I oppose: David S
2006-06-07 12:15:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by David Styvaert 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Here's my issue: If a catholic & muslim try to get married, neither clergy will do it cause it requires you to convert. That couple can then go down to the court & come back married & won't be thrown out of the church. That's the govt imposing rules on religion & violates the seperation of church & state. The same thing would happen with Gay marriage when churches are trying to discourage their youth from that lifestyle.
Here's what I support: Marriage is a religious ritual the govt has no right to regulate, tax, license, or perform. The govt should license civil unions, which are legal partnerships, for any two consenting adults, and THEN if you church is willing to perform the ritual ceremony to unify you before God then that's their business. That's it, a fairly ingenious constitutional solution if you ask me. I still think it's a sin, but that's between you & God, not me.
2006-06-07 20:35:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by djack 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gays should have absolutely every right and priviledge that a married couple has, but it should NOT be called marriage. Call it a civil union, or whatever, but not marriage. Make it legally equal to marriage in every way except the name it is called. The reason is that marriage is a religious institution and making such a law violates the separation of Church and State. While it may take the Church a thousand years to catch up to modern times, still I would ask that our government not interfere with that growing process. There are other ways. If a church no longer has much of a following, it has to change its policies and doctrines to be more acceptable to the public at large. Forcing others to accept what you want when you seem to have no consideration for what they want only generates ill will.
2006-06-07 18:48:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by SteveA8 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm not typing my name because I don't hide behind a screen name. Marriage is a basic human right. The "civil union" idea is just them giving an inch. Don't settle for less than the full mile.
2006-06-07 19:43:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by john_stolworthy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
civil union is OK with me! marriage is out of the question.I will never except it.Unless its G.W Bush and Taft the Gov of Ohio.cause I do NOT LIKE EITHER ONE
2006-06-07 18:54:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by I'm Jerry 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Debbie B
2006-06-07 18:40:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by sclady62001p 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dear Tom: I am with you all the way.
This question should never have to be asked.
I can't give you my name - but sign me on
as a definite "YES" vote.
Good Luck! PEACE!
2006-06-09 21:52:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
John T.
2006-06-07 18:40:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Tom, I agree even though I am not biosexual.
alyssa (last initial anoymous)
2006-06-11 16:31:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Scott R.
2006-06-07 18:57:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by se_roddy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