niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
I know that many people see this right as very important, and I accept that, even though I don't value this right or wish to exercise it.
Output: Valid
I don't give a XXXX if people have "criticized" the survey.
Output: Invalid
This fight is about equal rights for gay people; I believe that equality is all that is needed for acceptance, and it sounds to me that you believe the same.
Output: Valid
A married gay person is unlikely to have sex with others while he/she is married so therefore, the virus would really be kept between the couple.
Output: Valid
While I don't have a problem with gay marriage personally, I do support the power of the voters.
Output: Valid
Now, society has changed, and people will not be as direct, in general, for fear of looking bad themselves.
Output: Invalid
There are plenty of incredibly committed same-sex couples today, and there will be a few more if same-sex marriage is legalized because our laws teach people.
Output: Valid
The governemnt should only be allows to give extra rights to common law marriages, whether sanctified in a church or a temple, between a man or a woman or a man and a man or a woman and a woman.
Output: Valid
But it is still law, and to pretend that DOMAs are invalid and don't demonstrate the way states view marriage (between a man and woman) is wishful thinking on your part.
Output: Valid
As evidence of the negative long term effects of gay marriage we can look at statistics that show that birth rates are approaching 0 growth throughout Europe where gay marriage has been legalized for some time now.
Output: Valid
Funny that the author didn't look at lost inhetitance taxes, which could easily offset the income tax advatage stated above, the additional cost in SS survivor benefits and additional corporate healthcare costs.
Output: Valid
The Idea of A Government acting as a Charity and relying on PEOPLE to willingly give will never happen.
Output: Invalid
I am in favor of a limited constitutional right to homosexual marriage--the limitation being that the right should not force a religious group opposed to the practice to perform the marriage.
Output: Valid
Also your conflating different institutions with the same name, how hard is it to know that legal marriage, social marriage, and religious marriage are all really different things and shouldn't be confused.
Output: Valid
If I had my way no one would believe in the kack that the church spews...but as long as they exist they'll use (and abuse) the system just as everyone else seems determined to do.
Output: Invalid
The opponents of same-sex marriage refuse to allow gay people to be treated as equals.
Output: Valid
BUT the above comment(found on your side as a rebuttal), regarding an action to do to him/her self is definitely out of line not only for a Christian but for anyone on this site.
Output: Invalid
Churches and other religious bodies are free to espouse what they choose, and people are free to believe as they choose about same-sex relations and marriage, and they are free to believe that such relations are sinful.
Output: Valid
if being gay was as popular as being straight, being straight would be as "unnatural" as being gay is.
Output: Valid
Religious and conservitive ad campaigns stating gays want to destroy the institution of marriage or take away freedom or force homosexuality upon children or why stop at same sex couples, why not groups or animals has had an effect.
Output: Valid
Generally speaking, it should be no surprise that making gays marry straights, or denying gays the right to a stronger legal/religious bond, creates less stable marriages.
Output: Valid
Since you are heterosexual and have rallied against gay rights/gay marriage you have done this and are therefore imposing your religion on others.
Output: Valid
They argue that conservative people are using religion, not conservative principle to stand against gay rights.
Output: Valid
If there are cases where we can not determine what sex a person is, how can we determine if they are homosexual or not?
Output: Valid
So try, for the moment, to understand that your view of a homosexual is only a small piece of who that person is; they are not as different from the next person as you seem to believe.
Output: Valid
Gays asking their non-conjugal relationship to be declared the equivalent to marriage is the equivalent of motorcycles drivers asking to be declared the equivalent of automobile drivers.
Output: Valid
Even if you have documents, they are lost in the flood somewhere.....but the married couples just say the majic words....I am looking for my wife or husband.
Output: Valid
There's also plenty of speculation that gays are more likely to be tested for and report cases of HIV infection than heterosexuals due to increased awareness programs targeted at gays in the United States.
Output: Valid
The argument in favor of same-sex marriage is based on religion often as well; whole bunches of people hold religious beliefs which state that marriage is between any two people who are not related by family.
Output: Valid
I think there are multiple ancient views on marriage but just a simple marriag where to people can share intense levels of compassion and produce offspring together and form a family is what he is talking about.
Output: Valid
So if someone is against same sex marriage then they are for hurting my family.
Output: Valid
It's no surprise that people who hold to the idea that the constitution shouldn't be taken with a strict interpretation would not like accusations of judicial activism, and in fact deny them at all costs.
Output: Invalid
You are saying that we shouldn't correct an inequality on the grounds that if we do we destroy tradition and all authoritative vales.
Output: Valid
The reason that we "Mormons" opposed gay marriage so vocally is that giving gays the right to marry is that it endangers the traditional family.
Output: Valid
marriage is simply two people who love each other expressing that love and making a commitment, so why can't a man and a man or a woman and a woman who are in love make a commitment?
