NationStates Jolt Archive

I propose we make gay marriage illegal in the UN, I am not against gays, I just have moral convictions that are influenced by religous belief. If they want to be joined in a union first off, it wont be holy second off it should not be called marriage. It will be defined with another term.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia

Come on a proposal and then resolution will come from this input needs to be provided for it to happen. This isnt outerspace stuff this neighbors and family stuff that effects everyone.

Vote Cast: Gays should be able to be joined in marriage regardless.

This is my personal view and the international view of the Ravilan Chairman.

gays should not be allowed in a marriage because a marriage cannot exist bewteen two people of the same sex. Gays must be treated with respect but their actions must not be support and should be taught as immoral and wrong. this is my official and moral position.

Hrm. Seems to be, there's a whole lot of moral discussion going on. And, hey, would you look at that! None of it crosses international borders! Now, according to my official UN dictionary, if it stays in the state, it stays in the state. And thats precisely how legislation involving homosexuals should remain.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

I agree one hundred percent. tell anyone you can about this forum thread, I am going to write a proposal based on the votes on my poll in four days. I need support.

I agree but since as of right now gay marriage is legal in the UN i am proposing we redefine gay union

I beleive that homosexuals should be allowed to marry those of the same sex, because in order to maintain the health and continuance of our nationswe must prevent the church from influencing political decisions.

marriage is a religous based ceremony regardless of what you believe. marriage laws violate seperation of church and state. all those who are married and recieve more of a tax refund the law that gets them that is in violation of the US constitution

Ahem, (Clears throat)

ARGH, SHUT UP.

THE POINT IS GAY MARRIAGE IS ALREADY RECOGNISED BY ALL NATIONS AND PROTECTED BY ALL NATIONS, U.N. MEMBERS THAT IS, AS THERE IS A PASSED RESOLUTION MAKING IT SO !

YOU CANNOT RE-PEAL IT, AS EVEN IF YOU TRY TO THE MODS WILL GET ANNOYED (THANK HECK FOR SOME PEOPLE WITH SOME SENSE) AND SMACK YOU ONE !

YOU CANNOT IGNORE IT !

DUE TO THE AUTOMATIC "ENFORCEMENT" IDEA OF THE GAME SYSTEM !

YOU CANNOT MAKE ANOTHER PROPOSAL THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH IT, AFTER CONSULTATION WITH A HIGH PLACED MOD, I DOUBT THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A MOVE !

SO - SHUT - UP - ALREADY - PEOPLE !

Ahem, geeez, in the past fort-night I've lost count of times I've had to rave like this.

The Rep of Komokom

so you are saying if popular belief decides we should change a law that we made. it doesnt matter it sticks no matter what. thats crap. the whole point of this is so simulate international affairs. if the UN makes a mistake in a resolution they make a new one right.

I agree with this sometimes goverment makes wrong decisions and for the better of the people need to be repealed

I agree with this sometimes goverment makes wrong decisions and for the better of the people need to be repealed
Yes, quite true. However, under the current system which runs the game it can't be done. It's like playing Monopoly and suddenly saying "I think we need to change the rules so that all my houses become hotels immediately". It'd be fun, it'd spice things up, it might even make the game work a bit better (it would if I were playing and changed houses to hotels, since I barely ever build a ruddy thing, so it'd even things out a bit), but it's not allowed.

"so you are saying if popular belief decides we should change a law that we made. it doesnt matter it sticks no matter what. thats crap. the whole point of this is so simulate international affairs. if the UN makes a mistake in a resolution they make a new one right."

No, I am saying, in this instance of this U.N. what your all blathering about is bollocks in the end, while I agree, if it sucks then maybe it should by changed,

But,

1)

I don't think it should be changed, hence my vocal-ness on the issue :D

2)

(I sound like a broken record...) "The Rules State..."

No, I'll just be repreating points from my last post, you see, what I am trying to say in my specially formatted propogandistic.... who am I kidding, I write clearly and use CAPS when I rave on... is that is done, and can't be for now be changed to due game mechanics and the iron will of the mods, bless'm.

