Should queers be allowed to marry? It seems like its gonna cause the breakdown of society.?

Answer 1

I fail to see how allowing a loving, monogamous couple to marry will cause the breakdown of society.

Answer 2

This question is getting so tired. The UK, Canada, and Spain not to mention Massachusetts seem to be doing fine...and "queers" are, and have been for a while now, entitled to wed. This whole bit of propaganda about the "gay agenda" and it causing the end of moral society is nothing but a slick and very dangerous political tool. I believe the homosexual community deserves the equal right to marry. Of course I'm biased - I'm gay, I've been with my partner for 10 years and we have an 8 year old son - so losing rights or not getting any at all could hurt our family should we have some sort of catastrophe. Sooner or later "gay marriage" will happen in the USA. Change in this country is inevitable as history has proven. It's all just a matter of time.

Answer 3

Yes they should be allowed to marry, if they love each other, who are we to decide whether it is right or wrong? It sure is a better reason to marry than for the sake of money or getting a visa or due to an unwanted pregnancy!
And why would it be the breakdown of society? Society evolves, you can't stop the process. I mean would you rather still be living in a cave hunting large animals?

Answer 4

I don't know where you are calling from but let me bring you up to date in The United Kingdom.
Firstly, only children and retarded adults call gay people "queers"
Secondly in this country, the only people who can marry in law are two people of the opposite sex, i.e. a man and a woman. That is the legal definition of marriage, the legal joining together of a man and a woman.
Thirdly same sex people are allowed legally to enter into a contract (similar to but not the same as marriage) known as a Civil Partnership. This has been legal since December 2005 and although thousands of gay couples have entered Civil Partnerships, there has been no rioting, no breakdown of civilised living, no breakdown of society. Sorry to disappoint you but there it is. Next question?

Answer 5

Why shouldn't people of the same sex be allowed to marry?? You think that it cause the breakdown of society. Have you forgotten that people are still misplaced after Katrina?? That millions of Americans don't have health insurance?? That our soldiers are dying for no reason at all in the Middle East and the president refuses to bring them home?? But you're right, none of that matters. All that matters is if two guys decided to get marry, our lives will be over. Society as we know it will collapse. Why didn't I see the light??

Answer 6

Our society will break down because people are too concerned with what is happening over their neighbors fence. If I was going to marry my guy- how does that really affect the rest of the world? It all comes down to morals and how we treat others not what sexual identity or other means we use to judge/ridicule/misinterpret other people.
As the Dalai Lama said "If you have two consenting and loving adults in a relationship- how can that be wrong?"
And if there is a ring on a certain finger? Whatever aye!
I know plenty of heterosexual people who have caused the supposed "breakdown" of society as we know it- try some of the US presidents or UK Royals for starters......
And the world will still evolve....

Answer 7

Getting married doesn't bind a couple into an automatic obligation to produce children, so the counter-arguments of "but gay's can't have children," don't hold up - also, what about heterosexuals who decide not to (or cannot) have children? Is their marriage any less valid?

Being homosexual isn't something which someone can choose - hence, the misconception amongst homophobics that "gay marriage will break down society by luring people into gay relationships" doesn't hold up.

We could either apply the term "marriage" to cover both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, or we can have a new definition for homosexual unions. Whichever way we go, homosexual unions need to have the same rights as heterosexual marriages. The UK has gone down the route of defining "civil partnerships"

Answer 8

I love this question as its been a annoying me since it was first talked about. The answer is absolutely "NO". Why the hell anyone needs to subscribe to an outdated and clearly bigoted religious system is totally beyond me. Why anyone needs to get "joined before God" in order to spend the rest of their lives together is so totally 16th centuary as to be unbelivable in this day and age.

Should gay couples have the same legal rights as their hetrosexual counterparts, absolutely "YES". Any government or nation that does not endorse such a view is openly displaying a level of discrimination against its own citizens, and no citizen whatever their sexual orientation should take that lightly.

And lastly let me end with this The soul has no gender. Let me say that again so you can all hear it ... THE SOUL HAS NO GENDER, so if that's the case then what are we really talking about here??

Gold star to me!

Answer 9

If two people want to show thier commitment to each other, either spiritually or legally, then i see no reason why the gender of those individuals should disqualify them or cause a breakdown in society.

Guns, attitudes, racism and a lack of community sprirt is causing the breakdown of society......not personal and consenting relationships.

Answer 10

Marriage is, among other things, a legal contract which confers obligations as well as rights on the partners. This obviously contributes to the consolidation and stabilisation of society, whatever the sexual orientation of the parnters, not to its breakdown.

If what you mean by society is the obscurantist straitjacket of licensed oppression and organised intolerance created by religious fundamentalists of various creeds, and apparently favoured by you, then the sooner that breaks down the better.