What's the point of getting married if your gay? Baldwin is just one Jew pushing to make a deviant behaviour fit in the normative. The honourable gays care for their country, its children and don't go out to militate. Them Jews are promoting homosexuality and multiculturalism and feminism all over the world. Gay or not It's time to wake up!
@NS1Hit....I...I have no words....Seriously? You wrote that? You purposefully wrote out those words in that order without realising what an ignorant lug-nut you sound like? Wow, I am impressed.
Nothing I could possibly say could possibly match the profound idiocy of what you have just vomited out of your brain. The whole of YouTube is now dumber for having read this post. Bravo, dum-dum. Bravo.
@NS1Hit I'll take it one step further... whats the point of getting married... I know your type and i know you'll agree with me here. (BTW his type is recently divorced with 2 daughters that hate him. marketing research) but i digress. Who wants to get married to an old bat thats never gonna put out and get knocked up only to make 2 more kids that hate you. fuck you, fuck your old wife, and fuck your ingrate kids... marriage is like war... everyone will always loose.
Major thanks to Alec Baldwin for speaking on behalf of the LGBT community even when it's not socially convenient. This video makes me proud to be a NYer.
The idea of marriage may have emotional impact in the last hundred years, but before then, it was a case of identity and ownership. It came with the bible; 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, wife, manservant' blablabla. And to enforce this right of possession, they made it a sin to have a child out of wedlock because biological testing thousands of years ago was... well, non-existent. There was no way to tell who the parents were without the label of marriage. Rant over :)
People who argue about how gay marriage is unnatural are just stupid. If you want to talk about unnatural, try stripping down to the very essence of nature because marriage itself is unnatural. Scientifically speaking, of the 4000 strong mammalia species, only 3% are monogamous by nature and guess what... HOMO SAPIENS AREN'T IN THE 3%. Monogamy came as evolution as ours is the only species that matures the slowest... ie puberty. Horses can walk right out of the womb, we take at least a year.
He's a homophobe because he makes it clear he's straight? How is that in anyway related to being a homophobe? Again, it was a comical response to someone else's video; and yes, of course it's good PR. Nevertheless, i doubt he cares, at his age, what people speculate his sexual orientation to be. Have you ever had a social conversion? How the fuck is he being sneaky in this video? .
alec valdwin is ding this to make himself look good. Hes clearly also doing it just to prove he isnt hay. I man ffs he sas it in like 4 different ways before a vooice confirms it for us. Just a sneaky way to be popular and not look homophobic.
@44ownzu no shit. thats not my point at all...he is being really sneaky. Hes advertising gay marriage so as to not look like a homophobe when in fact he makes it very clear SCRIPTED OR NOT that he is straight. Basically he was worried people would think he was gay and so he panicked and got somebody to write him a sketch where he says he is straight but in a way thats flattering to gays. He is the biggest homophobe of all. I dont even dislike him either im just calling it as i see it
@sidMGS Firstly, he doesn't need 'to be popular' because well, he already is. Secondly, he doesn't need good press by 'not looking homophobic'. Thirdly, I respect other people's opinion, but only if it's presented well and highly deliberated before posting. Yours was neither. I could barely read what you said.
Too bad you put "FUNNY" in the tag. Otherwise I would have THUMBED UP the video for its message in relation to its tags. Instead its just false advertising, trying to get me to click on your message when I'm depressed and want to LAUGH at something "FUNNY". I believe in your message, I just don't think you should do it dishonestly. I mean if you really want to spread this message, put in fake tags like porn or "she can't take it all".
"nonsensical?" Is it nonsense for a child to be weaned on it's own mothers milk? This is one simple example of how two men cannot fullfill this early necessity (without assistance). From the start of two men parenting they require assistance from 1. a woman 2. modern technology 3. major financial ability 4. a specialized doctor. It's completely unnatural, and it's a counterfit alternative to the real thing.
@swarmis What about couples that can't have children? Some women cannot produce milk, and need formula. From the start of couples who can't conceive they require assistance from 1. a woman or man 2. modern technology 3. major financial ability 4. a specialized doctor. Are you saying we should prevent women or men who can't have babies from getting married because it's 'completely unnatural'? My point is man or woman, we all may face similar issues. You ignorant fuck.
@imyumi Your language reflects your maturity level. Althought many suffer from these situations, (infertility etc.) the ideal remains the same. And the institution of marriage should be based on the ideal situation for a family. After all we're not talking about an individual who can't produce milk, we're talking about completely redefining what a marriage/family is. It is the backbone of society/culture.
@swarmis Marriage is the backbone of society/culture? 26% of children raised in America are raised by one parent. And I'm not seeing the country falling apart. My point is: marriage/family has already been redefined. There's childless families,unmarried couples with children, and women are not always housewives nor are men always breadwinners. In the 50s, mentioning divorce would be blasphemous. But society's moved on from that archaic view of defining family, and so should you.
@swarmis The fact is that gay marriage is legal in some parts of the world, yet I'm not seeing anything changing, I'm not seeing their country becoming a mess (i.e. Norway, Canada etc.) It's legal in some parts of America - so it doesn't really make much sense for it to be 'redefined' in some areas and not in others. But no you're right - it is the backbone - I believe the rapture occurred in those areas? You ignorant (my apologies) son-of-a-gun
@imyumi There's no point arguing with someone who has his/her mind set on a particular ethic/moral/way of thinking. No matter what you throw at them, they're still going to try their best to win an argument. I'm a man, getting married to a man from the UK next year and adopting is a possibility in the near future :D
@zztstenglish wrote "look at what happened to his marriage with Kim Basinger. He's a fine one to talk about marriage when he cannot hold his own"
Explain what the legality of marriage -- and its practical effects on society -- has to do with whether one's personal marriage is successful. Where exactly does he claim a knowledge of marriage counseling? In short, what are you talking about???
I know couples married for 50 years, yet know nothing about the law. So what's the correlation?
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
First of all, I don't accept this laziness from my students, and I won't accept it from you. If you have points you want me to argue, quote and list them. I am not arguing Allen, I am arguing you. And you haven't even proven that you understand the links you give so give you me YOUR interpretations. Your lazy approach is as invalid as, "You're wrong. Go read the Bible!"
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
1) You quoted me completely out of context. That quote asked why Alec Baldwin's failed marriage disqualifies him from supporting gay marriage, or discussing the "practical effects on society." So be honest, or don't bother posting.
2) Try listing points from Allen's paper for me to argue. Or are you one of those people who just copies links from bibliographies without actually reading the source?.
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
This is my only comment on Allen until you actually quote. The paper is flawed since it's based on procreation. Yet NOT ONE marriage law requires a promise of procreation before licensure. Nor are infertile couples or post-menopausal women given a separate marriage, as he proposes for gays. The fact that US marriage is not based on procreation, nor requires it, invalidates any argument based on it.
@lgbtTV4 - "infretile couples or post-menopausal women" Do u think the state subsidizes marriage for fun? The benefits are for children to be raised in the best paradigm suited for them. The reason why the gov't permits infertile couples is cus it cannot take fertility tests before marriage. it would be cumbersome, expensive and illegal since it would violate privacy laws. Hence, it is ASSUMED in regards to the reproductive potential of a hetero couple
> it is ASSUMED in regards to the reproductive potential of a hetero couple
Why would you assume the procreative viability of a 60 y/o woman? And what "cumbersome" and "expensive" test are required to prove her infertile? Expectedly, you completely ignored the question why the State allows the marriage of admittedly non-procreative couples if procreation is a basis for marriage. Indeed, why not "ASSUME" that the couple is eligible and forget the questionnaire altogether?
@zztstenglish wrote "the reason why the gov't permits infertile couples is cus it cannot take fertility tests before marriage...illegal since it would violate privacy laws"
It can merely ask, "Are you infertile?" just as it asks if s/he is currently unmarried, or if the couple are first cousins, etc. Furthermore, people who are sterilized, had hysterectomies, or post-menopausal know without testing.
Illegal? Learn your laws. DC and New York, for example, require blood tests before licensure.
> assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
2) Neither you nor Allen met my challenge. I asked for ACTUAL PROOF of harm from countries/states that have gay marriage. His article was speculative. Did he not include such data because they contradict his agenda?
2) His approach was economic. Since when was civil rights based on national economics? If it was, slaves would not have been freed. Nor would there be Title 8. Or equal pay for women. Etc, etc.
@lgbtTV4 - First, u make alot of pts. maybe try to confine it to just 1 or 2 so confusion won't arise. Second, u said the study is speculative when, in fact, it proved to be prophetic. Read page 962 where he talks about the legal problems regard same sex divorce. Then, for evidence, lookup
- google miller v. jenkins (viriginia)
- google mother of all battles sperm donor
- google gay calgary man challenges family law act
"u make alot of pts. maybe try to confine it to just 1 or 2 so confusion won't arise"
Total cop out. I'm an academic Research Analyst, so I had the courtesy of QUOTING you (and Allen), as well as numbering some points. There is no confusion if you do the same; it's how it's done in academia. I make so many points because there is so much wrong with your and Allen's arguments. Read my post about his claim of "novel" legal problems with egg donors. Do you agree with him?