Output: Valid
Since people cannot come up with any tangible reason for denying same-sex couples marriage - and same-sex couple can at least quantify the harm of denying them marriage, who do you think wins the argument?
Output: Valid
Remember that gay marriage is not further down the line than straight marriage.
Output: Valid
"It means the world isn't changing, it means the world has already changed," said Steven Goldstein, chairman of Garden State Equality, the state's largest gay rights organization.
Output: Valid
I believe you will see a major sociological shift in opinion on many social issues as the baby boomers die off and the curent young generations age.
Output: Valid
Cause when you grow up in a (roughly) 1:1 ratio of men:women, and then you marry off in 1:3+, you will get men who don't have any women.
Output: Invalid
You: You left out that gay marriage is legalized by legislatures.
Output: Valid
If you listen to people talking about the benefits of marriage upon society (Note, DIFFERENT from the benefits the government gives married couples)...
Output: Valid
But to receive government recognition of their marriage or (better put) the government "promoted" aspects of their marriage,... they must conform their relationship to fit the government's definition.
Output: Valid
HOW does that lead to ANY conclusion that "polygamy" is the solution???
Output: Invalid
It just behooves society to bring gay couples into full inclusion and equality, when there isn't a reason not to, and we want in.
Output: Valid
Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, and with gay marriage, everyone will have the right to marry someone of the same AND opposite sex.
Output: Valid
I would say that they think nothing should be off limits including puting nazi type death camps on the ballot for people to vote on.
Output: Invalid
If the government "redresses" the grievances against gay marriage it will only establish the Christian faith further which is against the constitution.
Output: Valid
In either case, it is a weak argument for the RC being anti-gay, since homosexual sex is just one of a hundred or so "risk factors" that disqualify one from donation.
Output: Valid
I think absolutely no reasonable argument can be made suggesting that same-sex marriage might cause any harm, and I think that no reasonable argument can be made which suggests that same-sex marriage will not help people.
Output: Valid
Denying the right to marry and deciding what is not recognized as marriage are the same thing, just phrased in different language so I think my explanation still stands.
Output: Valid
We are active socially, and I expect that people will respond to and criticize what we stand for and work for in the society.
Output: Invalid
The family unit has been decimated by the high levels of single mothers, single fathers, abusive parents, neglective parents, high rates of divorce, rising rates of infeditelity, and those are just a few examples.
Output: Valid
Same sex marriage can cause a perfect union of two people the same as M/F and can make a mockery or marriage just as many M/F unions currently do.
Output: Valid
then why does the state allow couples who can't have children to get married or couples in their 70's and 80's to get married but won't let gay people get married?
Output: Valid
There are no actual legal stipulations regarding HIV patients having sex, particularily with non-HIV people, which may as well be considered murder.
Output: Invalid
Schwarzenegger also has indicated he will veto a raft of other bills the Democratically controlled legislature has passed including bills allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses and a hike in the minimum wage.
Output: Invalid
I say it applies to everyone and if the law said "if you are gay you can't marry" then I'd say that denied equal protection.
Output: Valid
Those people's religion would certainly not call it a "marriage".
Output: Valid
Because it doesn't work as well, the argument that gays and straights have equal opportunity for marriage is fallacious because it assumes that opposite-sex marriage works equally for everyone.
Output: Valid
The particular issue you raise here regarding the 14th Amendment is the issue of substantive due process, a rather novel concept that only a select group of creative lawyers could possibly have contrived (since it is a contradiction in terms).
Output: Valid
I feel like you are keeping gay marriage and gay rights separate in your mind, and I think that that is a very wrong assumption.
Output: Valid
I am asking you to not stand up and fight for your religious values because by doing so, you are stripping the religious freedom and equality of other people.
Output: Invalid
Some people may think atheists are unintellectual; based on that premise, then atheists cannot give consent.
Output: Invalid
Anyone who supports anything but a flat tax has no ground to stand on for demanding equal benefits.
Output: Invalid
The fact that other types of legitimate state interest may exist does not change your misrepresentation of the two cases discussed.
Output: Invalid
In fact, a recent CNN poll showed that 55 percent of Americans oppose gay marriage, so Prejean's stance is clearly within the mainstream of public opinion.
Output: Valid
Though if you're asking whether those people would acknowledge that the law has made some accomodation for that individual, then certainly that is the truth.
Output: Invalid
Jefferson did not specifically speak out against denying rights to homosexuals, but he did propose an act that would prevent the government from granting special rights based on one's religion.
Output: Valid
Because it is not between a man and woman, it is not right to call this a 'marriage', in saying this, I am in no way trying to demean the relationship two people of the same gender can have.
Output: Valid
I'm saying heterosexuals are group A and homosexuals are group B and that group A and group B are equal.
Output: Valid
I have found that the majority of people who claim others use fallacies haven't the faintess clue about how they work.
