J says:
Thu, 25th Jun 20097:25 pm 

Wow, you are so right on.

Casey says:
Thu, 25th Jun 20098:39 pm 

I think it's ignorant to assume that the same people who are against same sex marriage would also be watching this show. Where are the statistics and facts that prove the audience for this show are the same people fighting for the sanctity of marriage? I guarantee you they are not the same people. You can not take some crap TV show and use it in an argument for gay rights. That's ridiculous, and stupid.

Also, who's to say that ALL gay couples are "legitimately in-love"? I am sure most gay couples only want the right to get married so they can take advantage of the benefits. Otherwise, why would they get married? To religious hetero couples marriage is sooo much more than legal benefits. To everyone else, what other reason is there to get "married" than the benefits? Doesn't that fact alone cheapen marriage?

This article was repulsive to me. You argument was not well thought at all, and merely a cheap jab at people who are against gay-marriage. Maybe if you'd actually done some research on the target audience for this show and offered some facts to back up your ridiculous insinuations then this article wouldn't sound so ignorant.

ArmyMP says:
Thu, 25th Jun 200910:25 pm 

Casey, to suggest that most non-religious heterosexual and/or same-sex couples get married for legal benefits is absurd! Mind you that same-sex couples can also be religious. Your condescending religious beliefs are the very definition of ignorant. How can you guarantee that the people watching the show are not fighting for the sanctity of marriage? Where are your "facts to back up your ridiculous insinuations"? How about that research you speak of? No? I didn't think you did any. The author's article does not target all that are against gay marriage, she is simply targeting the hypocrites. You are the last person that should be tossing around the word ignorant in your vocabulary. Unless, of course you are describing yourself!

Alex says:
Fri, 26th Jun 20096:35 pm 

Don't forget to answer me Casey!

Answer all the questions!

Alex says:
Fri, 26th Jun 20096:41 pm 

"I’m not getting into the debate that same-sex couples can also be religious. It says, clear as day, in the bible that homosexuality is wrong."

Just wanted to add that I love how you assume that everyone's spirituality revolves around the Bible and that those who don't follow it, like Hindus, those that follow Shinto, etc. aren't religious because they don't worship the same way as you do.

Kinda ignorant, I think. But go ahead and justify why being religious means 'following Judaeo-Christian scriptures' and ergo why Hindus monks aren't religious at all. Again, definition of ignorant…

Casey says:
Fri, 26th Jun 20096:56 pm 

Alex, sorry I don't have time to respond to your comment right now (it's late where I am) But I wanted to clarify that last comment you made. I was not limiting "religious" people to Judaeo Christians. But since I am one, that is the position I am speaking from. Other religions also have religious marriages. I was including all religious marriages in my comment. Not just christian, sorry I didn't specify. I don't know enough about any other religion to go into detail about them. I also, can not speak from their side, so I don't. Religious is religious, not matter what religion you are. If homosexual couples aren't in it for the legal benefits, then why do they need their marriage recognized by the law? They can still have ceremonies to prove their love to each other, no one is stopping them from doing that.

Casey says:
Fri, 26th Jun 20096:59 pm 

Also, I did start to comment back to you, but I have to wake up early to take my boyfriend to work so I apologize that I can't finish my response, but here is the beginning.

Alex, I have no problem with homosexuals as people. I know tons of extremely nice, extremely generous homosexuals. One of my aunts is also a homosexual. My sister claims to be bisexual. That doesn’t change the fact that I do not agree with their lifestyle. I love them, despite their “sins” and I am all for civil unions, and granting gay couples every right that hetero couples get through marriage. I have never, on this site, or anywhere else, said otherwise.

Alex says:
Fri, 26th Jun 20097:33 pm 

(Oh, and in case you forgot, separate but equal was declared unconstitutional in Brown Vs. The Board of Ed. Just one of the largest court cases in American history. Not to mention you obviously don't know much about civil unions, because more than a thousand benefits given to married couples aren't give under a civil union. I love how you didn't know that, even though you would apparently vote on the issue.

And please, don't forget, explain how you use the Bible to determine U.S. law in terms of Homosexual marriage, but not FOR polygamy, incest, rape, genocide, or stoning virgins. I am MOST interest in why you think Gods word is only important when discriminating homosexuals and not in legalizing rape, genocide, incest, etc.

Cause gosh, if you seemed to post on those topics half as much as you do on the lives on homosexuals who never asked for your influence in their lives!)

Alex says:
Fri, 26th Jun 200911:16 pm 

Casey, sometimes you are so offensive that I don’t think that even you believe the stuff you post.

I agree that it is not necessarily true that those that are against same sex marriage will support the show. However, I’m sure a bunch will.

However, the next bit was WAY out of line. Are you implying that a gay couple may not want to make a contract to celebrate their commitment to each other? I just…I can’t believe you would be so ignorant. Homosexual relationships don’t have a one year lifespan; they vary from flings to decades, just like heterosexual ones. Furthermore, there are a lot of people who are gay and religious. What, do you think gays hate whatever supreme force there may be? Well, if so, you’re wrong. Completely wrong. I have two aunts that go to temple every week and are more spiritual than anyone else in my family. Like you, they don’t take note of every single thing the Bible says, because…
A) Because they know it was written millenia ago.
B) They use it as a guide, now the law.
C) They see how absurd many of the things written in the Bible are.

I mean, Casey, you don’t really believe that a woman that commits adultery should be stoned, do you?
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. Deuteronomy 22:23-24

Please explain why you deny homosexuals equal rights but you believe that this extract from the Bible is antiquated. I really want to hear this.

And, Casey, marriage is between one man and one wife, right?