So yeah, can you dig it?

- The Rep of Komokom.

I propose we make gay marriage illegal in the UN, I am not against gays, I just have moral convictions that are influenced by religous belief. If they want to be joined in a union first off, it wont be holy second off it should not be called marriage. It will be defined with another term.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia

In response to President Calvin of Ukroatia... the People's Republic of Yarsola would like to make apparent the definition of "Marriage" as according to the common "dictionary" as it were.

Marriage: \Mar"riage\, n. [OE. mariage, F. mariage. See Marry, v. t.] 1. The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife; wedlock; matrimony.

By every means are religious affiliation and belief important to those who are spiritual, however, the matter involving the naming of "same sex marriage" as "marriage" should not be an issue, as the word "Marriage" has no religious implication. In fact, the act of marriage in itself does not specify anything "holy". Having stated our opinion, Yarsola maintains same sex marriage be legalized in the form of "Marriage" without a substitute in terms of any sort.

Kris
Chairman for the People's Republic of Yarsola

yeah i get that point which is why im not arguing as much, because theres no real point in it. Jeez, im starting to sound like an athiest.

and if you see that im still arguing i think you get my point

yeah i get that point which is why im not arguing as much, because theres no real point in it. Jeez, im starting to sound like an athiest.

and if you see that im still arguing i think you get my point

Jeeez, your starting to sound like an athiest... :wink:

You had a point? :shock:

- The Rep of Komokom :wink:

Notice One: There are many religions that do not use the Bible as basis, so defining 'holy' as relating to Biblical authority is incorrect, and can be offensive to those of other faiths.

Notice Two: What about common-law or secular marriage? That does not utilise religion, unless the participants later choose to recognise there partnership in line with a religion.

Notice One: There are many religions that do not use the Bible as basis, so defining 'holy' as relating to Biblical authority is incorrect, and can be offensive to those of other faiths.

Notice Two: What about common-law or secular marriage? That does not utilise religion, unless the participants later choose to recognise there partnership in line with a religion.

Well, I bet that above post set off some klaxons and red lights in the minds of the anti-gay-marriage-wacko's.

Geee Whizz guv'nor, could this person have made a perfectly valid, logical and possibly water (Or maybe even "bible" :wink: ) proof argument? What will the Ukroatian have to say I wonder, no, wait, like most people, I am sure I could not care less,

Hannah of Enn, I see you in the Stranger's Bar, a drink for you will await !

:wink:

- The Rep of Komokom

first off now the athiest is coming off as annoying. second i have already been proven wrong. the current definition of marriage as i see and agree to is two people who have legally unified in marriage and who love and cherish each other and want to spend the rest of each other's lives with each other.

If there is a god, I pray to it to stop me from flaming >_<

i've got a problem with the proposal, it makes it seem like the only religion of the UN is Christianity, not everyone in the world goes by "The Bible". other than that i don't have a problem with it. oh and my vote is for the last one, no restrictions

I rely don’t see what the sexuality of the proposal has to do with anything... oh that’s not what you meant. Urm no restrictions then.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World

I propose we make gay marriage illegal in the UN, I am not against gays, I just have moral convictions that are influenced by religous belief. If they want to be joined in a union first off, it wont be holy second off it should not be called marriage. It will be defined with another term.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia

G.P. Punkachu takes to the podium, his face purple with deep seated rage and clumps of his own hair in his hands. Unable to speak, he hands the matter to his Soviet Delegate without portfolio, Mallie Testa.

Now look mate, if you managed to get here then you can obviously read so you know that a) there's a resolution already passed in the UN which makes gay marriage legal, and b) you should know that the resolution can't be repealed. So what are you playin' at, eh? Now we don't give a toss for anyone's moral convictions here mate. The resolution is the resolution and we ain't 'avin' no bible thumpers dictating to us what the state calls marriage.

We don't elect pastors or bishops or whatever they're bloody called, we elect soviet delegates, and they decide what marriage is called. If The Soviets meet tommorow and decide that marriage is defined as the loving union of a man and his carrot, den that's what it is and if the church don't like it, then they can go cry into their beer about it. Same for the mosques, the synagogues, the satanist whatevers, the witches' covens, the moonies, the taoists, the hindu temples and any other religion sect or cult, uunless one of 'em manages to win a majority vote in the soviets and some luck they've got of that!

