Poll: Gay marriage- your thoughts?

[Inverse Skies]

All for it. It honestly doesn't worry me either way. I have a couple of friends who are gay and it would be fantastic for them. So yep, I think it'd be great.

 

[kellenheller]

I think marriage is an outdated custom that is almost meaningless now. With divorce rates so high (myself included), marriage has no real meaning. Does it matter if two men or women want to get married anymore? No.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Marriage is an outdated religious custom that shouldn't be given the dignity of requesting whether it's okay for someone to love each other.

If you didn't have marriage you'd have to invent it. It is an extremely simple way for two people to pool their collective life resources in a legally binding way without consulting lawyers or faffing about with contracts. Marriage as a religious custom is actually something that came after the original chattel arrangement that originally constituted marriage.

 

[Orekoya]

Yes we allow parents not of the norm to raise kids... but in a safe envioremnt. A parent who abuses their kid emotionally or physically usally have their childern taken away to a safer enviorment. No homosexuals will probably not abuse their kids physicallly or emotionally(however like us their could be exceptions) but we must protect the childern from harm even if the harm is completely unintentional and with the intentions of care. A childerns relationship with their parents dramtically influnces their life, and while most of us will be exposed to stimlus like death or other negative influnces not everybody will be exposed to having homosexual parents... While no body is sure yet if there are any effects of such an upbringing all percations must be made for the childern to develope as normal as possible. You wouldn't expose an child to a murder or other negative event since most childern don't... so why POSSIBLY expose them to an negative event that most childern will not have to go through.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the studies have already been done. There are no negative side effects from kids being raised by gay parents. And those studies have been done for years. Also, what a horrific concept you are suggesting, "Quick, rip those kids away from those loving homo-parents and put them in some overcrowded orphanage."

Actually, the only noticable negative effect one study noticed is that kids around 9-12 were slightly more homophobic because of the other children making homophobic comments and the children of gay parents felt they had to compensate with extra hatred to fit in and be normal. So if gays were more socially accepted, then this social negative side effect would go away.

 

[Chibz]

The only reason i voted no was because marriage is a christian ceremony

Or satanist weddings? Not just Christians have marriage ceremonies, you know.

 

[JWAN]

It depends on where the Marriage is
If its a state marriage, fine then, I have no issues with it, (I'm Catholic and we believe in marriages only done by priests so they can have all the fake marriages they want, I don't care)

If its in the church it needs to be accepted by the leaders of the church (ex. Catholic church, it needs to be sanctioned by the Pope) If the state forced the church to marry gay people then I am against it because that is violating the separation between church and state.

 

[PMetal]

They're still human.


They still have compassion.


They have every right to marry, therefore.

 

[Robyrt]

They're still human.

They still have compassion.

They have every right to marry, therefore.

You mean unless they are closely related, or underage, or already married? Yeah.
There are plenty of good reasons to restrict marriage licenses. Compassion has nothing to do with it.

 

[AgentNein]

The only reason i voted no was because marriage is a christian ceremony whereby a man and a woman specifically are meant to be joined by god, but i have no problems with civil ceremonies i guess. Also i am a christian and i have plenty of gay friends, heck my gf's housemate is gay and we hang out alot these days, so please don't think of me as a gay hater

I'm sorry, but I just have to stop you for a second. Christianity (nor judaism, nor any religion) did not create marriage. It's actually pretty hard to tie down the origins of marriage, so there's no reason to assume that it's strictly a religious practice, or that it didn't possibly precede religion (as it's a useful social tool, regardless of religion).

Christianity cannot 'claim' marriage. Marriage has in fact been around long before Christianity, I can tell you that.

It depends on where the Marriage is
If its a state marriage, fine then, I have no issues with it, (I'm Catholic and we believe in marriages only done by priests so they can have all the fake marriages they want, I don't care)

If its in the church it needs to be accepted by the leaders of the church (ex. Catholic church, it needs to be sanctioned by the Pope) If the state forced the church to marry gay people then I am against it because that is violating the separation between church and state.

This. I appreciate this. Why would any Christian have any sort of issue with state recognized marriage? After all, they believe the only 'real' marriage is the marriage recognized by their god?

 

[Cliff_m85]

I am not going to say much, as I do not want to influence your answers. I will say that it is a very important issue to me, and I am doing a school report on it.

Well, I don't know you that well but I am flattered you would ask. Perhaps just a date first though then we'll see how it goes.

