Gay marriage??

Question

Look, this is a nasty topic, but people need to talk it out instead of letting it sit in the corrner and boil over. So here it goes, please be nice, please be respectful but i want to know your opions, here's mine:

I don't think anyone gets the right to tell you who you love and don't love. People argue that a "marriage" is one that can produce children, but what about women/men who are barron, and can't reproduce, are they not allowed to be married? Just because "god" claims that being gay is wrong (by the way, the bible says maybe three times that gay marriage is wrong, but it preaches love and acceptance through the entire book) doesn't mean there should be a law against such actions. If you don't believe in it, that's fine, but don't impose your beliefes on thoes who feel differntly. It's almost like me saying that because i don't believe in god you can't either... I just don't think it's fair. what do you think?

-Gay partners should not be allowed to adpot children:

You say that they would be robbed of a mother and a father, what about single mothers? their children are "robbed" of a mother/father, what about single women and men who adpot? same situatiuon. i agree that the only fight against gay marriage is religon and intoillerance, neither of which should be made a law.

Answer 1

Religious belief should not equal what is legal in this country. So quoting the Bible, to me, has no merit in the discussion about the LEGALITY of the issue.

A man or a woman can marry and divorce 50 times if they want to and it is perfectly legal, but gay marriage is wrong?

Marriage in this country is a legal union, not necessarily a religious one. You can get married by an Elvis impersonator in Vegas to someone you just met at a strip club for Pete's sake.

Some people argue that gay marriage somehow makes other marriages less legitimate.

If someone else's relationship can make you feel like your marriage is no longer legitimate, the problem is within your marriage, not gay unions.

Answer 2

It is a nasty topic for sure, and people should talk about it. More or less, I think when it is discussed, it is tossed around by politicians trying to garner votes rather than addressing the issue with the hope of coming to an agreement. That being said, I am guessing you do not have a deep seeded faith in Christianity. I am not bringing this up as an attack. I see it as an excellent representation of the current debate which is seemingly defined as "Christians vs. The Rest of The World". One point I would also like to address is that the Bible does not preach "love and acceptance" though the entire book. It's not until the New Testament that the Jews are told to "turn the other cheek". There is also no difference between how many times one or the other is mentioned. Because comments about being gay are mentioned less than say, love your neighbor does not make it any less significant.

Personally, I do not believe homosexuals should be granted all of the same rights and privelidges as heterosexual couples. I am not imposing my belief on anyone else. The status quo at this time is that marriages are defined as a union between a heterosexual couple, usually capable of creating offspring. It seems that since homosexual couples do not accept the current definition of what marriage is they are, in fact, imposing their beliefs.

Conversely, it is almost like me saying to you that because I believe in God that you must. This is America, believe what you want; I would still die beside you to protect your right to not believe, provided you did the same so I could believe.

Answer 3

You are correct in saying that no one should be allowed to coercively keep a person from having a loving relationship with another person, regardless of gender. (I would include multiple persons, but that's a whole different topic.) While I believe that a person has the right to disapprove of such relationship, they should not be allowed to interfere in that relationship in a legal manner.

However, the concept of marriage is a different matter. First of all, it is not simply between two people. It is a contract between two people and a larger entity, meaning a government body and/or a religious organisation. The existence of this contract entitles the marrying pair to certain privileges that are not extended to singles, such as different rules on taxes and inheritance in the case of legal matters, and various privileges within a religious body, which varies from one sect to another.

The problem is that both governments and religions use the term marriage, and there is disagreement between the two. For example, a couple married in a civil ceremony might not have their marriage recognised by a religious group, and vice versa. (These can apply even to heterosexual couples,) There is not clear mutual agreement of one honouring the other. Even marriages performed by one government body might not be recognised by another government body, and the same holds true for religious organisations as well.

Probably the only current solution is to live with the fact that marriage is not going to be universally recognised. A government body and a religious organisation are within their rights to define marriage contracts involving them, although they may be influenced by citizens within a republic or laymen in a religious group. I doubt that there will ever be unanimity among all groups, but that's OK in my mind. However, in no case does this negate the emotional bonding between the two.

