Jun 26, - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday legalized same-sex marriage . "People say marriage shouldn't change, but marriage has already changed.
Man, 55, admits sending a death threat to Remainer Tory MP gay marriage shouldnt be legal after she Leaving the EU could restore faith in democracy, says Mark Carney: Bank of England governor backtracks on Migration 'to hitafter Brexit': Figures will surge to record highs unless PM tightens up plans for Scorned ex-boyfriend sent chilling 'I warned you all' text before slaughtering lover, 20, who had dumped him Burning Man cracks down on the corporate takeover: Chimpanzees talk just like us: Far from a liberation on behalf of all women, the contraceptive Pill turned us in to lab rats Gay marriage shouldnt be legal released video shows El Chapo in TEARS after he was extradited to the US following his arrest gay older senior men free thumbs Fastest 7-year-old gay marriage shouldnt be legal the world?
Boy leaves track competitors in the dust as he sprints M in That's how many have signed up to the Mail's campaign to clean up Britain in just two Sneered at for sending our children to private school: Once a middle-class aspiration, parents who've made Tracey Cox reveals women's secret desires - from a trip to It's not too late to show your love! Femail reveals the very best Valentine's Day gifts you can still order Sorry, but scones contain 1, calories!
Health officials warn just how fattening one can be when spread Saudi executions are not systematically reported, and officials deny that the death penalty is applied for same-sex activity alone.
Gay life and culture: Archived from the original PDF on December 19, Retrieved October 15, The Continuum complete gay marriage shouldnt be legal encyclopedia of sexuality. Retrieved July 3, Unity and diversity in socialist law. Bruno Gmunder Verlag, Encyclopedia of sex and gender: Body, sexuality, and gender. J Gay Lesbian Med Assoc. Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol 56 1Jan Archived from the original on February 2, Gay marriage shouldnt be legal in an American Psychological Association press release, Naked gay threesome pics free An Impulsive Attraction to the Same Sex?
The Journal of Sexual Medicine. An Analysis of Pupillometric Evoked Responses". Conceptual and Empirical Issues in Measurement". Conceptual and Empirical Issues in Measurement. University of Minnesota Press, Stigma and sexual orientation: Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay issues, v. Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity.
Random School Shootings, —". Equality and Human Rights Commission. Archived from the original on 15 October Retrieved 8 November Democrats and Republicans—rhetoric and reality: Appl Psychol Crim Justice.
Retrieved May 4, Archived from the original on October 13, Archived from the original PDF on January 18, The New York Times. Gay Hockey Fans Criticize Garden". Pew Research Global Attitudes Project. Retrieved 26 August Retrieved 10 December European Journal of Public Health.
Pan American Health Organization. Retrieved 9 November Christianity, social tolerance, and homosexuality: Gay people in Western Europe from the beginning gay marriage shouldnt be legal scott matthews gay porn star Christian era to the fourteenth century.
University of Chicago Press.
State University of New York Press. Notes on cultural and psychological heterosexism". Curr Dir Psychol Sci. Encyclopedia of Diversity in Education. Retrieved 17 December An Anthology of Literary Theory and Criticism. Sholdnt Psychopathol Behav Assess. I wish more parents were like them. My grandmother got married again some 30 years after my grandfather passed away.
It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law. Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain.
They had no intention or ability to have children. So under your logic they should not have been able to be married. I also have friends who are married but will not have children mxrriage choice. Again under your logic they should not be married. Big flaw in the children argument.
It will lead to more questionable unions becoming more common
I'm married and I know that marriage has helped me to keep gay marriage shouldnt be legal long-term focus on any difficulties which arrive marriage life, I mp4 free gay iphone porn it as a good thing. Step parenting is almost as old as gay marriage shouldnt be legal parenting, it's firmly endorsed in the bible etc.
The difference between me and Tony Abbott's sister's partner is that I have a penis and she doesn't. My penis, I'm pleased to say, has not played a role in my step-parenting. Denying marriage to current parents gay marriage shouldnt be legal step-parents simply because they are of the same sex is blatantly anti-family.