Output: Invalid
Our Forefathers didn't want a state religion to be forced on the governed, but it certainly wasn't interested in a God-less government as evident by the heavy use of prayer throughout our government's history.
Output: Valid
Eventually gay marriage will be legallize just as intermarriage has been and future generations will look down upon those who are against gay marriage now as we look down upon those who disagreed with intermarriage.
Output: Valid
If one does not, then the correct path is to seek to amend the Constitution to exclude gay citizens, and this the GOP has repeatedly sought to do.
Output: Valid
And NOWHERE in their statements on "legitimate state interest" do they specify ANY requirement that the issue involved not be a "choice".
Output: Valid
Sex is not a protected right sanctioned by the constitution, however it is regulated through marriage, the ACLU lawyers vainly trying to argue this knwo the truth of it.
Output: Valid
Significantly, the group emphasized, Quidachay denied San Francisco's request to stop the case in light of the city's lawsuit filed Thursday against CCF and Liberty Counsel, claiming the "equal protection clause" requires homosexual "marriage."
Output: Valid
In a free society, the government does not deny rights or benefits to its people without a good reason; it does not deny those rights and benefits unless they are harmful.
Output: Valid
I believe that marriage is about commitment and that the government should therefore grant the benefits of marriage to every committed couple.
Output: Valid
Some feel it is a way for church and state to be too involved.
Output: Valid
If two people should be allowed to "do their own business" in peace than why not gays?
Output: Valid
We're talking about this country here Archangel, and there ARE muslims who want gays to have equal rights (ya think maybe, gay muslims?
Output: Valid
Lastly gay isn't a civil right, you don't have a right to be gay.
Output: Valid
For example, if a state Congress passes a bill that grants additional benefits to marriages and civil unions, a governor could simply line-item veto the benefit to civil unions, which then means that the benefits would apply only to marriage.
Output: Valid
Basically, Foundit's list of "suspect posters" seems to amounts to anyone who actually debates with him and disagrees with him any more than an nominal amount.
Output: Invalid
If gay couples are allowed to marry then any combination of marriage should be allowed as long as it involves consenting adults.
Output: Valid
He could have used his clout as the mayor of SF to help gay couples sue the state to change the law against gay marriage.
Output: Valid
However, by comparison, the 1977 survey was truly random, and so its results should certainly be given more weight.
Output: Invalid
Changing the current state of marriage to allow same sex marriage will not effect straight marriages at all.
Output: Valid
Had it been fair, the public would have been informed that there are 1,049 benefits of marriage that are being denied to homosexual families.
Output: Valid
So you are right that a state law legalizing same-sex marriage does not give people the right to marry someone of foreign nationality of the same sex in order to give them U.S. citizenship.
Output: Valid
How does that still justify denying marriage to same-sex couples if the same "privilege" is given to opposite sex couples?
Output: Valid
And as the creator of both man and woman, instilling an innate desire for companionship and love, who expects that love be a covenant between two people, he would not truly concern himself with the physical disposition of those people.
Output: Valid
It can't be proven that opposite-sex marriage is harmless, it can't be proven that alcohol use is harmless, it can't be proven that airbags or seatbelts are harmless, even.
Output: Valid
I forgot a few but one I can recall goes like this: studies show that children need a mother and a father for parental role models.
Output: Valid
Allowing use will have literally no impact on people who are not gay couples looking to call their union a marriage.
Output: Valid
it simply brings to light a common misconception that society has been spreading for the past few years.
Output: Invalid
And we don't hate gays we just don't think gay marriage is right nor do we see a men to men action nor women to women action right
Output: Valid
I didn't say marriage was about just reproduction you incoherent person, marriage is just friendship with sex added.
Output: Valid
If one has sex with 100 people with protection, they are at a lower risk than someone who sleeps with one person and no protection.
Output: Invalid
I'm not sure it's circular reasoning, exactly, but is an interesting reference to make, since we're changing a law, and we change laws every day.
Output: Invalid
Social standards are subject to evolution, adaptation and refinement as determined by society as a whole.
Output: Valid
Any benefits that exist in allowing same-sex marriage aren't being weighed down by abnormality.
Output: Valid
The fact is, homosexual marriage is anathema to many religious people.
Output: Valid
Remember that gay people, like heterosexuals, can have sex without getting married.
Output: Valid
Same-sex marriage does not encourage people do move into the pedophile group; that group still has no sexual or marriage rights under the law.
Output: Valid
Doesn't really matter what the public is thinking, under current laws marriage is a states issue and unless that state has an ammendment the courts could rule in favor of gay marriage based on the 14th ammendment.
Output: Valid
Throughout history, even ion remote times, marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman.
Output: Valid
Your argument is like insisting that people should be able to get the marriage benefits even if they don't want to get the marriage license.
Output: Valid
Gay couples were granted the same legal rights, but not the title, as married couples on Feb. 19 when New Jersey became the third state to offer civil unions.
