Should same-sex marriages be leagalized in the U.S.?

Question

i need some different opinions please...... :)

Answer 1

Absolutely yes they should.

For people saying that the Bible says that homosexuality is wrong:

1. Do you support slavery? the bible does.

2. Do you support killing people for growing two different crops side by side? the bible says it's okay.

3. Do you support the killing of witches? the bible does.

4. Do you support the killing of misbehaving children? the bible does.

5. Do you support genocide? Your god sure is a big fan of it.

I'm sure I missed plenty of things, but you get the gist of it.

Answer 2

Technically, a marriage is a civil contract between two persons who do not need to be citizens of the country they are married in. While this had traditionally been a man/woman contract, there have been a lot of traditions that have been overturned in the last two hundred years with good results. For instance, it was only in the 1970's that the Supreme Court officially ruled that a husband's pursuit of his 'marital rights' was limited beyond the minimum of not murdering his wife. It was relatively recently that all of the States finally recognized marriages between persons of different racial backgrounds.

The specialty portion of a 'church' wedding is simply that the state allows the clergyman to act as the Justice of the Peace in performing the ceremony, but there is no difference in the legal standing between a wedding performed by a minister and that performed by a judge or a ship's captain. As with abortions for religious hospitals, religious institutions may be excused from performing ceremonies that they disagree with.

Unfortunately, this is another attempt to find a simple answer to a complicated problem. I understand that the institution of marriage is having problems (the 50% divorce rate is a misreading of statistics, but it is still in trouble anyways), but this is not one of those problems. This ammendment will not do anything to counter the real problems facing marriage - financial stress, infidelity, and domestic violence among others.

Pretending to defend and institution and actually defending it are, in this instance, two drastically different things. Conservative people are understandably anxious about the influence of homosexual persons on society because they see only the most radical and activist or this group's members. When homosexual citizens are allowed to live their lives without government intrusion, they will become truly adopted into society and this will not longer be a cause of such anxiety.

Answer 3

I don't see how it is "illegal" right now, seeing as each individual state in the union has it's own power under the 10th amendment to decide what is right for its own citizens.

I don't think it's a Federal Constitutional issue in the least, if anything is an issue with the US constitution it is the current president's interpretation of the "unitary all-powerful executive", one which no other president seems to have realized until now. This allows him to completely undermine or reverse a law passed by Congress without using the veto power (which he hasn't used once).

Answer 4

I don't see why not. Only religeous people have any reason why it shouldn't, but since there is supposedly a separation of church and state, I don't see what grounds the government could possibly have to make it illegal. If you want the constitution to work the way it's supposed to, you sometimes have to allow for what is just and not necessarily moral in your mind. Also, a lot of companies now allow homosexuals to provide health insurance to their partners. I would prefer them to have to get married just as straight people do for that right. There may be clauses and certain criteria they must meet before they are eligible to be covered under their partner's policy, I am not sure, but I am legally committed to my husband and I feel they should be legally committed to each as well.

Answer 5

what's the purpose of opposite intercourse marriage? it is approximately forming a clean family contributors; and suitable to the criminal attractiveness of one's family contributors unit. Uh, "something to do with 'equality'" sure, precisely. some anybody is authorized to marry, others are no longer, for no actual reason. i do no longer understand suitable to the united kingdom, yet interior the U. S., there are over one thousand particular rights denied to those that are no longer married, yet have civil unions extremely. It certainly comes right down to freedom -- why are some human beings allowed to marry, and others prohibited from doing so? Why could some human beings ward off others from doing the style of simple ingredient as getting married.

Answer 6

It only took 120 years to recognize marriages between heterosexual couples of different races, give the bigots some time.

Don't like gay marriage? Don't have one. Who the hell do you people think you are telling anyone else how to live their life? If two people love each other, they should be allowed to marry in their faith, with all of the rights and priveleges that marriage entails.

That's what I love about neo-cons: every time your basest, most hateful, divisive, vindictive and spiteful nature is catered to, you all respond. Every time.

Answer 7

It's incredibly stupid that a law is trying to be passed to dictate who someone shouldn't be allowed to love. If you find love in your life, that's wonderful. It shouldn't be an issue if that person is a man or a woman. It would still be marriage in the same species, for crying out loud.

Answer 8

I think this is the LEAST of America's worries, or atleast it should be. If two people love each other, who cares? Who are they harming? This issue is being used by the current administration to take focus off of the REAL issues; such as the immoral war in Iraq, the status of our economy, the burden of illegal immigration, etc.

Answer 9

Yes, I really don't understand what the big deal is. People say if we start letting same sexes marry then what will stop someone from marrying their dog, or from marrying a child? Are you kidding me? How on Earth do two consenting adults choosing to share their lives together equate to child molestation and beastiality?

Answer 10

For the sake of those invloved with that type of relationship..sure why not?I think they are entitled to the same rights as man and wife marriages are..I may not agree with their lifestyles but I do believe in equal rights for all Americans..Whether we like it or not it exists so I say we deal with it as we do so many diverse things here..and move on....=)