Gay marriage voted down in Oklahoma

[Spectral]

1. You're putting words in my mouth I never said. 2. Now you're being racist for no reason.

It's all the same rights just called something else, it's not like it's up to me in the first place and the government only doesn't want homosexual unions because they don't want further tax breaks, that isn't me, that's the government.

1. I don't think I did. If I did, I'm sorry, it wasn't my intention. What I took from your post is that you're good with separate but equal institutions.

2. I have no idea where you got that from.

The same rights called something else isn't the same rights. It's deliberately creating a marker to point to someone else as the Other, and not quite equal.

[Sam the Wiser]

People comfortable with arbitrarily denying basic human rights from significant portions of the population are monsters.

Human rights are pretty subjective here.

[Archangel Tyrael]

You're the one asserting the notion in the first place; a notion -against- the current medical and psychological consensus, to boot.

No I'm totally not, look at your VERY first post, you said it was a GARBAGE notion, I never said that, you did.

Might get taken to the Supreme Court and force a legal showdown that leads to Federal legalization.

oh, I see.

[Themius]

That's nonsense. There's a wide spectrum of human sexuality, even among people that self-identify as bisexual. I self-identify as bi, yet there's no possible definition why which I could be called a "sexual compulsive that do[esn]'t care where the gratification is coming from. I've got very, very specific preferences, most of them in women, and I'm not particularly promiscuous. Bisexuality is just attraction to both males and females, it doesn't say anything else about an individual.

I seriously feel people are just unfair when it comes to bisexuals... I am sure that a lot of people that identify as gay or straight could also identify as bi. I for instance lean heavily towards men; however, at times I am attracted to some women (very specific). I had a gay friend, almost stereotypical camp gay who identifies as gay but has slept with women, such as having sex with a lesbian at a gay pride parade.

[RaoBurning]

You show your true face.

Why is it garbage if one believes that being homosexual is a choice?
Notice that I'm not taking sides here, since I've heard varied stances on this issue from homosexuals themselves.

Do you believe homosexuals are born that way? If so, is there a ''gene'' or a different trait that causes people to be homosexuals?
Do you have any studies to show me that that is the case?

If being gay is a choice then so is being straight. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't have a switch I can flip to change teams.

[smelltheglove]

2. Now you're being racist for no reason.

really like to see your reasoning behind this. it's as if we didnt even read the same post

It's all the same rights just called something else, it's not like it's up to me in the first place and the government only doesn't want homosexual unions because they don't want further tax breaks, that isn't me, that's the government.

so his example is correct. difference of people involved means different name - yay separate but equal, has worked so well in the past!

[Espe]

Human rights are pretty subjective here.

If you think telling people who they can and can't marry is a good thing, I hope some day you live somewhere that you are kept "separate but equal."

I'm sure your parents are proud.

[Wilian]

Failure of a common sense in that state.

Oh well, I guess the politicians around those parts simply found the gay-marriage to be too good of an issue to be kept used as a divisive subject so they can fuck around while people debate.

[SageKalzi]

Why not call it marriage? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage

According to webster, it is the same thing. The word doesn't belong to any one group. "Separate yet equal" was tried before. It didn't work out then. Why would it now?

Just less than 6 months ago it was "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" and that was it. I don't see the reason to change the meaning of a word or anything just because a small group of people think they deserve the same word. Keep the tax breaks, be equal, name it something else, that isn't separate but equal, that's just equal.

Edit: This thread is already going the same "I'm for gay marriage, therefore you're wrong no matter if you think we deserve the same rights or completely disagree with us we're going to argue with you and call you a bad person who hates gay people" route so I'm gone. Enjoy bickering, everyone, that's going to change everything and everyone's mind.

[Themius]

1. You're putting words in my mouth I never said. 2. Now you're being racist for no reason.

It's all the same rights just called something else, it's not like it's up to me in the first place and the government only doesn't want homosexual unions because they don't want further tax breaks, that isn't me, that's the government.

