What is the common denominator between gay and straight marriages?

1. 50

   bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years ago

   What is the common denominator between gay and straight marriages?
   
   Basically, what makes equality, be specific.
   
   

   report
2. 80

   dashingscorpioposted 8 years ago

   The common denominator in most marriages is two people who want to build a life together as a monogamous loving couple.
   I imagine LGBT couples have the same expectations of their spouses as us heterosexual couples. Ultimately people are people.

   report
3. 93

   lisavollrathposted 8 years ago

   There is no gay or straight marriage. There is just marriage. And while every marriage is different, they all generally start with two people who love each other, and want to make a life together enough to stand up in front of their families, friends, and whatever gods they worship, and make a commitment for life.

   report
   1. 50

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      That is not an answer, it is a position.
      Where is the common denominator (CD) for marriage?
      In fact how is there any CD connecting the lgbt groups together. They are all quite different.

      report
   2. 93

      lisavollrathposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I answered your question: "...they all generally start with two people who love each other, and want to make a life together..". Sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted.

      report
   3. 50

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      That never was the entire basis of marriage. If you make love the sole criteria, then you can include people with their pets, multiple people rather than two, because love is not bound by age, or humans.

      report
   4. 93

      lisavollrathposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The basis of marriage was commerce, but I'd like to think we've evolved past that by now. You asked a question. I answered it. Sorry, again, that it wasn't the answer you wanted to hear, but I stand by my response.

      report
   5. 50

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      My question was about the CD that forced gays to commandeer traditional marriage. Changing the attributes of marriage is not a CD. Commerce?? The SC has made one bad decision after another on the Interstate Commerce Clause.

      report
   6. 93

      lisavollrathposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      That is not the question you asked. I gave my answer to the question you asked. Sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted to hear to support the anti marriage equality agenda you're trying to promote, but again, I stand by my answer.

      report
4. 80

   jlparkposted 8 years ago

   The CD is two consenting human adults who love each other and who wish to have legal recognition of said love, and make a family together. As what is usually touted (at least by those who disagree with marriage equality anyway) as the 'sole purpose' of marriage is procreation.
   
   Now, family isn't always about children who are genetically related to both or either parent, nor is it always children.
   
   Many heterosexual marriages are childless by choice or infertility, and have created family with their 'fur babies' - I know many couples who this is their family - and those fur babies are EVERYTHING to them.
   
   There are numerous couples who choose to adopt or foster rather than have their own biological children.
   
   These are all as much family as those families who have children who are biologically related to both parents.
   
   Marriage is about love, togetherness, and family. And being legally recognised as such.

   report
   1. 50

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Marriage doesn't solve the prob, there are couples both straight and gay that love each other but don't want the govt to be their parent. they also want to have control and the benefits of marriage. The govt s not be in charge of  marriage period.

      report
   2. 80

      jlparkposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Yet yr question wasn't about a 'problem' - it was about the common denominator. Not entirely sure what problem isn't being solved. But I'm pretty sure I answered the original question.

      report
   3. 50

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The problem was mentioned in my comment
      equality for non married couples.

      report