Before I go........?

Question

What do you guys think about the government trying to define marriage. You know the whole issue about banning gay marriages forever. In my opnion its not their business. Gay or Straight.

You guys may have whatever opinion about homosexuality and that is fine, because all it is is your opnion. I am simply stating that the government has no right and should not interfere with this issue. We have a lot more important things that they should be concentrating on.

For the record I am straight and married with a daughter. And for you guys that claim that you wouldn't want a child growing up with two parents of the same sex, just think that they may actually do a better job at it or would you rather let children stay in foster homes or with abusive parents.

For the record I am straight and married with a daughter. And for you guys that claim that you wouldn't want a child growing up with two parents of the same sex, just think that they may actually do a better job at it or would you rather let children stay in foster homes or with abusive parents.

Answer 1

People here will tell you that it is an amendment to define marriage in the Constitution. Of course, it provides a narrow definition as being "a union between a woman and a man." In passing, it precludes homosexuals from joining in a legally binding contract, and it therefore is an effective ban on gay marriage... so, you are quite right in wording your question that way. The NeoCons are, after all, known historically for being sneaky bastards... and that's why the debates are all about why gay marriage is bad. Which it isn't of course.

The 'gubment' have no business meddling in the affairs of people in love. They go on and on about how the United States is "the best country in the world because of our freedoms" and then they plot to take them away. The Conservatives believe in non-interference in a persons private life so they have no right to be monkeying with this at all. Of course, I want to call them bigots and prejudiced but they would just keep denying that.

They were holding a Senate hearing yesterday and I caught about a minute's worth of it. Some guy was parading this ridiculous graph that plotted the number of "Out-of-Wedlock Births" against the ratification of the Gay Marriage law in Norway. The births just went up and up, and then casually plonked on top of that were the dates that the law was passed, etc. The data together are quite ridiculous of course. One has almost nothing to do with the other. I was suspicous to the extreme so I decided to do my own research into this phoney chart. You can see two different graphs in the sources. The first is a comparison of "out-of-wedlock" births across different nations. Norway's figures are in keeping with several other countries that don't have legalised gay marriage. The second chart is the same data for the United States. As you can see, the plot is also very similar. My conclusion is that gay marriage has no impact on illegitimate children whatsoever. So their point is..?

So, it's obvious that they will resort to any 'fact' that they can get their hands on in order to justify their cause. They will do literally anything and quite possibly everything to get this thing passed. I'm sure that if they do it will become another 'prohibition' or as the Daily Show put it: 'homobition.'

The other arguments that they often resort to fall into two categories:

1. Gay Marriage erodes Traditional Marriage and has a negative impact on the role of the "family". Of course, this is the usual "family values" nonsense. If most people were asked to even define the word 'family' they would quickly realize that it's not that easy. It has people living together, or something similar. Wouldn't a gay marriage fall into that definition? Even so, I'm married and I don't believe that gay marriage has any impact on me or my marriage. It isn't possible. Similarly, the invention of cheese string didn't impact my marriage either. How preposterous!

2. The Slippery Slope. This to me is always a last-ditched effort to paint something black. They use the 'slippery slope' to dissuade many different ideas and concepts. The use of drugs is eschewed because "it's a slippery slope." No it isn't. Gay marriage will not fling the doors open to polygamy simply because the latter is already outlawed in this country. The few people that do engage in it do so in secret -- and they're not really married in the eyes of the law. So that's just crap.

Marriage by the way, isn't defined anywhere. It's a simple fact. They looked and looked for a definition, either in the Bible, or in law. There isn't one. So when they couldn't find the words 'marriage', 'woman', and 'man' in the same sentence they resorted to this bullsh*t.

So, if gay marriage won't effect a traditional marriage, and it isn't a slippery slope, and it sure as hell won't have any effect on the number of illegitimate children born every year, then what's the big deal? Well, it comes down to this... homosexuals may be real and dispersed throughout the country, but the NeoCon-Fundamentalist-Nit-Wits do NOT want them to be seen or heard. They just want them to all go away.

Answer 2

The first question I want to propose: since when has it ever been right for a majority to legislate things that a minority can and cannot do?

A point was raised about a child having to moms or two dads and having a hard time growing up because she/he would be picked on. This wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't for sucha mindset to begin with. If people could accept that two men or two women are just as capable of running a household as a man and a woman, a single man, or a single woman, we'd be making great progress. Studies have been done on the children of gay parents, they're just as healthy as any others raised by two parents. Also note, we're going to be forming families regardless of what is legislated. I can still get married, even if only in a religious sense, and plan to be in the next few years with my partner. What is being denied to us are the right, priviledges and responsibilities that civil marriage grants couples. I want to be able to make medical decisions for my partner without his family being able to contest it. I want our joint property to be secure should something happen to one of us and the family then decides to fight for it. All of these things I can get anyway, but I would have to pay a lot of money for a good attorney to write up the legal documents, and even then it wouldn't be fool proof. Straight couples on the other hand can get these 1000+ rights, priviledges and responsibilities for a small fee...and can then negate them the next day (Britney Spears anyone? Where's the sanctity there?).