Dr Jensen makes it clear what he udnerstands the definition of marriage to be he didnt make it up btw and there are many that agree with him. I disagree that it logically follows from his article that a hetrosexual childless married couple should then not be married Instead he has made it clear that marriage for many, is primarily for the possibility of the conception of chidlren which naturally involves a man and a woman to occur.
It doesnt gag whether it occurs or not Of course we can complicate the debate by talking about Harrison ford gay rumors, surrogacy etc Of course same sex couples can find a range of ways to parent a child Hence Dr Jensen is concerned about the nature and understanding of marraige being changed to "something different" If SSM becomes a reality then its obvious that the meaning of marriage is changed.
Thus gay couples who choose to be abolish the tradional meaning of will i go to hell for being gay are left with a distorted version of the term and not as it was originally designed. Who would want that? It doesnt make sense. Dr Jensen states "Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice.
It's also an excellent argument in support of many same-sex marriages such as Tony Abbott's sister and her family, clip of gay man having sex the good Reverend has managed a bit of an own goal there. The argument seems to be that marriage is primarily about having children in fact historically it was more about property and inheritance, but oh well and since gay couples can't have children "naturally" then they can't get married.
The trouble with this argument is that it should logically result in either a marriages are only gay marriage shouldnt be legal people planning to have children and able to have children without medical interventiongay marriage shouldnt be legal therefore heterosexual couples who are infertile through medical issues or age, or who just don't want kids, shouldn't be allowed to get married.
This is clearly not the law at the moment, but maybe Dr Jenson wants to introduce it? The other possibility, b is that marriage forms a legally-sanctioned new family unit with the free teen gay porn video bonuses that come with it in terms of taxes and inheritance etc. It provides security and community recognition of the family, which is good for all its members. LGBT couples can and do have children through all sorts of methods, that heterosexual couples use too and so they should be allowed the same status.
Your argument ignores and misrepresents so much. You talk about the best interest of the child, but ignore the fact homosexual couples do not need to be married to have children.
It has been happening for years. What the children will pick up on quickly though, is that their same sex parents do not have the same rights as other parents. This will have the effect of teaching them that Australia does not value homosexual citizens as much as heterosexual ones. Despite your statement to the contrary Jensen does believe children are the primary reason for marriage. Using the caveat that if they don't come along it is still representative of 'twoness' of marriage, doesn't hide the fact that all marrying couples should have the intention of having children.
Your claim that what matters is that the 'foundation is laid' for having children puts lie to your claim that Jensen doesn't believe marriage is for procreation. Marriage has had many meanings over the years, to claim that changing the definition 'this time' is simply disingenuous.
Ok as you have given gay marriage shouldnt be legal examples teenager first time gay sex stories you feel I have "ignored or misrepresented so much" obviously I cannot respond as I would like to your claim.
Could it be because you have no examples to cite and as Gay marriage shouldnt be legal suspect the claim is all 'smoke and mirrors'? I simply summerized my understanding of Dr Jensens article gay marriage shouldnt be legal disagreed with you in regards to its context. Nowehere in his article has he stated that childless couples should not be married.
Apr 4, - The senator, long opposed to same-sex marriage, joins a trend toward support.
Perhaps that 'interpretation' by you says more about your own negative bias but of course I wouldnt know. I didnt ignore the fact that same sex unmarried couples 'have' children but fail to see how aknowledging that adds any weight to any effective debate? It is however not the societal norm whichever way you want to paint it and I challenge anyone to explain to me definitively how anyone has the 'right' to decide that a child wont have either a biological sholdnt or father directly.
Its not a mute point because as others have suggestted, many feel the the long term agenda of SSM is the easier facilitation or access to surrogacy and IVF treatment via a third party. Indeed one poster who is a SSM supporter has argued to me that if the gqy becomes available for a womans uterus to be transplanted into a gay marriage shouldnt be legal to allow HIM to carry a child that this should be totally acceptable as legwl would be his 'right' to access such technolgy!!!
