09-02-2004 12:30									#1
	Is making gay marriage illegal censoring relationships? Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ben says no, I say yes.

Discuss.

	09-02-2004 13:02									#2
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

No, a relationship does not have to be a marriage.

	09-02-2004 13:05									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I don't recall the statement saying censoring all relationships.

	09-02-2004 13:06									#4
	Suffering from ads?

Ben is right.

	09-02-2004 13:12									#5
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Is marriage a type of relationship?

So how is prohibiting certain people from entering these types of relationships not censoring?

	09-02-2004 13:13									#6
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Marriage is just a legal thing.

I know some gay and lesbian friends who got married just for the legal benefits. They don't live together, sleep together, etc. Just, they count as married.

	09-02-2004 13:14									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

If marriage was just a legal thing, why do religious groups get up in arms in extending it to gay couples?

	09-02-2004 13:17									#8
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Because they are stupid. Why does anyone make a big fuss about something that has nothing to do with them?

	09-02-2004 13:17									#9
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

BTW, am I the only one who's suspicious about the usage of the word "censor" in this manner?

	09-02-2004 13:19									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten BTW, am I the only one who's suspicious about the usage of the word "censor" in this manner?

It came up because I said Ben was being a tad bit hypocritical because he criticized the government for stepping in to censor language, while at the same time actively promoting the idea of censoring certain types of relationships.

	09-02-2004 13:33									#11
	Remove this text

Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. The government could call a relationship between two men a marriage, but that wouldn't make them married.

Of course, we still ought not to deprive them of legal rights such as inheritance and hospital visits, so there should be civil unions.

	09-02-2004 13:53									#12
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. The government could call a relationship between two men a marriage, but that wouldn't make them married. Of course, we still ought not to deprive them of legal rights such as inheritance and hospital visits, so there should be civil unions.

Well said.

	09-02-2004 14:00									#13
	Remove this text

I believe your original statement added a few qualifiers.

1. consensual

2. adult

Now, if I am not correct, by your own definition, you censor certain relationships, and allow others.

How is this consistent?

	09-02-2004 14:05									#14
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

OMG! Slavery is illegal therefore the concept of private property has been undermined! Run for the hills and join the militia!

Ben, do us a favour. Slap yourself before you post on these topics. Seeming to think that involuntary relationships involving minors is a good thing to argue makes you look like less than a fool.

	09-02-2004 14:08									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Seeming to think that involuntary relationships involving minors is a good thing to argue

Please re-read my post.

Show me where I advocate relationships with minors as a good thing?

	09-02-2004 14:14									#16
	Got spare money?

My webster's defines marriage as the union between a man and a woman so it can't be changed.

Wait, english is not a dead language and American law is not set in stone so let gays celebrate their love and desire for one another.

P.S. I've been married twice. nothing like it. IT SUCKS, so gays be careful what you wish for!!!

	09-02-2004 14:27									#17
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Please re-read my post. Show me where I advocate relationships with minors as a good thing?

Ben, slap yourself. I'm not the only one who is going to read it that way. And I am past giving a **** to read between your sophisticratic lines.

You are defending crap by posting crap.

Get the hell out of everyone elses' lives and be happy with the small corner of reality that you will be allowed to impose your morals on, that being yourself, your family, and your own Church.

	09-02-2004 14:38									#18
	Put an end to popups!

I don't like the word censor.
Minors do not have the same rights as adults.
they have to be protected until the little chickies can fly far far away so i can walk around the house naked and don't have to hide my porn.

	09-02-2004 14:44									#19
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I'm not the only one who is going to read it that way.

You need some sleep. Irritable tigers do not post well.

	09-02-2004 14:47									#20
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Marriage is a state of consciousness between two people that transcends physical reality.
Such is not dependant on the location of sexual organs.

	09-02-2004 16:40									#21
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

It is dependent upon the total number of sexual organs, however, so tough luck for you and all your Joseph Smith loving comrades.

	09-02-2004 16:47									#22
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Depending on how you interpet the grammar of the topic's question, the answer is either a resounding YES or a resounding NO.

YES, the ban of gay marriage forbits a type of relationship, that is, a homosexual relationships within the frame of marriage.

NO, the ban of gay marriage doesn't forbit all kinds of relationships, not even all kinds of homosexual relationships.

Gosh, I fail to see the use of such an obvious question.

	09-02-2004 19:42									#23
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. The government could call a relationship between two men a marriage, but that wouldn't make them married. Of course, we still ought not to deprive them of legal rights such as inheritance and hospital visits, so there should be civil unions.

I agree -- since marriage is still such a strong cultural/social construct that can only acknowledge it being between a man and a woman, the only real chance is legal recognition of civil unions.

	09-02-2004 20:03									#24
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I concur. I don't care what they (the governemnt) call it - I just demand the same legal rights for my partner and I that that other Americans in a "relationship" (ie, marriage) enjoy.

	09-02-2004 20:15									#25
	Inflate your Upload Space

Whoa -- where have you been hiding, Wittlich?

	09-02-2004 20:24									#26
	Put an end to popups!

Busy with college...as a matter of fact, time for me to take off to classes...

	09-02-2004 20:39									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Since when must marriage be between one man and one woman? Traditional marriage included polygamy, and in a few places polyandry.

The definition of marriage as one man and one woman is a modern one that excludes some real traditional ways- and this evolution of the term can continue- for example, now people think for marriage you need a romantic couple- while through most of history two families would arrange who got whom regardless of the feelings of the participants, and not only rings, but actual money and goods had to be traded as well by families.

IN fact, if anyone deserves to get the blame for the "possiblity" of gay marriage it is the people who took marriage out of the realm of contracts and put it in the realm of a "romantic" relation between two human beings (as opposed to a joining of bloodlines with economic [and perhaps political] connotations for the participants) that love each other.

The government could say "marriage is a contract to join bloodlines and any joining that can not lead to children being created does not count as marriage". The state is less able to justify saying "marriage is between two people who love each other- but only of different sexes".

	09-02-2004 20:41									#28
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I agree GePap -- as I already stated, it's a modern social/cultural construct that we're not likely to change anytime soon, so civil union is the way to go.

	09-02-2004 20:55									#29
	Increase Your PM Length

Who the **** cares?

Wasn't it 10 years ago that we had a big flap over gays in the military- apparently only guys who like snatch can kill and be killed.

10 years ago- Gays want the right to be shot to death.

Today- Gays want the right to be nagged to death.

Just give it to 'em; they'll learn from their mistakes eventually.

	09-02-2004 20:56									#30
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Geez, Theben -- are you cranky because you didn't have your coffee this morning??