But…Casey…King Soloman had seven HUNDRED wives…and THREE HUNDRED concubines! Casey, please, what happened? OMG, and Casey, Sarah was Abrahams SISTER, RIGHT??? You’re not saying incest is an acceptable form of marriage, are you? And Casey, since you have all the answers in your trusty ol’ Bible and you thus can use your wisdom to tell people how to live their lives, is it true that in Deuteronomy, it is said that a rapist can force his victim to marry him? Cause that’s what I read! (I’m so nice I’ll give you the excerpt!)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

Wow, all examples of true holy marriage! So, Casey, should these types of marriage be applied to real life? Why, why not? And why are they better than a loving relationship between two committed same sex partners?

You know Casey, I always wanted to marry not for religious reasons, although I do consider myself a Jew, but out of commitment, to show that I will love that person for the rest of my life and that we will forever be one. That’s what my aunts wanted, too. And when the mayor of San Francisco allowed same sex marriage, they got that! But then, because people decided that they were going to force their religion and it’s ridiculous rules on everyone (even though my aunts are Reform Jews, and same sex marriage is accepted amongst our denomination), they had their marriage revoked. But it was ok, right? Because it’s what God would want?

No. They have been together twenty years and only wanted to solidify their relationship. They wanted what their beliefs said they could have. They are so deeply in love that my outlook on life is brightened just by being near them. They are two of the kindest, nicest, most generous people I have ever met. I’m graduating soon. Because my mom is a single mother that tries to pay the bills by working two jobs back to back in the summer, they paid over five hundred dollars so far for catering, clothes, and supplies for the house, just in case we needed any. I’m not their child, yet they are insisting on setting up a monthly allowance into my bank account so that I’ll be able to pay for everything next semester. They are…the most generous and nicest people I have ever met. One of them worked for numerous shelters for battered women and many other initiatives for the well being of others. It makes me sick to my stomach that people like you judge them as if they are below the level of humanity, when they are some of the most shining examples of what good is in the world. You judge judge judge. Homosexuality is far from a sin, but even if you believe it is, Jesus said love the sinner, not take away their rights and force your beliefs on them.

That’s why I want to hear your logic Casey. You have all the answers and deem yourself fit to tell the world how to live. Tell me, why do you pick and choose? Gays cant marry, but we shouldn’t stone virgins. Why? Your beloved Bible SAYS so. Gays cant marry, but it’s ok to have hundreds of wives. And rape. And perform adultery. But gays cant marry. WHY?

Explain yourself, if you can.

Also, who’s to say that ALL gay couples are “legitimately in-love”? I am sure most gay couples only want the right to get married so they can take advantage of the benefits. Otherwise, why would they get married? To religious hetero couples marriage is sooo much more than legal benefits. To everyone else, what other reason is there to get “married” than the benefits? Doesn’t that fact alone cheapen marriage?

Casey says:
Fri, 26th Jun 200911:27 pm 

ArmyMP, Ok, first of all, there is a major difference in writing an article which revolves around one of the most controversial topics of our day without using any facts to back up your claims, and commenting on said article without facts. I am not the author of this article. The topic didn’t stimulate MY interest to write an article about it. I just happened upon it and was appalled that someone would have the nerve to write about such a controversial topic in such an IGNORANT manner.

You say, “The author’s article does not target all that are against gay marriage, she is simply targeting the hypocrites.” The article didn’t specify who those hypocrites are. The article had absolutely no facts in it. The article implies that the same people who are against gay marriage are the same people who will be watching this show. And she shows absolutely no evidence of this. THAT is IGNORANT. Not to mention offensive.

I’m not getting into the debate that same-sex couples can also be religious. It says, clear as day, in the bible that homosexuality is wrong. If “religious homosexuals” choose not to abide by the guidelines set forth in the book that they apparently believe in, then why do they deserve the right to be unified under God? Why would God allow a marriage to take place that he has clearly said is wrong and against his wishes? I think you need to pick up a bible and read it a little more closely before you tell anyone that their religious beliefs are “condescending”. Obviously you have a very superficial grasp of the Christian religion, if any at all.

The author said that marriage is denied to the couples who are “truly in-love” who she says are the same-sex couples. Who is to say that same-sex couples are any more in love then hetero couples? Just because they love someone who is the same sex they are? THAT is absurd! There is also no proof of that. However, despite that, an argument that gay marriage supporters constantly use is that marriage was not meant to be about love. Marriage is a legal bind of two people, for LEGAL BENEFITS. If marriage is not about love, and these couples that you speak of are not looking for the legal benefits, than what would be the purpose of them getting married? Marriage, to religious couples, is a ceremony to invite God into their relationship. That is the Christian definition and purpose of marriage. The legal purpose for marriage is to obtain benefits. There is no “love” in that mix. So why, if as you have stated most non-religious hetero and same sex couples DO NOT get married (or wish to get married) for legal benefits, do they wish to get married?

You’re right, I didn’t do any research. It is also not my article. I’m not the one who is using insinuations about a television show to blatantly offend a (very large) group of people, simply because I don’t agree with their opinion. My comment was not meant to be offensive, but merely to defend a group (which I am a part of) that was being demeaned, with no substantial evidence to back up the claims made against them.

I think I have every right to throw around the word “ignorant”.

Alex says:
Sat, 27th Jun 200912:27 am 

Casey, I’m pretty sure that anyone can tell by the quote I showed that you equate being religious as following the Bible.