FYI, Allen's paper is not respected within the field. A friend looked in NexisLexis and it's hardly quoted. In fact, I've never heard it used in debates, and I've debated this since high school. I wouldn't have known about it article had a friend not sent it to me. Even Maggie Gallagher never cited Allen, i.e. in the 40 min CSPAN debate. Nor was it cited in Prop 8 or NY hearings. Allen claims his approach is unique ... No wonder, given its lack of coherence and usable data.
As I've said, I don't play that laziness game with my student or on YouTube. If it's important, summarize it. The google links are pointless. With gay marriage, of course there are gay breakups. Just like legal miscegenation led to miscegenist divorces. Indeed, it was used to SUPPORT NY gay marriage since out-of-staters divorcing in NY brings in money. The links don't prove that gay marriages or divorces burden society any more than straight ones.
Seriously, don't just paraphrase links off some anti-gay marriage website. I've taught college for 4 years, and have debated since 14, so I know the signs. You skim a website, lifting links and keywords without reading the source docs. it doesn't work with me. If you want to argue a point, write out the point. If you don't agree, feel free to leave MY channel. You links simply show that some gays have nasty breakups. So?
@lgbtTV4 - "some anti-gay marriage website" Again, u show you're intellectually dishonest since miller v. jenkins (viriginia) is a court case going on now. To assert that I'm skimming a website is fatuous since you are doing that yourself
@zztstenglish re: Miller vs jenkins ... so what? Lgbtv4 already addressed it; it merely shows that there are messy gay divorces, which was expected and in no way supports Allen's claim that gay marriage increases straight divorces. If your link does support it, how so?
I'm hardly a gay activist, but I have yet to see how Vernont, Iowa or NY allowing gay marriages affected me and my wife. Life hasn't changed, nor my marriage. Really, you need to focus and actually reply, and not just post.
@zztstenglish@lgbtTV4 That's exactly how it looks to me. It looks like he hasn't read the stuff he's linking. I'm not saying that's true, but that's how it looks to me. "Look it up" is never a good way to debate. I'm not saying I support gay marriage, but based on the the debate here, you got my vote. I wish lgbtv4 was on my debate team!
@zztstenglish wrote "u said the study is speculative when, in fact, it proved to be prophetic"
The fact that Allen had no data, even from countries that had gay marriage for years, means that by definition that his piece was speculative, regardless of whether it came true later. And it hasn't based on the links you gave. He claimed that hetero divorce would rise because because gay marriage decreased the incentive to stay married. So where is the CAUSAL evidence from statistical analysis?
@zztstenglish Are you seriously supporting a paper that blames, among other things, economic independence for divorce? (p 963) The alternative is a wife who is financially dependent, and staying in the marriage purely for financial reasons. You completely ignored this point yesterday. Studies show that those women are more depressed, have lower self-esteem and more likely to suffer abuse. Did Allen consider the societal costs of those things? No wonder Allen isn't cited.
@lgbtTV4 - Lastly, if u want to argue about marriage and procreation, this would be A SEPERATE arguement. it's effect would be to the extent that gay marriage officially severs the link between marriage & procreation which threatens the institution by creating "loopholes and areas of poor fit" in marriage law that weakens the stability of marriage thru misallocation of incentives. Read page 960 - 964
> if u want to argue about marriage and procreation
Hardly, because I see no linkage. It's Allen who says his "his "argument is rooted in..procreation." Yet you can't show me a marriage law that "assumes" or requires procreation.
> severs the link between marriage & procreation ...Read page 960 - 964
Laziness again? I read the piece months ago and again, what link? Does the law require marriage to procreate? Does the law require procreation to marry? What is the penalty?
@lgbtTV4 - First, u didn't take my advice and confine your response to 1-2 points. Second, I wasn't able to respond to yer posts yesterday but now I am. Lastly, you state where is the law that requires procreation. As stated, it is assumed since the state cannot take fertility tests before marriage since it would be cumbersome, expensive, and illegal since it would violate privacy laws
@zztstenglish wrote "gay marriage officially severs the link between marriage & procreation which threatens the institution by creating 'loopholes and areas of poor fit'"
Menopause "officially severs the link between marriage & procreation." So do post-menopausal women threaten marriage? How about voluntary sterilization? Show me that data. Empty quoting of "loopholes and areas of poor fit" is meaningless. Explain it, and why gays create it but not infertile women or vasectomized men.
@lgbtTV4 - you are intentionally intellectually dishonest. some of the loopholes were already explained especially in regards to same sex divorce on page 962. Learn to read or stop being liar
> an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
3) Allen even admits his "argument is rooted in the contracting problems involved in procreation." That necessarily means that his argument is not against gay marriage, but non-procreative marriages. Allen wants to have a separate gay marriage, but how about the infertile straight couple? Why not have the categories be procreative and non-procreative marriages instead? Seriously, try reading the article.
Are you so desperate as to use insults? if so, stay out of my channel.
You completely ignored my point that if Allen admits that his argument is "rooted in...procreation" (p 953) then why not create a separate marriage category for non-procreative couples rather than gay couples? Why not have Procreative and Non-Procreative marriages, rather than Straight and Gay marriages? Read his conclusion. That's more consistent with his logic.
@lgbtTV4 - "desperate as to use insults" I said it cus u made a false accusation that I did not read it when I did. Furthermore, if u want to get into the discussion of procreative & non procreative marriages, then what about artificial procreation for gays which blurs the issue. Not to mention artificial procreation has proven to be harmful
- google harms of artificial procreation montreal study
@zztstenglish The debate here isn't even close. You refuse to address anything lgbtv wrote, even though he made it easy or you. You refuse to actually cite any points in the article you brought up, and just put irrelevant ggogle links. What a waste of space.
@zztstenglish I read through the entire thread and no one brought up artificial insemination except you. So your link are simply irrelevant and a waste of space. it's just lazy to tell others to google. No one else did that here, and it makes you look like you haven't read the articles. I vote base on whether an issue affects me. if no, I say live and let live. In the many years since gay marriage was in Canada and elsewhere, my marriage has been great. Same with friends and neightbors.
@zztstenglish That Allen article was not on a recommended reading list provided by the professor when I took a class on Family and Society. The list had a balance of pro and anti gay marriage resources. It's really simple. Why don't you tell us in 500 chars, or take 2 or 3 posts, how gay marriage has harmed us, and how it will harm us, with proof. Don't tell us to Google. Just tell us, in your own words. You have completely failed to do that.
4) if you read the article, you'd see that it has little to do with gay marriage. He rambles about the evils of divorce for 10+ pages, yet fails to PROVE that gay marriage leads to heterosexual divorce (how about a simple statistical analysis of REAL data?).
Here's an example: "given that same-sex relationships are often composed of two financially independent individuals, there will be pressure for even easier divorce." So he's against financially-independent working wives?
5) Here's a last example of Allen's weak arguments: "Same-sex divorce will raise novel legal problems...Will sperm or egg donors to same-sex marriages acquire legal rights and responsibilities as parents?" NOVEL? How is this different than donors to infertile straight couples? He's portraying gay marriage as a frightening wilderness when 1) much can be based on hetero precedence; 2) these issues have not been a problem in ACTUAL places.
I was very short in middle school, so I spent a lot of my time in the hallway fighting backpacks, so I certainly support this message from the always bizarre and hilarious Mr. Schwetty. FIGHT BACKPACKS! Wait...why is he talking about gay marriage? Did they make a url that is a sadly unfunny double entendre? Oh, okay, good. Um. Fight Back! Pac! Man! Oh hell...I'm so confused...
As far as I'm concerned, the state should have no right to control who can be married or not with the exception of making sure people can't marry little kids or other sick shit. To my mind, marriage is a choice between two consenting adults and they should not need a license. If this were a free country, gays would have been able to marry long ago. The only real opposition to this is from the corporate/religious extremist/ fascist types who don't want to pay the health insurance out.
Congratulation Alec baldwin, you've satired your own position. Don't have the right to marry the man or woman..." Can you feel the IRONY to that statement (just in case your retarded, this has been a pro-marriage (not 'anti-gay') post.
The truth of the language of sexuality is also missing in sexual relationships
between people of the same gender. Homosexual acts themselves, not the person with a homosexual orientation, are objectively & gravely immoral because there is no communion of body and spirit which facilitates openness to the procreation of new life. Homosexuality undermines the truth, fullness & wholeness of sexual communion. The Theology of the Body
I have a huge crush on Alec for a long time....It's only we can't marry, because Jessy Tyler Ferguson stole him away and I live on the other part of the world! And people: Stop bullying Alec on his sexuality! Would you like it if everybody assumes that you are straight and confronts you with that?? LOL
/watch?v=oPVPUDtxg2E&feature=related Muslims have almost taken over Britain and France see it for yourself on this video,its spreading like wildfire the most common babies name in Britain is Mohammed now!Sharia law coming to a neighborhood near you in the future,you gays better get back in the closet because this carries the death penalty with the Islamics!
