We hear Joe Solmonese try to explain to conservatives why same-sex marriage should be allowed. We hear Michelangelo Signorile do it, too. The list of rational folks making the case that gay men and women should be afforded the same rights as heteros is … endless. But there’s something truly magical about young people voicing their support. Meet Macaulay, a young girl who believes not supporting same-sex marriage “goes against the core values of America.”
“For all those ‘real Americans’ out there saying ‘gay marriage is against America’ … that just, in my opinion, goes against what this country was actually founded on. … How can anyone say that love between a man and a man, and a woman and a woman, is not the same between a man and a woman. That argument just completely dirties one of the most purest human emotions: love.”
sal
u go girl
RCLOY
word. HUGS*
TheWeyrd1
I don’t know how many times I’ve made the argument that the Bible is inspired by God but written by man. AND then translated from one language to another BY man. So then how could it possibly be the direct word of God…sheesh. My dad and my maternal grandfather were both ministers…and yet I only went to church when my grandmother was visiting, so I might not know what I’m saying here. But my dad would totally agree with this young lady on this topic…he used to say something about how playing football would also be an abomination based on the right winger’s logic due to the touching of pigskin…heh…course they completely overlook THAT (God will get them with swine flu now I guess…heh). Good on the young lady for posting this. Unfortunately, there will be many people who will vilify her for her opinion…so good on this website for applauding her!
Pyron
She did a very good job summarizing all of the arguments I have been heard in my life for legalizing it. It just makes sense what she is saying. Unfortunately, Logic doesn’t always work in the face of close minded bigotry.
CondeNasty
Good kid!! Yes she is absolutely right. I went to Catholic school and they totally taught us the evolution of the Bible as we no know it. That book has gone through so many edits and translations its not funny.
jjm16
Great video! I’d like to create a code to blast this video to the dumbasses over at FOX news, but an overdose of logic might rouse all staff to flock away in enlightened fascination or utter confusion-further crippling out nation’s media industry. But, one needn’t even mention the Bible when arguing to small minds, or to their pathetic corporate mindsets.
On the important point of marriage being an institution adopted by christians, our nation-state’s christian/agnostic founders planted seeds for a melting pot, where people of all religions(or nonreligions) are now already able to marry… if opposite sexes.
Many opponents of gay marriage generally refuse to acknowledge marriage as a civil-not religious-institution in today’s society, be it or be it not founded by their christian “forefathers.” Take, for instance, Miss Cali’s (vacant pause here) family/community/pastor’s/daddy’s values, which fail to even fairly weigh the logic that clearly designate marriage to be a right, not a procession bound to the confines of their own churches.
obey wan
Should gay divorce also be allowed? There are many complicating financial and legal complications with marriage and divorce only makes those issues more complicated. Love is Love and anyone can get married and have a party/ceremony. But marriage is for breeders and procreation purposes only. A man can divorce a wife if she is barren and that was widely accepted and even accepted today by Mr. Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston. The govt has an inherent interest to protect children and secure their financial well-being and guardianship. Marriage is a restriction and a regulation of the government. It is not a right, that is why it is called a marriage license. There are many restrictions on a marriage license including age and requires a licensed official to perform the ceremony. Marriage is ultimately a prison and the only person that will benefit from this will be divorce attorneys because the rate of divorce among gay couples will be higher than among straight couples.
strumpetwindsock
@obey wan:
Of course.
Actually haven’t they already recognized it in New York (someone correct me if I am wrong)? I think it was a canadian-married couple, so essentially the state recognizes gay marriage by granting that divorce.
And as for the rest of what you wrote there, I think you’re wrong about pretty much all of it.