My aunts are religious. I am religious. We are Reformist Jews. We believe that our scriptures hold a lot of good advice towards living, but that many of the things that are in them are absurd and contradictory to whatever benevolent god there may be. We believe a loving and consensual relationship between two adults is a beautiful thing; between genders or within a single one. We also don’t believe in genocide, like the Bible preaches (don’t believe me? Go to Numbers 31, and read about how Moses decided to wipe out all of the Midianites, even the mothers and children! Heres a quote for you!

“Why have you spared the life of all the women and children? You are to kill all the children and kill all the women who have slept with a man. The lord says spare the lives only of the young girls who have not slept with a man, and take them for yourselves, so that we may multiply into a great nation.” -Moses), or that a woman who isn’t a virgin upon marriage should be stoned. I’m sure you don’t, right?

So, according to our denomination, Reformist Judaism, we believe that love is more important than murdering those whose hymens have been punctured before their wedding day. Do you agree?

Casey, I don’t think you can really empathize with homosexuals. I know you’ve been taught that they’re evil horrible people, but…did you ever look for anyone outside of your church for more info? Did you ever consult scientific studies, perhaps, to find out how homosexuals have quite a number of developments in the brain that differ from their heterosexual counterparts? Did you read about the likelihood of a boy becoming gay is increased with every older brother he has, do to the female body having a sort of ‘alien’ response to the male chromosomes? I know that you think that the Bible will tell you all, but I think, that if you doubt that non virgins should be murdered via stoning, like it says must occur, that perhaps you will see that some other parts of it are a little outdated, and perhaps ridiculous as well?

What I’m trying to say is that if you find out that homosexuality is quite proven to have genetic factors, you’d realize that gays aren’t lying when they say they can’t help it, and you might empathize with them. They’re born into a society where they are constantly told that they’ll burn in hell for feelings that are as natural to them as physical pain. They are denied the right to give blood, serve in the military, and even commit to a relationship in the same manner, with the same benefits, as everyone else. All they want is equality. Contrary to what many christians say, they don’t want to force churches to marry them. What they want is secular. You claim that marriage is only to invite God in a relationship. Don’t you realize that you have one view point, and there are many others? For my aunts, their marriage was to celebrate the strength of their love. You say ‘Why do they complain about the benefits?’. It’s about equality. Don’t you get that?

Casey, I know that you probably think otherwise, but our nation was supposed to be secular. Secular means without religion. That means that your Bible based arguements shouldn’t even be brought up, because Christianity and Judaism and Islam and Shintoism shouldn’t affect our government. Casey, it’s in the second amendment…Do you agree with that amendment, or do you think you should be able to force your religious beliefs onto others? I wouldn’t stop you from eating bacon, and I wouldn’t stop you from working on Saturday (those are rules in my religion). If I were to do so, would you think it fair that a Jew was forcing their beliefs and customs on you, ones that you don’t share? I would probably reply, ‘The tanakh clearly states’, but the tanakh doesn’t MEAN anything to you, and it SHOULDN’T, because our country is supposed to be a secular one where decisions are based on whether people or hurt or not (I anticipate you saying that gay marriages hurt your heterosexual one, should you have one, but how? If two lesbians are married, are you going to love your husband less (if you were married)? Would you consider your union held less? It’d be a SECULAR MARRIAGE, not a Christian one!).

You don’t seem to understand the concept of equality…THAT’S why we want marriage. That’s why we want the same benefits. BECAUSE GAYS ARE PEOPLE. No better, no worse. And another name just shoves in their face ‘You’re not good enough. You’re not wanted.’ You’ll say this isn’t true, but what do you know? You haven’t been affected by this at ALL Casey. When I gave blood, and I saw ‘if you are a male, have you ever had sex with another male’, do you know what I saw? Blatant discrimination. You (I hope, I mean, you do go to college, right?) and I both know that HIV isn’t a ‘gay disease’ and that plenty of heterosexuals and women have it, but they still won’t accept blood from gay males that have sex, even though it is proven that there is NO BASIS for that decision whatsoever. But it’s still there. And that’s a part of the discrimination that homosexuals face and you will never have to, and will never appreciate. THAT’S why they want everything the same. Because they’re second class citizens and it’s because of ignorance, hatred, and a lack of compassion.

Sam says:
Sat, 27th Jun 20093:38 am 

I don't understand why it is bad that same sex couples want to get married and as a result receive the legality of it. If they love each other, they should be able to together in the hospital when the other one is near death. They should be able to receive financial compensation from the other. Why is this so wrong? If heterosexual couples can do it (and abuse it) what is so wrong of extending a human right to homosexual couples? I just have a hard time of seeing the "other side" of the argument.

T says:
Sat, 27th Jun 20095:15 pm 

Alex. I've never heard anyone articulate their opinion about gay marriage so effectively. Its like you've said everything I feel about religion, the bible, as well as gay marriage. I honestly can't see how anyone could argue or refute the points you have made. As the daughter of a gay woman I am all for gay marriage and as a black woman (from the south) I am anti- discrimination because I have experienced it first hand and it hurts. Its people like Casey that keep me up at night wondering what we have become as a nation. Marriage under the law should be completely secular with no religious ties. Period. And personally I loved this article…it mirrored my thoughts exactly.

Alex says:
Sat, 27th Jun 20095:41 pm 

Thanks T

It really sucks that we have people like Casey today who would like to force their religion and prejudice upon others (which is really fascism, if you think about it. Maybe she'd have been happier in Mussolini's Italy?), but we ARE progressing. Is it too slow? HELL yes, but we are. Not to be cliche, but we've seen a man from a non-traditional and multiracial and cultural background become president. By all means, this doesn't mean that we as a society are as close to where we should be, but we have to remember that fifty years ago this would have been unthinkable.

