I am okay w/ it. The people aganist it are dumbasses. Trying to tell people who they can and cant marry is like living in a dictatorship.
Poll: Gay marriage- your thoughts?
- Thread starter Escapefromwhatever
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Personally I don?t really care about whether people are gay or not... its not really my business... but I do not understand why they should get married. I believe that gay couples have the right to the same entitlements as a defacto couple, but to me marriage has always seem like a bondage of males and females... My opinion doesn?t really hold up that well... and I could probably be persuaded by some good arguments but I can?t really think of a reason why it is necessary.
Why does everyone think marriage is a religious institution? You're just as married if you do it at the courthouse as you are if you do it in a church. Maybe it's not as pretty, but it's still called marriage and it's still a legally binding contract.
I think gays should be allowed to marry. I haven't seen one good argument against it that's not based on religion--hell, I haven't seen any good ones that *are* based on religion either. In fact, let me not mince words: Every single argument I've ever heard against allowing gays to marry has been nothing short of a steaming rectum sandwich on rye toast.
I think gays should be allowed to marry. I haven't seen one good argument against it that's not based on religion--hell, I haven't seen any good ones that *are* based on religion either. In fact, let me not mince words: Every single argument I've ever heard against allowing gays to marry has been nothing short of a steaming rectum sandwich on rye toast.
Marriage between a white and a black was illegal in the US until 1967. Things change. And it's not strictly necessary, but technically it's not necessary for straights to get married either; a man and a woman can get their bone on just as well single (so to speak) as they can married. Marriage *is* necessary if you want to, for instance, put your partner on your health/life insurance, and *that* is why I think gay marriage should be legal. And Orson Scott Card can lick my Bawls, by the way.Mew_chan said:
I've seen the same arguments over and over and over on this
There's no reason that the state shouldn't recognize Gay marriage as legal. It would be great for adoption at the very least.
Church is another deal. Leave that up to the individual churches I say.
That should take religion out of the argument all together. If Gays then expect all churches to recognize it, we're asking way too much.
If churches expect states to adhere to their religion, especially on this, that's asking too much.
There's no reason that the state shouldn't recognize Gay marriage as legal. It would be great for adoption at the very least.
Church is another deal. Leave that up to the individual churches I say.
That should take religion out of the argument all together. If Gays then expect all churches to recognize it, we're asking way too much.
If churches expect states to adhere to their religion, especially on this, that's asking too much.
But...surely atheists and agnostics have never gotten married, right? Right?[/sarcasm]dantheman931 said:
In other words, I agree.
To bring up another problem with justifications, civil unions. They can refer to one of two things. They can be a weaselly way of saying "marriage" for the inappropriately squeamish. However, much more often, "civil unions" (like those in Vermont...until September, at least) are state-specific arrangements. Even aside from the implied discrimination of not calling a spade a spade, gay couples in civil unions are thus eligible only for state, not federal, benefits. Kinda sucks, since the vast majority of legal benefits of marriage are on the federal level).
Huh, I didn't realize Connecticut and Iowa allowed same-sex marriages. Never thought they'd beat California to it. Hopefully someone'll challenge that damned Prop 8 soon...
Honeslty I could care less about the issue. It is entirely up to the gays if they want to marry each other, its not my descision. However as a good Catholic, I do believe that the sanctity of "mariage" can only be obtained by the union of a man and woman.
The word however is only a simple symbol, and can be applied however you like. The fact is Free Will is in the equation, so whatever happens, happens.
The word however is only a simple symbol, and can be applied however you like. The fact is Free Will is in the equation, so whatever happens, happens.
I am Christian,
I dont believe anyone was born gay.
I dont understand the "rights" they are fighting for.
I hate when Homosexuality is being compared to a Whole Race.
And even though Marriage in its truest sense can only take place between a man and a woman,
. .i dont see why "Gay" people cant be allowed to "Marry"
If the govt put in special privileges and rights for married people, i dont see why Gays
shouldnt partake in that. So one can even safely say Gays are fighting for money, reduction in tax e.t.c not fighting cos they want to prove their love, cos this can be done without a legal marriage.lol
I also dont understand why the Govt should have eyes in such personal affairs, while they are at it though, all the states that have legalized gay marriage, i hope they do the same for the Polygamous.
All in all, if this wasnt in my face everytime i opened my computer or put on my TV, i couldnt care less.
I dont believe anyone was born gay.
I dont understand the "rights" they are fighting for.