(Personally, I favour legalising civil unions for homosexual couples as a matter of law, leaving the contentious term marriage out of it. Religious groups can do as they wish.)

Answer 4

the main #1 reason being gay was wrong in the bible time was this was a new world and there wasn't many people they had to populate the world. and back then being gay would have made this impossible. i dont care if a person is gay or straight as long as they love their mate and are faithful!!! its not our place to judge and gay parents cant do any more harm then some of the straight parents. i had rather see a child raised by good and loving gay parents then to see them in a house hold of abuse. it all boils down to love, respect, honesty, and faithfulness. no matter who your with!

Answer 5

Some thoughts to keep in mind from a religious perspective.

We are all God's children. Created in His image. All God asks is that we love His children without condition as He loves us. Lest not judge or you will be judged.

Now..my thoughts on ALL Marriage. Because I am and I can.

I think that the word "Marriage" needs to be taken out. You see you can have a "Marriage of Business"-when two or more companies come together, "Marriage of State"-when two states come togther, "Marriage of Ideas", "Marriage of Plans", "Marriage of Concepts" are you following this "Marriage of thoughts"?

If you are talking Legal terms, Shouldn't the coming together of two actually be contracturally based? Why not simply make it contractual? Truly making it something that people would not be able to take lightly or get out of easily, legally.

I also think that the Tax department has a great handle on the situation by calling the major money source in a home-"head of household". Everyone who lives and contributes to the home is considered as part of the household. Young, old, poor, rich, handicap, black, white, male, female.

So simple. So basic. So easy to understand.

Answer 6

In the end, it all boils down to love. How could love be wrong? And how could responding to it with hate and violence be right? In the end, the only argument against gay marriage is a religious or intolerant one. Such things have no place in our laws. I think we would all do well to embrace and support the fleeting and few examples of love we see in a world so filled with suffering and violence, no matter where they come from. Honestly, why add more hate?

Answer 7

I have no problem with people who are gay, and it's not even about man with man or woman with woman it is the sexual act; "love is not wrong" people of the same sex are not suppose to be together in that manner, the same way a man and woman who are not married should not have sex. IT is unfortunate for them who have those feeling this is there test and we all one; but if you read the Bible it tells us to deny ourselves take up our cross daily! As far as marriage that's between a man and woman, now you have to think of the kids in this situation they would not have a mother and father and i know alot of kids are that way; but the teasing they would have to put up with would surely do serious damage.Lets not hurt any more kids there our future. Thank you for taking the time to read this and GOD bless

Answer 8

Marriage is the union and commitment of two consenting adults who have chosen to share their lives with each other. I think people are way too hung up over whether or not procreation is involved. Does that mean that post-menopausal women cannot marry? What of men who are sterile? Last I heard no one had a problem with ANY union that would not produce children EXCEPT a homosexual one. All I know is that a minister conducted my grandmother's wedding and she was 20 years or more past menopause. There was NO imagining SHE would have another child. Any law against gay marriage is a product of discrimination and belittles us all.

Answer 9

Monty Python.

