Is banning gay marriage discrimination? Bible-thumpers, civil-rights people, politicians: Please weigh in!?

Answer 1

Was the banning of inter-racial marriages discrimination? For many years, it was illegal for a man and woman of different races to marry. There were Biblical bases for this too, based on verses about the Hebrews not to take wives from other ethnic groups. It was considered immoral. It was discriminatory to prevent two people who loved one another from marrying.

Now people say it's immoral for gays and lesbians to marry. That's still discriminatory, because you are taking something that is allowed to the majority of the population and forbidding it to minority of the population simply because they are a minority. And saying, "they can call it something else, but not marriage" is the height of discrimination. This nation was supposed to have learned long ago that separate is not equal! (Or does no one remember Brown v. Board of Education anymore?)

The basis on which the distinction is made ("The Bible says gays are bad.") is discriminatory. Not all people believe that the Bible should be the source of our laws. We do not live in a theocracy. We live in a republic, with a clearly stated separation of Church and State. That is, the federal government shall make no compulsory (mandatory) religion. Because the basis for saying that it is wrong for men to marry men and women to marry women is religious, it is discriminatory.

Furthermore, some people are clever enough to frame the argument that marriage is for procreation, and therefore only men and women should get married because only men and women can have babies. This argument falls apart because 1)Thanks to in vitro fertilization, sperm donation, egg donation, and adoption, anyone can have children, and 2) there is nothing in place to prevent sterile male/female couples who can not have children, or person who do not want to have children, from marrying. When my husband and I married the beginning of this month, the county clerk asked us several questions, but not one of them was, "Do you intend to have children?" Thus, the purpose of marriage is clearly *not* procreation. Therefore, to say that men and men or women and women cannot marry because they cannot procreate is discrimination because it is not applied equally across the board to all persons who want to marry and can not/choose not to have children.

Answer 2

Yes of course it is. The government is not allowing homosexuals to do something based on the fact that they are homosexual!
Below 3 a. "the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually"
ALL homosexuals are discriminated against, not just 1 or a minorioty group.. All of them!
If Marriage is sacred between a man and a woman under the eyes of god, then it should be a law that people get married in a church with a priest! not a minister on a beach!
If they want to use that as an excuse, then the government needs to implement christianity into every aspect of life, as they are basing the future of our happiness on religion, and not EVERYONE believes in god! If Homosexuals can not be married as its sacred to god, then everyone MUST believe in god! This is just an excuse for the government to use so they dont come off homophobic, but no matter how you say it, it is!
(totally off topic, its just like when you go to court and you have to swear on the bible! that is a joke.. not everyone believes in the bible so why do they have that?)

Answer 3

YES! Banning same-sexed marriages would violate the Equal Protection under the law act in the Constitution. If the FMA would ever pass, it would be a contradiction in the constitution.

As for the one that stated that same-sexed relationships are not the same as heterosexual relationship, how would you ever know unless you have been in one?

Society has brought up a STEREOTYPE on what Homosexual lifestyle is like, and that is a total farce. There are many relationships out there that are just like the heterosexual relationships out there. MOST have even been together longer than most "normal" relationships I know.

Discrimination against gay "marriage" is neither an issue of sanctity of marriage nor the equal protection of it. Nor is it a violation of the Bible, in both 1st Samuel 18:1, 3-4 and Ruth 1:16-17 both shows of a gay and a lesbian "COMMITMENT" I just think those who don't know are afraid, lets show a little more FAITH in humankind and show that you can "Love thy neighbor!!!"

Answer 4

If marriage between a man and a woman is for the purpose of procreation, then how does same-sex marriage validate a sound reason for being married? Even gay individuals were conceived by the union of a man and a woman. No, not allowing same-sex couples to marry is not discrimination. Noone is being deprived of their civil rights or liberties. If gay couples purpose themselves to having a lifetime commitment what is stopping them from doing that? There are no laws forbidding their relationships. Same- sex couples are in a class of their own. And, If these couples feel comfortable about their relationships, why are they striving so hard to mimic the relationship between a man and a woman. Why not be happy accepting yourselves as as a different group of couples.

Answer 5

Banning gay marriage is discrimination, and it is also unconstitutional because everyone says that the Bible said that marriage is the bond between a man and a woman. Well that is fine and dandy except for the fact that there is suppose to be a Separation of Church and State, and that is being violated by the US Govt. Personally I think that they just need to let the gays and lesbians marry each other because sooner or later they are going to win their day in court anyways.

Answer 6

Yes, but that's not the problem. Discrimination is what you use to decide if you want cake or pie.
Most statutory (legal) arrangements have two sides to them (quid-pro-quo). The quid part of marriage is that people who are going to join together and have children get some benefits of that union in exchange for the quo (advantage) they provide to the society/state of taking care of a dependent.
Marriage between two people is otherwise by convenience and is not much advantage to the society overall. We don't need marriage licenses, we need Family licenses. Any two people should be able to establish a family by taking care of some dependent. This benefits the society equally, regardless of the gender of the family members.
The rest of the argument is just religion, and that's always just emotional role-playing and marketing.

Answer 7

I think God created the two sexes to mate and procreate. I know the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. But if we are trying to be fair to everyone I guess it is discrimination. I don't believe gays should marry. If they want to commit to one another call it something else. I'm not a Bible thumper but this is how I believe.

Answer 8

I have been taking a poll. As a hairstylist, I have a large variety of people types within my clientele... from gay people to very conservative christian.

I have been asking EVERYBODY this question.

Do you think the current controversey over the constitutional amendment regarding homosexual marriage is for the purpose of banning gay marriage outright, or to simply state that homosexual marriage will not be treated as equal to heterosexual marriage under the law?

83% of the people I have asked so far have thought that congress wants to ban it outright... make it illegal for gay people to take vows of committment to each other for life.

The truth is that is simply not the case. There isn't a state in the union that has or will even attempt to ban gay marriage outright. They know better. They just can't pass that type of legislation. To make sure that "renegade judges" don't force them to treat all marriages equal, they pass legislation to prohibit gay marriages from being treated equal.

IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN GAY MARRIAGE...

DON'T MARRY A GAY PERSON.

Leave the rest of us alone.

Answer 9

no more than banning men from the ladies rest room

Current marriage is a law based on Biblical marriage laws. i.e. Between a man and a woman.

If gays want to recieve the same tax benefits and whatnot then I am all for it. I dont believe that they shouldnt be allowed all the same RIGHTS as straight Americans...but marriage it is not.

Soooo...in this sense, I am not denying them their RIGHTS...just the ability to call what it is that they are doing "MARRIAGE"

Call it whatever else you want...I prefer "pipe cleaner union"

Answer 10

No. Is banning horse-man marriage discrimination? Is refusing healthcare to gluttons discrimination? Is higher healt insurance costs to smokers discrimination? Is prison for abusive dads discrimination. I would put those all in the same category.

Good question.