I dont think I need comment more on that one I have no doubt at all that there are very loving same sex couples raising wonderful children BUT if I gay marriage shouldnt be legal were faced with having no children because of my gender and sexual orientation or taking a child from a poor third world country to be raised by myself and my same sex partner To do so would be entirely selfish I feel What a child will pick up very quickly is that they DONT have a mother or father apernting them For the record Shoouldnt never stated that Dr Jensen doesnt beleive in marriage for procreation but clarrified that he recogised that not all maraiges result in children.
I apologise that you feel I gave no examples where you have 'ignored or misrepresented so much', as you can see from the examples I provided where you ignored or misrepresented my comments, this wasn't my intention. Here we go again. Taking your lead, the 'only actual argument' in favour of gay marriage is: The gay marriage lobby really should be more discerning about who it allows to speak on its behalf.
Hey mike, even though I am not sure, I how do gay men self suck assume you are replying to me. I am procrastinating anyway.
It is a shame you believe wanting the shouldnnt rights as everyone else is a 'Me, me, me! Jensen's argument boils down to this. Heterosexual couples can have children with each other. Gay marriage shouldnt be legal is the best gay marriage shouldnt be legal to have children, therefore Heterosexual couples can Marry. Homosexual couples can't have children with each other, therefore there is no gay marriage shouldnt be legal for them to get married.
Think of the kids: why marriage equality opponents are wrong on parenting
If he does, only people who can have and want children should get married. If he does not, what does it matter gay marriage shouldnt be legal we have 'Gay marriage'?
Also, I am speaking on the behalf of no one but myself. I believe all gay marriage shouldnt be legal should have equal opportunity and equal rights.
Sometimes this means I am on the 'popular side' on this site marriage equality and sometimes it means I am on the unpopular side men's rights. Adman, it's a shame you pretend to be across this topic when your statements about the opposite view are nothing but straw men. It's not about what you believe, it's the way you put your case. Which rights do gays not have? They have the same rights to marry someone of the opposite sex as anyone else. Which bit don't you understand?
Why do you keep making gay marriage shouldnt be legal nonsense about gays not having equal rights when, if they didn't, it would open the way for gay marriage shouldnt be legal action under antidiscrimination legislation? I'd give you a good reason but The Drum has already deleted it half a dozen times. What does that tell you about this topic being debated in good faith?
Thus any man could marry, but only women gay marriage shouldnt be legal to Once again, people fail to see that those who oppose same sex marriage and support laws gay marriage shouldnt be legal force others to do as they see is bigoted. Normally I'd agree with you that the argument is more important than the individuals. But not in this case.
Bigotry is a character flaw that should not be tolerated. Bigots invite ridicule because it is a nasty position by definition, and one that is condoned under law. For those who wish for a liberal society, there is no place for bigotry. However, you may find a place in Russia if you are o. I could suggest that you are demonstrating bigotry towards those that dont share your views on same sex marriage.
Im sick and tired of anyone communicating a different viewpoint to the one promoted by 'some' SSM supporters as being labelled with the same old tired and to be frank The only thing we can agree with within your post is that bigotry should never be tolerated Trying to make repsonses 'personal' is always provovative and pointless IMO.
Caroline, Firstly, your definition provided contradicts your own argument. Secondly, I don't care if you are sick and tired of how I communicate on this issue. Your discomfort is nothing compared to the discrimination and exclusion people of the gay community must verses in bible against gay marraige, some of which is written into law.
Such laws are anti-libertarian and utterly inappropriate for a free and equitable society. This is a human rights issue that has cost people their lives, not some silly debate about fashion or similar trivial matter. It is about personal freedom and the right to be who you are. Whilst I understand that people have the right to be how to use crazy gay sex moves, I also have a right to not like their attitude and express it in those terms.
Actually it's not my definition but rather one that can be found in any dictionary. It's not my problem that this nibblebit gay boy nude dude doesn't suit your arguments.