It just seems, though, that people who already hold prejudice are too quick to hold on to it, unwilling to even listen. It's like even giving the other 'side' a chance would be treason for them. I mean, I know Casey isn't going to really answer all of the questions I posted for her. She can't. How can she say that she believes one part of the Bible but not the other, when she is so convinced that it is the word of her god? She just can't, and she knows she can't, and we know it, so she isn't going to answer and explain every point I made.

But you know what sucks the most? Casey seems to be a peer of ours, raised in our generation of technology and in our nation. Is our nation as progressive and amazing and free as we're indoctrinated to believe, no, but does she have an amazing opportunity to be exposed to various cultures and ways of thinking from all over the world and history. That's what sucks. She's been raised with so much opportunity, and she is still as ignorant as to believe that atheists can't love, that she has the right to force her religious beliefs on people, and that, despite being able to access overwhelming proof about the real origins of homosexuality, homosexuality is a 'lifestyle choice' (**** the word lifestyle, btw, I can't even hear that damn word). All we can do is take comfort in the fact that future generations will continue to have it better and better as society learns the errors of its ways, just as history has shown it to do time and time again.

Casey says:
Sun, 28th Jun 20092:55 pm 

You know Alex, I’m not responding to your points because there is no point in arguing with someone who makes personal accusations against someone in a debate. Obviously you really are not interested in hearing anyone elses side of this issue, you only want to enforce your side on “non-supporters” not hear them out. But you have accused me of doing the same thing. People think entirely different. You’re not going to understand my way of thinking and I’m not going to understand yours. However, with that being said. The majority of America, religious or not, does not believe in legalizing gay marriage, there must be a reason for that, and there is. BUT most of the people who oppose gay marriage ALSO are for granting homosexual couples EVERY SINGLE RIGHT that hetero couples are granted. I NEVER said they only deserved the partial rights they are presently granted! NEVER! You made that up all by yourself to make me look like a prejudiced bitch, which I certainly am not. THAT is why I am not responding to your many questions. I don’t have all the answers, I don’t pretend to, but I also am not about to subject myself to someones hurtful personal attacks against me in a debate either. When you start making personal accusations, I stop listening. You don’t want to have a debate. I have said many times before, I have no problem with granting homosexual couples ALL the rights we receive as married hetero couples. The same for atheists, but the law and marriage should not go hand in hand. I know separate is not equal, but religious and legal marriages are not the same thing. Church’s do not have to perform ceremonies for “religious homosexuals” but the law SHOULD provide them with all the benefits they deserve.

But we don’t just not share the same views on gay marriage, we obviously don’t share the same thoughts on the world today. I certainly don’t think the world is getting better and better. Is it getting less predjudice? Of course! and that is awesome. But in general, the world is quickly declining. Crime rates are so high, corruption is in every government. Countries are all on edge with each other. This is not turning into an even better world. A more tolerant one? perhaps. But not better in every other aspect. But just as homosexuals have a right to voice their opinions, so does everyone else. And if it’s put to a vote, I will vote against it, because it is against my beliefs, and I will not go against my beliefs. If my opinion is asked (and as a voter, it is) then I will give it. Our revolutionary president, who you pointed out, is also against gay marriage. Is he prejudice? Someone who has been prejudiced against? I doubt it. He is for granting some sort of civil unions as well. To the person who said that homosexuals deserve the right to be with their partner in the hospital, they already have that right.

I have been exposed to many many cultures and ways of thinking, that doesn’t change mine though. I am all for reaching a compromise so that other people don’t feel discriminated against or left out. Were not as bad as you think we are, you just don’t want to try and see the situation from anyone elses point. There are so many reasons that gay marriage has not been legalized. One, is their a point where we as a government can say “ok enough”? If gay marriage is legalized, what about legalizing marriage between humans and their animals whom they say they love. If it’s love then what’s the problem right? Some people really do believe that they love their dogs, cats, pigs, horses, whatever! Should marriage be legalized for them? Is that the next step? What about bisexual couples? Should they be allowed to marry two people? Why not? Homosexuality may not be the perversion that religious people think it is, but it is a gateway to other things that it is lumped in with. If the government says yes to this, what will it have to say yes to next? I am not saying that homosexuality is perverse (although I’m sure you will say I am, go ahead make a few more accusations about a couple vague comments I’ve made) I’m done trying to prove my point on this. My purpose for my initial post was not to get into a debate. Lord knows I’ve debated this issue enough, I was merely saying that the way the author presented the article was offensive, and yes, ignorant. Whether anyone else agrees with me or not, it doesn’t matter, because almost everyone on this site is a liberal. Of course your not going to share my same views. However, the difference is I never called anyone ignorant, not the author, not a poster, no one. I never made personal attacks against anyone. Not homosexuals, not a poster, no one. I’m not the intolerant one here. I’m not the one trying to put others down. And I’m done debating with people who obviously don’t want to listen to anyone else. Despite the fact that you SAID you wanted to hear what I had to say, you don’t, it’s apparent, so I’m not wasting my time.

Asmi says:
Mon, 29th Jun 20091:58 pm 

Alex, I must say I LOVED your comment.

(And we all know why Casey isn't answering your questions.)

Casey says:
Mon, 29th Jun 20097:14 pm 

I forgot to comment on a couple other things

"You really show your ignorance when you ask if bisexuals should be able to marry to people, though. Bisexuals aren’t polygamists, and I really can’t stress how ignorant you are for saying that"

Oh really so my sister, who I already mentioned is bi, loves her husband, and her girlfriend, equally. That doesn't make her a polygamist? Another commenter on the site once commented on a post about dating a guy who had been with a man, and said that she had a boyfriend and a girlfriend. She's not a polygamist? Plenty of Bisexual people have both a boyfriend and a girlfriend. I think that's the definition of polygamy. I think that makes you the ignorant one.