Output: Valid
The fact that people did commit fraud in an attempt to strip minorities of their civil rights shows the need to further safeguard the rights of minorities.
Output: Valid
Remember, part of what defines marriage is that it is between a man and woman.
Output: Valid
Do you really not understand the difference between what some KKK guy does at home, or what his private opinions are, and the stance of the organization itself?
Output: Invalid
Marriage is a right for all people, as declared by the constitution.
Output: Valid
I thank the Red Cross for recognizing gay couples, but the Feds fo not.....another reason gay marriage isn't just a right but a necessity.
Output: Valid
This was not, in the view of the Court majority, even a rational basis for enacting the amendment, and they therefore ruled that the state could not abrogate an individual right with such an amendment.
Output: Valid
IMO, to argue as if they are the same is a fundamentally dishonest way of approaching things.
Output: Invalid
For instance do you think that the religious freedom of say that mormon, for instance, should go on the ballot for people to vote away?
Output: Invalid
That would be hard if sex is a big deal in one's life, but if it's not and life is about other, more important things, it's not hard.
Output: Invalid
It's weird indeed that all states except one allow single gay people to adopt children, but many do not allow gay couples to be adoptive parents together.
Output: Valid
They simply say they are against gay marriage and therefore would support making sure marriage is not redefined.
Output: Valid
That solution is a great one; no one has to lose benefits, and no one has to lose sleep because a same-sex couple is "married".
Output: Valid
I call opposing same-sex marriage evil because I believe that it is evil, and I am trying to explain why I disapprove of opposing same-sex marriage.
Output: Valid
Um, no ... there would still be no federal rights bestowed upon gay couples, not to mention prtability if a spouse was to migrate with his or her partner to another country.
Output: Valid
If the concept of 'harm' is to decide whether or not gay people should be allowed to redefine the institution of marriage, then gay rights groups have little to stand on.
Output: Valid
A second key D.O.M.A. component prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex or polygamous marriages for any purpose, even if recognized by one of the states.
Output: Valid
The issue is that THEIR religion (which in fact isn't Christian so much at all) is apparently to carry out social activism the way they do.
Output: Invalid
You realize you then exclude single mothers and fathers, and blame their childrens shortcomings as adults on the fact that someone else was not there.
Output: Invalid
I don't know of any supporters of gay and lesbian equal rights who want to strip anyone of their right to marry or deny anyone their fundamental rights.
Output: Valid
The burden of proof is not necessarily on you to show why homosexuality is harmful but to show why denying same-sex marriage is helpful.
Output: Valid
What is next you have to be baptized to get a drivers license or maybe circumsized to get a business license.
Output: Valid
One thing is certain: you don't automatically get to have gay marriage put in the same catagory as women's and blacks' right to vote, interracial marriage, etc.
Output: Valid
I believe that while this idea is somewhat radical, it is the only possible solution that takes into consideration the valid concerns of both sides of the issue.
Output: Invalid
It doesn't mean we shouldn't or won't give benefits to same-sex couples or to different-sex couples, or to other types of couples.
Output: Valid
There would be nothing put upon Congress, everything would be left to the states.
Output: Invalid
I do however respect all peoples views and beliefs because I believe that if people are going to take my opinion and faith seriously and actually listen I should respect their beliefs.
Output: Invalid
Because consenting adults should have the authority to marry and be entitled to the same benefits as all heterosexual couples who perform a ceremony showing their commitment as life partners.
Output: Valid
Answer me this then why does society allow couples who can't have children to get married or couples in their 70's and 80's to get married but won't let gay people get married?
Output: Valid
If you wish to argue for gay rights, realize that other things you may not agree with become a lot more possible.
Output: Valid
The 9th amendment acknowledges the existence of NON-ENUMERATED RIGHTS, which allows the courts to do away with any stupid argument that "marriage isn't in the constitution, and thus not a right".
Output: Valid
Nothing would prevent straight couples from the exact same marriage whether gay people can marry or not.
Output: Valid
There are several amendments guaranteeing rights that were not given before, and I can't see any reason why gay marriage should be any exception to this precedent.
Output: Valid
The problem is that the media only focuses on the civil rights battle, so the average person has no one has any idea who gay people are; they know only that gays are asking for the right to marry.
Output: Valid
Though I didn't vote, I do financially support ACLJ against gay marriage simply because a union between same sex couples can easily have their rights established through adoption, wills, or power of attorneys.
Output: Valid
I HAVE questioned McCain on the issue of not withdrawing troops from Iraq and his bailout, both of which are wrong approaches.
Output: Invalid
We further believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.
Output: Valid
It is not that just my religion says homosexuality is an abomination, but Holy Scripture, and the foundation for every denomination of Christianity says so.
Output: Valid
And right now, as long as marriage laws deny marriage rights to same-sex couples, they are unconstitutional.