@jpowers55 wrote "How can Alec be such a Lib and his brother Stephen be such a conservative?"
My guess is that Stephen was a failed actor whose career went nowhere so he had to look for a niche to make a living. He wound up making films for the conservative religious right. We see it a lot in other entertainers. When their careers are failing, they suddenly find God. Famous examples include gay icons, Donna Summers and Gloria Gaynor, and even openly gay Little Richard.
@jpowers55 Another example is former teen heartthrob, Kirk Cameron, of Growing Pains. He was always super-religious, but he also loved the money and fame of Hollywood. When the roles dried up, and his WB sitcom was a flop, he turned toward Christian cinema, starring in the Left Behind movies. Cameron's religiosity was a MAJOR problem for his Growing Pains co-stars, i.e. he demanded that an actress be fired because she had modeled for Playboy. Cameron apologized to the cast many years later.
@00belief00 Oh my goodness, did you read this back to yourself before you posted it? I hope you no longer have these gay friends, as you are not truly a friend. Dear oh dear.
although i fully support gay marriage, i feel in the mean time while we wait for the ignorance in this country to subside to tolerance, states should legalize unions between gay couples that would give them similar benefits of married couples but allow the union to be separate from marriage so they would still have the benefits and all the stupid homophobes could feel "safe" because it doesn't "alter the sacred marriage between a man and woman". love should always be acknowledged, gay or not
I really don't feel for alecs politics. but i do support gay rights It was so close to being passed but you can blame PG county for causing it to go under
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
no thanks. I have gay friends, but they know i don't agree with or support their homosexuality, so i will always vote against gay marriage because i believe it is wrong.
@Jacklgf wrote: "so i will always vote against gay marriage because i believe it is wrong."
And your reasons are...? If they're not rational and factually based, are you not simply a bigot?
The American Psychological Assoc, Amer Psychiatric Assoc, Amer Medical Assoc, American Sociological Assoc, Amer Assoc of Pediatrics -- and EVERY major relevant ACADEMIC group composed of EDCUCATED EXPERTS support gay rights, and the contention that it is normal. What's your expertise? Think about it.
Can I have some valid arguments, please? Not just "I think it's wrong?" Thats like keeping other people from eating a certain food or dressing a certain just because YOU don't like it. It's selfish, bigoted, and just a stupid line of thought.
@DragonHeart06 I believe that the Bible speaks against it. But to give you "a valid argument" means that the argument is subject to your opinion of "valid." So I could say all sorts of things as an argument, but you might still call them all invalid. So how can we keep from going in circles? The only argument that I consider valid is what God teaches in the Bible. I couldn't careless what man's opinion is about the matter. And its not even about my own opinion. I follow what God alone says.
Where? Please quote. FYI, the Bible NEVER mentions lesbianism.
It DOES speak against eating shellfish and working on Sunday. Should those be illegal?
"Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an ABOMINATION to you." - Leviticus 11:12
"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: WHOSOEVER DOETH WORK THEREIN SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH." - Exodus 35:2
"Everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death" - Leviticus 20:9
"Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." - Leviticus 19:19
"Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard" - Leviticus 19:27
Have you trimmed your beard, or cut hair from your temples? How about wear poly-cotton blends? Hypocrite. Should we hang or electrocute people who curse their parents?
> I couldn't careless what man's opinion is about the matter...I follow what God alone says.
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you, from them you may buy slaves" - Leviticus (25:44) So we should enslave people based on race.
"You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life" - Leviticus 25:45
And there is no chance for emancipation.
So Jacklgf, when will you tell the UN they're wrong to ban slavery?
> The only argument that I consider valid is what God teaches in the Bible. I couldn't
> careless what man's opinion is about the matter... I follow what God alone says.
Since you don't care what other humans say and want our laws based on your god's words, I guess you're against Democracy and our Representative Republic form of government, preferring instead, a Taliban-style theocracy. I guess elections are pointless since they represent "man's opinion." Think about it.
@DragonHeart06 what i wrote first is probably under this, making it look like i wrote this first.
To tell you the truth, I really have no interest in continuing this discussion because it'll just piss people off, or upset people, and I do not want to do that with my comments. So I'll just exit here. You have my response, i'm leaving it at that.
Hate solves nothing, to all the "Christians" spreading hate just remember that next time you leave church to go to Luby's for lunch, Gluttony is listed 22 times in the Bible as sin, homosexuality 4 (and only once by itself, in the Old Testament) all other times as part of a group of items, including many times hate and anger, so your hate is just as sinful in the eyes of God... Stop hating and try opening your arms to someone who may just be hurting on the inside, Love will win in the end.
this is stinkin hilarious... gay or not thats funny stuff, I am a Pastor (and can out quote most the haters out there) I am straight, but I also have many friends who are gay, I am not opposed to this, marriage truly solidifies monogamy. As a pastor I have seen how "Christians" have caused a great deal of pain and hurt to many people, I want to say I am sorry!! on behalf of those who know better, I say again I am sorry, I was bullied for years because many people thought I was gay, it hurts
@mrkwonsony Yes, this is the real Alex Baldwin. He is straight but very liberal and fully supports gay rights. In an interview, he said that he is considering running for office.
@TheVovo68 You disgust me. Hating people for being different is what makes a person a "verman of humanity". AIDs has been traced back to a straight black teenage boy who lived in St. Louis Missouri, he died in the 60's and they found out in the 80's that it was AID's that killed him. Scientists also believe that AID's has been here far longer than anyone thinks. Get your facts straight.
Um, no. people like YOU are the "disgusting vermin of humanity" for spreding your bigoted and hateful messages - which do nothing but hurt innocent people who only want to love each other.
In Spain (I'm spanish) people can marry and nobody died because of that. We can feel safe now that there is a law that protects us from intolerant people. Why is so hard for some people live their own lives and let other people have the same rights? Do you really feel better making people around you feel fustrated and really unhappy??
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The reality is, marriage is between one man and one woman. Civil Unions are fine, but the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story. A 2006 survey by Angus Reid Global Scan showed that 51% of adults oppose gay marriage while 43% support it. However, with the civil union option, 32% opposed marriage or civil unions, 32% supported gay marriage, and 32% supported civil unions. 4% were unsure.
> The reality is, marriage is between one man and one woman
Reality is, there is racism. Reality is, there was Antebellum slavery. Reality is, Christians were persecuted in Rome. SO WHAT? What does that have to do with what is moral and just, or even practical?
> marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story
End of story? What an intelligent statement! It may end in your simplistic mind, but the fact that the world is moving toward it proves you wrong.
First off, I believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman. That does not mean I dislike gays, but it does mean I support the traditional role of marriage. However, I support the right of states to be able to have civil unions, and I supported the repeal of DADT.
> I believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman
Marriage is a secular institution, and should not depend on what one thinks is sacred. As proof, note that marriage licenses are given and maintained by the state, and not the clergy. The state also decides who can get married, not the church. I couldn't care less if any church recognizes gay marriage, as long as the state does. This is about equality, not what some consider sacred.
@MrConservativeTalk Do you really still live in 1644?? The last time I checked the state and the church were separated. This shows that america can't handle the 21st century and has to go back to the dark days when religion held it's iron fist over everything everybody did everyday! Today the gay people, tomorrow that old lady that collects herbs....It's against the rules of the bible ( and if it isn't, I'm pretty sure someone will make it up), so burn that witch! Really : update your senses!
So what? Since when did American domestic policy rely on "global" polls? Maybe you have told Bush and Cheney before our illegal invasion. What don't you try surveys of Western countries most like the US. A 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion found 61% of Canadians want same-sex marriage to remain legal, and support for gay marriage has steadily increased since the mid-1990s, when it first hit a majority.
Our illegal invasion? I referenced the poll to show attitudes, not because I care about what other nations think about things in our own country. I don't believe polls should dictate our foreign policy, but that is another topic. A gallup poll of U.S. citizens showed that 57% oppose gay marriage while only 40% support gay marriage. In fact, support for same-sex marriage amongst Americans went down 6% between 2007 and 2009.
> marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story. A 2006 survey
Think carefully and you'd see how illogical you are. First you arrogantly declared an end of debate for all of humanity by writing, "end of story." Then you cited a 2006 poll. What is a poll? Think carefully, and use a dictionary if necessary. By definition, it is a TEMPORAL cross section of society. The whole point is that attitudes CHANGE (aka trends), and the results are NOT the "end." Duh.
@lgbtTV4 I am thinking carefully, and that is why I speak my mind. Secondly, Attitudes do change. In 2007, according to Gallup, 46% of Americans supported gay marriage. Two years later, that was down to 40%. Yes, polls are only a sample. Americans view of homosexuality is much more open than it once was, which is good. However, gay marriage is not something Americans support.
