Shared publicly  - 
Rui Li's profile photoSusan Rujema's profile photoSalvatore Paradisio's profile photomarilou atacador's profile photo
Who are the people in the top left? 
I think that's one of the kardashians.  Who are the ones on top right?
Katy Perry and Russell Brand,  who are the ones on the bottom?
Whoa whoa whoa, let's settle down on the name calling. Russell Brand is hilarious. 
Marriage is a religious word no matter what happens people will always see as so....why can't the government change the wording on there forms so the religious freaks come down and the issue will be mute.....this way anybody that wants to be together gets all the rights and we can move on to solve other issues.

Just a thought....
And kids now you see why marriage is bad 
+Fernando Gutierrez marriage does have a religious proceeding to a certain degree, but is not limited to or owned by any religious institution as it spans all cultures and societies throughout history. Demanding ownership of the word shows a limited worldview and disrespect to billions of people across time and space.
U and I may see it as so but many don't. Let's win some battles before we can declare victory on a war against Hate.Discrimination against colored people is still ongoing, it's not all going to be resloved by one law.
Of course it won't all be resolved by one law. My own father tried to pull that definition crap and I wasn't afraid to lay a verbal smackdown on him about it so I'm certainly not going to hold any punches on anyone else who wants to attempt it. Hate and discrimination are a longer war, but legal recognition is an easy battle in comparison.
Also it doesn't really have anything to do with the word "Marriage" at all, it about projecting morals.  Some people think that Homosexuals being together is "Immoral" therefore even if you change the legal word those people would oppose any kind of government acceptance of same sex coupling.
Those are the people that need to be educated that their personal vision of morality is not what are legislation is to be based on. Legislation ought to be universal which would encompass a great variety of beliefs and understandings. Logic and reason is what is missing in the process here. Too many people injecting personal emotion and superstition.
Sorry +Evan Kelley they are tied and until both sides unite both will loose. Believe me I love all people and we have the same rights no matter what but will u stand by me and say people from Mexico coming here have a chance to live a fruitful life like u and I. Hate is Hate if it's not a Arab today its a Mexican tomarrow then it's a Gay. They don't like us because we are different or our color is to dark or we don't speak the language or we don't dress alike take Ur pick its pure Hate.
Fine, if marriage is a religious concept, why aren't civil unions legal in all states?  When my wife and I got married at the court house, that's what it was called, a civil union.  Why not the same for all people?  People who flock to some 2,000 year old passage in their religious tome can keep up with the fact that marriage is a sacred thing but we can give everyone the same rights.  Separation of religion and government, right?
I'm married, to a woman, and the deity was not invoked at our wedding. Yet deity or no deity our relationship is fully recognised as a marriage by New Zealand law and civil society.

I fail to see why others can't also have their relationship recognised as a marriage just because of rampant homophobia of some bronze age goat herders and their fellow travellers.

Let's hope that Louisa Wall gets her marriage reform bill through parliament this session.
For clarification +Fernando Gutierrez, I do believe we need massive immigration reform, it's far too difficult and expensive resulting in too many illegals. But there should also be some form of amnesty towards those who come here illegal as long as they are providing something useful to society. I don't hate on other nationalities nor ethnicities. In fact, I hold a more globally-united view of humanity, and can speak three languages with some knowledge of at least a dozen others. Asking me to stand with you on that is fruitless as I am already there.

But none of that is relevant to the debates on marriage equality. That argument is entirely about civil protections, benefits, and rights that are already guaranteed but are not being granted to a subset of the population. We are not all being treated equally by the government and that's all this is about. (Yes, that concept extends to immigration but that isn't what the original post is about.)
HOLY SHIT! Check out the meat hooks on Kris Humphries!
I feel like this is an issue we should be done with. Bring on a space alien attack, because its the only thing that will make red-necks and ultra-cons move on from the terrors of gay people. I think "night of the gays" would do well as a horror movie in most republican areas.
Just sad. What they fail to realize is that the majority of the issue is not with the all. It's about equality with the state and government.

Imagine not being allowed to see the person you care for if they were ill and in a hospital, just a thought.
Marriages are not granted by propensity for diseases. Nor are they granted for ability to procreate. Your logic fails.
According to 2009 numbers ( 57% of HIV transmissions were caused by male-to-male sexual contact. But that's only HIV transmission rates. Black males contract HIV twice as much as white males. There's no attempt to limit black marriages. The transmission of HIV is far more complex than what person gives it to which person and has no business in the marriage debate.

