How would gay marriage affect your life?

[UnwishedGunz]

unless my gay neighbors are constantly breaking into my house and butt F**King me while i sleep i find no reason to have a problem with it, in fact there IS no problem

this is an interesting question but i'd like to make an expansion to it, lots of people say that gay marriage is morally wrong and a sin or some bullshit like that, but let me ask you this...

what if two gay people are atheists?? since they don't believe in god and it is NOT a moral sin should they be allowed to marry?

the government wont allow it, they say its a moral sin but thats just an excuse because most Americans DO believe in god, the government is using god as an excuse to keep gay people from marrying

 

[aSmo]

Well, the ensuing hellfire that consumes the world would be somewhat deleterious to my real-estate investments. Just sayin. The chance of 'fabulous wedding' invitations would likely increase, bringing a nice change from the tired hetero formula of church-dinner-reception.

 

[Carlston]

Let's see. Marriage that is normal is a man and woman. Union is to insure children for the work force/national forces (yeah i don't candy coat it) In return, the spouses get medical care, tax breaks and the like. The idea of marriage also is deeply rooted in the ideal the woman does not work or back when it was instated was not allowed to work. Once again not candy coating it and times have indeed changed. But state of the economy, both are required to work anymore...thank god for equality.

So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.

And umm seriously that's all...

So how does this affect my life... it don't.

Solution.
If Same sex couples want a union. Fine.

Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.

To understand a lot of problems with these kinda things you have to look at a law, recall the time and age it was made and just accept why it would up set someone. Then deal with a helping of logic.

 

[ComicsAreWeird]

Since i´m straight...not at all. But i guess gay people would be happier?

 

[The Stonker]

LIKE EVERYTHING WOULD CHANGE!!!!!


The water would become polluted!
Artists won't want to do art because of lesbian marriage!!!!!
AMERICA WILL NUKE FRANCE!


Well, to be honest, then nothing would change.
I would smile, say another victory for civil rights and then keep drawing.
So, nothing.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Exactly not at all. Well, I suppose I could stop having to shrug and say "Yeah, sure, why not legalize it?" when asked my opinion on it. But that's not really a significant change.

 

[Athol]

It wouldnt affect me at all.

 

[CoverYourHead]

Well, I might end up marrying a guy then. Other than that, it wouldn't.

 

[Harlief]

The only difference it would make to me is I'd know more happy gay couples.

 

[JemothSkarii]

Hmm, I have nothing against it, and neither does my girlfriend; a bisexual, Bhuddist Texan.
Odd combination, I know, but that makes her all the more cooler ^^

So, to answer for the both of us: NOTHING DAMMIT! Let loose the gay juice!

 

[Cakes]

Civilization will collapse, like it already has here in Canada. Also all of those G-d forsaken hellhole North and Western European countries.

 

[Senaro]

It wouldn't affect me at all. Just because my two male neighbors are married instead of just gay roommates doesn't mean anything is going to change.

 

[Veldel]

I think gay marrage should be legalized theres no good reason for it not to. Im straight fyi but i belive everyone should be equal and its downright stupid to be treated less then human becouse you like your own gender

 

[Durnknedued]

Union is to insure children for the work force/national forces (yeah i don't candy coat it)

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.

That's all well and good if you don't consider the vast amount of different sex marriages without children and I personally believe one the greatest things you can do with your life is to raise a child into a well formed adult (screwing that up should be a crime) and those who cannot should not be allowed to raise a child.
In the case of adoption, there is still prejudice against same sex couples. IT SHOULD NOT BE RELEVANT IF THE COUPLE IS SAME SEX, IT DEPENDS _-=ENTIRELY=-_ (I can't emphasise that any more) ON THEIR ABILITY TO RAISE CHILDREN.
I would MUCH rather a loving same sex couple raising a child than the foster care or orphanages that are in place today. Indeed, I would much rather a same sex couple raising a child over neglectful parents. Genetics are one thing that binds parents and a child, the love that is shown is another. A person may be related to their child but if they are not loving and attentive they are not their parent.
Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) there seem to be no people here taking up the opposing argument and thus I am preaching to the choir.

 

[loc978]

Well, the way people ***** about it would sound a little different... and I'd have one more group of opponents in my "no special rights for the co-dependent" campaign.

 

[Eumersian]

How would it affect me? Hmm?

