Poll: Gay marriage- your thoughts?

[NeverAiling]

I never really wanted to get married until I read this post. Yall make it sound so special. I'm gonna cry now cause I can't. lol

Oh seriously... I hope I can get married someday. I can't imagine being alone or illegitimate for the rest of my life.

I never got along with my parents that much, but I grew up in their marriage. I never realized until now, but I always saw that as the goal of life, getting married.

Wow. Just. Wow. I never thought about it like this before.

 

[Reaperman Wompa]

I'm not gay so it doesn't affect me, so why should I care? Let them get married, it's not the business of the people stopping them, nosy bastards.

 

[halodude155]

Who the hell really cares who marries who? It has no direct impact on you if you don't know them.

 

[scnd]

I don't understand how this became an issue. People who marry are generally miserable. I'm all for banning marriage, and that goes for everybody, not just (The) gays.

Actually, lets go a little extreme. All Marriages from here back are now null and void. That was easy! Lets say, From here on out, no two people will be able to be married with the exception that both parties are female.

This is fun!

now this

Three people are allowed to form a bond called a "civil union" This entitles them to similar rights that the female marriage allows, but must include at least one person from each gender. (if you can not afford one, one will be appointed to you)

The point is, Having a government dictating what you can and can't do is ridiculous. Benefits and tax breaks are just as crazy. Were entering a new age. Get rid of marriage benefits and let everyone be happy. Let the Gays and the Blacks fight it out for a while.

 

[redeemer09]

still not banned see forum arnt some high class writers no when i post on a forum i throw out grammar becouse i dont respect people who try to act like an old grammar teacher

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

still not banned see forum arnt some high class writers no when i post on a forum i throw out grammar becouse i dont respect people who try to act like an old grammar teacher

I don't respect people who don't have the decency to care about writing properly on my thread.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Interesting, this one just popped up at Punditkitchen:

If you don't like gay marriage, that's fine, but don't force your beleifs on others. They're not facts, they're personal opinions, so don't treat them like facts. Hence why I'm not against polygamous marriages as well. If it makes them happy, all parties are concenting, I see no reason to stop them.

 

[I_LIKE_CAKE]

I picked indifferent, because while I believe you should have the the same rights regardless of sexual preference, I just can't work up the energy to argue about it.

 

[SnowCold]

Why the hell should I care? They can be Married as much as I care, I dout It can affect me in any way.

 

[AlphaOmega]

For, love is beautifull. for everybody

 

[Ursus Astrorum]

yes of course, a homosexual should have every single identical right as a hetrosexual. I can understand why not in a church though i cant understand why a homosexual would still follow the catholic church seeing as it condemns them to enternal torture. (I didnt say not believe in God just follow the church)

Oh and whats with all the people saying stuff like

So long as they don't rub it in my face and try to make me follow them, they can do what they want.

How are they going to rub it in your face exactly. haha we can get married fuck you.....

In all truth, that was a stock response to anything particularly controversial, as that is my belief in most cases: Don't shove it under my nose, don't threaten me with a knife for believing otherwise, and you can do whatever you want. I'm not one to tell people what they can and cannot do unless it affects me directly.

As for why people keep saying stuff like that, it's probably because some folks have sense enough not to meddle in other people's affairs and actually focus on their own lives.

 

[Thunderheavyarm]

They're people who are in love. Doesn't matter if they're same sex. It's already hard enough to find. Let them be happy like everyone else for crying out loud.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

My two cents on the subject. Any reason you find to ban gay marriage is either religious, thus violating the separation of church and state, since marriage is a legal status, or is discrimination, just like America post 1865 but pre-1960's. Granted, I may be a bit biased, being bisexual, but I'd like to think that this country is "the home of the brave", not "the home of the straight".

 

[confernal]

I mean for the longest time since human beings have become civilised(even back before the dark ages) childern have been raised by one male and one female partner, who usally were their mother and father, this has been going on for so long that it has been incorporated into our consciousness as the human species(like language or creativity) ... To remove or change this aspect would be like not teaching kids to speak(meaning they wouldn't develope properly mentally).

 

[confernal]

I mean for the longest time since human beings have become civilised(even back before the dark ages) childern have been raised by one male and one female partner, who usally were their mother and father, this has been going on for so long that it has been incorporated into our consciousness as the human species(like language or creativity) ... To remove or change this aspect would be like not teaching kids to speak(meaning they wouldn't develope properly mentally).

 

[Wormthong]

i am against it but that is purely because i think marriage is an outdated concept.

 

[GothmogII]

I mean for the longest time since human beings have become civilised(even back before the dark ages) childern have been raised by one male and one female partner, who usally were their mother and father, this has been going on for so long that it has been incorporated into our consciousness as the human species(like language or creativity) ... To remove or change this aspect would be like not teaching kids to speak(meaning they wouldn't develope properly mentally).

Bull. Shit. It's nowhere even remotely the same thing as not teaching a child to speak. Where exactly do you get the idea that adding information will cause a deficit in the child's education? No-one is trying to convert children or turn them gay, just that being heterosexual isn't the only way to be, and that if they do turn out to be gay that it shouldn't be considered a flaw against them.

Second, on the history lesson. There have been homosexuals as long as there have been humans, and while it wouldn't be too off to assume otherwise given pre-history's lack of keeping records, it would be similarly erroneous to assume it was widely prevalent. I mean, I get that homosexuality doesn't directly contribute to the gene pool, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any effect whatsoever, nor that effect can't be positive.

 

[justicedeliverer]

Being a gay man its impressive to see so many enlightened people on one blog!
As for me and the whole marraige thing I wouldn't be arsed were it not for the next-of-kin rights!

 

[confernal]

But they have never played an large impact on society like rasing childern. I'm not saying that they couldn't be good parents, hell they would probably be better parents then alot of straight parents but to dramtically change an primary role in society like that could easily have untold conquences... Kids usally develope close parental bonds with their mothers and view their fathers as rolemodels, we all know that a kid without one of these could develope problems but having two mothers and two fathers would be extremely confusing. I'm not saying the kids will turn out gay or not... But I am saying that this kind of rearing of childern could affect them emotionally or mentally. As for homosexuality being a flaw... I'm not saying that it is but if society had to make a choice then it would have to be the way that keeps humanity going.

 

[Maze1125]

But I am saying that this kind of rearing of childern could affect them emotionally or mentally.

Indeed it could.
The question is how?
Until you can come up with a study that shows there is a statistically significant greater chance of the effect being negative, rather than positive, you don't really have a point

And going back to your original claim:

I mean for the longest time since human beings have become civilised(even back before the dark ages) childern have been raised by one male and one female partner,

That is completely false, for the significant majority of human history children have been raise by the tribe as a whole with little extra specific input, after infancy, from the genetic parents. The way we raise our children is going against their genetic expectations anyway, so the idea that being raised by two men rather than a man and a woman, considering originally they'd have been raised by multiple men and women, would be so much worse, is absurd.