@MrConservativeTalk As a Research Analyst, I can say that your post has no relevance to our current domestic debate, nor has similar "logic" ever been used in the US. More relevant is how countries THAT HAVE GAY MARRIAGE rate their experience. NOT ONE SUCH COUNTRY HAVE HAD ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON SOCIETY, OR STRAIGHT MARRIAGE. And that's the point that you guys are avoiding: I challenge you to show me how gay marriage negatively affects straight marriages or society. Think about it.
@lgbtTV4 I oppose gay marriage because I feel that marriage is a sacred institution, whether legal or religious, between one man and one woman. Having multiple spouses is illegal, having a spouse of the same-sex is not currently allowed. However, same-sex couples do deserve domestic partnership rights. But marriage is an institution between a man and woman.
@lgbtTV4 your statement is illogical...the concept of marriage is different in every culture, in China, marriage is not related to any kind of religion, and therefore does not challenge traditional beliefs. in US, marriage is considered "holy matrimony", I personally think it is wrong to establish gay "marriage" in US. Civil union and marriage for gays in China would not mean different things, but in US they are not remotely similar.
What statement are you talking about? Please have the courtesy to quote
> in US, marriage is considered "holy matrimony"
Wrong. ALL laws governing marriage from eligibility to dissolution is SECULARLY determined by the state. Who makes age requirements? The church or the State? Who maintains marriage licenses? You can get a divorce without the Church but can you do so without the State?
Bottom line is this: the Church is trying to tell the State its business, while the State is leaving the Church alone. Has the State ever demand that any Church recognize or perform gay marriages? No. I couldn't care less how the Church feels about anything, from evolution to abortion. And that's the fairest solution: the State will perform, recognize and maintain gay marriages while each Church follows its own policies.
@lgbtTV4 Society consists of families, homosexuality strikes the very concept of family at its core. Any confusion on this can be cleared up at the plumbing or electricity isle at the home depot.
So? Society also consists of single people, widows, infertile people, etc. What's your point?
> homosexuality strikes the very concept of family
Wrong. Learn your definitions. "Homosexuality" is a state of mind, while "family" is the relationship of people. They are unrelated. Try quoting some studies showing how gay marriage has adversely affected straight marriages, or society. Show me proof from Canada, Sweden, Spain, Vermont, etc. Duh
@lgbtTV4 I dont need to read a study/survey to validate my point.(although I'm sure there's plenty of them on both sides of this issue) I'm speaking from the standpoint of classical and natural definition of a family. And since having children requires sperm and egg (male and female) it is obvious what the intended design of a marriage/procreating family should be.Nobody is denying you of your right to love who you want, but marriage is an institution with parameters and they must be defined.
@lgbtTV4 in response to "soceity consists of families" @lgbTV wrote "So, Society also consists of single people, widows, infertile people etc. What's your point?" My point is simple, having a family is a great thing. And I'm sure the widows, single people, etc would agree with that. And in response to your point about a "state of mind", and family being unrelated, I strongly disagree. For example, if love is not individually included in ones "state of mind", a family is doomed. Duh
So? What does that have to do with whether gay marriage should be legalized? If having a family is a good thing, then equality dictates that all people should be allowed to have one -- including people who can't/won't procreate. Simply put, there is NO LAW in the US predicating marriage on whether the couple is able or willing to procreate, so procreation is separate and irrelevant to whether a couple should be able to marry.
@lgbtTV4 My point is that although many suffer from undesirable situations like "widows, infertility etc." that doesn't mean that they dont desire the opposite.And this gets to the point of an ideal situation for a family. Since there are things that a female can provide a child that a male cannot, and vise versa, it is ideal for a child to recieve what is best. Do you really think that the only thing that seperates men and women is our genitalia?
@swarmis What can mothers do that fathers cannot? And vice versa? Are you saying a single mother with, say, an infant son will never give him 'what is best' if she decides to never remarry or enter into a partnership with a man? Same with a single father with a daughter? Are we talking role models or models of behavior? A little boy needs a man to know how to 'act' like a man and a girl needs a woman to know how to 'act' like a woman?
@GinXYZ Your assertion is that men and women (fathers and mothers) are the same. And although the gender differences are obvious, science has proven that man and woman are wired differently. Your problem with these facts is not with me, it's with the laws of nature. These are the same laws that prevent a homosexual family (it takes sperm and egg to advance the gene through procreation).
FAG......Film Actors Guild.What a fat bum boy this wanker is!
JoeSoap68 1 week ago
@JoeSoap68 That's mature of you :)
theklamfyr 16 hours ago
ha ha thats good
gcracker897 1 week ago
I cant believe anyone listens to anything this tool has to say.
2012vote 1 month ago
What's the point of getting married if your gay? Baldwin is just one Jew pushing to make a deviant behaviour fit in the normative. The honourable gays care for their country, its children and don't go out to militate. Them Jews are promoting homosexuality and multiculturalism and feminism all over the world. Gay or not It's time to wake up!
NS1Hit 1 month ago
@NS1Hit....I...I have no words....Seriously? You wrote that? You purposefully wrote out those words in that order without realising what an ignorant lug-nut you sound like? Wow, I am impressed.
Nothing I could possibly say could possibly match the profound idiocy of what you have just vomited out of your brain. The whole of YouTube is now dumber for having read this post. Bravo, dum-dum. Bravo.
xblueblaze 1 month ago
@NS1Hit I'll take it one step further... whats the point of getting married... I know your type and i know you'll agree with me here. (BTW his type is recently divorced with 2 daughters that hate him. marketing research) but i digress. Who wants to get married to an old bat thats never gonna put out and get knocked up only to make 2 more kids that hate you. fuck you, fuck your old wife, and fuck your ingrate kids... marriage is like war... everyone will always loose.
TheoldJR87 1 week ago
end of story we won!
SC1337 1 month ago
what about Texas?
WhoAmI5573 1 month ago
@WhoAmI5573 I know we have to do something if tx allows same-sex marriage the U.S. will truly change! I just hope we get rid of Perry soon first
MrWorldwideCitizen 1 month ago
Alec is a whackadoodle.
southport97 1 month ago
Alec, your dulcet, calming toned voice is turning me on;)
orbazel 1 month ago 3
I love it!
Strelevitz 2 months ago
go america go. lol...
Darusdei 2 months ago
Don't worry buddy. I never assume anyone from Hollywood is straight.
mrredhatter 2 months ago
Major thanks to Alec Baldwin for speaking on behalf of the LGBT community even when it's not socially convenient. This video makes me proud to be a NYer.
hallowell2010 2 months ago
Perverts
MrRazorblade999 3 months ago
The idea of marriage may have emotional impact in the last hundred years, but before then, it was a case of identity and ownership. It came with the bible; 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, wife, manservant' blablabla. And to enforce this right of possession, they made it a sin to have a child out of wedlock because biological testing thousands of years ago was... well, non-existent. There was no way to tell who the parents were without the label of marriage. Rant over :)
drumgroovy 3 months ago
People who argue about how gay marriage is unnatural are just stupid. If you want to talk about unnatural, try stripping down to the very essence of nature because marriage itself is unnatural. Scientifically speaking, of the 4000 strong mammalia species, only 3% are monogamous by nature and guess what... HOMO SAPIENS AREN'T IN THE 3%. Monogamy came as evolution as ours is the only species that matures the slowest... ie puberty. Horses can walk right out of the womb, we take at least a year.
drumgroovy 3 months ago
He's a homophobe because he makes it clear he's straight? How is that in anyway related to being a homophobe? Again, it was a comical response to someone else's video; and yes, of course it's good PR. Nevertheless, i doubt he cares, at his age, what people speculate his sexual orientation to be. Have you ever had a social conversion? How the fuck is he being sneaky in this video? .
44ownzu 4 months ago in playlist Liked
alec valdwin is ding this to make himself look good. Hes clearly also doing it just to prove he isnt hay. I man ffs he sas it in like 4 different ways before a vooice confirms it for us. Just a sneaky way to be popular and not look homophobic.
sidMGS 4 months ago
@sidMGS You do realize that what he is saying has been pre-written, right? It's supposed to be comical, dumbs.
44ownzu 4 months ago in playlist Liked
@44ownzu no shit. thats not my point at all...he is being really sneaky. Hes advertising gay marriage so as to not look like a homophobe when in fact he makes it very clear SCRIPTED OR NOT that he is straight. Basically he was worried people would think he was gay and so he panicked and got somebody to write him a sketch where he says he is straight but in a way thats flattering to gays. He is the biggest homophobe of all. I dont even dislike him either im just calling it as i see it
sidMGS 4 months ago
@sidMGS Firstly, he doesn't need 'to be popular' because well, he already is. Secondly, he doesn't need good press by 'not looking homophobic'. Thirdly, I respect other people's opinion, but only if it's presented well and highly deliberated before posting. Yours was neither. I could barely read what you said.
drumgroovy 3 months ago
Alec and I are going to get married. We will be very important and own many leather brown books with our apartment smelling of rich mahogany.
imyumi 4 months ago
@oriousblack
MEOW! :)
lgbtTV4 4 months ago
I'll scratch Jesse's eyes out: Alec "Jack Donaghy" Baldwin is mine.
oriousblack 4 months ago
Ha, ha. Thanks for your support, Alec. You are our hero.