TANK
@obey wan:
Are you fucking retarded? Seriously…LOL! Should gay divorce be allowed if gay marriage were? NO, that shouldn’t be allowed, but gay marriage should be…CHRIST! You’ve got rocks for brains.
dgz
@TheWeyrd1:
right on. especially since homosexuality is curiously absent from the 10 commandments, or any of the words of Jesus. the only person who wrote about it in the New Testament was Saul/Paul, who was craaazy, and wasn’t a disciple — during Jesus’ life he was actually one of his chief persecutors. (he’s also the one who wrote the book of Revelations, which reads like an acid trip.) and don’t even get me started on the old testament…
obey wan
If gay marriage were allowed, will there be any children left in the world. There are declining birth rates in every industrialized country but this has more to do with economic concerns. Straight couples are no longer getting married because there is too much financial stress involved and while marriage may seem like a perfect fairy tale and everything is fine when you get the license, it is not. The only person who wins will be the divorce attorney.
When gay couples are married, gay widows will be entitled to govt programs like social security. This will bankcrupt social security because there will be less children paying taxes to support the social security pensions for their parents. With a smaller population, most govt programs will fail. The marriage license is pointless if you don’t have kids. It is just there to enforce you to pay spousal and child support in the event of divorce. There really no benefits to getting married if you don’t have kids. It will make your life more difficult.
strumpetwindsock
@dgz:
Revelations is believed to have been written by Paul the apostle not Paul/Saul. But it is not clearly stated.
@obey wan:
You’re really starting to repeat yourself. Plus you are talking nonsense. You get married because you love someone and you want to be with that person, not to have kids.
Will there be any kids left in the world? Fuck man, don’t be ridiculous. Perhaps you should start complaining when the world population actually starts DROPPING. Frankly I think calling a moratorium on reproducing for 20 years might be just what this world needs.
obey wan
“You’re really starting to repeat yourself. Plus you are talking nonsense. You get married because you love someone and you want to be with that person, not to have kids.”
I beg to differ on the getting married because you love someone. Sure we all love someone, but marriage is a lifelong contract. There are many more factors that come with marriage, including the number one factor of financial gain. (1) Marriage usually occurs because the girl is pregnant, usually for teenagers or accidental pregnancies – this is called a “shotgun wedding”. (2) Marriage occurs when the male and female are ready to have a family and the male feels financially secure enough to support a family, (3) A female wants to have kids and has found a rich husband to support her financially. In conclusion, marriage may start out as love, but it has more to do with having kids and one person gold-digging the other person. I think there will be just as many stories about young,hot gay guys marrying a richer gay man, and then divorcing him for a spousal support divorce settlement.
Straight and gay guys care about sex and money, even if it means gold-digging to get both.
“Will there be any kids left in the world? Fuck man, don’t be ridiculous. Perhaps you should start complaining when the world population actually starts DROPPING. Frankly I think calling a moratorium on reproducing for 20 years might be just what this world needs.”
The world probably need population reduction, but that doesn’t mean the social security checks for baby boomers will get paid. We’re complaining about govt budgets and spending cuts, this will be much worse with cuts, when there are less people to pay taxes.
TANK
@obey wan:
Dirty diapers! This is cracked idiocy. Why wouldn’t there be any children left in the world, or just as much as is now…if gay marriage were legalized nationally, or globally even? Because…the secret to the perfect wedding cake…is babies! ANd we all know that if gay people get married, they’ll be some cake eating going on! ha ha ha ha ha, you’re absurd.
obey wan
Then, I think that straight couples should get more tax benefits if they have kids. The population is decreasing or increasing depending on who you ask and maybe population growth is destroying the earth. But with regards to social services, especially social security, there will not be enough children left to pay taxes to support the retirements of their parents. My point is that with straight marriage we should be encouraging people to have children, maybe like the polygamists, hah. But marriage is more of a financial situation for the financial protection of the couple or at least the poorer spouse. Most guys will tell you that marriage is a prison with stiff penalties for divorce. Marriage is not necessarily about individual happiness, its about commitment and responsibility to raising a child for 18 years. If you just want love, you don’t need marriage, if you want a financial commitment, just go to a lawyer and get your spouse to sign a lifetime financial obligation agreement. Lastly, what is your definition of annulment, some say it is when a marriage is never consummated. Consummation occurs when the male seeds are released into a female cavity. Annulments are easy granted if couples never consummate their marriage. Can you have marriage without consummation? Would a marriage be fraudulent if it was never consummated, even with straight couples?