If you're so concerned about Google+ having such an outcry for LGBT equality, maybe you should consider that Google as a company supports equality. Arguing against it here on Google+ is like walking into a lion's den and complaining gazelle is for dinner.
There has never been a requirement of fertility to get a marriage licence. Elderly and infertile heterosexual couples never have an issue getting married. The argument that gays cannot marry because they cannot procreate is completely bunk.

Blood tests done in the past were discriminatory in that the government was controlling who could marry based on personal medical conditions. A mild form of eugenics. Sure, it's a good idea to know in advance what you're getting into, but the requirement is ridiculous.
How many straight people have aids?? Seriously... as long as you want to talk about STD's I have a few straight high school friends that are spreading herpes around like wild fire! I agree with calling it a "civil union" ...I am pagan and recognize that the term "marriage" is a Christian term...but call it whatever! Let them be what they are! I am bi, dont see myself marrying a woman, but that's not to say it couldn't happen. If the love is there who cares. I don't see why this is going to be effecting anyone else personally.
+Deklan Gael I emphatically disagree that marriage is a "Christian term" or that there should be a different term used by the government to recognize such unions. However, the rest of your statement I completely agree with.
Staggering that you seem to think that's the result of a "choice" to engage
in homosexual activity. The reason you think every post is about gay
rights is that gay guys terrify you. I left my homophobia at the door when
I was 18. Might be time for you to grow up too.
"Of all those infected" Of all those infected. And you think a single, albeit deadly disease that infects anyone regardless of sexuality is a reason to deny government recognition of the rights and privileges of marriage?
I always get a good laugh about how people react to things like "Gay Marriage", "Social Assistance", "Free Healthcare" and other non issues.  I mean honestly, take a step back people!
If you were to give half an effort to the real issues that face you today you would see the ridiculousness of the hate and fear that is spread among the masses.
The whole 99% movement started to look at some of the real inequalities that exist out there, unfortunately the masses can't see the forest through the trees.  We like to worry about things that never affect our day to day life.
Really who cares who marries whom!  Why the hell should you loose everything if you get sick?  NON ISSUES!

Stop looking at where you're told to look!
Start looking with your own eyes
Start thinking with your own brain
Start forming your own ideas and stop parroting the ideas you read.

Stop being a sheep!
You are a bigot to hold on to your biblical ways and to deny the countless medical research that refutes your position. Homosexuality is not deviant. It is not a choice. It is not against any god or deity. It just is. 

Besides, the government has no place in legislating based on religious views. It is secular and needs to encompass all people of all walks of life. We are equal and deserve equal treatment.
I don't believe it's actually correct: "illegal". You need fuel for the fire not water. Jeez.
Most of the threads I've read on thud "topic" have severe inconsistencies. And... Blah blah blah.
Marty, you may think your god has an issue with gay marriage, but I talked to Ganesha last week and he said 'Gay marriage?  Not an issue.  Can you pass the peanuts.'

On a more serious note, you shouldn't go around complaining about people talking about how they want to defend their choices which only effects their lives.  Nobody is forcing you to have homosexual sex, just like nobody is forcing you to read posts about gay marriage issues.
Sorry, but fuck you for equating homosexuality with pedophilia or bestiality.

And no one is asking for special rights. We're demanding EQUAL rights.
Gays are the biggest assholes! to forget they came from the vagina of their mother, when they had intercourse with hopefully (where is your dad). Now you want to convince me, married illegally for 8 years is such a great thing. Shame on you! trying to hide your filthy and sick behavior behind what only belongs to one man WITH one woman. May God rain sulfur on your sorry ass!
Yes, love would be a nice thing to have. It's a shame so many Christians don't have it.
I'm pretty sure it's been in the last decade, and it's been a while since I read the story so of course human memory is fallible, but I'm fairly certain if contact were as simple as a phone call, they wouldn't have had a problem.
God doesn't exist. Treating humans humanely is all that matters. It's sad that you would feel sorry for someone who cares more about equality than instilling a divisive dogma on others.
Haven't said anything hateful?  How about "Even when I look at your profile pic I feel sorry for you. Obviously you have issues and need someone to talk to."  Condescension may not be outright hatred, but it sure ain't christian love.
Marty, you really like to read selectively.  What do you think I meant when I said 'only effect their lives.'  Pedophilia and bestiality are behaviors that have effects on beings that aren't making those choices.  Of course I think you have a reason to argue your point, but you are doing so in a poor way.  You are using old statistics (though it is still true that over half of new infections are among people who have had male on male sexual contact) and you are not actually listening to other people's points.

