So I recently realized that gay marriage in Maryland was only passed in the state house and (I think) has yet to be passed in the state senate. (Sorry if I get the gov't stuff wrong). Anyway, that's still a major step forward so nothing I said has really changed. Just wanted to letter people know I did actually see the mistake I made.
Anyway, moving on... Half of the shows I watch were off last week so I am happily awaiting them to come back. Along with watching this week's episode of House which looks like it might be musical. If he sings then I have to say he is the BEST actor EVER!!!! And yes, right now his name escapes me.
Returning to Glee for a few things. First: I was a little confused when I got the impression from the previews that the Regionals competition would be this next episode (entitled Sexy). But the next episode is called Original Song. I assumed that one would be regionals, but I guess not. I don't know why I had to point that out, but whatever.
Second: I may or may not be creating a live journal account just so I can post fanfic there. I'm thinking of posting my original work here in the future, but using live journal for the fanfic. It just doesn't seem right to post fanfic here. And I feel like my original work would be a little safer here. Don't ask me why I think any of this, I just do. Besides, if I were to try and explain any thing more then it would be long winded and no one would probably understand except me. So yeah, when I make the account I'll be sure to link to it and list it on my dashboard I guess.
Last note: Prince of Persia... AWESOME! Love the movie, want the movie, so happy it's showing on the Starz networks that I have free for the next year. I currently have it recorded on my DVR. Jake Gyllenhaal is Hot! I also love the fact that there are like five times that Dastan is about to kiss Tamina and a lesser director or writer probably would have made them kiss. I don't know why I like that, but I do. It almost makes it more real.
So that's all! I may or may not post again tonight or tomorrow night after various tv shows have aired but who knows.
Ciao! :-*
Showing posts with label Gay Marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay Marriage. Show all posts
Feb 24, 2011
Gay Marriage In Maryland
Congratulations!
I will say that I am a Republican/Conservative, but unless I bring it up, I won't discuss politics most of the time. Mainly because I'm mostly uneducated and I know I'd easily go back and forth on my opinions for different things and probably get really annoying. Anyway...
I do support gay marriage, but I also understand the people who say that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman who want to have children. (The second part I've seen/heard more recently mentioned). The problem I have with that definition is the children part. There are plenty of straight people who get married who don't want children and gay couples who do want children. The other part? Marriage was a term created for legal purposes, therefore I don't think there's any point in changing such an old term.
I'm not positive on this, but it seems to me, the point of making gay marriage legal is to give gay couples the same rights as married couples. (If any readers are gay, let me know, please). That's why I agree with Hawaii and Illinois (and Europe I think) who label a gay 'marriage' as a civil union. They have the same rights as a married couple. It seems to me that if any gay couples are opposed to the lack of the marriage title then live with what the government calls you nationally, and say you're married privately, because really, if others support you then they shouldn't care whether you refer to your significant other as husband/wife or life partner.
I did discover that this bill and a few others "protect" religions from performing a civil union. First of all, it seems to me that if a church/religious group didn't support a gay couple, the couple wouldn't be asking them to perform the union. Second... okay I don't think I had a send part to that thought. I guess it's nice that the government is covering all the bases, but it doesn't seem to be needed. That's the government for you.
So before I start to repeat myself I'm going to stop it here. This is the article I read for "research." I'm not a big non-fiction type person, but I thought something this important warranted a little more info than what I over heard on the news.
Please comment if you read this. I'd really like to hear opinions from both sides.
Ciao :-*
I will say that I am a Republican/Conservative, but unless I bring it up, I won't discuss politics most of the time. Mainly because I'm mostly uneducated and I know I'd easily go back and forth on my opinions for different things and probably get really annoying. Anyway...
I do support gay marriage, but I also understand the people who say that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman who want to have children. (The second part I've seen/heard more recently mentioned). The problem I have with that definition is the children part. There are plenty of straight people who get married who don't want children and gay couples who do want children. The other part? Marriage was a term created for legal purposes, therefore I don't think there's any point in changing such an old term.
I'm not positive on this, but it seems to me, the point of making gay marriage legal is to give gay couples the same rights as married couples. (If any readers are gay, let me know, please). That's why I agree with Hawaii and Illinois (and Europe I think) who label a gay 'marriage' as a civil union. They have the same rights as a married couple. It seems to me that if any gay couples are opposed to the lack of the marriage title then live with what the government calls you nationally, and say you're married privately, because really, if others support you then they shouldn't care whether you refer to your significant other as husband/wife or life partner.
I did discover that this bill and a few others "protect" religions from performing a civil union. First of all, it seems to me that if a church/religious group didn't support a gay couple, the couple wouldn't be asking them to perform the union. Second... okay I don't think I had a send part to that thought. I guess it's nice that the government is covering all the bases, but it doesn't seem to be needed. That's the government for you.
So before I start to repeat myself I'm going to stop it here. This is the article I read for "research." I'm not a big non-fiction type person, but I thought something this important warranted a little more info than what I over heard on the news.
Please comment if you read this. I'd really like to hear opinions from both sides.
Ciao :-*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)