My youth minister got married to her partner maybe 5 or 6 years ago. I remember having a great time at the reception afterward.

Oh, like, negatively? None. Weddings are always fun events. We should have more of them. Gay marriage affected me by giving me another event at which I could have fun and eat really awesome cake.

 

[The Long Road]

The problem I have with gay marriage is in the name: marriage. People say "It's just a word, get over it", but things aren't that simple. Language is the way humans communicate, and it has become so core to us as creatures that to take it lightly is to say "It's just a leg, get over it" to an amputee.

Consider this. If Microsoft renamed its next console "PlayStation 4", Sony would make a BIG stink out of it. What is the difference between a PlayStation and an Xbox? Not much. They both play games on a TV, have the potential for online use of those games, and cost way too much. Yet they are different, and the difference matters precisely because we use language to communicate. Language is why it's so easy to tell if someone is speaking it as a second language to native speakers, and it so powerful that it has been used to start both the greatest and most evil endeavors in human history.

Civil union/partnership/bond/whatever-s are fine by me. I don't plan to use it, so the details can be left to those who care enough. My opposition to homosexuality is religious in nature, and my religion tells me to leave the judgement to The Big Guy. I hope the metaphor I used doesn't paint homosexuality itself in a bad light. PS and Xbox are fairly equal, right?

...right?

It wouldn't in the slightest.

I mean, we have "civil partnerships" over here, which are basically marriages, but if they did call them marriages it would just mean, oh I don't know, the elimination of discrimination.

As for America (am I correct in thinking some States allow it, or not?), it seems everyone gave it the tagline 'the land of opportunity' and forgot the suffix, 'as long as you're white, male and straight'.

Don't forget "born into the right family" and "have the right religion and beliefs"!

Actually, that's just the crap graffitied over "next to whatever comparatively lousy socioeconomic mess you came from" by deluded misanthropes such as yourself.

 

[Dr.Fantastic]

It would affect me. I would laugh at the catholic church trying to make it so gays cant get married

But being serious, it wouldnt affect me one goddamn bit
(Lets hope all the hardcore catholic/christian people at my church dont read this or they will yell SINNER!!!! at me for the rest of my life). It really wouldnt affect me.

 

[geldonyetich]

From what I gather, the overwhelming resistance to the idea of gay marriage comes from a large body of people who figure that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Let me underscore that word, "sacred," a bit: they basically figure the divine forces of the universe will be pissed off if they gave a thumbs up to the idea of letting gays marry.

It's a hard conviction to hold considering that, if marriage is such a great and sacred bond between a man and a women, why doesn't seem to work very often [http://www.divorcerate.org/], to the point where even heterosexual couples are taking to "living in sin" rather than bother with all the hubbub of a marriage and separation. Not to mention a couple can just go out and sign a marriage license, no ceremony or religious affiliation, and in doing so it loses a great deal of trappings.

However, in all fairness, marriage was the idea of religious institutions to begin with, so I suppose you've got to give them props for trying to keep it within their belief structure rather than letting folk do whatever with it. From what I gather, they've have had massive bloody wars over smaller ideological differences - granted, such wars were often just an excuse for invasion.

 

[Carlston]

Union is to insure children for the work force/national forces (yeah i don't candy coat it)

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.

That's all well and good if you don't consider the vast amount of different sex marriages without children and I personally believe one the greatest things you can do with your life is to raise a child into a well formed adult (screwing that up should be a crime) and those who cannot should not be allowed to raise a child.
In the case of adoption, there is still prejudice against same sex couples. IT SHOULD NOT BE RELEVANT IF THE COUPLE IS SAME SEX, IT DEPENDS _-=ENTIRELY=-_ (I can't emphasise that any more) ON THEIR ABILITY TO RAISE CHILDREN.
I would MUCH rather a loving same sex couple raising a child than the foster care or orphanages that are in place today. Indeed, I would much rather a same sex couple raising a child over neglectful parents. Genetics are one thing that binds parents and a child, the love that is shown is another. A person may be related to their child but if they are not loving and attentive they are not their parent.
Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) there seem to be no people here taking up the opposing argument and thus I am preaching to the choir.

Hey, love is love. I still would not give them the tax breaks aimed for kids and a spouse unable to work due to the kids. I'm all for say... medical insurance coverage, long as one person pays the bill.

But unless the old laws are remade anew...the old thinkers cling to this kind of stuff.