First off, blood testing before marriage was primarily used to help stop the spread of syphilis.   Honestly this policy could still be used even with legalized gay marriage to help locate people infected with HIV.  Honestly if your concerned with the contracting HIV then you can protect yourself by avoiding unprotected sex, especially with other men.  If your issue is that you believe homosexuality is against your religion, then you still shouldn't get in others way.  'Judge not less ye be judged,'  that means that it's not your job to judge other's sins.  This is a country of freedom of belief and a separation of church and state, which means the law cannot be determine based on religious dogma.
Being against the human rights (it's not "special" rights if everyone else has it) of any individual(s) makes you a bigot. It does not matter what your religion, your insecurities, or your upbringing leads you to believe. they deserve the right to be as (un)happy as any other married couple. Now anyone still whining that about the gays poease take your backwards-ass 1950's logic and vacate the fucking planet so those of us that have a sense of common human decency can enjoy our gay sex and rainbows dammit.
If it were unnatural, it wouldn't be as common as it is. Claiming it is indecent is your opinion, but biologically wrong. And if you really think it has nothing to do with true love then you have never interacted with homosexual couples or allowed yourself to be moved by their history.

There is no proof in your pulled-out-the-ass 1000 years. You've drunk the Kool-Aid of your religious upbringing to believe such nonsense. And let's talk about throwing it in faces. This hetero-normative society throws man-woman sexuality in everyone's faces from movies, TV, books, and public displays of affection. It's always out there, in everyone's faces. You're just pissed off that people who love differently are being recognized.
+Marty Demichele you're judging them.. opinions expressed as facts is judgement... and saying its about lust and lack of self respect is expressed an opinion as fact. And 1000's year of proof? Do you even now that homosexuality was more common in the antic than now? You come with 1000's year of proof... i come with 3000's years ;)
I don't respond well to anyone telling me to seek god, especially when insinuating I need help. So all I can say is Fuck you and your imaginary sky daddy.
+Marty Demichele and you really want to tell us that god would judge a person on their sexual preference?? That would be a really petty god and i would bet that there are a lot more important things he will consider ;) 
Calling a person's sexual preferences deviant is a judgement.  Calling homosexuals indecent is also a judgement.  They are also opinions, a judgement is a type of opinion, specifically one that you enforce on others.  I was never trying to convince you that homosexuals should have the same rights, that would be a waste of my time.  What I am trying to convince you is to either make better thought out supportable arguments, or to let let other's be.

By the way, saying that straight isn't in my vocabulary is definitely your attempt to patronize me by reducing my dignity.  Also if you must know, I prefer women.  As far as your 1000's of years of proof, there have also been culturally accept homosexuality within that time.    here's some compiled research on the topic  You are right that you don't have to answer to other people being gay, you do have to answer for adding to other's misery though.  While you might be tired of having to see people talk about the issue, many gay individuals are beyond exhausted having their sexual identity challenged.  If you don't want to hear about these issues then do your part and don't give the LGBT community a reason to defend themselves.

oh, and PS, you may not think gay people love each other but they do, and considering that their the ones having those emotions, I think they're likely to have a better idea than you do.
But you stake eternity on that god will punish the homosexuals and not you for judging them... wise choice fella.
Wow, Marty, you've really gotta start thinking for yourself rather than just repeating what your religion tells you. If your God exists, he gave you free will and the ability to think for a reason.

Why is the big bang theory and the evolution of life so weird to you but a being you have no evidence of having created it all is reasonable?

And finally, gay people don't have true love? That's just idiotic, sorry but it is. I know plenty of gay couples who are madly in love. One couple I know have been together for more than 30 years.

Your entire argument boils down to 2 things; 'my god says so' and 'eww'. Both of which, if you know anything about argument, are fallacious arguments. 
God made man and woman.  Transgenders just can't decide, conjoined twins just have separation issues, and all the genetic variations in between are just choices.  Gay males make great interior decorators because of a choice.  Seems legit.
</sarcasm> for good measure.

It appears that those who don't believe in evolution can't mentally evolve either.  That's the only explanation I can come up with.  ¯\_(シ)_/¯
Its absolutely discusting that inequality like this ia still exsistant. Surely you can sue for discrimination?
I'm a little disappointed in some of these responses against Marty. While I disagree with his points, he does have the right to believe what he wishes without being attacked for it. If Marty believes in god and creationism that's his right given to him by the first amendment. If he believes that god will punish homosexuals, that is still his right so long as he doesn't do the punishing. We may not agree or like it, but this is the flip side to people like Marty not being able to deny us our beliefs because they are different from his.
Problem is David, that he is attempting to use his opinions as justification to continue discrimination against people with views and lifestyles that differ to his own. That is what is the problem here.
I agree that it is a problem, but you don't solve a problem with a problem.  If we start harassing Marty over his religious views then we are no different than he is.  If we want to address his behavior without being hypocritical, then we cannot judge him for what he believes, only how he acts on those beliefs.
+Marty Demichele Have you forgotten the bible was written by man, man is tainted so therefor the bible cant be all Gods word exactly. It probably has self appointed opinion in it as well from the men who wrote it.
If Marty doesn't like gay marriage then that's fine. I fully agree with his choice not to marry a man.

