Hypothetically If you had to sacrifice one of our other rights to gain the right to marriage would you?

Question

And which right would it be?

FTW I completely agree, no sacrafices should be made at all, this is a just for fun hypothetical question.

Zeebus 3000 years ago huh. Are you talking about the times of the ancient Romans where homosexuality was a commonly acepted practise?

Answer 1

Well, since I don't believe in or have any use for religion, I'd give up my right to freedom of religion.
But I think it's a bad hypothesis, we shouldn't have to give up anything to get what the majority has.

Answer 2

Even though my partner and I have no intention of getting married, I think I agree with the majority here...why would you have to give up something to get something in the first place? Besides, the whole "protection of marriage" thing has absolutely nothing to do with the religious aspects of it, though the "Moral Majority" would have you believe otherwise. The fundies think that only breeders should have all the legal and financial benefits that marriage affords couples willing to make the commitment, and not including LTP gay couples in that IS discrimination, and therefore is dead wrong.

Answer 3

No! The problem is not the fact that gay citizens cannot marry. The problem is the fomation of laws based upon religious belief in this nation. What gay citizens are facing is laws aimed at denying them equal treatment under the law in this country. Giving up one right for another will insure that these citizens continue to be denied equal treatment.

Additionally, the right to marry is, in my opinion, a human rights issue as much as a constitutional issue. Gay citizens will never achieve equal rights and acceptance should they exhibit a willingness to give up any rights or full acceptance.

Answer 4

speaking of obfuscation, it is exciting the type you attempt here to bury various unfounded claims in a tangled mess of verbiage. this would have been stated plenty extra basically: "we won't call it gay "marriage" because of the fact homosexuality is unnatural, as shown via the relationship between sexuality and hormones. If we enhance the unique definition of the notice marriage to incorporate something unnatural, that erosion of language will reason human beings to lose the potential to tell apart between organic and perverted relationships. If we settle for that, we will settle for all way of unfavourable definitions, thereby top-rated to the decline of all human intelligence and comprehension of actuality." So the failings here could be: a million) which you look basing your argument with regard to the character (or perversion) of homosexuality on no longer something extra advantageous than a pair of knowledge which you have via no skill carried to the tip you fake to have derived from them. 2) that then you definitely argue that an greater definition of "marriage" might a technique or the different reason human beings to lose the potential to tell apart between a relationship between a guy and a woman, and one between 2 human beings of the comparable gender - this in spite of the obtrusive gender differences and in addition to your man or woman declare that basically heterosexual relationships are organic. 3) An obvious slippery slope argument, interior the experience which you seem to sense that to allow any growth of notice meaning might convey approximately the sluggish loss of potential to conceptualize something accurately, finally top-rated to the decline of human intelligence as all of us know it.

Answer 5

OK, ignoring the fact that I *have* the right to get married where I live (Canada) and just for fun's sake, as you said, I'm gonna say I'd give up the right to -

Answer 6

well I would have to agree one should not have t o give up on any ones rights. everyone should have the right to marry who ever they please. But if one had to be chosen I would give up the right of Assembly.

Answer 7

What do you mean by other rights? As in, the right to vote, right to free speech, etc? If you're talking Bill of Rights-level stuff, I'd say no. UH-uh, not a chance. If you're talking the right to turn on red, well, sure!

Answer 8

Well I'm sure there are plenty of rights I don't exercise now, so sure. Like, I'd give up the right to bear arms, in exchange for the right to marry.

Answer 9

Why is marriage a right? We already have the freedom to associate under the first amendment. There is no crime committed if two men or two women get married. This is done all the time.

Why would anyone choose to give up rights?

Answer 10

"People who sacrifice liberty to gain security deserve neither liberty nor security."

-- Benjamin Franklin