Comments

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  3:13 pm on Monday, May 6, 2013

  No, people would label you a hater because you are trying to stop someone from doing something that has zero affect on your life. If two men marry, you don't have to approve and your God can still smite them if that is what you believe. As for nature's law, there is no such thing as marriage in nature. Yes, there are some animals that pair for life. But guess what? There are also some animals that engage in homosexual acts and pair with the same gender for life. Sooooo....yeah. Your freedom to marry still exists if same gender marriage is allowed.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  2:10 pm on Monday, May 6, 2013

  There are litterally live articles on patch right now where you can discus our fiscal problem with all the other posters. You seem to imply that all of us can only care about one thing at a time which is absurd. I would imagine that many of us are concerned with Illinois' problems as well as what is happening in our country financially. But again, this article is about gay marriage so we will talk about it.

  ...and although it wasn't directed at me, civil unions are not at all the same as marriage. In many states, including IL, companies do not have to recognize your partner for insurance and other benefits. Nor do other states need to comply to recognizing your union. It is more or less a purely ceremonial title.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  11:25 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  I have no issue with religion or using it to form your own beliefs and ideas. As a means of teaching morals, it is outstanding. You, and others like minded will always be allowed to dislike the idea of gay marriage based on your God. When it becomes a problem is you deciding that your faith can dictate to others how they need to live. Crying foul over people infringing upon your religion and then turning around and forcing someone to bend to your God's law is one of the longest standing hypocrisies.

  Picking and choosing certain things to follow in the bible based on content is flawed from both sides. Do you take all biblical laws at face value such as slavery, not mixing certain fibers in garments, not touching unclean women and men, etc? Or do you (or a religious official) decide which to follow direct, which to interpret differently, and which to outright ignore?

  I don't think a church should ever be forced to marry someone that they don't see fit to marry. I also don't think a church should get to decide if the government recognizes a marriage.

  Asking that people regain responsibility of their lives and regain moral ground is a good thing, but religion isn't the only way to succeed in that venture.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:55 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  That is a huge point, and very valid V.O.R. But this is an article about marriage equality so the comments will generally revolve around that topic

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:54 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  So do you rally against divorce with the same gusto? Sham marriages among celebrities? What abut all the homosexual men (both liberal and conservative) who have married women as a cover up?

  Why do you feel that the bond between a man and woman would be weakened by two men or two woman being married? My marriage is just fine. My parents didn't get a divorce because two men exchanged vows of love. You make it an issue because you want to blame something concrete for societal problems you observe. You dance on the slippery slope argument because you want to make it seem far worse than it actually is.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:48 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  I didn't say that it had. You completely misunderstood my post. All of the things that I used as examples were issues that someone needed to bring up before they were changed or clarified. People read the constitution as "all men," so women didn't receive certain rights. This issue is no different. Again, her quote may be strong, but someone, or a group of people, need to stand up and say something when American citizens are denied basic rights that others enjoy freely. When companies can legally deny same sex partners health benefits, something is wrong. And that is just the tip of the iceberg with this issue.

  If no person or politician championed certain changes to laws, we would still have slavery, women still wouldn't vote, and there would numerous arcane state laws still enforced.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:28 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  So if there are laws on the books that are immoral, limit rights, or can be interpreted as a limit of rights they should not be changed? In order to change certain things to ensure more inalienable rights (ie. women's suffrage, slavery, 3/5ths, etc), someone has to stand up and promote the change. Could her quote have been worded better? Probably, but in addition to upholding the rights, they are also counted on to secure rights for those who are not afforded them under current laws.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:23 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  So then you are actually concerned that you will no longer be allowed to marry a woman? Marriage will always exist through the church, even if our government changes our laws to civil unions as the basis for tax codes, inheritance issues, and other legal standings.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  9:19 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  It seems you are looking to blur the lines of pleasure and a second definition of love. People express a love for someone else through acts of giving and receiving pleasure, starting with basic contact all the way to your "genital love." The act itself isn't love, it's an expression of your feeling towards someone else.

• On the article The Long Journey to Change Minds About Marriage Equality

  

  Brian

  8:41 am on Monday, May 6, 2013

  Assuming here you actually meant necrophilia. And yeah, those are all the the same as two consenting adults asking to be recognized by the government as married.

  ...and if the bible is the main reason that people discredit homosexual marriage, then polygamy shouldn't be a problem as there are passages that advocate it. There are also some groups of Christians (albeit a small selection) who are trying to make it legally acceptable.