them, there really is no problem to be had. At the same time though, im weary of teaching youngsters that being gay, or lesbian is something thats completely normal, because its not, thats just a fact. If it were normal, our species would be a lot let numerous. Its not normal, but at the same time, its nothing to be ashamed of.


BTW, Skyrim was the first nation to legalize gay marriage im pretty sure...on one of my characters, i married marcurio, purely for tax evasion
68747470733a2f2f7261772e6769746875622e636f6d2f64657374696e7967672f776562736974652f6d61737465722f736372697074732f656d6f7465732f656d6f7469636f6e732f4b617070612e706e67

Being homosexual or bisexual, to me, may be abnormal to a certain extent in our society but in nature, it does exist. So I tend to think that to a certain extent it's a normal thing, atleast in nature. I believe societal standards make it out to be abnormal, if that makes sense.
There are species of fish and slugs out there that can even change their gender in times of need to help repopulate the species. So in nature, even being trans is normal. It may not be normal by societal standards, but it is somewhat normal in nature.
For example, according to Wikipedia, it is a known fact that between 8 to 10 percent of male rams refuse to mate with female ewes, but readily mate with other male rams. So it can be argued that homosexuality is natural since it does actually happen in nature.
As for bisexuality, dolphins in the wild have been found to have relationships both with their same gender and with the opposite gender. There was even a whole pod of dolphins that were found to be exclusively male and homosexual at that.
There are even cases of lesbians in nature. In Oahu, scientists discovered a group of laysan albatrosses where over half were female. Thirty one percent of the group were in same gender relationships (the females). These pairs of female birds were found to have all the normal behaviors of close pair bonding, bill kissing and even engaged in nesting - basically they engaged in all typical breeding behaviors. Laysan albatrosses are known to be highly sensitive of intruders, but they had no problem with these same gender couples.
My point is, it's arguable that being homosexual or even bisexual isn't natural. Technically, it is, if your definition of natural means it happens in nature. If your definition is different though, it may not be. I suppose it's all perspective.
Not trying to attack ya, just thought I should say something. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Rayven

Global Moderator
Staff member
I think saying something is "abnormal" is using language that is already loaded. While the pure semantics may be correct, the linguistic baggage that goes along with it is more likely to invoke emotive responses. If I say that, for example, I had a blood test and it came back with abnormal results, it begs to be cured or fixed.

I have blue eyes. More of the world has brown eyes. But we don't typically refer to blue-eyed people as "abnormal". Or left-handed people. Or ginger/red heads. We typically accept that these things are simply genetic possibilities.

I think it is more conducive to say "uncommon" or perhaps "minority". I think both of those speak directly to simply discussing numerical ratios without any added gravity of implying that something is a medical or psychological condition in need of a cure.
 
Top