What is your current stance on Gay marriage?

Question

Do you guys believe that marrige is sacred, and was only ment for members of the opposite sex? Or that everyone should have equal opportunity to be whith who the love, no matter the circumstances?

Answer 1

love is love, no matter if the sex is the same..
im not a les but i feel that everyone should have a chance in a married life. Gays/les should have the right to get married

Answer 2

I do believe that marriage is sacred - but I Don't believe it is only for members of the opposite sex. Any two people who love and are committed to each other should be able to get married and have or adopt children. I'm a straight female from Toronto, and our church was the first to offer gay marriages in Canada.

Answer 3

I am not fond of the idea of Gay marriage. I don't really feel a burning desire to declare my love before God and witnesses. My 16 year relationship has gone quite well without it.

I have often said that the only people that will get anything out of gay marriage is divorce lawyers.

My own personal feelings aside, I assume your question refers to how I feel about the way society is addressing the idea of gay marriage.

First of all I'm stunned at how many people who are against it think they are fighting to BAN gay marriage from happening. The current fight is not to allow or disallow gay marriage. The current fight is over whether when gay people do get married, should the government treat it equal to a straight marriage.

Gay marriages are happening. They have been happening for a long time. Christian churches are performing their marriage ceramonies. It has been going on, is currently going on, and will continue to go on. This is something the right wing political people and the "fundies" refuse to understand. They can't stop gay weddings from happening.

The question is and will remain: Does the constitution garentee equal protection under the law, or does it not? If a murderer and rapist have equal protection, shouldn't people who choose to devote their lives to each other? I think rational thinking people will see that the answer has always been and will always be yes.

When asked at the polling booths, vote yes for equal protection under the law, not for or against gay marriage.

It's the American thing to do.

Answer 4

I dont mind gay people getting married and having all the same rights as straight married people. However I wish the government / state of massachusetts would call it something else. Just so marriage can be held as sacred for straight people who want it that way. For example I wish when gay people get married the state would call it a Civil Union or something to that affect. Giving them all the same rights as traditional straight marriage, but just another name to make it clear. That way there would be 2 seperate names for straight people and gay people, giving them there own sacred identity. That is just an idea, though I have which probably will never happen. If gay people want to marry someone then there is nothing wrong with it. It means (hopefully) they wont be sleeping around. When people get married they are supposed to be with just each other, therefore lessening the spread of STDs.

Answer 5

What do you recommend you've heard all of it ? If that's, really real, are you putting forward that you're a stranger to actuality? Marriage is a SACRED union between a guy and a lady. there is not any sanctity in SIN any more advantageous than there is crying in baseball. even if Obama says it, Rick Warren says it, or Mickey Mouse says it, it is a actuality. There should be a Federal mandate adverse to gay marriage. Civil unions are effective, yet should be saved inner most. Celebrating the gay sex act is an insult to God and an affront to instantly society.those are the info we ought to continually be maximum conscious of. What gays do behind close doors is their employer, yet behind closed doors it is going to stay.

Answer 6

The gay marriage battle is a fascinating one -- and the battle itself frightens me, though not for any reason you might expect.

The gay marriage fight is really a battle between two groups of religious denominations - Christian and other in both cases. That battle is being missed by the media, and I believe that the battle threatens democracy in America.

One of the reasons for the Revolution, in which ancestors of mine fought -- was to establish freedom of religion in the new nation. Now, we are throwing that away, because contrary to what those on the Right would like you to think, this is not a battle between "people of faith" and "atheists" or some such -- this is a battle between two groups of people of faith, using the government to establish one sides views -- the EXACT THING that the anti-establishmentarian clause of the Constitution is there to prevent.

Of course no one should "make" those whose faiths oppose gay marriage perform such marriages, and no one ever would. So ministers from the Southern Baptists and Assemblies of God and Ultra-Orthodox Jews and Fundamentalist Muslims should never be asked to perform gay marriages, and certainly not forced to.

On the other hand, why should faith groups that support gay marriage -- such as the United Church of Christ, the Unitarian/Universalist Society, the North American Spiritualist Church, Reform Judaism, and the Correllian Tradition of Wicca -- all recognized Churches and 501c3s be barred from practicing their religious faith, which says it is ok to marry same sex couples?

The first group of faith groups is realistically using the government to prevent the second group of faith groups from practicing what they believe. The founders tried to prevent this, for the stability of the country. It doesn't matter that everyone "thinks" they are right and others are wrong -- it matters that we are plural as a society and the government should recognize everyone's ceremonies the same -- which means that gay marriages committed by churches and faith groups that believe in gay marriages, should be honored by the government regardless of what groups that don't like it say.

Everyone's beliefs can be honored, thus preserving the values that my 12 times removed Great Grandfather died for -- but not if we allow one side to legislate away the rights of the other side.

Since I do not believe the government should be used to control religious belief -- I think that the government should recognize gay marriage, when performed by members of clergy -- and should create a civil union equivalent for those interested only in secular marriage.

Otherwise we should stop saying we don't have an establishment of religion.

Regards,

Reynolds Jones
http://www.rebuff.org
[e-mail]

Answer 7

I truly believe that everyone has the right to be with the one they love.. How can we justify saying who one can or cannot marry?? Do we as human beings, have that right to our fellow human beings? What is the main reasons behind gay marriages, that everyone is so afraid of?? Could it be that they would have what straight couples have had all along?? How selfish. Someone to love is the most precious gift that one person can give to another yet some think that because they are the same sex they should be denied. In our present time you think people would start to behave like adults, open their eyes and hearts to let love in.

Answer 8

I don't understand why people have a problem with gay marriage. If a man loves another man, who are we to deny them the rights that a man and a woman can have? A lot of people use the excuse that two men or two women getting married and adopting children is going to cause the meaning of 'family' to be ripped apart. What about all of the crack whores that are having babies? What about all of the alcoholic child abusers that think of their children as a burden? Two women or men who love each other and love their children surely can't be as much of a problem.

Answer 9

Marriage is both a legal contract and a "sacred" contract. The legal contract is sanctioned by the state and the "sacred" contract is usually sanctioned by a church. If a church does not want to sanction a "sacred" contract between two people based on sexual orientation, they have that right based on freedom of religion. However, the state should not have the right to deny a legal contract of commitment between two people based on sexual orientation. That is a matter of fairness and equality under the law, I believe.

Answer 10

Years ago, when people pushed for interracial marriage to be legalized, they were not seeking to change the fundamental definition of marriage.

Marriage was, and is, a man-woman union. Legalizing interracial marriage did nothing to change that.

That's why comparing gay marriage to interracial marriage is absolutely ludicrous.

Interracial marriage did not change the fundamental definition of marriage as a man-woman union.

But gay marriage will.

There's no reason why society must change what has served as a fundamental bedrock of society, simply to appease that small percentage of society which is seeking government sanction of sodomy.

The idea of two men (or two women) marrying each other is simply strange, and I make no apologies for saying so.

Gay marriage a civil right? The thought of this must be making the Founders spin in their graves.