Output: Valid
How would you like it if same sex marriage was normal and you weren't allowed to marry the opposite gender even though you truly love them.
Output: Valid
These battles are going to be fought on different fronts.
Output: Invalid
One acceptable option would to be to completely sever the link between church and state in this regard and stop giving financial benefits to married couples; then gays would only be denied something of religious significance.
Output: Valid
Yet there is no reason to believe that any particular deviation is morally and rationally valid or invalid, nor is there reason to believe that the standard is valid or invalid.
Output: Invalid
Defense of Marriage Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Also, if you'll notice, DOMA had strong democratic party support and Bill Clinton, the first black president signed it into law.
Output: Valid
Except that in the US, the law is pretty clear that the government is not permitted to be Christian.
Output: Valid
And to trump this as a question of morality only serves as a mask to curtail the prejudice objections one personally has to a ceremony, right, and relationship that person will not even be personally affected by....
Output: Valid
Saying, as the Bible states, that gay sex is a sin isn't 'bashing' anyone.
Output: Valid
When you IGNORE the facts which are the starting points, you have demonstrated you cannot even build to "logic".
Output: Invalid
Laws in this country are based on the morals of the citizens...who just so happen to be predominantly Christian.
Output: Valid
All of the above I do support people should be allowed to live in any relationship form between consenting adults.
Output: Valid
Once we redefine the union of marriage to NOT exclude everyone but hetero couples, we have to allow all permutations in order to maintain the "equal protection statute".
Output: Valid
One of the interesting developments in recent years has been the rush by people in many states to amend their marriage statutes so that they explicitly say that marriage is between one man and one woman.
Output: Valid
Merely because the state law says A does not make it consitutional, but then again, look who posted the article emoticonXRolleyes, that says much about which kind of people think lowely of the consitution.
Output: Valid
People keep touting how marriage is a "religious" institution, but what if the government were trying to decide whether or not Christian marriages would have legal recognition?
Output: Valid
In the Gallup Poll, for example, only 45% of people of over 55 years of age support ��_��__��_��__��_��__homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle��_��__��_��__; whereas young people from ages 18-34 years old are 75% in favor.
Output: Valid
But I am drawing a parallel between the arguments by the Commonwealth of Virginia and the arguments by those who claim that gay people already have equal rights, including the right to marry someone of the opposite-sex.
Output: Valid
It was taken for granted that marriage, legally, was only open to heterosexual couples.
Output: Valid
If you don't want parents to be judged, the mother and father should have different cars.
Output: Invalid
If marriage is so sacred socially, then heterosexuals who get married should never divorce, and quickie marriages that celebrities have all of the time shouldn't be allowed (Not to mention things like Joe Millionaire and the Bachelorette).
Output: Valid
I prefer to make up my own mind, rather than have it made up for me by people that believe the ignorance of 2000 years ago should return.
Output: Invalid
When a court appears to have made up meaning in a constitution to strike down a democratically passed law then the law is not serving the people but dictating to the people.
Output: Invalid
But not allowing gay marriage hurts all homosexual couples to a greater extent than the prior.
Output: Valid
The comparison of gay marriage to voting is tenuous when one realizes that voting has been a constitutional gurantee specifically stated from early on.
Output: Valid
To say "I want marriage to be broadened to include MY union" when your union doesn't fit the definition is to say you want marriage to be a broadenable institution to begin with.
Output: Valid
It WILL take a Constitutional amendment for it to say that homosexuals are less than equal.
Output: Valid
The conservatives would argue that by offering same sex marriage that their persute of happiness is denied by gay people even existing and that they have to look at us.
Output: Valid
Stop using the "sanctity of marriage" as an excuse not to give equal rights.
Output: Valid
minorities become majorities in large part by persuasion - so people should definitely try to convince people with different beliefs.
Output: Invalid
If civil unions do not provide the same benefits and protections as marriage, then civil unions are clearly not equal to marriage, and again, gay people are being treated as less-than-equal citizens.
Output: Valid
However just extending marriage to gay couples is not enough, it must be extended to all permutations of sexual relationships and society must look at sexual relationships that are otherwise banned.
Output: Valid
Think the big thing that people miss is that the real reason for marriage is to ensure that you have a suitable heir to inherit your things, generally one with a partner who has also invested heavily into the offspring.
Output: Valid
Civil unions would probably bring on the same financial problems that gay marriage would, although I don't agree with JP on all of this.
Output: Valid
A variety of research has also been done on the issue of comparing parenting of gay parents to straight parents, and gays are proven to be just as good parents as straights.
Output: Valid
If the husband and wife are comfortable with that situation (as presumably the gay couple would be), then the government doesn't care to get involved to disqualify the marriage...
Output: Valid
Statistically, it's the people who aren't adopting because the people who can accidentally have children don't always accidently have children, and those who do, aren't always bad parents.
