i don't think that's possible for the bible freaks on here,i don't see any plausible reasons why they shouldn't be allowed to get married so i'd like to see a well thought out answer to this....
2006-07-06 03:47:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by SarcasticAnomaly 3
·
4⤊
6⤋
There is a procreation argument, but that is geenrally flawed with advances in genetic research and cloning. In general, the best argument against gay marriage is that it is against the dominant social norms of society. This is a similar argument as to why there should be no death penalty or abortions. However, that argument is shaky at best. There is no real definition of marriage, just a conception of it. A main problem is the fact that those people who are not married are denied approximately 141 rights afforded to married peoples (hospital visits, tax breaks, etc.) The entire issue is over those 141 rights.
2006-07-06 10:57:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by benjamin_nussdorf 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
How can two people of the same sex continue the human race? They can't since they can't make babies. The law says marriage is between a man and a woman. Personally people will do what they wish. It's not up to me to decide or judge. There are other countries that will allow same sex couples to get married. Maybe that's the alternatve?
2006-07-06 10:46:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by LadyK 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, nor would I care to-the issues to address are in the long-standing probate laws and tax codes (state-by-state). Common law marital status has worked fairly well for heterosexual couples in South Carolina, why not for homosexual couples? There are contractual ways to deal with greedy family members in estate matters, so put some of those family attorneys to work. Most people put off life's unpleasant tasks such as Health Care Power of Attorney, Durable Power of Attorney, and bequeathments, trusts, etc. Become knowledgeable about these instruments and regardless of gender, a person would be better prepared than most for 'recognition' of the role of their significant other. Don't leave your partner to keep the 'wolves from the door' without that valuable paperwork! A real partner would not leave one defenseless, and exposed to petty bias and greed. You can choose your friends, and you can choose family!
2006-07-06 11:16:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Elaine 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If gays were allowed to marry that would make the current president appear to be a failure! We certainly wouldn't want the world laughing at the USA and their failure of a president would we? Afterall, the public opinion of the USA throughout the world is so wonderful today, given all of the fantastic things that have been done to free Iraq and fight terrorism. Im sure we are just days away from capturing Bin Laden and ending Al Qaeda! Maybe we can allow gay marriage once Bin Laden has been caught?
2006-07-06 10:50:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marriage is an institution that was allowed by God not government. It's going to be impossible to leave the Bible out of it but if you are going to exclude religion this includes evolution. You have to take a larger leap to believe evolution considering that the theory was claimed to be flawed by the guy that is assumed to believe it most.
2006-07-06 10:47:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Revelator 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Same sex relationships are unproductive unions, X + X = 0, Y + Y =0 , A lot of M/F Marriages are unproductive in a compatibility scence. You are right, it's a free country so I reserve that right to say "different strokes" they are people and people do strange things to each other. Be it done by State or Church that piece of paper doesn't mean sqwat when in the big scheme of things.
2006-07-06 10:58:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by twostories 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Can you buy groceries without a farmer?
Can you drive a car without an engine?
Can you watch tv without a source of electricity?
Can you walk with no legs, hug with no arms, breath with no lungs?
God gave us the Bible to use, not to ignore.
I would say one reason would be financial. Companies in this country are already over-burdened with high health-care costs and to add same-sex "partners" would be a devastating blow.
Another reason is tradition. It is simply in the natural order of propagation of the species for man and woman to be together. Not man and man or woman and woman.
Personally, it's none of my business what people do with their lives. In the same respect, it is my right to find such actions unnatural and against my moral judgement.
2006-07-06 10:55:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Mike 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
'Marriage' is every culture going back before recorded history is between a man and a woman; it is natures way of establishing continuity of the species. I believe that if two same sex individuals want to be together legally, then there should be an official term such as civil union to describe this association. They should have the same rights as any heterosexual union which includes divorce and property rights.
2006-07-06 10:47:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by 7782264 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Can never truly be a family?
in the dictionary, family is decribed as:
a.Two or more people who share goals and values, have long-term commitments to one another, and reside usually in the same dwelling place.
b.All the members of a household under one roof.
so, yes, technically homosexuals can be a family.
as for procreating, so what if they cant make babies? say, for men, you shoot blanks. does that mean that you cant marry a girl because you cant make babies with her? hell, we might as well kill you, you have no use for this world any more.
who said the goal of life is to have babies? or, who made it my goal? maybe they dont want to have kids. or they could adopt kids. for women, they could go to a sperm back.
to make a law preventing homosexuals to get married, would not only be wrong, but it would be done so based on religion. and you make excellent points about being a free country, and keeping religion out of politics. voting against their marrages would take us one step closer to being a Theocracy, and one step further away from being a free country.
if i could vote on your question i would give it ten out of ten. you make an excellent point.
kudos.
Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands? - Ernest Gaines
2006-07-06 10:56:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Dahlia Jihad 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Okay I will leave god out of it when you and your boyfriend make a child between the two of you>And that is without the help of any doctor medical science.
When to men come together that is sick and against nature, there is no way that to men can make a child so what is the point other than you are just plain sick.
The reason that I am being rude is you wanted me to leave god out of it.
when two have a baby with out help, then I will still never concider it normal
2006-07-06 10:53:20
·
answer #11
·
answered by Mr. Clean 3
·
0⤊
0⤋