Crazydud20 4 months ago 2
you tell them, alec.
wilhub 5 months ago
Too bad you put "FUNNY" in the tag. Otherwise I would have THUMBED UP the video for its message in relation to its tags. Instead its just false advertising, trying to get me to click on your message when I'm depressed and want to LAUGH at something "FUNNY". I believe in your message, I just don't think you should do it dishonestly. I mean if you really want to spread this message, put in fake tags like porn or "she can't take it all".
revenant666vids 5 months ago
looks dead behind the eyes
WizardWorm 5 months ago
Alec is great!
QueerSwede1 5 months ago
"nonsensical?" Is it nonsense for a child to be weaned on it's own mothers milk? This is one simple example of how two men cannot fullfill this early necessity (without assistance). From the start of two men parenting they require assistance from 1. a woman 2. modern technology 3. major financial ability 4. a specialized doctor. It's completely unnatural, and it's a counterfit alternative to the real thing.
swarmis 5 months ago
@swarmis I know a single father, raised his boy on his own since the mom died giving birth. Should i take the child away from him?
theklamfyr 5 months ago
@swarmis What about couples that can't have children? Some women cannot produce milk, and need formula. From the start of couples who can't conceive they require assistance from 1. a woman or man 2. modern technology 3. major financial ability 4. a specialized doctor. Are you saying we should prevent women or men who can't have babies from getting married because it's 'completely unnatural'? My point is man or woman, we all may face similar issues. You ignorant fuck.
imyumi 4 months ago
@imyumi Your language reflects your maturity level. Althought many suffer from these situations, (infertility etc.) the ideal remains the same. And the institution of marriage should be based on the ideal situation for a family. After all we're not talking about an individual who can't produce milk, we're talking about completely redefining what a marriage/family is. It is the backbone of society/culture.
swarmis 4 months ago
@swarmis Marriage is the backbone of society/culture? 26% of children raised in America are raised by one parent. And I'm not seeing the country falling apart. My point is: marriage/family has already been redefined. There's childless families,unmarried couples with children, and women are not always housewives nor are men always breadwinners. In the 50s, mentioning divorce would be blasphemous. But society's moved on from that archaic view of defining family, and so should you.
imyumi 4 months ago
@swarmis The fact is that gay marriage is legal in some parts of the world, yet I'm not seeing anything changing, I'm not seeing their country becoming a mess (i.e. Norway, Canada etc.) It's legal in some parts of America - so it doesn't really make much sense for it to be 'redefined' in some areas and not in others. But no you're right - it is the backbone - I believe the rapture occurred in those areas? You ignorant (my apologies) son-of-a-gun
imyumi 4 months ago
@imyumi There's no point arguing with someone who has his/her mind set on a particular ethic/moral/way of thinking. No matter what you throw at them, they're still going to try their best to win an argument. I'm a man, getting married to a man from the UK next year and adopting is a possibility in the near future :D
drumgroovy 3 months ago
@drumgroovy Oh Congratulations! :D I wish you both all the best <3
imyumi 3 months ago
@imyumi Thank you! :)
drumgroovy 3 months ago
is it wrong that i was turned on for the first half of this video?
max918358201 6 months ago 18
@max918358201 wrote "is it wrong that i was turned on for the first half of this video?"
---
Yes, because you were supposed to be turned on for the ENTIRE video. Now you've made Alex sad....
lgbtTV4 6 months ago 18
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul on gay marriage (Dr. Paul says yes and even wins the Values Summit GOP Straw Poll!)
/watch?v=l1gzs27HswQ on gay marriage statement
/watch?v=ug1nZSI_fsA Values Straw Poll result conservation
Vote Ron Paul, President 2012! -- The anti-war candidate -- and champion of the Constitution!
vechorik 4 months ago
EQUALITY IS EQUALITY and its what everyone should be fighting to protect!!!!
MundyArtStudio 6 months ago
alec baldwin is sooooo fuckin sexy
iHeartPlans 6 months ago
yeah, and look at what happened to his marriage with Kim Basinger. He's a fine one to talk about marriage when he cannot hold his own...
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote "look at what happened to his marriage with Kim Basinger. He's a fine one to talk about marriage when he cannot hold his own"
Explain what the legality of marriage -- and its practical effects on society -- has to do with whether one's personal marriage is successful. Where exactly does he claim a knowledge of marriage counseling? In short, what are you talking about???
I know couples married for 50 years, yet know nothing about the law. So what's the correlation?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - "and its practical effects on society"
Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
First of all, I don't accept this laziness from my students, and I won't accept it from you. If you have points you want me to argue, quote and list them. I am not arguing Allen, I am arguing you. And you haven't even proven that you understand the links you give so give you me YOUR interpretations. Your lazy approach is as invalid as, "You're wrong. Go read the Bible!"
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
1) You quoted me completely out of context. That quote asked why Alec Baldwin's failed marriage disqualifies him from supporting gay marriage, or discussing the "practical effects on society." So be honest, or don't bother posting.
2) Try listing points from Allen's paper for me to argue. Or are you one of those people who just copies links from bibliographies without actually reading the source?.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
> Google an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
This is my only comment on Allen until you actually quote. The paper is flawed since it's based on procreation. Yet NOT ONE marriage law requires a promise of procreation before licensure. Nor are infertile couples or post-menopausal women given a separate marriage, as he proposes for gays. The fact that US marriage is not based on procreation, nor requires it, invalidates any argument based on it.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - "infretile couples or post-menopausal women" Do u think the state subsidizes marriage for fun? The benefits are for children to be raised in the best paradigm suited for them. The reason why the gov't permits infertile couples is cus it cannot take fertility tests before marriage. it would be cumbersome, expensive and illegal since it would violate privacy laws. Hence, it is ASSUMED in regards to the reproductive potential of a hetero couple
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
> it is ASSUMED in regards to the reproductive potential of a hetero couple
Why would you assume the procreative viability of a 60 y/o woman? And what "cumbersome" and "expensive" test are required to prove her infertile? Expectedly, you completely ignored the question why the State allows the marriage of admittedly non-procreative couples if procreation is a basis for marriage. Indeed, why not "ASSUME" that the couple is eligible and forget the questionnaire altogether?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote "the reason why the gov't permits infertile couples is cus it cannot take fertility tests before marriage...illegal since it would violate privacy laws"
It can merely ask, "Are you infertile?" just as it asks if s/he is currently unmarried, or if the couple are first cousins, etc. Furthermore, people who are sterilized, had hysterectomies, or post-menopausal know without testing.
Illegal? Learn your laws. DC and New York, for example, require blood tests before licensure.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
> assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
2) Neither you nor Allen met my challenge. I asked for ACTUAL PROOF of harm from countries/states that have gay marriage. His article was speculative. Did he not include such data because they contradict his agenda?
2) His approach was economic. Since when was civil rights based on national economics? If it was, slaves would not have been freed. Nor would there be Title 8. Or equal pay for women. Etc, etc.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - First, u make alot of pts. maybe try to confine it to just 1 or 2 so confusion won't arise. Second, u said the study is speculative when, in fact, it proved to be prophetic. Read page 962 where he talks about the legal problems regard same sex divorce. Then, for evidence, lookup
- google miller v. jenkins (viriginia)
- google mother of all battles sperm donor
- google gay calgary man challenges family law act
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
"u make alot of pts. maybe try to confine it to just 1 or 2 so confusion won't arise"
Total cop out. I'm an academic Research Analyst, so I had the courtesy of QUOTING you (and Allen), as well as numbering some points. There is no confusion if you do the same; it's how it's done in academia. I make so many points because there is so much wrong with your and Allen's arguments. Read my post about his claim of "novel" legal problems with egg donors. Do you agree with him?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
FYI, Allen's paper is not respected within the field. A friend looked in NexisLexis and it's hardly quoted. In fact, I've never heard it used in debates, and I've debated this since high school. I wouldn't have known about it article had a friend not sent it to me. Even Maggie Gallagher never cited Allen, i.e. in the 40 min CSPAN debate. Nor was it cited in Prop 8 or NY hearings. Allen claims his approach is unique ... No wonder, given its lack of coherence and usable data.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
> Read page 962
As I've said, I don't play that laziness game with my student or on YouTube. If it's important, summarize it. The google links are pointless. With gay marriage, of course there are gay breakups. Just like legal miscegenation led to miscegenist divorces. Indeed, it was used to SUPPORT NY gay marriage since out-of-staters divorcing in NY brings in money. The links don't prove that gay marriages or divorces burden society any more than straight ones.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
"for evidence, lookup google miller v. jenkins"
Seriously, don't just paraphrase links off some anti-gay marriage website. I've taught college for 4 years, and have debated since 14, so I know the signs. You skim a website, lifting links and keywords without reading the source docs. it doesn't work with me. If you want to argue a point, write out the point. If you don't agree, feel free to leave MY channel. You links simply show that some gays have nasty breakups. So?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago 2
@lgbtTV4 - "some anti-gay marriage website" Again, u show you're intellectually dishonest since miller v. jenkins (viriginia) is a court case going on now. To assert that I'm skimming a website is fatuous since you are doing that yourself
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish re: Miller vs jenkins ... so what? Lgbtv4 already addressed it; it merely shows that there are messy gay divorces, which was expected and in no way supports Allen's claim that gay marriage increases straight divorces. If your link does support it, how so?
