New York Assembly Passes Gay Marriage Bill »
Posted By altnrg 6 months, 1 week ago in NewsThe State Assembly approved legislation on Tuesday night that would make New York the sixth state to allow same-sex marriage - a pivotal vote that shifts the debate to the State Senate, where gay rights advocates and conservative groups alike are redoubling their efforts.
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
308 Views Share Story 42 Comments Report
Submitted By:
altnrg
Thank you for visiting my profile.
I run two topic-focused article publishing sites:
Alternative Energy Base - For renewable energy related articles.
Real Estate Pro Articles ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 42 (view all)
-
-
-
-
-
-
13%
DaneL6 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
Charlson6 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
Tangent0016 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Triad marriages are next."
Reply
If you look at countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, there simply has not been an upsurge in the movement toward polyamorous marriage.
Frankly, I don't have a problem with it as long as all parties are on equal footing and wholly consensual. -
LiliVonShtuppComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
0%
tanglang6 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good. It should be up to the states. The citizens in California twice voted it down. It should have been put to rest after the first vote. Same thing happened in GA. If NY wants to legalize it I say good for em. However don't interfere with states that vote against it.
Reply-
100%
willottica6 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hmm... let's extend the argument. The Federal Government shouldn't be able to overrule what the state has decided, right? That would be excessive government interference.
Reply
On the other hand, why the State level? Why not let individual municipalities decide for themselves. After all, the demographics in say, San Francisco, are much different from the demographics in say, San Diego. They're a long way away, too... no reason that the people of San Diego, who'll never be affected by John and Joe's San Francisco wedding, should have a say in it.
And then you can extend it even further. Why let the municipalities decide? Why not let individual households decide? Get the government out of it altogether! After all, whose business is it if John and Joe are cohabitant roommates with benefits or if they decide to call their particular relationship a marriage? Not mine. Not yours. Not the voters.
Should we arrange a vote on whether vegetarians should be allowed to raise children? It's a nutritionally risky home for them...
And then, some religions don't allow their adherents to celebrate birthday parties! Depriving a child of such a simple, harmless, joy seems unconscionable! Maybe we should deny people of those religions the right to have their marriages recognized.
Other religions allow the use of birth control! What a terrible message to send to children. Sex should be for reproduction only! Anyone who doesn't belong to a religion that forbids birth control is definitely unfit for marriage (and raising children, because that's ultimately what marriage is about). -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.