Today same sex mrg go to supreme court.

[Beja]

The definition of marriage belongs to humanity, and any efforts by any group to redefine something that's been already defined, specified and practiced by humanity for millenniums, is trespassing and intrusion to the property of someone else, and can only be redefined, if it had to, in open referendum by all people, not by special politically motivated groups.. therefore, I urge respected Justices in the US Supreme Court to declare they have no jurisdiction on this matter, and recommend to return to the American people to decide on it.

p.s.
I am not against gays and lesbians rights, and believe every individual has the right to do whatever they want with themselves.

 

[derez]

return to the American people to decide on it

Not by Erel ?

 

[Beja]

Sorry, not getting it..

 

[lemonisdead]

Me neither, dear Beja

 

[Troberg]

Marriage has been redefined over and over throughout history. Variants like polygamy, child marriage, arranged marriages, political marriages, forced marriages, concubines and so on has come and, in most cases gone. It's not long ago that interracial marriage was considered illegal in some countries. It will continue to be redefined, change is the only constant in nature.

As far as I see it, marriage is just a formal commitment of love between two persons. In that definition, gender seems unimportant.

 

[Beja]

Marriage has been redefined over and over throughout history. Variants like polygamy, child marriage, arranged marriages, political marriages, forced marriages, concubines and so on has come and, in most cases gone. It's not long ago that interracial marriage was considered illegal in some countries.

All of the above were between a man and a woman.
This is the universal definition of marriage I am talking about.

I am not talking about the right and wrong of same sex relationships.. but about political parties who want to re-define marriage without authority. I am also ok with them naming their relationship a marriage, but against politicians, who out of greed of the votes of GL community they want to give them what they (politicians) don't have. Besides the recognition of same sex marriage is against the preservation of the environment. If this concept had momentum and attracted more copy-cats, with this kind of encouragement and support from greedy and ignorant politicians who don't see further than their noses, then the chain of life will brake and human race will vanish from the face of this planet.. this is what I mean by it is against the environment.

We did not support and elect politicians in order to tell us what marriage is.

 

[Troberg]

Not all those examples were between a man and a woman. There are several examples of a man and several women, or a woman and several men. Some ancient cultures held the love between men as the most pure.

Also, marriage is, today, a legal construct. As such, it is within the authority od the legislators to redefine it.

As for the human race vanishing, you'll have to realize that preference is not learned. The gays don't learn to be gay, it's genetic, just like I couldn't be taught to be gay, as I am a genetic heterosexual. So, it won't affect the numbers either way.

But, bottom line, for me, is that I can't let my preferences dictate the lives of others. I'm pretty much a "people can swing their fists around as long as they stop before it reaches my nose"-guy. What other people do in the privacy of their home or how they define their relationship does not hit my nose.

I can also speak from experience. Sweden has allowed same sex marriage for a long time now, and was one of the first countries to do so, and it hasn't have any negative impact on society so far. If anything, it has increased tolerance and reduced discrimination and attacks on gays.

Also, I don't know how much you know about Swedish politics, but you might recognize my name. That's because my sister, up until a couple of months ago, was the first openly homosexual party leader of a major Swedish political party. So, let's just say that I have some insight into the issues involved.

 

[WAZUMBi]

Wow this is deep...

I am now giving seconds thought as to what the exact definition of "Boolean" really is.

define("FEMALE", 0);
define("MALE", 1);

if($var == FEMALE)
{
    //Uh? What happens now?
}
elseif($var == MALE)
{
    //I'm so confused
}

"However your Twinkie swings"...

As I always say.

 

[Troberg]

Well, I've seen quite a few examples of booleans redefined as True, False and Exception...

 

[Beja]

Troberg, will get back to you soon.

@WAZUMBi

"define("FEMALE", 0);
define("MALE", 1);"

(Hypothetical)
Don't you think this is kind of discrimination?

and this is segregation:

I hope the discussion is not deviated.. the issue is (marriage definition) and nothing else..