How is he being racist?! lmfao!

[Archangel Tyrael]

How is he being racist?! lmfao!

He was not.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Nah, WoW forums are "if you don't think we need buffs, you're clearly a moron".

If you're not with me....then you're my enemy.

[Deleted]

1. You're putting words in my mouth I never said. 2. Now you're being racist for no reason.

It's all the same rights just called something else, it's not like it's up to me in the first place and the government only doesn't want homosexual unions because they don't want further tax breaks, that isn't me, that's the government.

Seriously? When was race mentioned?

[stumpy]

Just less than 6 months ago it was "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" and that was it. I don't see the reason to change the meaning of a word or anything just because a small group of people think they deserve the same word. Keep the tax breaks, be equal, name it something else, that isn't separate but equal, that's just equal.

Until it isn't.

[Elegiac]

Just less than 6 months ago it was "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" and that was it. I don't see the reason to change the meaning of a word or anything just because a small group of people think they deserve the same word. Keep the tax breaks, be equal, name it something else, that isn't separate but equal, that's just equal.

You clearly have a different definition of the word "separate".

[Sett]

It will take a few decades for somewhere like Oklahoma to crawl out of the deep religious roots it has to even be accepting of such state-wide. That and other parts of the Bible-belt make me face palm sometimes.

[Spectral]

I seriously feel people are just unfair when it comes to bisexuals... I am sure that a lot of people that identify as gay or straight could also identify as bi. I for instance lean heavily towards men; however, at times I am attracted to some women (very specific). I had a gay friend, almost stereotypical camp gay who identifies as gay but has slept with women, such as having sex with a lesbian at a gay pride parade.

Not to be too whiny about it, but that's one thing that sure seems a lot easier for women.

[Sam the Wiser]

If you think telling people who they can and can't marry is a good thing, I hope some day you live somewhere that you are kept "separate but equal."

I'm sure your parents are proud.

Well you pretty much proved my original point.

[Spectral]

Just less than 6 months ago it was "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law" and that was it. I don't see the reason to change the meaning of a word or anything just because a small group of people think they deserve the same word. Keep the tax breaks, be equal, name it something else, that isn't separate but equal, that's just equal.

Words change as their common usage changes, not because of small groups of people that do or don't "deserve" the same word.

You're eventually going to look pretty dopey if you insist on using an outmoded definition.

[Zeek Daniels]

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/nati...-oklahoma.html

84-0. Its nice to see our country is still diverse. Too much of one side (for or against) isnt good for a nation.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/dis...e-sex-marriage

Our country is diverse. It seems you dont realize that diversity can be spread out or in this case focused in certain areas. For instance there could be alot of mexican americans in the south western united states but barely any in the north west. But since the total Pop of the US consists of a significant number of them you can say the US is diverse.

So when using country you shoot yourself in the foot trying to make your point. In the situation you posted you have 2 states one being Oklahoma who voted 84-0. Thats 84 people out of the whole population of oklahoma or in your points case 84 people out of the entire united states. You seriously think you wouldnt be able to find 84 people in the same area who are against gay marriage?

Now i didnt read the article but im going to assume they were not just straight up voting Yay or Nay to gay marriage being allowed in the state. Im going to assume that there was some written law or bill or something that expressed what this vote would put into law. Now im no law maker but im going to assume that just because it was a gay marriage bill does not mean it was written like this. "The State of Oklahoma now declares that marriage can occur between man and woman as well as man and man and women and women." Im pretty sure in actuality they took about 50 pages to say that and added a whole bunch of other things into it. And its the other things that law makers worry about. Even if you were for gay marriage what if they did not give you all the benefits that non gay marriage gave? Would you still vote it into law? What if something was added into the law that had nothing to do with marriage like a new tax or something, would you vote that into law? What if the law was sloppily written with too many loopholes blah blah blah, would you vote it into law?

I think this has less to do with diversity, and more to do with getting it right and taking your time to do so.

Or they could all be homophobes =p