The Empire of Beaumontia allows same-sex marriage within our seven provinces. Some of the people working within the government have same-sex partners who they are married to and it has not devalued or hurt those who are married to somebody of the opposite sex.

Our belief is that it's up to each nation to determine for themselves whether or not same-sex couples can marry.

As UN Ambassador I oppose this motion and should it come to the vote will campaign against its adoption into law.

Thank you,

Artorius Mentora, UN Ambassador for the Empire of Beaumontia, Regional Delegate for the Zhaucaouzian Friendship

Could we request another answer for the poll? this would be:

Answer: I would like to see more than 3 days pass without having to see another gay marriage bill, whether I agree with the issue or not.

The topic is becoming somewhat stale.

I move that further discussion of this matter be indefinitely postponed.

Lord Evif, Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Founder of the DU Region
Retired UN Delegate

As you can already tell the issue is dead and i am not pursuing any further towards a new proposal. If you were here last night or if you read in any of the other forums I conceded the point. Thanks for the feedback any ways though.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia

Please help us out at Bondak.

Due to the UN proposal being prepared, our community is in doubt. In Bondak we don't have legislation regaring homosexuals. That is, we don't have any legislation restricting sexual preference. That's simply because we don't have any objections at all against any sexual preference.

Now, in our community, two different groups are opposing each other. The first group says legislation on sexual preference should not exist at all. Sexual preference is a personal preference (choice) and government shouldn't interfere with that.

The other group agrees that sexual preference should be totally free, but they want that freedom protected by legislation, stating, amongst other things, marriage is open to homosexuals.

I, the delegate of our region Left Wing Utopia and the leader of our community of Bondak, hope you will help us with our dilemma. In short: we agree that sexual preference (and marriage) should be totally free, but should that be protected by legislation?

It's been said before, but I believe I may have to reiterate:

A previous resolution already allows and protects gay marriage. Thus making this current proposal obsolete. That, and any other proposal that would place a ban on gay marriage. I don't see what's so hard to understand about this.

Might I all point you to my forum thread on the U.N. forums pages, near or on the front page, titled,

"GAY MARRIAGE ALREADY RECOGNISED AND PROTECTED BY U.N. LAW"

Or something like that, you all might find it educational,

Regards,

- The Rep of Komokom.

While the issue is one that is fun to debate, and I've done my fair share of expressing my opinion on it. It CANNOT BE IMPLMENTED! This comes from someone who opposes gay marriage very strongly as well, so please just stop trying to implement it as a proposal. If you're going to post on it, make sure that people know that it is for debating purposes only, not to discuss things for the game. Thank you.
-And just remember, there is always more... Booyah For All!

As you can already tell the issue is dead and i am not pursuing any further towards a new proposal. If you were here last night or if you read in any of the other forums I conceded the point. Thanks for the feedback any ways though.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia


THIS IS NOW FORMALLY ONLY A DEBATING FORUM THE PROPOSAL IS DEAD LOOK AT THE POLL, READ THE RULES. NO PROPOSAL WILL BE SUBMITTED BY THIS NATION.

President of Ukroatia

As you can already tell the issue is dead and i am not pursuing any further towards a new proposal. If you were here last night or if you read in any of the other forums I conceded the point. Thanks for the feedback any ways though.

Calvin
President of Ukroatia


THIS IS NOW FORMALLY ONLY A DEBATING FORUM THE PROPOSAL IS DEAD LOOK AT THE POLL, READ THE RULES. NO PROPOSAL WILL BE SUBMITTED BY THIS NATION.

President of Ukroatia

Hmmm, so shall I turn on the CD player?

(The Death March echo's through the lofty halls of the thread...)

- The Rep of Komokom. :wink:

well it would if you would stop posting on it

Oh, like this?

Yes, its childish, but it makes me smile. :)

- The Rep of Komokom.