If Marty thinks that loving a man will result in his being sent to hell then I think he's right to choose to love women instead based on his belief. He already implied that sexuality is a choice so he probably thought about his options and chose women as his sexual preference.

...but I hope he understands that telling gay people that they are going to hell because they have somehow offended his god is quite meaningless, as a large number of them probably don't believe in his god in the first place.

...which is interesting because some religions preach that anyone who doesn't believe in their religion is going to hell anyway, straight or gay, so non-believers might as well just do what they like =)
+Anthony Kelly Actually, telling someone they're going to hell for being gay isn't meaningless. It would be meaningless to me (for two reasons: 1. I'm not gay. 2. I don't believe in a hell), but for some people it can be quite hurtful.
Yet, Gay Marriage "destroys the institution of marriage". Yeah, right.
the two on top would be illegal, but they can't figure out how to make stupid illegal without everyone ending up in jail.

Why did she think marrying one of the cavemen from the Geiko commercials would be a good idea?
Thanks Marty.  I never thought it would possible for us to agree, but I figure if people try to understand each other a little bit better most issues would be easier to deal with.
Sorry for the misquote, Marty

I took your statement about the day coming where gays will be on their knees begging not to be judged for their sexual preference before God to mean that you believed that gay people would have trouble entering the kingdom of heaven because of their being gay and therefore would end up going to the other place.

It's nice to know that you don't think gay people are going to hell just for being gay.
+Marty Demichele You said "Its not about true love, its about lust and lack of self respect." did you not see what you're responding to?  The picture is of two heterosexual couples getting married because of lust and a lack of self respect and how a homosexual couple of 8 years cannot get married legally.  Why is the heterosexual marriage legal and not the homosexual one, since they're proven to be the opposite of what you just said marriage was about.
+Marty Demichele When you allow them to get married but not the good homosexuals you condone the Kardashian/Perry/Spears/etc. marriages and exclude the good homosexuals like Sally Ride, George Takei, NPH, etc.  I would like to see you take a stand and move to actively prohibit both "bad" kinds of marriage(in your view) or neither of them.
I think what a lot of people posting are forgetting is that people won't change something they believe unless they want to.  Matthew, while you make a decent point about the original intent of the image, the truth is that it is an argument that is only meaningful to those who are already open to the concept of gay marriage.   But I think that there has been progress made in this thread.  Marty has acknowledged that the lives of decisions of homosexuals do not have to affect his life or his beliefs.  This is very different than earlier when he was making points where homosexuality was sexually deviant and was using pedophilia and bestiality as an extreme comparison.  Meanwhile, most of the posters have stopped claiming that Marty's religious views or even choice of religion were backwards and based on ignorance.  This is progress, it might not be a solution but it's sure a lot better than yelling out insults and making each side hate each other more.  So let's stop trying to convince each other and start trying to understand each other, because that's where we'll find true advancement on the issue.
Evan's posts are still up, he just changed his profile pic.  Making remarks like that isn't right even if it's done out of anger or annoyance, but your not making them now.  Rather than saying 'oh it's horrible that Marty said those things' I prefer thinking about it as 'Marty made those remarks before, but he has stopped and is now acting more reasonably, I believe that we are learning to communicate better.  Let's encourage this and see if we can come to an understanding.' 
These comments did hit a bit of a raw nerve with me.

I don't know what it feels like to love another man, but I know what it feels like to love a woman and I imagine it's pretty much the same feeling. I imagine it feels nice to be in love for most people.

I also know what it feels like to have people tell you that you shouldn't be with that person, that your relationship is wrong and that your love is somehow inferior.

In our case it was because of religion.

A person's relationship with the one that they love is at the core of their identity, and having that relationship judged by outsiders does hurt.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that people can agree with or disagree with homosexuality all they like, but at the very least they should be careful not to judge or be offensive, because it's not nice to be on the receiving end.
+Leela Debris I don't see it as being politically correct

I just have very little patience for people telling two adults who they should or shouldn't be in a relationship with

Relationships are very intimate, personal things, and for others to judge two people based on religion, race or gender is pretty assholey, and I don't mind calling that out if I see it

I can't see his posts now, so the guy has either blocked me or deleted his posts, but if I remember correctly there was a guy in this thread being an asshole. I was simply trying to make a logical counterargument 
Add a comment...