NO!!!
2006-07-01 07:24:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by Vagabond5879 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you believe in separation of church and state then you believe that the government shouldn't be in the business of marriage at all-straight or homosexual. What should happen is that all mention of the word "marriage" should be stricken from every law book everywhere and replaced with "civil union", a civil union that cares not what race religion creed gender or sexual orientation you are. Once two people obtain their civil union, if they see fit, they can go to their church and get married before their god-or not, it's none of anybodies business. PROBLEM SOLVED!
except I'm sure that wouldn't be good enough for the extremists on both sides of the issue.
2006-07-01 14:25:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by mrknositall 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can barely understand your question. Why don't you go back to school and learn how to communicate?
It should be up to the state of the people to decide whether they should be able to get married and to vote. It's called EQUALITY. According to some people here, why don't we go back to the times when women and blacks were being repressed? People like you are the ones holding the human race back.
As for your homosexual bashing, you know what they say: People who has a problem with it are most likely to be gay themselves.
2006-07-01 14:25:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If there is a seperation of church & state, homosexuals should be able to legally get married. If the church chooses not to perform the nuptuals..so be it. The government can not regulate a legal act by using the church as an excuse. We came to this country to avoid religious persecution. The government is an idiotic entity.
p.s. i am straight and 1/4 indian(came to this country comment)
2006-07-01 14:26:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well at least we know Son of Brunhilde is a fool and a moron.
To the question, if you love another human being and they love you--whats the deal? The only reason states/laws get involved are for fees and benefits--which is why if you could care less about fees/benefits, dont bother getting married in the first place.
2006-07-01 14:25:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by tabledanceman2003 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Before you answer this question, ask yourself how history will remember this debate. Will the people who stand opposed to gay marriage be classed with the people who did not want to allow women the right to vote? Or those who wanted to keep black people segregated? Bigotry is ignorance, and as mankind advances ignorance (hopefully) will keep being pushed farther into the shadows. Perhaps one day we can stop wasting time debating non-issues like this and concentrate on things that make a difference. (you know, War, Global warming, Child poverty,.....etc.)
Why would anyone be concerned about gay marriage unless they were gay?
2006-07-01 14:41:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by rotgut a 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think it shoudl be allowed period. Marriage is necassary for insurance and benefits and noraml everyday things. i think there shoudl bea vote just liek for the presidency. It hink everyone shoudl be able to vote (over 18) thats the only fair non bias way. If there sia vote and gays are not allowed to vote thats like says only republicans can vote for the president.
I think if there is a vote it will pass with flying colors. The people who rip on gays the most are too lazy to get up and vote against it.
2006-07-01 14:24:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by BIFFERD 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think what people do in the privacy of their own homes should have nothing to do with basic rights. homosexuals should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals. they should be able to legally bond and be a family in the eyes of the law. if anybody should vote on this subject, it should be those effected by the outcome of the voting.
2006-07-01 14:25:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Homosexuals can never marry, they can only pretend to marry. When a state or a church pronounces two men "man and man" or anything like that, it merely lies. So it doesn't matter what anybody tries to do, since what God has put asunder, no man can hope to join together.
2006-07-01 14:24:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by SHUT UP ALL OF YOU! 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marriage is marriage. If two people are in love and want to have a spiritual and legal commitment to each other, then they should have every right, no matter who they love.
A man in Vermont married a head of lettuce in 1986. So what's wrong with two men or two women getting married?
2006-07-01 14:23:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by grinningleaf 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think everyone should have the same rights... therefore, yes, gays and lesbians should be allowed to be married. It is legal in Mass but doesn't transfer to federal rights or any other state. It's legal in Canada and several other countries. I don't believe there should be a constitutional amendment banning gay/lesbian marriages....
2006-07-01 14:25:05
·
answer #11
·
answered by ckm 2
·
0⤊
0⤋