Thread: Miss California

My 2 cents- My marriage is not defined by a word-it is the love and commited relationship between my DH and I. So, ayone else's marriage doesn't change that. Therefore, if homosexual couples want to marry-let them and let them legally call it a marriage. They should have that right too. It doesn't change anything for me. Who people marry, where, and why doesn't affect my marriage at all. Heck, if my neighbor wanted to marry his blowup doll I could care less and it would in no way change my marriage at all. As long as the two people are legally consenting adults, who cares? More people should worry about their own marriage and relationships instead of worrying about who other people choose to marry.

OT but when I read these posts about it's only a word-I couldn't stop thinking of the schoolhouse rock, I'm just a bill , yeah I'm only a bill and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill. LOL

Originally Posted by SurferGirl

Why don't the same sex couples get married in the states that allow same sex marriage and leave the other states alone. There are still people that find certain things very repulsive and the more this issue is thrown in their faces the more repulsive they will find it. Most people used to be like live and let live until some of the stuff just got out of hand.

Perhaps the same sex couples that live in Massachusetts and some of the other states are more respectful to other people's feelings and don't go around making such a big issue of this and filing lawsuits just to make others miserable. If they wanted to be treated with respect they need to start to respect other people.

Why should they have to leave their state to get married? Hetero couples do not have that inconvenience, why should same-sex couples?

There was a news story on mail.com talking about how allowing same sex marriage will hurt small businesses because they'll have to provide health insurance for them. I don't agree with it because they have to provide insurance for their workers anyway so whats the difference. I saw it on there today.

Originally Posted by pepperpot

I've just come back and started reading some follow up posts.......I stopped....





I'm only gonna say.....if "it's only a word....almost comical"......then why isn't that line of "it's only a word....almost comical"......aimed at gay people too? (assuming the equal rights under civil unions is given). Obviously that word means more to those on both sides........

I can recall during the "woman's movement".....women were quite offended and upset because there were only 2 options to choose from on a form (or to address them as)...Mrs. or Miss....they felt their 'marital status' shouldn't 'define' them... so now we have 'Ms.".........no one bats an eye....now.

So if, as a society we are 'embracing' a long overdue 'status' in society (rights as well) for this group...why wouldn't they want their own distinguished status? To unequivocally state to all what their relationship is comprised of? Why do they wish to change an 'accepted'/established definition and make it ambiguous? Why wouldn't they want to say....."we've finally arrived, we've gotten our rights, and this is who we are".....?

Its real simple...they want to feel normal, be treated normal, to fit in if you will. They are no different then you or I.

Originally Posted by krisharry

My 2 cents- My marriage is not defined by a word-it is the love and commited relationship between my DH and I. So, ayone else's marriage doesn't change that. Therefore, if homosexual couples want to marry-let them and let them legally call it a marriage. They should have that right too. It doesn't change anything for me. Who people marry, where, and why doesn't affect my marriage at all. Heck, if my neighbor wanted to marry his blowup doll I could care less and it would in no way change my marriage at all. As long as the two people are legally consenting adults, who cares? More people should worry about their own marriage and relationships instead of worrying about who other people choose to marry.

OT but when I read these posts about it's only a word-I couldn't stop thinking of the schoolhouse rock, I'm just a bill , yeah I'm only a bill and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill. LOL

Yes but would you still send your neighbor and new wife a gift??? LOL. Sorry couldn't resist.

Originally Posted by SurferGirl

Why don't the same sex couples get married in the states that allow same sex marriage and leave the other states alone. There are still people that find certain things very repulsive and the more this issue is thrown in their faces the more repulsive they will find it. Most people used to be like live and let live until some of the stuff just got out of hand.

Perhaps the same sex couples that live in Massachusetts and some of the other states are more respectful to other people's feelings and don't go around making such a big issue of this and filing lawsuits just to make others miserable. If they wanted to be treated with respect they need to start to respect other people.

Repulsive??? Unreal. And you are a mother correct? I hope you teach your children better tolerance then this. If not they sure are in for a long hard adult life. Time waits for no one and it seems you are stuck in time.

Originally Posted by SurferGirl

This is getting a little extreme. I think the whole issue is complete nonsense.
Marriage is between one man and one woman and that is how it should always be. It this keeps up there will be a complete and total end to political correctness and I for one think political correctness has gone way too far this time.

A few more thoughts since this thread has gotten so off track from Miss California keeping her title to a Gay Marriage/Religious Discussion:

1) If marriage is defined as between one man and one woman then are priests, nuns, preachers, rabbis, and all other religious figures who say that they are married to the church and/or married to God in direct violation of the definition of marriage?

2) If marriage is to procreate, then again are priests, nuns, monks and other religious persons taking a vow of celebacy in violation of God's command to be fruitful and multiply?

3) Isn't calling a group of people repulsive in direct violation of the teachings of The Bible since basically you are calling God repulsive since The Bible states that God created man in his own image?


Not to offend anyone (as Carrie Prejean said) but just a few thoughts that I had. I have many other thoughts but they are best left to the religious forum and another time. Just wanted to put a few thoughts out there for discussion dealing with gay marriage, the definition of marriage, etc.