I'm hardly a gay activist, but I have yet to see how Vernont, Iowa or NY allowing gay marriages affected me and my wife. Life hasn't changed, nor my marriage. Really, you need to focus and actually reply, and not just post.
ProudHappyDaddy 6 months ago 3
@zztstenglish @lgbtTV4 That's exactly how it looks to me. It looks like he hasn't read the stuff he's linking. I'm not saying that's true, but that's how it looks to me. "Look it up" is never a good way to debate. I'm not saying I support gay marriage, but based on the the debate here, you got my vote. I wish lgbtv4 was on my debate team!
BriannaNoob 6 months ago 2
@zztstenglish wrote "u said the study is speculative when, in fact, it proved to be prophetic"
The fact that Allen had no data, even from countries that had gay marriage for years, means that by definition that his piece was speculative, regardless of whether it came true later. And it hasn't based on the links you gave. He claimed that hetero divorce would rise because because gay marriage decreased the incentive to stay married. So where is the CAUSAL evidence from statistical analysis?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago 2
@zztstenglish Are you seriously supporting a paper that blames, among other things, economic independence for divorce? (p 963) The alternative is a wife who is financially dependent, and staying in the marriage purely for financial reasons. You completely ignored this point yesterday. Studies show that those women are more depressed, have lower self-esteem and more likely to suffer abuse. Did Allen consider the societal costs of those things? No wonder Allen isn't cited.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago 2
@lgbtTV4 - Lastly, if u want to argue about marriage and procreation, this would be A SEPERATE arguement. it's effect would be to the extent that gay marriage officially severs the link between marriage & procreation which threatens the institution by creating "loopholes and areas of poor fit" in marriage law that weakens the stability of marriage thru misallocation of incentives. Read page 960 - 964
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
> if u want to argue about marriage and procreation
Hardly, because I see no linkage. It's Allen who says his "his "argument is rooted in..procreation." Yet you can't show me a marriage law that "assumes" or requires procreation.
> severs the link between marriage & procreation ...Read page 960 - 964
Laziness again? I read the piece months ago and again, what link? Does the law require marriage to procreate? Does the law require procreation to marry? What is the penalty?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
Comment removed
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - First, u didn't take my advice and confine your response to 1-2 points. Second, I wasn't able to respond to yer posts yesterday but now I am. Lastly, you state where is the law that requires procreation. As stated, it is assumed since the state cannot take fertility tests before marriage since it would be cumbersome, expensive, and illegal since it would violate privacy laws
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote "gay marriage officially severs the link between marriage & procreation which threatens the institution by creating 'loopholes and areas of poor fit'"
Menopause "officially severs the link between marriage & procreation." So do post-menopausal women threaten marriage? How about voluntary sterilization? Show me that data. Empty quoting of "loopholes and areas of poor fit" is meaningless. Explain it, and why gays create it but not infertile women or vasectomized men.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - you are intentionally intellectually dishonest. some of the loopholes were already explained especially in regards to same sex divorce on page 962. Learn to read or stop being liar
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish wrote
> an assessment of same sex marriage laws written by Douglas Allan
3) Allen even admits his "argument is rooted in the contracting problems involved in procreation." That necessarily means that his argument is not against gay marriage, but non-procreative marriages. Allen wants to have a separate gay marriage, but how about the infertile straight couple? Why not have the categories be procreative and non-procreative marriages instead? Seriously, try reading the article.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - I did read it, ya moron.
See my follow up responses.
Furthermore, a '1 size fits all' law doesn't work. It's showing in Canada when ssm divorce arrived.
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
> I did read it, ya moron
Are you so desperate as to use insults? if so, stay out of my channel.
You completely ignored my point that if Allen admits that his argument is "rooted in...procreation" (p 953) then why not create a separate marriage category for non-procreative couples rather than gay couples? Why not have Procreative and Non-Procreative marriages, rather than Straight and Gay marriages? Read his conclusion. That's more consistent with his logic.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 - "desperate as to use insults" I said it cus u made a false accusation that I did not read it when I did. Furthermore, if u want to get into the discussion of procreative & non procreative marriages, then what about artificial procreation for gays which blurs the issue. Not to mention artificial procreation has proven to be harmful
- google harms of artificial procreation montreal study
- google side effects to artificial insemination
- google my daddy's name is donor
zztstenglish 6 months ago
@zztstenglish The debate here isn't even close. You refuse to address anything lgbtv wrote, even though he made it easy or you. You refuse to actually cite any points in the article you brought up, and just put irrelevant ggogle links. What a waste of space.
cutemikey 6 months ago 3
@zztstenglish I read through the entire thread and no one brought up artificial insemination except you. So your link are simply irrelevant and a waste of space. it's just lazy to tell others to google. No one else did that here, and it makes you look like you haven't read the articles. I vote base on whether an issue affects me. if no, I say live and let live. In the many years since gay marriage was in Canada and elsewhere, my marriage has been great. Same with friends and neightbors.
ProudHappyDaddy 6 months ago
@zztstenglish That Allen article was not on a recommended reading list provided by the professor when I took a class on Family and Society. The list had a balance of pro and anti gay marriage resources. It's really simple. Why don't you tell us in 500 chars, or take 2 or 3 posts, how gay marriage has harmed us, and how it will harm us, with proof. Don't tell us to Google. Just tell us, in your own words. You have completely failed to do that.
BriannaNoob 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
4) if you read the article, you'd see that it has little to do with gay marriage. He rambles about the evils of divorce for 10+ pages, yet fails to PROVE that gay marriage leads to heterosexual divorce (how about a simple statistical analysis of REAL data?).
Here's an example: "given that same-sex relationships are often composed of two financially independent individuals, there will be pressure for even easier divorce." So he's against financially-independent working wives?
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@zztstenglish
5) Here's a last example of Allen's weak arguments: "Same-sex divorce will raise novel legal problems...Will sperm or egg donors to same-sex marriages acquire legal rights and responsibilities as parents?" NOVEL? How is this different than donors to infertile straight couples? He's portraying gay marriage as a frightening wilderness when 1) much can be based on hetero precedence; 2) these issues have not been a problem in ACTUAL places.
Read your sources and choose better ones.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
I was very short in middle school, so I spent a lot of my time in the hallway fighting backpacks, so I certainly support this message from the always bizarre and hilarious Mr. Schwetty. FIGHT BACKPACKS! Wait...why is he talking about gay marriage? Did they make a url that is a sadly unfunny double entendre? Oh, okay, good. Um. Fight Back! Pac! Man! Oh hell...I'm so confused...
jessemmartin 6 months ago
I will never have enough of Alec Baldwin.
chachaandpowpow 6 months ago
Why say you fight for freedom when you deny it to others.
Lt. Col. Joshua L Chamberlain.
TheIcelandicPatriot 6 months ago
Honey, it is not what you do...it is what you don't! LOL
yescandles 6 months ago
As far as I'm concerned, the state should have no right to control who can be married or not with the exception of making sure people can't marry little kids or other sick shit. To my mind, marriage is a choice between two consenting adults and they should not need a license. If this were a free country, gays would have been able to marry long ago. The only real opposition to this is from the corporate/religious extremist/ fascist types who don't want to pay the health insurance out.
heartfire451 6 months ago
Congratulation Alec baldwin, you've satired your own position. Don't have the right to marry the man or woman..." Can you feel the IRONY to that statement (just in case your retarded, this has been a pro-marriage (not 'anti-gay') post.
muel0341 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth of the language of sexuality is also missing in sexual relationships
between people of the same gender. Homosexual acts themselves, not the person with a homosexual orientation, are objectively & gravely immoral because there is no communion of body and spirit which facilitates openness to the procreation of new life. Homosexuality undermines the truth, fullness & wholeness of sexual communion. The Theology of the Body
teton99 7 months ago
I have a huge crush on Alec for a long time....It's only we can't marry, because Jessy Tyler Ferguson stole him away and I live on the other part of the world! And people: Stop bullying Alec on his sexuality! Would you like it if everybody assumes that you are straight and confronts you with that?? LOL
gyqz 7 months ago
NOW U CAN!WHADDDUPPPP
ohdamnipopbubbles 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=oPVPUDtxg2E&feature=related Muslims have almost taken over Britain and France see it for yourself on this video,its spreading like wildfire the most common babies name in Britain is Mohammed now!Sharia law coming to a neighborhood near you in the future,you gays better get back in the closet because this carries the death penalty with the Islamics!
majorl311 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fags
mariorakoc 8 months ago
I now fully expect Alec Baldwin and Jesse Tyler Ferguson to get married.
lilyequalitygirl 8 months ago 22
We did it Alec!! Thank you
ScottyDoug 8 months ago
New York keeps winning! Thank you Alec.
doyouhavemybrains 8 months ago 10
LOVE
lilyequalitygirl 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Gay marriages should be aloud, on other planets. :) HA nasty shit.
jerm26554 8 months ago
@jerm26554 You're pathetic...and obviously retarded.
niptuck117 8 months ago
Heh. Backpack.
itsashame16 8 months ago
I never really liked Alec Baldwin or cared for him, but this makes me want to watch everything he does, starting with 30 Rock!
