jumpergirl

Your paddle or mine? 'Cause I'm bringing mine.

[replyBut what makes YOUR definition the right one and not theirs? I never said it was right... or wrong. My very first sentance in the very first post says, "I'm sure I will be flamed for my thoughts, but so what." Ah-hem... MY THOUGHTS. I agree it is a very slippery slope. You can't give one group one set of rules and another group another set. That was my original argument. But, seeing what you, and others, have said about MJ marrying Bubbles or a man marrying his mother, or whatever, makes me wonder how that would ever work. But, for the record, if it ever comes up in a vote, I will be voting yes, it should be allowed. If one of my gay friends asked for my support, they already have it. This thread has been highly entertaining and informative. I've learned things and have been able to see how people react to a question. Thanks everyone for that - even those that feel totally opposite of how I do.

Point taken.

Yep and they have said it is between a MAN AND A WOMAN. WHY!?!?!? Because a book supposedly says so!? If the Bible can be translated so many times, and can be made to fit into whatever beliefs this religion has, or whtever that religion wants it to say, then how do we even know what it really says? WE DON'T. God wants us to be HAPPY!! Why is THAT so damn difficult to understand?? I am not religious. I consider myself agnostic. I have my own beliefs and thoughts. But the overall thing is GOD WANTS US TO BE HAPPY. I do not believe in Hell. We live in Hell here on Earth. I can't imagine what it must be like to love someone else with allo f your heart and want to be with them and spend your life loving them, and not be recognized for it, while the couple who live next door and want the same exact thing for themselves are recognized, celebrated, and encouraged for it. Oh wait, yes, I can imagine it. That must be HELL. **Ron, that was not a direct reply to YOU**

Why not three people? If you are going to create or change the definition, why not have it possible to marry several people as long as it makes them happy? And there IS a religious precident. I see your point. I do agree there are SOME "regulations" (for lack of a better word) that need to be adhered to regarding marriage. ie. relatives can't marry, must be between 2 people, must be X age, blah blah blah. My arguement is PEOPLE are PEOPLE and we should all deserve and GET the same treatment, rights, benefits, and respect.

Why not? Because "marriage" is MAN and WOMAN? Marriage is LOVE between two PEOPLE regardless of their sex or race. Period.

I realize that... but you can get an extra FROM me.

I think that's a great idea... extra from you for that comment, extra from me for another comment in another thread.

Your paddle or mine? 'Cause I'm bringing mine.

That's exactly my point. I didn't ask my questions looking for religious arguments against it. You're right, "The issue here is with the gov't and civil unions."

Well since we aren't in the office doing the paper work, we have no idea. I'm sorry I won't met you at SkyFest. I'm sure our paths will cross some day

Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. That's exactly what I was looking for.

I didn't take your post as a put down for SkyFest at all.

I've always wondered this myself... AndyMan and I had a civil ceremony with a justice of the peace. We're not religious in the slightest bit. I guess we're not really married--we're civilly united. Silly semantics! Well, that was my point. I've been married 3 times. (I know... WTF? ) The first time was with a preacher. Second was with a notary. Third was with a JP. Does that mean the last 2 weren't "real?" If that's the case, I'd lke that!

Okay, so the people that put WFFC together, shouldn't make any money? Of course they should make money. That's the idea of a lot of events (skydiving or not) right? But his refernce to SkyFest is (I believe - Bob please correct me if I'm wrong about your meaning) that SkyFest makes very little money then turns around and GIVE IT BACK to the skydivers in the form of the scholarships. Nothing goes into pockets. It's all about fun, safety, and paying it skyward. THIS explains it best, and what SkyFest is all about.

DUUUB-LINN!! DUUUB-LINN!! DUUUB-LINN!! I haven't been around long enough to deduce a real reason. Last year I didn't go because I was still a homebody as a jumper, and NONE of my friends were going. I do know that in nature, when the big fat lions get lazy, the young hungry ones are always there to grab the meat. OOoohhhh... you will be punished for that.