And to those who say it's against God's law...well, do a bit of reading. There's a lot of ambiguity around that, and context is important for the verses you love to quote. Translations are also interesting, having recently obtained a Latin translations and found some interesting incongruencies. Also, check the reaons why Sodom was destroyed, you won't find homosexuality on the list. Instead you get this: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me." I also believe the central message of the Bible is that of love. And we're talking civil marriage here anyway.

Answer 3

Okay, first of all, the government isnt trying to decide if someone is allowed to be gay or lesbian. Its a persons free will and right to their own sexual orientation and that privacy has always been protected by the legal system.

Theyre trying to decide if gay marriage is honerable by our laws as a legal union.

You have to understand not only the process involved, but the issue at hand before you can summerize a theory or ask an intellegent question.

SCOCIETY is who gays and lesibans fight to gain approval for their lifestyles from. Its never, nor will it ever be voted on in our legal system.

Our country is a country of majority, and the majority of people have set common morals, while a few groups of minorities have different standards by which they measure the lives of those around them. Its a fight between those groups.

Your best bet in this situation is to seek representation by the appropriate senate. Write a letter to your government stating what you want. Those things do not go unnoticed, it encourages those who represent you before the majority to fight on your behalf.

Lastly, if anything is no ones business its what someone believes. I for one believe marrige is between a man and a woman. But that means nothing to anyone else except those who represent my beliefs in the government.

All the more reason why being educated and registered to vote is so important.

Answer 4

Most gays and lesbians whom I know (and I DO know quite a few) are very flaky individuals where their relationships are concerned. They think a two month old relationship is "permanent" and they go all to pieces when it falls apart. If same sex couples were allowed true "marriages" I can see divorce courts clogged up for YEARS!

I think that truly permanent same-sex relationships should have the same legal rights as any marriage though. Take for example a long-time same-sex couple, one dies and leaves all his worldly goods to the other. They should be afforded some means to see that this happens, such as "partnership agreements" or some other document. And they can even have a ceremony if they want one, but it shouldn't be called a true marriage.

The government is involved because the public is screaming for them to settle it.

Answer 5

I am strait and married, but I agree with you. Why is it ANYONE elses busines who you should be allowed to marry? It's your business what you do and how you live. Gay and Lesbian marriages should be allowed and should be honored just as any other union. Do they not love their spouses in the same way?(Ive known many gay/lesbian couples with a much healthier relationship than some of the strait married couples I know!) I just think it's crazy that the government wants to have the power to decide who can marry and who cant! Next thing you know they will want to start telling parents how to raise their children......Oh, Wait, they already do that!!!!!! LOL. I agree with you on this one.

Answer 6

I have to agree with you on this. Right now in this day and age, there are WAAAAAAY more serious issues going on than the governmental definition of marriage. I'm a lesbian and while yes I think it would be great to legally marry my partner I dont feel that this should be a governmental priority right now. Now dont get me wrong!!! I think there still be some concentration on human rights BUT at this time our country is in a crisis and families are loosing loved ones left and right. It's distressing that marriage rights are taking the front page when we have thousands of families facing the death of loved ones, our country is teetering on the brink of financial ruin, and some families dont even have enough money to pay for gas to get to work! It's hearbreaking that the necessities are not taking more presidence right now. Just my thoughts!

Answer 7

I think is great. I wouldn't want any child growing up with 2 dads or 2 moms. Think of what kids in school would say to that poor child or call them. What would that child think?
It is disgusteing. Who ever was the first gay person should of never went that way. They should of stayed straight and we wouldn't have all these problems now.

Answer 8

Agreed. It's nobody's business who you or I choose to go to bed with.

The constitution is very specific about what powers are allowed to the federal government. And the Tenth Amendment is also specific: it says that any power not given to the federal government, belongs to the state governments. Therefore marriage is to be regulated at the state level (if at all), and indeed some states are working on or have already passed their own "definition of marriage" legislation.

Answer 9

If things like this aren't the business of the government and lawmakers, then nothing should be. We must be governed. You just can't go around doing whatever you want to do when you want to do it. There must be laws and structure. This country was founded by certain principles and because of the destruction of most of those principles our society is going steeply downhill. It's becoming a Sodom and Gomorrah all throughout this once glorious country.

Answer 10

Jenny, please get your facts straight. The government is not trying to ban gay marriages. The amendment under debate is not at all related to gays. It simply states that the only legally recognized marriages will be between one man and one woman. That means if you marry your gay partner in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts, you cannot come to Georgia, and demand that your marriage be recognized as legal and binding.