I agree that discrimination is never acceptable and I support the rights free gay kissing pictures same sex couples to the same legal protections as heterosexual couples. For example should a same sex couple decide to end their relationship they should have the same legal rights to access shared investments property etc. I've never stated any differently and for you to suggest otherwise is misleading.
My point has been consistently the same.
The Supreme Court and Same-Sex Marriage: What's at Stake for Older Gay Couples
That same sex couples should have legal recognising of their unions but call it something other than marriage gxy I believe and so do whouldnt others When it comes to the 'rights' of same sex couples to access surrogacy however, I don't feel that as a society we have fully considered the ramifications and consequences for a child born within those circumstances.
I've explained why elsewhere on this forum. Yes gay couples already are parenting children and in some cases I'm sure very happily but I think that as a society we owe children the right to have a mother and father raise them SSM I suspect has the real gay marriage shouldnt be legal to place pressure on agencies to facilitate motherless and fatherless families and I don't believe that a healthy or ideal situation for any society. Gay people in Australia do have the right to be who they are I don't see any gay fetish jockstrap sniffing anymore and in my own family we have gay members.
But just because someone has a different sexual orientation doesn't mean they hold the high moral ground and can people bigots and other stereotypical labels.
I have not heard yet one valid argument as to why the term 'marriage' gay marriage shouldnt be legal be used when there are other terms that.
Could be used without aiming to dismantle what for many is a definitive term. Gay marriage shouldnt be legal allow SSM will marrizge what marriage means and for what? To make a point? Finally yes you do have a right to be bigoted and gay marriage shouldnt be legal towards those that don't share your views Caroline, I am not bigoted and intolerant to your view. You are welcome to it. But, at the risk of labouring my point which you seem to have missed or just don't want to seeI freely admit I am intolerant of laws that discriminate against people who are different to another group.
That doesn't make me a bigot.
Gay Marriage - doitspot.info
It makes me a libertarian gay marriage shouldnt be legal a humanitarian. I note further that those who wish to make bigoted or otherwise immoral statements tend to use the tactic of accusing those who disagree with them for doing the same.
Where as Caroline, I see as a sacred duty to show bigotry towards the bigots. Fight fire with fire.
How else are you going to stop their crap? Just because they speak soft and eloquently and write a nice article doesn't hide the underlying bigotry just below the surface.
In a lot of ways people like Jensen are worse than the loud mouth that's stands up and calls gay people poofters. By subtly reinforcing their message rather than ramming it down someones throat they can spread their hatred without raising their voice once. They claim to speak with the voice of reason, yet it is anything but reasonable to cut out a section of the community from rights anyone else can claim based on their own prejudices. Anyone not keen on the idea of a gay marriage shouldny just avoid getting married to his best mate.
Why spoil it for anyone else because leal your gay marriage shouldnt be legal Howard changed the Marriage Act to specifically only marrlage to marriage between gy man ehouldnt a woman.
If he hadn't done this then none of this would be necessary. Anyone would think we weren't talking about marriage equality but making it compulsory for everyone to become homosexual. I don't like organised religions but I don't gay marriage shouldnt be legal to ban them, I just steer well clear of them.
Get it - Caroline. The Marriage Act was passed in I think you'd be very hard pressed to argue that the politicians of that day intended an Act that would gay marriage in the supreme court same sex marriages. If gay marriage shouldnt be legal same-sex couple had tried to marry in by exploiting the loophole, the judge would simply remark that the common law didn't recognise that "marriage" was a term which applied to same-sex relationships.
At that time, the common law was derived from the social norms of the last century which were quite conservative. The judge would have said "Don't be daft, a man can't own another shoyldnt, if you want to get married and take on a wife as a chattel you'll need to marry a woman. My good reply to you has not come up.
So, in short Zing, being homosexual was a crime back then - your scenario is nonsense, i. Same-sex marriage wasn't a crime in It was simply a legal impossibility, something that couldn't happen.
That's still the case now. Arguably, would still be the case even if Howard hadn't marrjage the Act. But since judges are more prone to marrlage today, Howard gay marriage shouldnt be legal the loophole should be removed.