 

[Cliff_m85]

Correct we don't know the possible conquences off letting homosexuals rasing childern... but too simply do somthing even though we don't know what will happen has rarely served humanity well in the past(only rarely has somthing good come of this) like using fossil fuels or antibotics. Maybe homosexuals rasing childern will make them more understanding and less stereotypical of what males should do and what females should do, in that case it's a positive force that will improve humanity as a whole... however the opposite end of the spectrum could be true in that the kids could devlope sexual relation problems or could be completely alienated from their own gender... We simply don't have enough data! So instead of leaping into the abyss as we so often do, we should do some long term studies and plan this out to see the effects. I believe if there is more postives then negatives or no negatives at all then go for it... but don't expect me to agree with somthing that we don't understand yet.

Wrong. We do understand what children go through in a gay household.

The same things that go on in a straight household.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

A point I should bring up is that there is currently only one recorded homosexual in hell- Nikolai Ezhov, and he's in there for murdering millions of people under Stalin's rule, not for rampant bum-banditry. If the homosexuals were all to be confined to hell then I'd quite frankly have expected to meet Oscar Wilde by now, and since I haven't I must conclude that he isn't there (or possibly the devil keeps him around to make amusing comments to people while he tortures them, and is hiding him from me). Anyway, Satan insists that there are remarkably few homosexuals in hell, and indeed the only real sexual deivant who is in there is a crossdresser who also happened to be Britain's prime minister for several years.

 

[Jim-a-Lim]

ok quick explaination = i believe in christianity therefore i also believe that when god created the eartyh he made man a woman and married them so i actually believe god created marriage at the beginning of the earth therefore i believe nothing came before it however im not so ignorant as to say others who do not believe so are wrong for marrying ^^.(that was for a previous post - i am rushing this out as i just got home from work and want a shower). I also believe that yes otrher religions have marriage and as I said i'm cool with them doing there own thing too, because how on earth am I suppose to ask others to respect my beliefs if i dont first respect theirs, so i'm happy for them to walk a different path to me as that is also the choice that i believe god has given all of us ^^. There, so to cover myself from all angles read up unless ofc you think of any others that you wish to question of my statements in which case make a post and i'll reply as and when

 

[AgentNein]

A point I should bring up is that there is currently only one recorded homosexual in hell- Nikolai Ezhov, and he's in there for murdering millions of people under Stalin's rule, not for rampant bum-banditry. If the homosexuals were all to be confined to hell then I'd quite frankly have expected to meet Oscar Wilde by now, and since I haven't I must conclude that he isn't there (or possibly the devil keeps him around to make amusing comments to people while he tortures them, and is hiding him from me). Anyway, Satan insists that there are remarkably few homosexuals in hell, and indeed the only real sexual deivant who is in there is a crossdresser who also happened to be Britain's prime minister for several years.

It's nice to finally have a poster from hell to clear these things up. Much appreciated.

So what are you doing time for? On a side note, I did not realize that hell had internet access. Satan's really sprucing up the place, isn't he?

 

[Tarmon'gaidin]

As long as I don't have to watch during the the weddingnight people can do whatever they want.

 

[WrongSprite]

A point I should bring up is that there is currently only one recorded homosexual in hell- Nikolai Ezhov, and he's in there for murdering millions of people under Stalin's rule, not for rampant bum-banditry. If the homosexuals were all to be confined to hell then I'd quite frankly have expected to meet Oscar Wilde by now, and since I haven't I must conclude that he isn't there (or possibly the devil keeps him around to make amusing comments to people while he tortures them, and is hiding him from me). Anyway, Satan insists that there are remarkably few homosexuals in hell, and indeed the only real sexual deivant who is in there is a crossdresser who also happened to be Britain's prime minister for several years.

If you mean Thatcher, you just made my day.

 

[hippo24]

Why care, the argument is weather the state directly acknowledges the union, thus giving them tax breaks etc etc...

I mean do people really need the government telling them, yes you love each other, The whole concept is ridiculous, the reason the government acknowledges the union between a man and a women, is because it creates a stable structure for children to be raised. As far as I know the homosexual community cannot have children together, and have notoriously short unions.

If you want to get married and your truly in love, it doesn't matter if your gay or not, it doesn't matter if you have a finger on your hand, it doesn't matter if you have any children to put to bed, all that matters is that you love each other, you don't need anything more or less.

 

[magnus gallant]

i dont really care, you cant treat as second class citazens but you cant force a church to marry them, if they do it it should just be a civil union, by a judge, unless they can find a priest who will do it.

either way, im not gay, so it wont have any effect on me.

 

[freakonaleash]

well, since marriage was originally created so kids could be legally bonded to their parents that is why there is such a disfavor of it.

 

[setsunafseiei]

If a couple love one another they should be allowed to get the piece of paper that shows that, regardless of sex or religious standing.