"And for the last hospital bit, that’s not true at all. You don’t realize that civil unions aren’t a universal thing. They vary by state and the majority of states don’t have them. Don’t talk about shit you don’t know."

You don't have to be "civilly united" to have rights to see a loved one in the hospital. The person in the hospital can name any person they want, and the person doesn't have to be related AT ALL and the hospital personnel have to give them information and allow them to see the patient. It can be anyone the patient wants. It has nothing to do with civil unions AT ALL Maybe YOU shouldn't comment on things you don't know about.

Alex says:
Mon, 29th Jun 20099:32 pm 

Thanks Asmi.

I wasn’t going to reply, cause from what I saw from Caseys reply, she denied almost everything, but then I saw how I could further point out her flawed logic.

Casey, you say I don’t want to listen. That’s not true. It’s simply that I have seen that almost every point that opponents of equality bring up seem to somehow revolve around religion or the Bible, which our second amendment explicitly state should not occur. In case you didn’t know, Casey, that amendment says that no religion should be favored or promoted in this country, and that means that using the Bible for justification of denying AMERICANS rights is moot. You can’t legally do it. I also hear homosexuality is not natural- again, bull shit. Ask any zoologist and they’ll tell you how well documented it is. And then there is the whole WELL, CAN A MAN AND A MAN MAKE A BABY? NO! Well…neither can a sterile male or a barren female, but I know plenty who were allowed to fulfill their right to marry their loved ones. There’s also the whole thing where gay parents make gay babies. Then explain how gay parents were born in the first place. Another is that there has to be a male and female role model. Um, my mother is a single parent. Why wasn’t I taken away from her after my parents divorce? Should I have been? Casey, it’s not that I’m not willing to listen. It’s just that I can show how all of your points are irrelevant or flat out wrong.

I like how you say that since the majority of America believes same-sex marriage is wrong, it is. Well, I’m just going to use the obvious analogue to that in American history- slavery. The majority of American citizens believed, for around a hundred years, that African Americans didn’t deserve basic human rights. So, Casey, does that mean it was okay? Another one: womens suffrage. For a while, the majority of voters believed women shouldn’t have been able to vote. Did that make it right? Your logic is flawed.

“I know separate is not equal, but religious and legal marriages are not the same thing.”

We know that. Unless you haven’t been listening, we don’t care about your fucking churches. We don’t. Keep your safe houses of hatred, all we want is LEGAL MARRIAGE. NOBODY WANTS TO FORCE CHURCHES TO DO ANYTHING. So stop acting like it. You say that a marriage without God is meaningless. If so, why the hell do you care so much? Since gays don’t even want to be married in a place where they’re not welcome, and since it would be unconstitutional to force a church to marry a same-sex couple, the ‘holy’ marriages would stay completely Biblical, and gays and atheists and all the fellow heathens would just have STATE marriages. I honestly think you don’t even listen to half the shit we say. (You may have noticed I didn’t and won’t mention on my ‘personal assaults’ on you. I kinda feel that I don’t owe any justification to you when you attack a whole segment of the population and claim that they only want to marry for the legal benefits.

“I am sure most gay couples only want the right to get married so they can take advantage of the benefits.” That’s fucked up).

You say that you will vote for your beliefs- go for it. But I don’t understand how part of your beliefs is forcing your RELIGIOUS beliefs on the nation. Once again, I said how I believe that saying gods name (y-w-h) is against my religious beliefs, but I think anyone should be able to say it as much as they like. I distinguish between my religion and my secular beliefs. By the way, I already told you all of this and you still didn’t get it (or care about not forcing your religion on people, ya little fascista). That’s a thing that I hear people on the religious right say- secularists and atheists have no morals. Excuse me? Not only is that incorrect, it’s arrogant and just plain ignorant to think that only people who live by a book written millenia ago that preaches rape, genocide, and pillaging truly have morals. We have morals, we just don’t need a book to tell us what we are. We hold them self evident, they don’t need a magic book given from the big man upstairs as a reason to act a certain way. It’s just…known. You treat people well. You help your fellow man. You don’t force your religious beliefs on others who just want to live the way they want to that harms absolutely no one else. It’s simple.

What I really love though, is your bit about Obama. It’s so funny! I mean, it’s hilarious! You said, because he experienced prejudice, he is immune to it! HAHAHA! WHAT IS YOUR COLLEGE TEACHING YOU? That’s seriously the funniest thing I read all day. My great grandma was like, 84 when she died, and I always remember how racist she was. She would tell my mom “Clutch your purse, I see a *horrible word here* comin up”. It was really weird to me as a little kid why she hated black people. Know what, Case? She was in a concentration camp in Poland when she was little, and her sister died there (Remember, I’m a Jew). And you tell me that those who have been persecuted aren’t immune? Seriously, can you defend that statement you made? And for the last hospital bit, that’s not true at all. You don’t realize that civil unions aren’t a universal thing. They vary by state and the majority of states don’t have them. Don’t talk about shit you don’t know.

I was most disgusted by your last paragraph. It makes me sick that you compare a loving and consensual relationship between two adults to bestiality, which is NOT consensual is basically rape. You really show your ignorance when you ask if bisexuals should be able to marry to people, though. Bisexuals aren’t polygamists, and I really can’t stress how ignorant you are for saying that (and I really really want to know what college you attend, because I’m sad if you have actually been taught this).

“Homosexuality may not be the perversion that religious people think it is, but it is a gateway to other things that it is lumped in with.”

