Gay Marriage for it or against it.

[union]

and who says democracy is anything buy tyranny of the majority? If 51% vote to kill the other of 49%, hey that's democracy in a nutshell.

American democracy was founded on the notion of majority rules and minority rights, with certain unalienable rights being drafted into the Constitution itself as the Bill of Rights. For over 200 years of democracy, the US has shown a commitment to this ideal and has steadily expanded rights to all previously disenfranchised groups. I don't see why that would change now.

In the state of Washington Gays have all the same rights as heterosexual couples. The only thing that they don't have is the right to redefine marriage.

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

[Shirib]

As a muslim I believe marriage consists of Man and Woman. But as an American, I couldn't care less. So how should I vote?

Are you really have a conflict as what you should do as a Muslim and an American?

[Shirib]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

The state (humans) do and it can be changed. That's why the referendum is on the ballot.

[ElfRuler]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

Why should a Secular State decide what marriage is?

[union]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

The state (humans) do and it can be changed. That's why the referendum is on the ballot.

You just said they "don't have the right to redefine marriage". Obviously by being able to place this referendum on the ballot, they do.

[Based]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

Why should a Secular State decide what marriage is?

Because the institution of marriage in this country confers benefits that are currently denied to a group of people.

[Shirib]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

The state (humans) do and it can be changed. That's why the referendum is on the ballot.

You just said they "don't have the right to redefine marriage". Obviously by being able to place this referendum on the ballot, they do.

my bad, i miss stated what I meant, I meant to say the only right they don't have is to call their union a marriage. It will change if the referendum passes.

[Alphanumeric]

Waiting for the day when they start voting on whether or not another place of worship can be built.

Let em. It ain't my bed they'll be doing it in. Though as a Canadian, this is a non-issue.

Only concern to raise is if culture should be taught in school. Family dynamics shouldn't be part of education. Remove it entirely, I say. Stick with the biology of it all.

[original dervish]

I feel like throwing up when folk refer to "American democracy".
Its like believing in santa claus. You should have grown out of that nonsense years ago.
There is no democracy anywhere in Amerika.

[ElfRuler]

Who defines marriage? Humans right? We can change our definitions, they're not written in stone.
If you say god in the bible/other holy book, well then that argument cannot hold water in a secular state.

Why should a Secular State decide what marriage is?

Because the institution of marriage in this country confers benefits that are currently denied to a group of people.

Those group of people do not meet the historically established requisite standards of what constitutes a marriage.

[Alphanumeric]

Remove marriage benefits. That's discrimination against single individuals.

Or level it out by spreading the good.

[Based]

Those group of people do not meet the historically established requisite standards of what constitutes a marriage.

Standards no doubt based on cultural and religious beliefs that are wholly subjective.

A government shouldn't grant benefits and preferential treatment to one set of people based on the aforementioned "standards" and deny the same benefits to a different group in a democratic state that professes to be "free" and "egalitarian".

[Shirib]

Remove marriage benefits. That's discrimination against single individuals.

Or level it out by spreading the good.

In the state that the topic starter is from, Gays have every right, except to call their union a marriage.

[ElfRuler]

Those group of people do not meet the historically established requisite standards of what constitutes a marriage.

Standards no doubt based on cultural and religious beliefs that are wholly subjective.

A government shouldn't grant benefits and preferential treatment to one set of people based on the aforementioned "standards" and deny the same benefits to a different group in a democratic state that professes to be "free" and "egalitarian".

Secularism is subjective as well.

Governments always grant benefits and certain opportunities to particular individuals who meet the established criteria. Not everyone has access to medicare, financial aid, free housing, social security benefits, and not everyone has access to military benefits.

[afisoone]

This is how you stopped gays.. funny..