Are you against gay marriages?

Question

Religion shouldn't even be an issue, because we do have diversity in this country and how about respect. Honestly, how does a working gay couple hurt Americas financial status? It should be a legal issue and not religious issue, if it's about morals, what about slutty looking clothing that is adverticed and sold all over the country to girls as young as 10, isn't that a moral issue? If the gay couple want a church wedding, then it should be up to the church and them, not the law. As far as a legal wedding not involving the church, it should be just as it is for straight couples, it is not hurting anyone. Isn't the government suppose to look out for the publics best interest, aren't gays part of this group, aren't gays voting citizens.

Answer 1

Hey, they pay taxes like the rest of us, they should be entitled to Marriage tax breaks as well.

Answer 2

Right you are about this being a legal issue. There are legal ramifications when dealing with a re-definition of marriage other than as traditionally stated. Let's say that any marriage be recognized be it between two individuals of the same sex, or opposite sex, or between multiple partners. Now here is where there is a problem. I am a religious institution and I preach against the new definition of marriage. The problem arises when this is classified as a civil rights issue. I could be sued or prosecuted for "discrimination" when it is not. I as a religious institution am using my freedom of speech but now can't because in a sense it's against the law. This is the problem as I see it. Leave the definition as it is. Re-defining it encroaches on two Constitutional Protections: Freedom of Speech and exercising of religion.

Answer 3

Absolutely, I'm against gay marriage. Marriage is an institution created as a commitment between a man and a woman, with the idea in mind that the two would raise children together. A gay couple, being unable to produce offspring, has no reason to marry. If they are gay obviously they have rejected the norms and traditions of family. Why should they then decide to adopt the tradition of a couple coming together to form a family, the marriage ceremony, thereby degrading the tradition itself.

I'm not against them having some sort of civil commitment ceremony, but marriage is between a man and a woman. They have opted to live outside of cultural norms, let them form their own traditions,

Answer 4

i'm not against anyone getting married..as long as they love each other..so why shouldn't they! I'm in UK and it's now allowed here! The only thing I worry about is how life will evolve now.. eg kids have 2 mums or 2 dads and they might get bullied at school etc..so I feel this will all have to be brought into children's education and upbringing.. because eventually it won't be as taboo as once was and is still to a degree.. and eventually it will become part and parcel of life! The divorce rate of hetrosexual marriages is so high.. will be interesting to see what the divorce rate is of gay marriages!! I would imagine lower..but who knows! I agree with you that religion shouldn't have to come into it..after all..people don't always get married in a church..so religion is already not part of marriage!

Me personally don't like the thought of marriage..it's an old and dying institution! Legally, if you live with someone and love someone.. just sort out the legalities to cover the joint financial issues..and in the event of one's death etc... why do we have to feel peer group pressure, a thing of the past, to sign our lives away to someone! If I ever did marry the one thing i'd make sure of is a change to my vows..to honour, cherish and obey..or wotever it is.. .bollocks and bugger that!!! I'd make up my own romantic vows .. honour and cherish is good but to hell with obey!!! That should be put back in with the stone age!!!

Good luck to anyone who is gay and wants to get married and I hope your president eventually sees this too... let people live and be free & happy.... well that's what democracy is all about is it not...freedom!!!

Answer 5

What does slutty clothing for young girls have to do with gay marriage? If parents buy the clothing for their kids its their decision,not ours,if two people of the same sex want to get married I have no objections,I am neither gay nor a parent of a young girl so its a non biased opinion
Our problem is in trying to force our morals on another,it doesn't make our morals right ,they are subjective ,because we don't hold universal morals .There are both race and cultural differences in what is and what isn't immoral.I think lying is despicable in any one ,I think infidelity is unconscionable,but those are my moralist points of view,they are not universal morals.

Answer 6

The Governments job is to protect its citizens, and that's all> Being a voting citizen has nothing to do with this. I find Gays to be disgusting, but that's not a reason to disallow their marriage. I do believe they are not qualified for family health coverage, or any other "family" benefits. They are not a "Family" They are results of a family. If they think marriage will benefit their relationship, then let them marry. I have yet to see a Gay marriage last very long anyway.

Answer 7

I have no objection to straight marriage, gay marriage, same-sex marriage, opposite-sex marriage...

Any two consenting adults should be able to get the legal benefits of state-registered monogamy.

The only rational arguments against same-sex marriage are religious ones. And religious grounds are not a valid reason to enact civil laws.

{EDIT to netjr} The difference between a marriage and a civil union is that if I get married to a woman, that relationship and status is legally recognized in every other state, under the constitution.

If I get civil unionized (what is the verb-form anyway?) then that relationship and status is not legally recognized in every other state, which violates the Full Faith and Credit clause, and the Privileges and Immunities clause, of the constitution.

Note, that applies even if the civil union or domestic partnership is between a man and a woman. It's still not portable to other other states. So, the term does make a difference if the legal benefits are different.

Answer 8

Actually, religion should be the only issue. If a church/temple/whatever doesn't want to marry gay people then that should be the end of it. If they're okay with it, then that should be fine, too.
As far as the government goes, they should simply administer civil unions to any individuals who would like to enter into a state of sharing their wealth (that's pretty much all that marriage is).

Answer 9

I am emphatically for gay marriage. After years of breast-beating by the Religious Wrong, their made-up "statistics" they get from creeps like James Dobson, and the impression they have that this country somehow turned into a Christian Theocracy, I've had about as much as I can take anymore without being really waspish in debate about it. The hypocrisy of their weak arguments and their assumption that all and sundry in this country are Christians, their further assumption that all Christians feel the same way they do, and the really infuriating notion that they somehow represent the moral yardstick for each and every one of us has just gotten to be almost unbearable. This applies not only to the subject of gay marriage, but in just about every American pie they can stick their self-righteous fingers into. Whew, that felt good to get that off my chest this morning, thanks :).

Answer 10

I am not against gay marriage in the least. I like your point that it could be left up to individual churches whether they want to perform the ceremony. There are plenty of people who get married in this country (USA) and aren't affiliated with the Christian church--pagans, Hindus, buddhists, people who just get married in a lawyer's office...gays should be allowed the same legal right to get married, even without the Christian stamp of approval.

Answer 11

Not at all, if someone wants to get married, they should be able to, whatever their orientation is. I cant believe how people go on and on about this when it really doesnt matter at all, and yes, gays are voting citizens like everyone else and should be allowed to marry. Someone will catch on soon about how powerful the gay vote is and hopefully we can move on to the next "moral" issue.