Talk of The Villages Florida - View Single Post - Obama for transgenders?
View Single Post
 
Old 04-09-2015, 10:51 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
here is the problem. The CIVIL rights of homosexuals has not been the issue, as civil unions have been allowed for some time. The problem erupted when there was an insistence that they be allowed to be married in churches and in the eyes of God. To those of us of faith, who perceive marriage as a holy sacrament, and based on biblical scripture, as between a man and a woman (note the Bible speaks in terms of husbands and wives), it then becomes an abomination from that perspective. To me, it does not matter whether I view homosexuality as right or wrong - just like anyone else they are Americans and deserve the same respect and civil rights as any citizen of this country. On that we can agree. I just don't understand the push to desecrate other people's religious beliefs when they already had the rights of every other married couple, with the recent additions of healthcare benefits for partners, adoption, etc.
I'm sorry but your analysis and concerns are completely contrary to the gay rights movements goals. Marriage is not a civil union. There are specific laws both Federal and state which clearly differentiate the benefits of marriage vs a civil union. Married people can file a joint tax return, civil union cannot. Married people can inherit without tax or probate, civil union cannot. Married can have pensions, hospital visits, protection of privileged communications etc etc. What the gay rights movement has been fighting to achieve for decades it that all the civil rights afforded to married couples apply fully to married gay couples. Not a single gay rights organization has ever insisted that a religious ceremony must be made available although they have wished it would be and many denominations that read the same holy book you do have agreed that they will perform those ceremonies. Marriage is a legal contract. A religious marriage that does not include a legal contract (a government issued marriage license signed and returned to the state) is just a religious service. Your religion is not under attack. Your attempt to force your religion's definition of a proper legal contract is under attack as it denies equal protection to gay persons.

Your errant belief that the rights of gay persons to adopt is established shows your lack of awareness of the thrust of the GOP to thwart gay adoption. Today
Florida House Approves Bill To Let Adoption Agencies Refuse Gay Parents