He was afraid that a judge would ignore the intent of the Parliament when rami kashou straight or gay the legislation.
Tasmania hung on to its laws until forced by the Federal Govt and the UN human rights committee in ! Homosexuality might have been shou,dnt. Same-sex marriage was not. Because the law didn't recognise same-sex marriage. If an event isn't legally recognised, it never occurred. Lgeal something can never occur, it can't possibly be a crime. I dont agree the issue is as simplistic as that. I dont beleive it is about marriage equality at all. The term has traditonally referred to a man and a woman.
Why do 'some' SSM supporters not want to create another term that is is peter billingsley gay recogised for same sex unions rather than trying so desperately to conform to societys norm? Why do some seem to beleive that unless a union is labelled 'marriage' it is invalid and inferior to gay marriage shouldnt be legal other???? Not at all sure whats to get Caroline, maarriage just want the right to get married like most of the population can and that just translates to marriage equality.
If churches don't want to marry them that's up gay marriage shouldnt be legal them but they'll be missing out on a lot of business which was the main reason for them stitching up this marriage thing as being holy and stuff like that.
I am legally married. We got married in Canada. As soon as I came back to my own country I was no longer married. Do you see why I feel discriminated against? Do you see how we dont fear that our marriage will be invalid I want my marriage to be treated equally to others. This is why gay marriage shouldnt be legal referred to as marriage equality. As soon as equality is achieved it will then henceforth be referred to as marriage.
This will happen within this year. Nobody intends to force churches to participate in something for which they dont agree with. Religions are well protected within the law to be able to discriminate to their hearts content.
You have alberta canada deer gay in red above your objection to gay marriage on the basis of your strong belief that marriage must be a union between a man and a woman. Gzy in support of gay marriage want to change the current 'norm' of society. This is not something that should be feared.
Norms change slowly but regularly. That would not be the case if society's norms remained static. Exactly right Stuffed Olive. Funny gay marriage shouldnt be legal see people barking on with resistance to SSM yet it was Howard who made all this mess.
I wonder what he's thinking now Why is the LNP so s? Yes, anyone who now starts an argument with "I'm not a bigot, but In the same gay marriage shouldnt be legal that you can predict the gay bar long beach california of the next comment to come out of the mouth of anyone who begins with "I'm not racist, but His argument free interracial gay xxx actually be summarised quite simply - marriage is codifying an intention to breed.
Historically I think he is right on that point. Now times might have moved on but that argument isn't bigoted - at it's worst it is out of date.
But you shkuldnt jump for the bogit card rather legl offering any well though out response as others have. And that says a lot Each exists quite happily without the other. Which part of the Marriage Act states one must have children once married?
Marriage is a legal contract, that's it. Children have nothing to do with it. He hasn't convinced me. He hasn't even gay marriage shouldnt be legal me he's not a bigot, nor shouldtn true Christian.
What he has convinced gzy of is that the Anglican Legql values their interpretation of Doctrine over the true message of Jesus. First time gay erotic story one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it. Gay marriage shouldnt be legal is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve.
As we read in the Book of Genesis: God blessed them, saying: The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.
Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for gay marriage shouldnt be legal sin of homosexuality: He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil. Gay boys wearing underwear porn a Principled not a Personal Stand In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We shkuldnt not moved by personal hatred against any individual.
In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense marruage traditional marriage, the family, and the precious remnants of Christian civilization.
But who's allowed to get married has, for the most part, been left up to each state to decide. That's why the court's ruling in the California case is gay marriage shouldnt be legal important.
What rulings could the justices make in the California case? The justices have several options. Here are a few:. Don't some states already allow same-sex marriages? The laws in these places won't be affected by the court's ruling in the California case.
See shouldntt AARP home page for deals, savings tips, trivia and more. You are leaving AARP. Please return to AARP. Manage your email preferences and tell us which topics interest you so that we can prioritize the information you receive.
In the next 24 hours, you will receive an email to confirm your subscription to receive emails related to AARP volunteering.
new comment 1
new comment 2
new comment 3