WTF? HOMOSEXUALITY IS A GATEWAY DRUG TO …. well you basically just say a bunch of unrelated practices. I’m not touching this.

And I love your last bit. You portray yourself quite the martyr my friend. But the thing is, you are ignorant. You advocate law based on Abrahamic beliefs, despite a vary key part of our constitution otherwise. You said that homosexuals probably just want legal benefits (which is true, advocates want equality, but it is FAR from that, and it’s kind of obvious because why wouldn’t gays marry when they’re 18 if there’s no love in it and just stay married their whole lives? No logic there). The last thing, I just want to say though is that you comment OVERWHELMINGLY on LGBT related posts. I’ve been reading this site for a while, because, well, it’s amazing, and I’ve noticed a poster named Casey always talking about gay marriage and I’m like “Why the fuck is she so obsessed with it, I mean, she’s not gay, it wouldn’t affect her.” But that ‘innocent initial post’ pissed me off so much that I just said “You know what, I think I’m going to expose her views for what they are: religiously motivated prejudice that she wants to force on the nation from a book that would say that it’s okay to rape.” And I did. And I think I did a good job at doing so. Because, like I said, you wouldn’t answer the majority of my questions. Because you couldn’t.

Great article by the way!

Casey says:
Mon, 29th Jun 200911:49 pm 

I’m not answering your questions, not because I can’t. But because you don’t deserve it. Because you’re an asshole, because you make personal attacks instead of being mature and rational. It bothers me so much because I have to live in this country to. And I have to see things that go against my beliefs. If I have children then they have to see things that go against our beliefs (if they choose to adopt my belief system) and I have every right to vote to keep things that I don’t agree with illegal.

You must have missed the parts where I said I am all for homosexual couples being granted EVERY SINGLE RIGHT that hetero couples are. I am not trying to discriminate against anyone; I’m not trying to take away rights that people SHOULD HAVE.

You say you’ve been on this site for awhile, so maybe you remember the poster that commented about nudists, how they are not allowed to walk around nude everywhere just because it’s how they live. Nudists are a minority. Should they be allowed to walk around nude everywhere? Why not?

Perhaps you also remember the comment about music genres? Hip-hop and country music are not the same things, they’re not called the same things, they have different names, but they are both music. A relationship between a man and a man is not the same as a relationship between a man and a woman. So why should we call it the same thing? They are different things. But they are both love.

My views aren’t all religiously motivated. And most of the accusations you made about me in your comments you completely made up, and are in no way how I think. You think you did a good job “exposing me”? Not at all! You did a good job being a conniving prick who likes to twist people’s comments to fabricate some horrible perception of people who believe differently than you.

Your historical analogy of slavery is irrelevant in this conversation, I never once said that homosexuals didn’t deserve all the rights that hetero couples have (a point that you seem to have missed OVER AND OVER AND OVER!) So I don’t even know why you are bringing this up.

And again you skewed my comments. I didn’t say churches should be forced to marry homosexual couples, because you can’t force a church to do anything, separation of church and state guarantees that. That was not the point of my comment. But of course you saw another opening to twist my words. This is what I said, “the law and marriage should not go hand in hand. I know separate is not equal, but religious and legal marriages are not the same thing. Church’s do not have to perform ceremonies for “religious homosexuals” but the law SHOULD provide them with all the benefits they deserve.” My point was that even though churchs will not perform these ceremonies, the law should provide homosexuals with the same benefits. You have taken so many of my points that are FOR HOMOSEXUALITY and twisted them to be ignorant and prejudiced. Like I said, you don’t want to hear what I have to say, you want to argue and make me into the bad guy, no matter what I say. Can you say arrogant prick?

“Since gays don’t even want to be married in a place where they’re not welcome” What happened to all of those religious gay couples that you were talking about? I think you’re contradicting yourself.

“I don’t owe any justification to you when you attack a whole segment of the population and claim that they only want to marry for the legal benefits.”
I didn’t attack anyone, As I have said, I’m all for granting them every single right that hetero couples get. And I don’t believe that all they want is legal benefits. I understand the whole “we love each other and want to prove it” aspect. But can they prove it with another ceremony, that grants all the same benefits. Not a “separate, but equal” situation, but a “this is something entirely different so it needs to be called something different” situation. Do you people not see that aspect? No, of course you don’t.

““I am sure most gay couples only want the right to get married so they can take advantage of the benefits.” That’s fucked up.) Is that not what you’re arguing for? I said most, not all. Let’s be logical here, why else, if not to receive the benefits, do they want to get married, like I said I understand the whole proving your love aspect, but they can do that with their very own state recognized ceremonies. It doesn’t have to be called marriage, because it’s not the same thing. But “marriage” is just a word! To who? Homosexuals? Then they can calls theirs something else if all it is is a word.

“secularists and atheists have no morals. Excuse me? Not only is that incorrect, it’s arrogant and just plain ignorant to think that only people who live by a book written millenia ago that preaches rape, genocide, and pillaging truly have morals. We have morals, we just don’t need a book to tell us what we are. We hold them self evident, they don’t need a magic book given from the big man upstairs as a reason to act a certain way. It’s just…known. You treat people well. You help your fellow man. You don’t force your religious beliefs on others who just want to live the way they want to that harms absolutely no one else. It’s simple.”

Umm excuse me? Where is this coming from? Did I say anything about non-religious people not having morals? NEVER! Can you get your fucking arguments straight! I don’t like being yelled at for shit that I DON’T BELIEVE AND HAVE NEVER IN MY ENTIRE LIFE SAID OR THOUGHT! OBVIOUSLY YOU’RE NOT TRYING TO HAVE A MAURE ARGUMENT WITH ME YOU’RE TRYING TO YELL AT ME FOR EVERY PREJUDICED THING ANYONE HAS EVER THOUGHT! GET YOUR FUCKING ARGUMENTS STRAIGHT ASSHOLE!