Output: Invalid
Quite frankly, one absolute certainty in science regarding homosexuality is that being gay IS NOT a "choice".
Output: Valid
This is a situation that can actually be considered harmful, and it brings up a whole new debate over whether it is morally just to conceive a child who is at a greater risk of disease and mental retardation.
Output: Invalid
Given your statistical argument in defense of marriage, you should have some formula that should show the break-even point at which homosexual reproductive proclivities will allow them equal access to existing marriage laws.
Output: Valid
The economic reality, Badgett argues, is that gay and bisexual men earn between 17 and 28 percent less than similarly qualified straight men.
Output: Valid
I don't see how this is NOT related anyway.
Output: Invalid
BTW it is an evil vile christianist organization in every state that has put these evil vile amendments on the ballot.
Output: Invalid
I do not want gay deviant sex to be considered anything other than that, deviant.
Output: Valid
A person who identifies as being sexually oriented to adult females, but who victimizes young boys is a "Homosexual Pedophile", but his sexuality in regards to ADULTS is HETEROSEXUAL.
Output: Invalid
You have the right to marry the person with whom you have chosen to form a lifelong committed partnership.
Output: Valid
Then twist around words to fit in this weird idea you have that somehow gays are discriminating against you by wanting to get married.
Output: Valid
This whole marriage thing is about creating a legal precedent, for further pushing the gay agenda.
Output: Valid
They could not find a single legal expert or constitutional expert who was willing to say such a ban even MIGHT be constitutional, so they went after the amendment.
Output: Valid
Possibly, but changing marriage to allow such between couples of the same sex is going against the custom and usage of societies throughout the ages.
Output: Valid
The homosexual agenda's justification for demanding marriage has always been for the equal benefits which marriage affords couples who marry.
Output: Valid
That's totally irrelevant, however, because it doesn't matter how many people vote for something if it is unconstitutional.
Output: Valid
I do wish there was a way for gay couples to recieve the same benefits in government as married couples, but I don't believe in homosexual marriage.
Output: Valid
It has to do with ALL INDIVIDUALS (not just those who are gay) being able to freely and legally marry according to the dictates of their OWN FAITH , the same as every heterosexual couple.
Output: Valid
The crock is how you will do anything but allow people to decide for themselves if they will call a same-sex union marriage.
Output: Valid
If a church does not want to perform a same-sex marriage, the church should have the right to deny it based on religious reasons.
Output: Valid
In your wildest dream, if this should happen, I suppose there'd be a civil uprising followed by the secession of several states to form at least two countries.
Output: Invalid
It could only be those people who are uncertain of their sexuality right now; it could only be those people who might suspect themselves of being homosexual today, but deny it because of society's lack of acceptance.
Output: Invalid
But San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera argued after filing suit, "The rights afforded by California's Constitution clearly trump laws restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples."
Output: Valid
The only feasible and truly fair solution, since you've decided to screw it up for everyone, is to have a system of giving these benefits that has nothing to do with marriage whatsoever.
Output: Valid
Scientists during the era of "scientific racism," in the late 19th and early 20th century, also made these kinds of claims.
Output: Invalid
When asked if gay marriage should be allowed to exist equally with marriage, but with a different name, gay rights advocates respond that this would separate it from marriage and cause discrimination.
Output: Valid
The difference with homosexuality is that most people don't want to break those "rules", and so it's easy for the majority to say that they should remain in place.
Output: Valid
It doesn't mean that state has to recoginze your marriage if you move in though.
Output: Valid
and i already mentioned how polygamous or incestious marriage are wrong - because in polygamous marriages, women are being brainwashed into marrying a man who has 48 other wives and thats an infringment of her rights.
Output: Valid
What is your basis for concluding that ancient governments (who formalized common law marriage which was then codified into U.S. law) used reproduction statistics for this purpose?
Output: Valid
My disagreement with any court decision is not ever going to be based on whether it results in "conservative" or "liberal" policies.
Output: Invalid
Do you not realize the problem lies with you (in that you are too easily taking it personally), rather than everyone else?
Output: Invalid
Only heterosexual acts and unions can actually produce offspring - so gay unions aren't really producing new taxpayers and citizens at all - their relations with the opposite sex are producing new taxpayers and citizens.
Output: Valid
All I am asking is that you accept that my marriage is just as valid under my religion as yours is under your religion, and that we are all entitled to the same civil rights.
Output: Valid
The divorce rate is over 50%, single parent families by choice are on the rise and plenty of messed up people had two parents.
Output: Valid
We are fired for being gay, and prevented hospital access to our partners cause we are gay.
Output: Valid
All we have to do is eliminate the laws that discriminate against gay people.
Output: Valid
They may not intend to incite those who are unstable enough to physically attack those who are deamed undesirable, but you cannot tell me they do not know that their words incite disdain.