QuickenedSand 8 months ago
And while we're at it get rid of Michelle and Barack for standing in the way of gay rights.
woody5551 9 months ago
This video statement made my day completely. Alec, you're amazing!!
MoonlightHermit 9 months ago
Alec and Steven and Baldwin at dinner time bust be a battlefield of political debates...
starlight104 9 months ago
How can Alec be such a Lib and his brother Stephen be such a conservative?
jpowers55 9 months ago
@jpowers55 wrote "How can Alec be such a Lib and his brother Stephen be such a conservative?"
My guess is that Stephen was a failed actor whose career went nowhere so he had to look for a niche to make a living. He wound up making films for the conservative religious right. We see it a lot in other entertainers. When their careers are failing, they suddenly find God. Famous examples include gay icons, Donna Summers and Gloria Gaynor, and even openly gay Little Richard.
lgbtTV4 9 months ago
@jpowers55 Another example is former teen heartthrob, Kirk Cameron, of Growing Pains. He was always super-religious, but he also loved the money and fame of Hollywood. When the roles dried up, and his WB sitcom was a flop, he turned toward Christian cinema, starring in the Left Behind movies. Cameron's religiosity was a MAJOR problem for his Growing Pains co-stars, i.e. he demanded that an actress be fired because she had modeled for Playboy. Cameron apologized to the cast many years later.
lgbtTV4 9 months ago
@00belief00 Oh my goodness, did you read this back to yourself before you posted it? I hope you no longer have these gay friends, as you are not truly a friend. Dear oh dear.
bow1976 10 months ago
although i fully support gay marriage, i feel in the mean time while we wait for the ignorance in this country to subside to tolerance, states should legalize unions between gay couples that would give them similar benefits of married couples but allow the union to be separate from marriage so they would still have the benefits and all the stupid homophobes could feel "safe" because it doesn't "alter the sacred marriage between a man and woman". love should always be acknowledged, gay or not
matt1523 10 months ago
I really don't feel for alecs politics. but i do support gay rights It was so close to being passed but you can blame PG county for causing it to go under
stargazerblue186 10 months ago
gay
badmanblottclott 11 months ago
CLASSIC!
cifier 11 months ago
I wish I could like it 1,000 times...
oriousblack 11 months ago
Why the fuck would they ask for money. They got Alec Baldwin's.
MrTretlitely 11 months ago
Ok, according to this thingie, I'm viewer 9999. Am i it, for realz? Is there any other viewer 9999 out there? Is there? Because if there is then....
I'm coming to get you.
AllegroRubato 11 months ago
@AllegroRubato wrote "according to this thingie, I'm viewer 9999. Am i it, for realz?"
Yep, you win a date with Alec Baldwin, but you must reply by 28-3-11. :)
It is now up to Viewer 10,435....
lgbtTV4 11 months ago
@lgbtTV4 Awesome. I can be gay for Alec.
AllegroRubato 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
no thanks. I have gay friends, but they know i don't agree with or support their homosexuality, so i will always vote against gay marriage because i believe it is wrong.
Jacklgf 11 months ago
@Jacklgf wrote: "so i will always vote against gay marriage because i believe it is wrong."
And your reasons are...? If they're not rational and factually based, are you not simply a bigot?
The American Psychological Assoc, Amer Psychiatric Assoc, Amer Medical Assoc, American Sociological Assoc, Amer Assoc of Pediatrics -- and EVERY major relevant ACADEMIC group composed of EDCUCATED EXPERTS support gay rights, and the contention that it is normal. What's your expertise? Think about it.
lgbtTV4 11 months ago 9
@Jacklgf Same for me I have a couple of black freinds, but I don't support their being black, I am strongly opposed to being black.
dieMaddie71 11 months ago
@Jacklgf
Can I have some valid arguments, please? Not just "I think it's wrong?" Thats like keeping other people from eating a certain food or dressing a certain just because YOU don't like it. It's selfish, bigoted, and just a stupid line of thought.
GTFO.
DragonHeart06 11 months ago 3
@DragonHeart06 I believe that the Bible speaks against it. But to give you "a valid argument" means that the argument is subject to your opinion of "valid." So I could say all sorts of things as an argument, but you might still call them all invalid. So how can we keep from going in circles? The only argument that I consider valid is what God teaches in the Bible. I couldn't careless what man's opinion is about the matter. And its not even about my own opinion. I follow what God alone says.
Jacklgf 11 months ago
@Jacklgf
Do you follow everything he says in the Bible, down to the letter? In all parts of the Bible?
RocketmanUT 11 months ago
@Jacklgf wrote
> the Bible speaks against it
Where? Please quote. FYI, the Bible NEVER mentions lesbianism.
It DOES speak against eating shellfish and working on Sunday. Should those be illegal?
"Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales; that shall be an ABOMINATION to you." - Leviticus 11:12
"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: WHOSOEVER DOETH WORK THEREIN SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH." - Exodus 35:2
lgbtTV4 9 months ago
@Jacklgf wrote
> I follow what God alone says
"Everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death" - Leviticus 20:9
"Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." - Leviticus 19:19
"Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard" - Leviticus 19:27
Have you trimmed your beard, or cut hair from your temples? How about wear poly-cotton blends? Hypocrite. Should we hang or electrocute people who curse their parents?
lgbtTV4 9 months ago 2
@Jacklgf wrote
> I couldn't careless what man's opinion is about the matter...I follow what God alone says.
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you, from them you may buy slaves" - Leviticus (25:44) So we should enslave people based on race.
"You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life" - Leviticus 25:45
And there is no chance for emancipation.
So Jacklgf, when will you tell the UN they're wrong to ban slavery?
lgbtTV4 9 months ago 2
@Jacklgf wrote:
> The only argument that I consider valid is what God teaches in the Bible. I couldn't
> careless what man's opinion is about the matter... I follow what God alone says.
Since you don't care what other humans say and want our laws based on your god's words, I guess you're against Democracy and our Representative Republic form of government, preferring instead, a Taliban-style theocracy. I guess elections are pointless since they represent "man's opinion." Think about it.
lgbtTV4 9 months ago
@DragonHeart06 what i wrote first is probably under this, making it look like i wrote this first.
To tell you the truth, I really have no interest in continuing this discussion because it'll just piss people off, or upset people, and I do not want to do that with my comments. So I'll just exit here. You have my response, i'm leaving it at that.
Jacklgf 11 months ago
No one tells a New Yorker that they can't marry Jesse Tyler Ferguson!
Arteia 1 year ago 2
Lol if only Alec was gay... good stuff though nice to know people support gay rights
BlinginTom 1 year ago
Hate solves nothing, to all the "Christians" spreading hate just remember that next time you leave church to go to Luby's for lunch, Gluttony is listed 22 times in the Bible as sin, homosexuality 4 (and only once by itself, in the Old Testament) all other times as part of a group of items, including many times hate and anger, so your hate is just as sinful in the eyes of God... Stop hating and try opening your arms to someone who may just be hurting on the inside, Love will win in the end.
blarbymcblarbston 1 year ago
this is stinkin hilarious... gay or not thats funny stuff, I am a Pastor (and can out quote most the haters out there) I am straight, but I also have many friends who are gay, I am not opposed to this, marriage truly solidifies monogamy. As a pastor I have seen how "Christians" have caused a great deal of pain and hurt to many people, I want to say I am sorry!! on behalf of those who know better, I say again I am sorry, I was bullied for years because many people thought I was gay, it hurts
blarbymcblarbston 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Get a peace to your life with an Latino girl rockmycity.info
ETHEUNICE 1 year ago
uhm,,is this real Alec Baldwin 'lgbtTV4' ???? really ??????? Is he really gay ????? I'm asking cause I really wish he were.....
mrkwonsony 1 year ago
@mrkwonsony Yes, this is the real Alex Baldwin. He is straight but very liberal and fully supports gay rights. In an interview, he said that he is considering running for office.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago 2
gay marriage is disgusting.
being gay somthing to be ashamed about.
dot publisise your retardation!
DISGUSTING VERMIN OF HUMANITY!
you sick people caused aids, you nasty little animals!