I brought up the bestiality point because it is relevant. Whether you’re sickened by it or not. To those people it’s not rape, people who partake in acts of bestiality actually believe that they love the animal and that the animal loves them back. I have known people who are in love with their animal. Did their animal seem to love them back? Yes, they did. Do I think it’s completely disgusting as well? Of course! But try to tell them that. There are entire communities devoted to making people understand bestiality. Read an online bestiality forum, those people do not believe they are raping their animals. In fact a lot of them say the animals come onto them first. You want to discriminate against them. They don’t believe it’s wrong. But the law says it is. Perhaps those people have a mental disorder. Well that’s what people thought about homosexuals for a long time to. The gateway comment was not that people who are homosexual will want to partake in acts of bestiality, it was meant as if we legalize gay marriage it will open the door for many other things that yes, even homosexuals, think is wrong. (it’s a gateway to legalizing other practices.) Do you just not read thoroughly? Because you have skewed so many of my points or just missed them entirely!

“which is true, advocates want equality, but it is FAR from that, and it’s kind of obvious because why wouldn’t gays marry when they’re 18 if there’s no love in it and just stay married their whole lives? No logic there).” This doesn’t even make any sense.

Of course homosexuals want equality, and I am all for giving it to them. I never denied that. But go ahead, pick out some more quotes from my comments to warp and twist to fit your little tirade of completely false and inaccurate accusations. I’m actually enjoying reading them now, and laughing at all the ridiculous things you are putting in my mouth.

Joe the Drunk says:
Tue, 30th Jun 20097:50 am 

to the editors: what the hell is this shyt? dumbass arguments, ad hominem attacks – who cares? why do you allow these stupid comments but delete mine about having hot sex with hotties in sexy stockings? what's more important here? you need to get back in touch with your subscriber base.

- Joe

Sarabeth - Universit says:
Tue, 30th Jun 20091:28 pm 

all i can say to this is Boof! TLDR!

sharon morales says:
Tue, 30th Jun 20091:59 pm 

Plenty of straight people have more that one girlfriend/boyfriend as well.. Why do you feel the need to point out what bisexual people are doing? I believe that they are much more evolved than you or iI .. they can truly say that they love someone for who they are and look past their anatomy. Perhaps the reason that bothers you is because you haven't come to terms with your sisters lifestyle choice.

As for marriage meaning nothing to people who aren't religious .. to many people it is a symbol of their everlasting love that has nothing to do with God. Its proclaiming to the world that the you would do anything for the person you are married to.

As a high school student i have heard many ignorant and idiotic comments made by my peers but comparing bestiality to homosexuality takes the cake. Congratulations .

Becca- Clarion Unive says:
Wed, 1st Jul 20095:15 am 

also casey, Just as an FYI, I'm fairly certain that polygamy is defined as "the practice of multiple marriages" so unless she's married to both her husband and girlfriend, she is not a polygamist…. just saying.

Casey says:
Wed, 1st Jul 20098:12 am 

Becca, umm that was the basis of my premise. Should bisexuals be allowed to marry two people, since they romantically love both men and women? No my sister is not also married to her girlfriend, cause it's illegal, but she loves her too. So why shouldn't she be allowed to marry her as well? Because it's illegal. Well, probably not for much longer the way things are headed.

Random says:
Wed, 1st Jul 20098:37 pm 

Honestly, I don't think everyone should be attacking Casey- her beliefs and her choices are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and that's what makes our country so great is because everyone can express their own thoughts and feelings on whatever subject (somewhat). As well as Casey is not a horrible person, she is just trying to express her own point of view and there is no reason to deny her beliefs because they are hers.

Alex, you've made extremely good points but the bashing Casey extensively is sad. The problem is not with Casey and you should understand that (since beliefs are implanted). The bashing from both sides is ridiculous because both of you guys will never obtain what you want from each other.

And right now, the law is that homosexuals cannot be married (it hopefully will change soon though, because the fact of the matter is that the only reason why its restricted now is because of fear. Fear of what may happen as the after-math of granting this right. Though once the fear is cleared up, people will begin to realize that allowing gays to marry will only allow them to show how much the couple loves one another. Then the air will clear up but until then, everyone just needs to look beyond their own beliefs and see what the actual facts of granting gay marriage will have. As well as think about those who are actually****(homosexuals and loved ones) directly affected by this law.).

And, the article was good just maybe should have been thought out more ~ haha

uh... says:
Fri, 3rd Jul 200911:26 pm 

yeah, the 2nd amendment totally gives casey the right to be opinionated…i mean, the right to bear arms definitely comes into play here. REALLY? come on.

S says:
Sun, 5th Jul 20099:30 am 

I agree with Random, everyone is allowed to have their opinions and Casey hasn't been personally attacking anyone. I was born in a different country and over there people are generally less tolerating of homosexuality. in my mind, marriage is between a man and a woman but at the same time i'm fine with gay marriage being legal and it is where i live (canada). i haven't voted on the issue but regardless, i don't think casey is a horrible person for having her own beliefs. i think more people should have their own values (not on the topic of homosexuality but in general).

itsnotaboutme says:
Sun, 5th Jul 20096:52 pm 

I think arguments about this kind of thing are pointless. Here's why:

1. People have different bases for their beliefs. To argue about whose belief is right is pointless if their core beliefs and morals differ. For example: Let's say Bill likes cake, while Joe likes french fries. It would be pointless for them to argue whether icing or ketchup were better, since they are putting it in different contexts. No better are your attempts to reconcile (if that's what you're really trying to do) your beliefs on a specific issue, while you can barely agree on much broader topics.

