North Carolina Nesties
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Another controversial discussion
My post for the day:
A judge overturned California's ban on same sex marriage....discuss
*I'm probably in the minority here, but I believe marriage is between and man and a woman and is ordained by God. I have friends that are gay and I don't say mean things to them or treat them poorly, but I don't believe they should be allowed to get married. That's totally my opinion though*
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
Re: Another controversial discussion
I think it is great! I am all for same sex marriage.
My personal stance of gay/lesbian relationships is to not judge. I haven't been able to come to terms with if I believe it is actually a sin or not. I've seen too many loving gay/lesbian couples that I find it hard to believe that God wouldn't have something to do with making those two people meant for one another. I have also know a few friends who STRUGGLE with dealing with their sexuality because they were taught growing up that homosexuality is wrong. Seeing them struggle against their true feelings to be homosexual just makes me think that God created them that way and that it isn't wrong. So since I don't know 100% either way, I choose to let people make their own decisions and honor that since 1) they will be the ones held accountable at the end of the day and 2) I'm a sinner too. Therefore, I think the government should take the same stance, especially since they aren't supposed to incorporate religion into laws anyway.
Ditto.
I actually think that 30 years down the road gay marriage will be legal everywhere in the US and people will look back at this "issue" and think it's as ridiculous as slavery. Sort of like how a few decades ago people were debating on whether it should be ok for women to vote and now if anyone says women voting shouldn't be legal, we all raise our eyebrows and wonder what planet they grew up on.
By depriving someone of the right to get married you are essentially depriving them of their constitutional right to the persuit of happiness.
On a personal level, it doesn't bother me at all. I don't care what people do behind closed doors: bondage, S&M, foot fetishes, tickling... whatever floats your boat is your own business... and that, in my opinion, includes your sexual preference. I have way more important things to spend my time worrying about than whether Joe wants to marry Steve and people who are majorly against homosexuality sort of make me raise my eyebrows in curiosity. That's not meant to offend or hurt anyone's feelings... I just don't understand what exactly the issue is. Do you care whether someone is sexually attracted to a different race? Or if someone likes being spanked? Or which sexual prosition someone prefers? Probably not... so why does their sexual preference get so much attention?
I agree with everything you said, except it's sexual orientation, not preference. Preference implies choice, and gay people did not choose to be gay.
I like that I can just "ditto" Elissa on all the controversial posts
100% ditto - I don't think anyone has the right to decide who can and cannot get married.
I believe that as far as any government is concerned - state or federal - marriage should be a civil matter. I have no personal issues with same-sex marriage, polyamory, or anything else that involves consenting adults. Pay your taxes like everyone else & I don't care what you do with your personal life as long as you're not bringing harm to others.
I prefer what some countries in Europe do: Go to the courthouse/magistrate's office/government building for your legal marriage. If you, because of your faith, desire a religious ceremony, then by all means you should have that too...but it's in addition to your government-recognized civil marriage.
It was still illegal for my parents to be married in a few states until the late 1960's (my mother is Asian). Most of these laws were justified by religious stances. To me, this is just another version of the same sort of thing.
I suppose I'm in the minority here, and I hope most of you hear me out. I do think that "marriage" should be reserved to define a religious ceremony creating a bond between a man and a woman. I think a "civil union" could be between any two, loving, consenting adults and should be the standard for the laws of the land. I have no problem with the state recognizing and giving gays all the rights and privileges that other traditional couples have--I think its LONG overdue in fact.
I agree with Laud in that every couple that wishes to be recognized officially as a couple/union by the government should have to go to the courthouse and do so. I also wouldn't have a problem if there were a word to separately describe a "marriage" between two gay people either (and perhaps "gay marriage" or a new word would be needed to describe it). I just don't believe in re-defining terms--will something we describe as "red" today become "yellow" tomorrow just because a lot of people prefer the word "yellow" more? Historically, "marriages" have always been between a man and a woman--and since now we're finally becoming enlightened enough for gays to have this privilege (because I know that there have been gay people for as long as there have been people), maybe it's time to give THEM a special name for their unions before the eyes of God. For me, its just a matter of semantics. (If someone can give me an good argument as to why or how my logic in having a new name/term created is a bad idea, I'm all ears.)
So, long and short of it for me is, I'm glad that gays are one step closer to gaining the rights they deserve in the state of California.
This, I think the law should just come up with another term...
Marriages can still be the union of a man and woman, which gives them certain legal rights while JOINAGES (you know, or some other new term) could be the union of a man/man or woman/woman, which will give them those same rights.
Snaps to this comment.
totally agree!
Ditto this. And ditto what AT said about this issue being a "non-issue" in 30 years, when (I *hope*) we'll look back and wonder how we could have withheld the right to get married from people.
I guess my argument about the logic of having a new name for marriage would be, if marriage to you is only a Christian ceremony, then am I married? My wedding was non-religious, performed by a justice of the peace. Should I say I just had a civil union (or whatever word you'd make up), and not a wedding?
What about people of other religions?
I agree with having a separate legal union at the courthouse or what not, but I would still call that a marriage. Whether or not you choose to have a religious ceremony to me does not make it a marriage.