How would gay marriage affect your life?

[jack583]

i don't agree with gay marrage, and i have several reason why it is wrong.
but i respect the choices of others because only they have the right to choose how they live.
anyone who tries to take away that right is no better then hittler.
but i do advise that people who choose to be gay should fully consider his or her actions.
they might be able to find what they are looking for while still being strait.
so i recomend that the strait should try to understand the reasons a person chooses to be gay, but only if you are concerned for that person.

do not fight them, EDUCATE them.
make sure that they know what they are getting themselves into and why they want to.

 

[Hashime]

It would not as long as it was considered something separate from traditional marriage. This is because in my view marriage is a man and a woman, and the place in which I hope to be married (eventually, maybe) would not be happy about having to perform ceremonies for same sex couples.
My point: If you make it legal, call it something else legally. I feel that would be the easiest way to avoid conflict.

 

[Sexbad]

i don't agree with gay marrage, and i have several reason why it is wrong.
but i respect the choices of others because only they have the right to choose how they live.
anyone who tries to take away that right is no better then hittler.
but i do advise that people who choose to be gay should fully consider his or her actions.
they might be able to find what they are looking for while still being strait.
so i recomend that the strait should try to understand the reasons a person chooses to be gay, but only if you are concerned for that person.

do not fight them, EDUCATE them.
make sure that they know what they are getting themselves into and why they want to.

You're talking about education of gay people when you're saying it's a choice? Learn some fucking science. You're born with your sexuality, whether mostly straight, mostly gay, or a little bit of both. When did you choose to be straight?

By being gay I'm not "getting myself into anything." It's not dangerous unless you count the unwarranted discrimination.

 

[GamerRelic]

I'd come to more weddings,my gay friends might be happier.That's it.

 

[Seneschal]

i don't agree with gay marrage, and i have several reason why it is wrong.
but i respect the choices of others because only they have the right to choose how they live.
anyone who tries to take away that right is no better then hittler.
but i do advise that people who choose to be gay should fully consider his or her actions.
they might be able to find what they are looking for while still being strait.
so i recomend that the strait should try to understand the reasons a person chooses to be gay, but only if you are concerned for that person.

do not fight them, EDUCATE them.
make sure that they know what they are getting themselves into and why they want to.

You're talking about education of gay people when you're saying it's a choice? Learn some fucking science. You're born with your sexuality, whether mostly straight, mostly gay, or a little bit of both. When did you choose to be straight?

By being gay I'm not "getting myself into anything." It's not dangerous unless you count the unwarranted discrimination.

He indeed sounds like a troll. Who the hell would choose to be gay? I can understand coming to terms with it, but it seems like a really rocky path to take.

Christ, like it's the 1950s.

EDIT: LOL, I just realized that Jack583 is talking about gay people as if they were a gang.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

It would not as long as it was considered something separate from traditional marriage. This is because in my view marriage is a man and a woman, and the place in which I hope to be married (eventually, maybe) would not be happy about having to perform ceremonies for same sex couples.
My point: If you make it legal, call it something else legally. I feel that would be the easiest way to avoid conflict.

You guys tried that with racial segregation ("separate but equal") as well. I do wonder where that got you, in the end..

*Hems*

[sub]Hint - It didn't work[/sub]

 

[Del-Toro]

It hasn't (I'm Canadian). I did go to that one gay wedding, but it was no where near as gay as I imagine some people must imagine it. Case in point, neither groom wore a dress, and not a single reference to Sex and the City or any musical.

 

[Hashime]

It would not as long as it was considered something separate from traditional marriage. This is because in my view marriage is a man and a woman, and the place in which I hope to be married (eventually, maybe) would not be happy about having to perform ceremonies for same sex couples.
My point: If you make it legal, call it something else legally. I feel that would be the easiest way to avoid conflict.

You guys tried that with racial segregation ("separate but equal") as well. I do wonder where that got you, in the end..

*Hems*

[sub]Hint - It didn't work[/sub]

It is not the same thing. Being gay does not make you a different race or give you different rights, it just makes you getting married different. Besides, using different legal name does not mean segregation, it means a different legal name. It also allows for making provisions specific to gay marriage easier. I don't know of any such provisions at this time, but the ability to make the change is easier.

 

[Vidiot]

I still think that marriage should be removed from our legal system entirely. Straight and gay couples alike would have the option to make their unions official, granting them the same benefits as marriage within the current legal system, but the religious conservatives can throw their tantrums without treading on anyone's rights.

Seems like the best solution. *shrug*

 

[Josdeb]

It would mean I would be able to marry.

Yay

 

[WanderingFool]

Well, unless it was ME that was bein married to a guy, Gay marriage wouldnt affect me at all. Thusly, why I havnt a problem with it.