I never said, nor did I think, you are opposed to it. I truly appreciate your thoughts and views on the whole thing. I do think marriage is religious, but not religion. That brings up another question for me though. If marriage is religious, what about those that are not married in a church? What about the ones who go to the JP at the courthouse or are married by a notary? Are those marriages not "counted" because they aren't done in a church and aren't religious? How are those marraiges any different than a gay couple going to the courthouse?

He answered that. He does not support gay marriage and as a business owner if homosexual marriage is allowed he can either: 1. Be forced to give partner benefits to homosexual companies against his wishes. 2. Cut benefits to all spouses. Then maybe that's not the answer I was looking for. He said "as a taxpayer and as a small business owner i do not want to give them health benefits because of a farce mariage." When I read "farce marriage" I immediately thought of people who marry just to get the insurance benefits or a green card or are claiming "common law", not 2 people getting married because they love each other and want to spend their lives together (gay or not). If it is a legal marriage and he (or anyone) offers benefits to their employees and the employee's spouses, then it should be offered or denied to ALL employees, not just the gay ones. If he doesn't want to offer benefits to homosexual couples, don't, but you can't pick and choose who to benefit. Ron, you know how I feel about you. We are friends and will always be friends, no matter how much we disagree with each other, and I do disagree with you on this. YOu keep quoting and talking about religion, but that's not at all where I wanted this thread to go. I'm very impressed with your knowledge of the religions. I've learned a lot by reading your posts here and in other threads. But, this is not about religion to me. It's about treating one group of people one way and another group another way. Whether they are gay, black, poor, whatever. It's just wrong.

But my questions is, why is it so important to ban things (such a gay marriage) for some people but make it ok (such as "regular" marriage) for others? I agree that a couple should not receive benefits if they are in a farce marriage. If it's not a real marriage (ie. with a marriage certificate) then they don't get "real" benefits, whatever those benefits are. HOWEVER, what damn difference does it make WHO someone loves? Wouldn't it be better to have happy people around you (because they are equals in the world and have the same rights as everyone else) than to have sad, bitter, even angry people around? I know I would much rather be around someone who is happy than anyone who is not.

I've always wondered about that story. I jumped in S'Port and I know you and your brother, among all of the others. I've heard things here and there, but reading it from you for the first time, gave me goosbumps and fills empty holes I've wondered about over the years. Hope to see you at SkyFest!!

I call bullshit. Just because it has always BEEN a man and a woman doesn't mean it always has to be that way. Weren't pot and opium legal once upon a time? Wasn't alcohol illegal at one point? If that can change, they why can't "marriage" change? Personally, I don't need the ring and certificate to be "married." I can be married in my heart and actions without that. Granted, I can't get on my husbands insurance or receive his death benefits if we aren't married on paper. I just don't see why I (or any other hetero person) can have something and my gay friend can't have the same thing. We're all PEOPLE! We all want the same things... LOVE, HAPPINESS, SECURITY. I will forever disagree with banning gay marriage and treating them differently than straight people are treated. It's not right. I know people disagree and will forever AGREE with it. That's fine. We can disagree with eachother and still be friends, right?

Bill, I'm assuming you meant to say "Why have special laws for heterosexuals, and different ones for homosexuals?" My reply is in no way directed at any one person, including you, Bill.

It's because SkyFest is going to replace WFFC.

I still don't see why it's wrong for gays to gather in their chosen place of worship and have their own church. Actually, I don't see why "they" can't go to "our" churches. However, I do understand wanting to be with a group of like-minded people who share your same beliefs. As far as I know, no two religions believe the same thing. Why does the "gay" religion have to believe the same as any other? Do the gay people believe the Bible says homosexuality is a sin? Some religions say "No dancing" but others allow it. How is that any different?

And why is that wrong?