I hate when Homosexuality is being compared to a Whole Race.
And even though Marriage in its truest sense can only take place between a man and a woman,
. .i dont see why "Gay" people cant be allowed to "Marry"
If the govt put in special privileges and rights for married people, i dont see why Gays
shouldnt partake in that. So one can even safely say Gays are fighting for money, reduction in tax e.t.c not fighting cos they want to prove their love, cos this can be done without a legal marriage.lol
I also dont understand why the Govt should have eyes in such personal affairs, while they are at it though, all the states that have legalized gay marriage, i hope they do the same for the Polygamous.
All in all, if this wasnt in my face everytime i opened my computer or put on my TV, i couldnt care less.
You can love and live with someone for your entire life without being married under the law. If it's just about love, then marriage is unnecessary.
However, the legal right of marriage does come with certain perks, and I think gays should be entitled to those perks. Therefore, in a perfectly legal sense, I'm for letting them have them.
On the other hand, I don't really think of that as marriage. To me, real authentic marriage is something granted by the church. I respect the gays' right to marry under law. So, please show me the courtesy of my right to marry in the church, according to my church's doctrine and belief system.
I guess that's it for me.
However, the legal right of marriage does come with certain perks, and I think gays should be entitled to those perks. Therefore, in a perfectly legal sense, I'm for letting them have them.
On the other hand, I don't really think of that as marriage. To me, real authentic marriage is something granted by the church. I respect the gays' right to marry under law. So, please show me the courtesy of my right to marry in the church, according to my church's doctrine and belief system.
I guess that's it for me.
But that's the thing. Allowing gays to marry wouldn't somehow prevent straights from marrying; it's not like there's only so many marriage licenses to go around or anything. Go ahead, have your church wedding. But (and here I'm speaking editorially, not specifically to you) don't act like it's somehow infringing on you to allow two guys or two women to marry. A lot of my tax money goes to things I don't agree with, but that's part of living in the United States (and I assume it's similar elsewhere too).sonidraw said:
There's where it gets sticky. I don't think polygamy should be legal, and I have legitimate reasons for feeling that way*, but gay marriage opponents love to act like allowing it would somehow open the floodgates to all kinds of stuff. I don't buy it; I've read a ton of (legitimate) studies, and not one of them has proven or even suggested that being gay harms anyone at all. You can't say the same thing for pedophilia or zoophilia.Gamine said:
Incidentally, there *is* such a thing as changing the channel, you know.
*I know someone's gonna call me out on this, so here goes: Can you imagine what a mess it would be trying to dissolve a polygamous marriage, even partially, especially if kids are involved? What if the husband wants to divorce wife #1, but wives two through six disagree? What do they do, flip a coin? Plus taxes would be a nightmare.
Well, seeing as how part of marriage is a legal contract, it would all have to be arranged upfront, with everyone agreeing to the terms up front, rather than later.dantheman931 said:
Yeah, but how many people actually bother signing a prenup? If you're gonna make it mandatory for polygamists, it has to be mandatory for everyone. Imagine trying to push *that* one through!vxicepickxv said:
*Is suicide legal? Sure aint harming no one.dantheman931 said:There's where it gets sticky. I don't think polygamy should be legal, and I have legitimate reasons for feeling that way*, but gay marriage opponents love to act like allowing it would somehow open the floodgates to all kinds of stuff. I don't buy it; I've read a ton of (legitimate) studies, and not one of them has proven or even suggested that being gay harms anyone at all. You can't say the same thing for pedophilia or zoophilia.Gamine said:
Incidentally, there *is* such a thing as changing the channel, you know.
*I know someone's gonna call me out on this, so here goes: Can you imagine what a mess it would be trying to dissolve a polygamous marriage, even partially, especially if kids are involved? What if the husband wants to divorce wife #1, but wives two through six disagree? What do they do, flip a coin? Plus taxes would be a nightmare.
*Its not about Gay marriage opening a floodgate, if Marriage is redefined, i think everyone should have equal opportunities. I have seen Polygamy work (allowed in my country)and not work, so there you have it. i have friends from polygamous homes, who wouldn't have it any other way, even though they may not go into it themselves.
*Changing the channel? bah! the remote control is broken
Im against all marrage, there should only be government sancitioned unions when it comes to couples benefits the government should not spend money/time and resources collaborating with churches to give said benefits. Want your sanctity fine have it, jsut dont benefit from it and it would give us another reason to knock religion off the tax exempt list aswell.