 

[teh_Canape]

nothing at all

homosexual (as in, man-man) would be the same as any regular straight marriage, except that instead of sex at night, would be fencing at night

and for lesbian... well, I don't know any lesbian people personally, but would be pretty much the same

 

[ShadowsofHope]

It would not as long as it was considered something separate from traditional marriage. This is because in my view marriage is a man and a woman, and the place in which I hope to be married (eventually, maybe) would not be happy about having to perform ceremonies for same sex couples.
My point: If you make it legal, call it something else legally. I feel that would be the easiest way to avoid conflict.

You guys tried that with racial segregation ("separate but equal") as well. I do wonder where that got you, in the end..

*Hems*

[sub]Hint - It didn't work[/sub]

It is not the same thing. Being gay does not make you a different race or give you different rights, it just makes you getting married different. Besides, using different legal name does not mean segregation, it means a different legal name. It also allows for making provisions specific to gay marriage easier. I don't know of any such provisions at this time, but the ability to make the change is easier.

"Married different"? The only difference two gay individuals have in a marriage ceremony to a man and a woman is the same gender concept. Otherwise, heterosexuals and homosexuals alike have hundreds of different ways they celebrate the marriage itself. And the provisions would be exactly the same thing. The homosexual population does not want special treatment, simply the same rights and benefits heterosexuals get by default. You know, equal civil and human rights. Those silly concepts.

And you are advocating the "separate but equal" fallacy. You don't want your personal definition of marriage to be "corrupted" by allowing same sex individuals to marry one another like a heterosexual couple would, so by such logic, society should keep gay's out of the "sacred", traditional term of marriage in order to make you happy and let you cling those last decades to the traditional format that appeases you before it likely vanishes. Society does not operate to restrict the rights to civil ceremonies (which fundamentally, that is all marriage is) of others because some have the belief those others should not have access to it.

And I assume in the bolded, you are speaking of a church. Legalizing gay marriage does not force churches to perform what they do not wish to do. They are private organizations. It only affects the society outside of the church. You know, the secular one.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

It wouldn't really. I'm not gay nor am I religious, so gay marriage would have very little to no effect on me.

My view is, the only part of marriage the state should be involved with is granting the license, that's it. So if it's btwn a man and a women, great, but if it's btwn two men, fine, 2 women, also fine. Any religious complications are btwn that person and their God, the state should not be involved in that department.

 

[Russian_Assassin]

In no way whatsoever. Why would that affect anyone except gays themselves?

 

[Josdeb]

It would not as long as it was considered something separate from traditional marriage. This is because in my view marriage is a man and a woman, and the place in which I hope to be married (eventually, maybe) would not be happy about having to perform ceremonies for same sex couples.
My point: If you make it legal, call it something else legally. I feel that would be the easiest way to avoid conflict.

You guys tried that with racial segregation ("separate but equal") as well. I do wonder where that got you, in the end..

*Hems*

[sub]Hint - It didn't work[/sub]

It is not the same thing. Being gay does not make you a different race or give you different rights, it just makes you getting married different. Besides, using different legal name does not mean segregation, it means a different legal name. It also allows for making provisions specific to gay marriage easier. I don't know of any such provisions at this time, but the ability to make the change is easier.

"Married different"? The only difference two gay individuals have in a marriage ceremony to a man and a woman is the same gender concept. Otherwise, heterosexuals and homosexuals alike have hundreds of different ways they celebrate the marriage itself. And the provisions would be exactly the same thing. The homosexual population does not want special treatment, simply the same rights and benefits heterosexuals get by default. You know, equal civil and human rights. Those silly concepts.

And you are advocating the "separate but equal" fallacy. You don't want your personal definition of marriage to be "corrupted" by allowing same sex individuals to marry one another like a heterosexual couple would, so by such logic, society should keep gay's out of the "sacred", traditional term of marriage in order to make you happy and let you cling those last decades to the traditional format that appeases you before it likely vanishes. Society does not operate to restrict the rights to civil ceremonies (which fundamentally, that is all marriage is) of others because some have the belief those others should not have access to it.

And I assume in the bolded, you are speaking of a church. Legalizing gay marriage does not force churches to perform what they do not wish to do. They are private organizations. It only affects the society outside of the church. You know, the secular one.

ShadowsofHope, I'm totally with you on this.
Just a bit of backstory, I've discussed (A little bit, then the rest of the forum did it for me) hoosexuality with Hashime.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.234029-Homosexuality?page=7#8276743

He thinks being gay is a mental illness and it screws up kids.
Good luck talking to him

 

[Biffin Bridge]

I have no problem with gay marriage. They should be allowed to be miserable like the rest of us.

 

[magnuslion]

well let's see.....I wouldn't have to hear about it on the **^%*$$ news anymore. The republicans would have to find something else to ***** about. and I would get to watch some of my gay friends go through the joy and horror of married life.

Beyond that, not a damned bit.

 

[magnuslion]

I have no problem with gay marriage. They should be allowed miserable like the rest of us.

you get +20 internets, sir.