TheVovo68 1 year ago
@TheVovo68 You disgust me. Hating people for being different is what makes a person a "verman of humanity". AIDs has been traced back to a straight black teenage boy who lived in St. Louis Missouri, he died in the 60's and they found out in the 80's that it was AID's that killed him. Scientists also believe that AID's has been here far longer than anyone thinks. Get your facts straight.
cinderandsmokejs 1 year ago
@TheVovo68
Um, no. people like YOU are the "disgusting vermin of humanity" for spreding your bigoted and hateful messages - which do nothing but hurt innocent people who only want to love each other.
DragonHeart06 11 months ago
In Spain (I'm spanish) people can marry and nobody died because of that. We can feel safe now that there is a law that protects us from intolerant people. Why is so hard for some people live their own lives and let other people have the same rights? Do you really feel better making people around you feel fustrated and really unhappy??
sararequero 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The reality is, marriage is between one man and one woman. Civil Unions are fine, but the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story. A 2006 survey by Angus Reid Global Scan showed that 51% of adults oppose gay marriage while 43% support it. However, with the civil union option, 32% opposed marriage or civil unions, 32% supported gay marriage, and 32% supported civil unions. 4% were unsure.
MrConservativeTalk 1 year ago
@MrConservativeTalk wrote
> The reality is, marriage is between one man and one woman
Reality is, there is racism. Reality is, there was Antebellum slavery. Reality is, Christians were persecuted in Rome. SO WHAT? What does that have to do with what is moral and just, or even practical?
> marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story
End of story? What an intelligent statement! It may end in your simplistic mind, but the fact that the world is moving toward it proves you wrong.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago
@lgbtTV4
First off, I believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman. That does not mean I dislike gays, but it does mean I support the traditional role of marriage. However, I support the right of states to be able to have civil unions, and I supported the repeal of DADT.
MrConservativeTalk 1 year ago
@MrConservativeTalk wrote
> I believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman
Marriage is a secular institution, and should not depend on what one thinks is sacred. As proof, note that marriage licenses are given and maintained by the state, and not the clergy. The state also decides who can get married, not the church. I couldn't care less if any church recognizes gay marriage, as long as the state does. This is about equality, not what some consider sacred.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago 2
@MrConservativeTalk Do you really still live in 1644?? The last time I checked the state and the church were separated. This shows that america can't handle the 21st century and has to go back to the dark days when religion held it's iron fist over everything everybody did everyday! Today the gay people, tomorrow that old lady that collects herbs....It's against the rules of the bible ( and if it isn't, I'm pretty sure someone will make it up), so burn that witch! Really : update your senses!
gyqz 7 months ago 2
@MrConservativeTalk wrote
> A 2006 survey by Angus Reid Global Scan
So what? Since when did American domestic policy rely on "global" polls? Maybe you have told Bush and Cheney before our illegal invasion. What don't you try surveys of Western countries most like the US. A 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion found 61% of Canadians want same-sex marriage to remain legal, and support for gay marriage has steadily increased since the mid-1990s, when it first hit a majority.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago 4
@lgbtTV4
Our illegal invasion? I referenced the poll to show attitudes, not because I care about what other nations think about things in our own country. I don't believe polls should dictate our foreign policy, but that is another topic. A gallup poll of U.S. citizens showed that 57% oppose gay marriage while only 40% support gay marriage. In fact, support for same-sex marriage amongst Americans went down 6% between 2007 and 2009.
MrConservativeTalk 1 year ago
@MrConservativeTalk
> marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story. A 2006 survey
Think carefully and you'd see how illogical you are. First you arrogantly declared an end of debate for all of humanity by writing, "end of story." Then you cited a 2006 poll. What is a poll? Think carefully, and use a dictionary if necessary. By definition, it is a TEMPORAL cross section of society. The whole point is that attitudes CHANGE (aka trends), and the results are NOT the "end." Duh.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago 4
@lgbtTV4 I am thinking carefully, and that is why I speak my mind. Secondly, Attitudes do change. In 2007, according to Gallup, 46% of Americans supported gay marriage. Two years later, that was down to 40%. Yes, polls are only a sample. Americans view of homosexuality is much more open than it once was, which is good. However, gay marriage is not something Americans support.
MrConservativeTalk 1 year ago
@MrConservativeTalk As a Research Analyst, I can say that your post has no relevance to our current domestic debate, nor has similar "logic" ever been used in the US. More relevant is how countries THAT HAVE GAY MARRIAGE rate their experience. NOT ONE SUCH COUNTRY HAVE HAD ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON SOCIETY, OR STRAIGHT MARRIAGE. And that's the point that you guys are avoiding: I challenge you to show me how gay marriage negatively affects straight marriages or society. Think about it.
lgbtTV4 1 year ago 44
@lgbtTV4 I oppose gay marriage because I feel that marriage is a sacred institution, whether legal or religious, between one man and one woman. Having multiple spouses is illegal, having a spouse of the same-sex is not currently allowed. However, same-sex couples do deserve domestic partnership rights. But marriage is an institution between a man and woman.
MrConservativeTalk 1 year ago
@lgbtTV4 your statement is illogical...the concept of marriage is different in every culture, in China, marriage is not related to any kind of religion, and therefore does not challenge traditional beliefs. in US, marriage is considered "holy matrimony", I personally think it is wrong to establish gay "marriage" in US. Civil union and marriage for gays in China would not mean different things, but in US they are not remotely similar.
starxing618 9 months ago
@starxing618 wrote
> your statement is illogical
What statement are you talking about? Please have the courtesy to quote
> in US, marriage is considered "holy matrimony"
Wrong. ALL laws governing marriage from eligibility to dissolution is SECULARLY determined by the state. Who makes age requirements? The church or the State? Who maintains marriage licenses? You can get a divorce without the Church but can you do so without the State?
The whole China argument is pointless.
lgbtTV4 9 months ago
@starxing618 wrote
> in US, marriage is considered "holy matrimony"
Bottom line is this: the Church is trying to tell the State its business, while the State is leaving the Church alone. Has the State ever demand that any Church recognize or perform gay marriages? No. I couldn't care less how the Church feels about anything, from evolution to abortion. And that's the fairest solution: the State will perform, recognize and maintain gay marriages while each Church follows its own policies.
lgbtTV4 9 months ago 2
@lgbtTV4 Society consists of families, homosexuality strikes the very concept of family at its core. Any confusion on this can be cleared up at the plumbing or electricity isle at the home depot.
swarmis 6 months ago
@swarmis wrote
> Society consists of families
So? Society also consists of single people, widows, infertile people, etc. What's your point?
> homosexuality strikes the very concept of family
Wrong. Learn your definitions. "Homosexuality" is a state of mind, while "family" is the relationship of people. They are unrelated. Try quoting some studies showing how gay marriage has adversely affected straight marriages, or society. Show me proof from Canada, Sweden, Spain, Vermont, etc. Duh
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 I dont need to read a study/survey to validate my point.(although I'm sure there's plenty of them on both sides of this issue) I'm speaking from the standpoint of classical and natural definition of a family. And since having children requires sperm and egg (male and female) it is obvious what the intended design of a marriage/procreating family should be.Nobody is denying you of your right to love who you want, but marriage is an institution with parameters and they must be defined.
swarmis 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 in response to "soceity consists of families" @lgbTV wrote "So, Society also consists of single people, widows, infertile people etc. What's your point?" My point is simple, having a family is a great thing. And I'm sure the widows, single people, etc would agree with that. And in response to your point about a "state of mind", and family being unrelated, I strongly disagree. For example, if love is not individually included in ones "state of mind", a family is doomed. Duh
swarmis 6 months ago
@swarmis wrote "having a family is a great thing"
---
So? What does that have to do with whether gay marriage should be legalized? If having a family is a good thing, then equality dictates that all people should be allowed to have one -- including people who can't/won't procreate. Simply put, there is NO LAW in the US predicating marriage on whether the couple is able or willing to procreate, so procreation is separate and irrelevant to whether a couple should be able to marry.
lgbtTV4 6 months ago
@lgbtTV4 My point is that although many suffer from undesirable situations like "widows, infertility etc." that doesn't mean that they dont desire the opposite.And this gets to the point of an ideal situation for a family. Since there are things that a female can provide a child that a male cannot, and vise versa, it is ideal for a child to recieve what is best. Do you really think that the only thing that seperates men and women is our genitalia?
swarmis 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swarmis You are full of shit. Go kill yourself.
metronomic1 6 months ago
@swarmis What can mothers do that fathers cannot? And vice versa? Are you saying a single mother with, say, an infant son will never give him 'what is best' if she decides to never remarry or enter into a partnership with a man? Same with a single father with a daughter? Are we talking role models or models of behavior? A little boy needs a man to know how to 'act' like a man and a girl needs a woman to know how to 'act' like a woman?
GinXYZ 6 months ago
@GinXYZ Your assertion is that men and women (fathers and mothers) are the same. And although the gender differences are obvious, science has proven that man and woman are wired differently. Your problem with these facts is not with me, it's with the laws of nature. These are the same laws that prevent a homosexual family (it takes sperm and egg to advance the gene through procreation).
swarmis 6 months ago