Output: Invalid
I also doubt I've argued that a hospital shouldn't be required to be decent, or that 'visiting a lawyer' would mean one was 'all set' in every way.
Output: Invalid
Just because a religion proclaims a marriage is to be defined a certain way does not mean the government must conform to the wishes of the religious definition, quite the contrary.
Output: Valid
We can easily create a word for a legal gay union without destroying or changing the meaning of any other existing word...such as "marriage".
Output: Valid
Thirty years of social science research has shown the consequences for both children and adults when mother-father marriage is not present (crime, poverty, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, school failure, and mental, emotional and physical problems).
Output: Valid
If you think people are up-in-arms about gay marriage now, how up-in-arms will they be when someone suggests that the term "marriage" should be removed from the law?
Output: Valid
And the meaning of life isn't to reproduce, if it was then why are there barren straight couples?
Output: Valid
It's called gay rights because it is gay rights.
Output: Valid
If you like, we can talk about Arab nations who prefer to have sex with little boys, and just use women for reproduction.
Output: Invalid
I rather give gays their rights than to live in a country that says it's equal, yet won't allow two lesbians to have the same marital status as a man and a woman.
Output: Valid
I don't think most religious peoples' opposition to gay marriage has to do with individual harm.
Output: Valid
Marriage has evolved over the years, and has involved different things in different times and cultures."
Output: Valid
Marriage evolved because of moral and religious grounds rather than a mere union approved by the state... To debase marriage just to accomodate base desires of gay couples in disguise if a right is simply stupid...
Output: Valid
There will never be a mass exodus of Gays to Canada becasue most gay people have no real interest in gay marriage......
Output: Valid
The word marriage will not magically get them to be acceptance nor get them a chance at the happiness that everyone else takes for granted.
Output: Valid
Lambda Legal, which represented Valentine argued that since same-sex couples are not legally permitted to marry in New York State the court should accept the domestic partner registry as equivalent to marriage.
Output: Valid
The incidence of sickle cell anemia is highest among the black race, therefore, black people should not be allowed to have children.
Output: Valid
Nobody is asking you to be gay, marry a man, or even like gay people.
Output: Valid
Surely this isn't what you are saying but if it is then where does it say this in the law?
Output: Invalid
so why cant everyone just get married with out religion involved so that no one can get offended.
Output: Valid
My upcoming marriage will have nothing to do with the bible, but I am pretty sure the country will still recognize me as married.
Output: Valid
I agree that rape is about asserting control over another person, but regarding your view that rape is not about sexual attraction at all, I don't buy it.
Output: Invalid
Would gay people being allowed to have the same legally recognized marriages that straight people have affect you in any way?
Output: Valid
We can't decide these things for ourself based on other peoples beliefs.
Output: Valid
Actually the whole thing is a graft tacked onto the Christian Religion in order to create an enemy force and to provide an explanation of evil.
Output: Invalid
This culture, the effects of gay marriage, may very possibly "hurt" Pastor Joe in the sense that he is not happy with the effects of allowing it, later down the road.
Output: Valid
Often the argument given in favor of gay marriage is that they want the right to marry the person they love.
Output: Valid
Such a government would not rule such marriages void as the idea of gay marriage has strong support from the Canadian populace.
Output: Valid
The fact that foundit must first re-interpret every post he responds to by misinterpreting what the opposition say's and then attacking that misinterpretation is undeniable evidence that it is impossible to have an honest debate with him.
Output: Invalid
Marriages are public acts bestowed with all the state rights.
Output: Valid
But Sen. Biden argued that same-sex couples should be treated equally under the law and afforded all the same rights and responsibilities as straight married couples.
Output: Valid
Since marriage (love) is legally sanctioned for all heterosexuals, the same rights and protection should be granted to homosexuals who choose to marry...or these "legalities" should be terminated completely.
Output: Valid
Yes you are because you believe it is a sin and want to stop two men from getting married doesn't mean everyone believes it is a sin.
Output: Valid
Amendment protects them there and since we are talking a sexually behavior... and not a handicap or ethnicity... sorry pal, it doesn't not fall under federal protection and should never.
Output: Valid
You are correct that in the United States, the Supreme Court has ruled over time that rights are not absolute; they are to be balanced against a state interest in passing laws that may limit rights.
Output: Valid
The "public" has a right not to have a gay's "sexuality" to be flaunted in front of them (like a gay day events).
Output: Valid
That there is only one "logical" method of interpreting the Constitution is the brainchild of the radical hard right which would turn an organic document into tablets of stone.
Output: Invalid
People wiht values don't accpet things below their values because of the affect on society.
Output: Invalid
When someone says "gays can't get married" that's really not accurate.
Output: Valid
A man can marry "Chris" based on what "Chris's" gender is.
Output: Valid
The movement for gay rights and LGBT equality is doomed to failure, or at the very least a fatally slanted naming convention (equality is equal if we are both trying to be like a standard model).