Praline:
(John) Hello, I would like to buy a fish license, please.
Man:
(Michael) A what?
Praline: A license for my pet fish, Eric.
Man: How did you know my name was Eric?
Praline: No no no, my fish's name is Eric, Eric the fish. He's an halibut.
Man: What?
Praline: He is...an...halibut.
Man: You've got a pet halibut?
Praline: Yes. I chose him out of thousands. I didn't like the others, they were all too flat.
Man: You must be a looney.
Praline: I am not a looney! Why should I be attired with the epithet looney merely because I have a pet halibut? I've heard tell that Sir Gerald Nabardo has a pet prawn called Simon - you wouldn't call him a looney - furthermore, Dawn Pailthorpe, the lady show-jumper, had a clam, called Stafford, after the late Chancellor, Allan Bullock has two pikes, both called Chris, and Marcel Proust had an haddock! So, if you're calling the author of 'A la recherche du temps perdu' a looney, I shall have to ask you to step outside!
Man: Alright, alright, alright. A license.
Praline: Yes.
Man: For a fish.
Praline: Yes.
Man: You are a looney.
Praline: Look, it's a bleeding pet, isn't it? I've got a license for me pet dog Eric, and I've got a license for me pet cat Eric...
Man: You don't need a license for your cat.
Praline: I bleeding well do and I got one. He can't be called Eric without it--
Man: There's no such thing as a bloody cat license.
Praline: Yes there is!
Man: Isn't!
Praline: Is!
Man: Isn't!
Praline: I bleeding got one, look! What's that then?
Man: This is a dog license with the word 'dog' crossed out and 'cat' written in, in crayon.
Praline: The man didn't have the right form.
Man: What man?
Praline: The man from the cat detector van.
Man: The looney detector van, you mean.
Praline: Look, it's people like you what cause unrest.
Man: What cat detector van?
Praline: The cat detector van from the Ministry of Housinge.
Man: Housinge?
Praline: It was spelt like that on the van. I'm very observant! I never seen so many bleeding aerials. The man said that their equipment could pinpoint a purr at four hundred yards! And Eric, being such a happy cat, was a piece of cake.
Man: How much did you pay for this?
Praline: Sixty quid, and eight for the fruit-bat.
Man: What fruit-bat?
Praline: Eric the fruit-bat.
Man: Are all your pets called Eric?
Praline: There's nothing so odd about that: Kemal Ataturk had an entire menagerie called Abdul!
Man: No he didn't!
Praline: Did!
Man: Didn't!
Praline: Did, did, did, did, did and did!
Man: Oh, all right.
Praline: Spoken like a gentleman, sir. Now, are you going to give me a fish license?
Man: I promise you that there is no such thing: you don't need one

So you see you don't need a license for a fish. A license for a gay marriage is like crossing off dog and writting in cat.

Answer 10

First how can people sit there and say well the bible says this,,, do u not reamber that there is more than one bible, and plus it has been re writtin so many times its not funny... so how can u say that u go by something that is not even a proven fact... come on anyone could say they r god and people would belive them just for the fact that people r so insecure w/ themselves...Religion should NOT run a country that was based on FREEDOM of RELIGION...but what am i sayin BUSH has his head so far up is asss he cant see that this country has people w/ feelings... Being gay is not a mind disorder, its not a desision its a FEELING... Gay people r not mad all the time,,, and who the *** cares if a kid has 2 moms, 2 dads, or a mom and dad..my mom is gay and always has been... and just because people r gay dosent mean the generations r going to stop gay familys want kids and there will always be people willing to give birth for a gay couple or donate sperm to a lez couple....People have the right to make there own desicions... Homosexuality has alwyas been around and will always be around... how pathetic do people have to be to care what people do behind closed doors... its not like the gay community cares if 2 str8 people r ***** in the next room... its called privacy everyone hates a nosey person next door so y r u people being one. and come on how can people sit there and say gay people dont stay togeather as long as str8 people... thats like sayin celebs shouldnt get married i mean sht they marry someone new each week... and i know more gay couples that have been togeather longer than i know of str8 couples.. and newsflash its called Divorce millions of str8 couples get divorce EVERYDAY... they make the wrong choice there human but so r gay people... and u know its not like we r going to make kids thank hey im gay... its gonna open kids minds to thinking hey gay people r just the same as us... just because kids find out that BEING GAY IS OK dosent change the fact that kids experament gay or str8 they will experament w/ men and wemon... and legalizing gay marrage would be good for the finacial stability of the state and country...hello TAXS....so whats so bad about gay marriage theres nothing wrong w/ it. it would be a good thing in all aspects... so lay the ignorance aside and forget what BUSH says i mean come on every biz hes had a part in has failed i dont know about u but it dont make me think very highly of the Dip....instead of turning aginst one another lets work on trying to vote BUSH out of office befor he makes the United States of America become another has been country... look in the history books all great countrys had there downfalls because of people like bush...