Originally posted by rusky
Dude, true love is something each one of us feels at a moment in life, and it's up to each one of us to decide who we love... so, why do u find it so hard to believe that some guy loves another guy or a gal loves another gal ? I cannot see myself doing smth like this but as I said earlier, people are different... How would something like this affect u ? Why would u stand against someone else's happines ?
EDIT- so true love is in the dictionary, but it is also defined in a nother book
I would only stand against someone elses happiness if i knew it was wrong, just like how a son will bring a girl, that he loves, over to his house to meet his parents, and how the mother would be able to tell if she was going to be a good wife, or a bad wife. So the mother might take the son aside and talk to him about how he really feels about her. The mother only wants to help.
Originally posted by yerssot
TF, up to this point I haven't, cause I'm attracted to girls, but if I'm interested in guys, it's quite normal that I do that, no?and what makes you tell it's wrong? cause you're being vague here
well i couldn't make it anymore obvious here but i'm not trying to be too religious, i'm just stating why i feel it's wrong. That's all, we all have different things that we believe in.
Originally posted by rusky
But do u think the mother actually knows what the boy 'feels' ? Do u think a more rational approach is better than a strong belief in feelings ?
well in this case she's using a belief in feelings, that's why she questions the son, but for a more rational approach, what would you mean?
well in this case she's using a belief in feelings, that's why she questions the son, but for a more rational approach, what would you mean?
I mean the mother says what she says because she rationally deduces that it would not be a good choice.. but the son feels it is not so, he feels love, even though his mother cannot understand, what he feels is above any logic..
My two cents worth. I think the reason that there's so much controversy over it in the US is that churches see marriage as a union between a man and a woman established by God - speaking in biblical terms. The fact that our society has been built from religious principles keeps that perspective in almost every area of government. I think that calling it a contract or union or any other term besides "marriage" would probably pass for most people a little easier. I think one of you mentioned in another thread that this happened in your country first, and eventually it came to be called a marriage. Most people that I know who would have a problem with same-sex "marriage" would probably not have a problem with some sort of legal "contract" to allow tax breaks, etc. I've even heard the proposal of such a "contract" for siblings who live together unmarried or cousins or friends, etc. - no sexual connotation - just financial, tax-breaks, etc. I think that is where it will have to start if there is to eventually be acceptance of same-sex marriage. Get the technical/financial stuff passed first. Then see where it goes from there. Does that make sense?
the way i see it is that some people are attracted to the same sex and that they should not be treated any differently and should have all the privilidges of a heterosexual couple. If you refuse to allow gay couples to marry then in my eyes it is discriminatoryand the same as saying e.g. white people are not allowed to marry