2. You're not going to agree. This is why we take a majority vote, and not a unanimous one. If everyone were required to agree, no governmental system could function. So we're going to have our differences. We can deal with it peacefully and maturely, or we can yell at each other over the internet.

3. Politics is not the greatest achievement of man's thought and reason. It's not perfect, and don't try to act like it could be. As a race, man is fallible, to the end. Laws will always be a means to get a fellow man to conform to one's own standards.

I don't believe this, but if I said that I really believed that the founders of our country were wrong when they built into the Bill of Rights things like free speech, voting, pursuit of happiness, etc., how would you argue? You say man is advancing, but what if I think freedom is evil? I do not subscribe to these claims, but how would you deal with a group who did? Can you justify forcing your beliefs on them?

My problem with these arguments is that absolute truth (and I do believe there are absolute, universal truths) is slippery. We always see things through our own experiential lenses, distorting our perception of truth. We may approach it, but rarely is it ever found. Therefore, we must be convicted of our beliefs, stand for them, and advocate them, but bickering about it is no way to improve anyone's well-being. So if you have an opinion, you may state it, but this quibbling and endless debating is tasteless, and shows a lack of maturity.

Also, to clarify, that's the First Amendment that contains the establishment clause.

Marriageequalsuniono says:
Sun, 12th Jul 20095:04 am 

As my name says, marriage is the legal union of a man and a woman. If you want to change the definition of marriage to simply be the union of a two people, then you may as well let people marry rocks. Marriage would simply be the legal union of two entities to share legal benefits, monetary benefits, and whatever else…

Having said that, I would not stop those people from being legally bound in the same manner married people are, I simply object to them referring to it by an incorrect term. They are free to do what they want, that is their right, but its insane to bend the mechanics of the English language to encompass their behavior.

Alex says:
Sun, 12th Jul 20099:49 am 

Ugh, do you REALLY think marriage has been the same throughout history? No, it's changed a million times as anyone who has opened a book can tell you.

In this country, it has changed. Originally, blacks couldn't get married, and the people of that time cited the Curse of Ham as reasons for why our favorite imaginary friend would hate a marriage between them. Then, it was illegal to marry between races, again, using the Bible as an excuse (God created the separate races, let them remain such).

And PLEASE, do not use language as a front for your prejudice. Any linguist will tell you that languages aren't set in stone. If they were, French, Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians, and Romanians would still be speaking Italian. We would still be speaking Old English, and Arabic and Hebrew would be the same. Languages are in a constant state of change, ESPECIALLY in regard to semantics (meanings and connotations). That is actually one of the FIRST things that usually changes. Don't you dare use language as a front, it makes no sense at all.

Sharz says:
Fri, 17th Jul 20099:56 pm 

Wow this article is so true!!!!! they are cheapening marriage through a game show!!!!! Ugh!!! But I don't understand its connections with gay marriages??? I have a lot of gay friends and I love them to death,but do not at all believe in what they are doing, I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman,but wait a second marriage is nothing to America, they have freaken 2 day marriages,lets get to the nitty gritty, i believe sex should be between a man and a woman!!!!! I'm not being judgmental, I'm not being cruel to someone else's feeling and all that crap…I'm being real sex was made for a man and a woman, our bodies prove that point,as a woman has one hole in her body made perfectly for a man and eventually a baby! That's nature proving my point! there's really no other argument past this men and men and woman and woman just weren't made for each other…..They can have healthy loving relationships, but they don't HAVE to have sex. One more thing all things like marriage and family were cheapened when people decided to have sex outside of marriage and family, so that T.v show just made it more mainstream….yea I think im gonna go to sleep now

bookworm says:
Sat, 18th Jul 20098:37 am 

Both Casey and Alex have points in their arguments and it would be best to come to an understanding. You both have different beliefs on a subject. No amount of arguing who or what is right or wrong is going to change your opinions. The topic of gay marriage is such popular and passionate topic because the world is full of so many individuals now, who all should have a right to their opinions and beliefs. We can try to change different veiws, but most of the time, it won't work, and will be harmful. Trying to change a staunch Catholics beliefs on Gay marriage is about as useless as an ex-Gay camp most of the time. This debate is just evolving into nonsense, personal attacks, and far-fetched statements based on whatever is running through peoples' heads when they write.

Alex, I defend your right to speak your mind. I myself am a huge advocate of gay marriage. In the state. I believe churches and other religious groups must come to their own decisions on whether or not that is right of wrong. Those beliefs should affect those people of those religions, and not anyone else. Seperation of church and state is important in America.

Casey, though I do not agree with all of you opinions, you also deserve a chance to speak and give valid points on your side of the argument. You simply have been raised with different views and opinions then Alex. You both equally deserve a right to free speach.

So the argument is important. Even if we cannot change someone else's beleifs, it is good to try and make them understand OUR veiw and reasonging. Even if none of us like it. This argument should be talked about, online, in person, in politics. But it should never lead to personal attacks, word twisting in any manner, and nonsense. If we're going to have a rousing debate about such a hot topic, let's do it right. Okay?

venomxbrothers says:
Mon, 20th Jul 20093:52 pm 

Haha, interesting debate going on in your comments. Oh wait did I say interesting? More like pointless…you think they could at least take the argument somewhere else, but whatever I suppose its not that big a deal.

I loved the article! I think you're right…even if I don't think the people who are worried about ruining the sanctity of marriage are the same people watching these shows, you still can't argue to keep something that we as a country have thrown out long ago…but try telling THEM that, haha…