Output: Valid
In fact it is worse, if we ban drugs and find that it was the wrong decision at least it is possible to ban them again, allowing gay marriage is a once only decision .
Output: Valid
If strong arming others seems too harsh (which it many would say it is) then you need to find secular reasons to make gay marriage illegal.
Output: Valid
Although gays have all the rights of heterosexuals, the laws are currently designed so that heterosexual relationships are rewarded while homosexual relationships are punished.
Output: Valid
That's like saying the Jewish admonition against pork is just telling people 'they aren't good enough for pork.'
Output: Valid
People are also killed because they are of a certain race, religion or even gender every day, and they have civil rights protections, so what would the difference in this case be?
Output: Invalid
I HAVE seen where the gays appear to be shunning recognition by wanting to blend in homogeneously with all married couples thereby losing some of their own identity.
Output: Valid
So those arguments about haircuts, mixed fabrics, and shellfish are invalid to be applied to Christians.
Output: Invalid
Homosexuality would not be enforced, and it wouldn't be the government regulating births.
Output: Valid
There may individuals who personally differ, of course, but their opinions are not based on evidence.
Output: Invalid
Not so long ago gay sex was considered beyond the pale let alone gay marriage so really morals have nothing to do with the gay marriage debate.
Output: Valid
I think the reason there has been resistance to redefine marriage is that people really know that this is not a civil rights issue, despite attempts by the gay lobby to paint it that way.
Output: Valid
It should come as no surprise that some in these forums would think that way, because people like that might be more prone to seek an outlet for their statements.
Output: Invalid
The point is that I am not intending to LEGISLATE any action against homophobes for their own INDIVIDUAL and PRIVATE opinions.
Output: Valid
You HAVE to be--your view that ANY religious objection = hate is just too far outside of reality.
Output: Invalid
Multiple partners, close relatives, same-sex partners, non-human partners and underage partners are all not recognized as legitimate by the government.
Output: Valid
You don't have the right to have love in your marriage, though ;)
Output: Valid
Gay couples have marriage certificates, they have wedding ceremonies, they get married in churches.
Output: Valid
Gay people are not being treated any different from anybody else with respect to the issue of gay marriage.
Output: Valid
2) You're right that the American image of the Middle East would not be improved by legalizing same-sex marriage, at least not today, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't legalize it.
Output: Valid
It is the same thing with the same sex marriage because a man and a man or a woman and a woman should never be together.
Output: Valid
Lets look at the polygamy claim, since no one else can marry more than one person no one is being discriminated against.
Output: Valid
I'm talking about the social recognition and support, which is why straight people enter into marriage.
Output: Valid
Our courts are infested with liberal judges who manage to inflict the will of other whining liberals who constantly beg for concessions to the rules.
Output: Invalid
There are TWO fallacies here - one, that it is unhealthy for kids, 2 - that marriage and parenting are consistently tied.
Output: Valid
And the question isn't whether civil rights is being voted on, but whether or not changing the institution of marriage is a civil right to begin with.
Output: Valid
But if we as a people could truly call ourselves good, it would not be.
Output: Invalid
Unless you change the legal definition of marriage, you can't allow two men to get married to each other.
Output: Valid
We should not argue that gays should have the 'right' to marry we should argue that the definition of ' marriage' should be changed.
Output: Valid
True, the courts have ruled that denying gay people the right to marry is a violation of their human rights.
Output: Valid
*SOAWatch, a movement to challenge American foreign policy and its support for tyrants in Latin America, by calling annual attention to the School of the Americas which trains fascist terrorists.
Output: Invalid
But one who teaches that homosexuality is wrong, yet who sees violence against homosexuals and also states that we should not harm them cannot be blamed for violence.
Output: Valid
Now, I am uncertain why gay people should not be allowed to have civil marriage and in fact many people (perhaps most) support civil unions.
Output: Valid
While extremists, primarily evangelicals, invariably resort to quoting scripture in emotional attempts to drive their point(s), most discussions are very civilized with well researched and intelligent comments.
Output: Invalid
You could also make the claim that this story would hold true for the child of any gay rights activist, or even the child on any other political issue.
Output: Valid
The definition you'll hear from conservatives is more along the lines of: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law.
Output: Valid
But same-sex marriage doesn't cause disease transfer; gay people will have sex whether they have marriage or not.
Output: Valid
Well, there is a United Nations Universal Declaration of Human rights that state everyone of concentual age has the right to get married.
Output: Valid
A federal just has struck down as unconstitutional California's ban on same-sex marriage.
Output: Valid
We give Christians exactly the same rights as Buddhists in every situation, yet you have no trouble distinguishing between the two.
Output: Invalid
Or put in a different light, parents always have the right to raise their children as they please.
Output: Invalid
If so, then states need at least a rational basis for making certain marriages illegal, and there is no rational basis for making marriage between people of the same sex illegal.
Output: Valid