I agree that there are people in this country that need their civil rights but this topic is about a great occasion in NY. All I'm saying is that it's not the point of this thread to bring up how people can't marry their cousins or sisters or even a few of their sisters.

_________________

Not as much a rant about government as much as it is a lament of our acceptance of government prescribed morality.

but carry on.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Okay Cross. Okay. Anyone else that jumps in on this board with some random shitty rant gets a talking to from the mods but we're used to your special situation. Sorry mon Capitan.

_________________

From the other thread...

Me-
Mine is not a slippery slope argument. I don't suppose that there would be an increase or increase in demand for other marriage arrangements after same-sex marriage. I simply state that the same logic used to justify and sanction same-sex marriage would do the same for these other types of marriages. Whether or not a supposed majority of people agree or not is far from the point. By all logic and fairness and equality, anyone that wilfully wishes to marry anyone else in any number of partnerships should be able to do so and be recognized by the state.
To deny that is to deny all other willing partnerships the same way same-sex partnerships have been denied.

DP-
I agree with your point 100%. The majority of people think incest and multi-spouse marriages are a no no but in the terms of what people are comfortable with, how many degrees are they from gay marriage or interracial couples? When it comes to human on human marital agreements I think Uncle Sam needs to get the fuck out of the conversation unless they want to investigate fraud, criminal or citizenship rights. Religious opinion is afforded a place in hundreds of thousands of tax free buildings so stay the fuck off the public lawn please.

Now DP, you're all bent about my point and think it's off topic...uh...ok.

Really?
That qualifies as a rant?

/and for the record, the mods around here do precious little to stifle debate one way or the other. And that's the way it should be.
//getting tired of that argument

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

I'm not "bent" about your point at all, I just think it's off topic. Did I say I disagreed with you? Nope.

_________________

Whatever mows your lawn man. I have been a member of this community for a long time and have seen people get talked to time and time again for going off topic. It's common. Usually a mod will chime in with a simple "Please stay on topic guys" or a gentle "relax and stop picking fights." It happens all the time except when you are involved for obvious reasons. We all know and at this point realize its just the way things are here. Moving on.

_________________

Ok DF, but both topics are under the same big issue of marriage equality. It's not like I started talking about surfing. If anything got this thread off topic, it was your complaining that did so.

Okay man. It's me baby, not you.

This is not "under the same big issue of marriage equality" as it pertains to marrying your cousin, marrying the cheer leading team or fucking a goat. It's about NY finally realizing that the old christian dogma can't run their policies on gay marriage. But fuck it. Have fun. I won't bother you anymore or worry about the bitching that is taking place in pm's about this. You're right, you did nothing wrong.

_________________

Oh ok, I'll start to give a really big crap about what people are saying in PMs. If it's that important they can post it. Besides, if this is somehow raining on your big celebration for the day, you're in the wrong place to begin with.

I didn't say you should care about the pm's, I'm simply saying that more people than myself are annoyed. But moving on. Let's get back to the point.

The Church says that homosexuality is bad based on literal translations that ignore the same being said about eating shell fish, planting two different types of seeds in the same hole and wearing wool with cotton. It's about time NY realizes that ancient stories shouldn't run policy making. So like CV said, congrats NY for coming out of the dark ages!

_________________

which?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Well the church doesn't influence my thoughts. I adhere to logic, and when I see flawed logic I address it. The most logical answer to this issue is to either sanction any/all marriage arrangements, or have the state out of the equation all together. Everyone should have an opportunity for a civil union for legal benefits, and then take the extra step of a religiously approved "marriage" if they desire, for ceremonious purposes only.

The Anglican faiths with exception of the Episcopal Church to a large degree. Not to be too broad let me clarify by saying that the faiths that adhere to a literal biblical tradition in regards to homosexual entries. Any faith that takes it upon themselves to judge sinners instead of leaving it to God.

_________________

I was pretty excited when the church my parents used to attend made the decision to wed gays were it to become legal (this was probably 3-4 years ago). Not excited enough to make me return, but a good move by them.

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

just for clarification, most of the Church of England, to my knowledge, accepts homosexual marriage, with the exceptions being the Anglo-Catholics

_________________
PSA: I am an overly sarcastic person. If you take me at my word, then i will most likely anger and offend you.