what do you guys think the solution is to the gay marriages issue?

Question

im doing a paper on this issue and i have no idea what to write.

Answer 1

How's this work for your paper...
Take the religion out of governance, go with civil union for everyone (since the marriage license is a legal contract anyway), and let churches marry whoever they prefer. Gay marriage is about legal equality, it's not a religious issue.

Answer 2

Well let's look at the problem first.

George Bush is in office and wants to pass an amendment -- which blows me away he's spending any time at all on this. Some call it 'constitutional discrimination', which sums it up.

Some people are threatened somehow, perhaps afraid to make their own marriage less or somehow tarnished?

Another problem is a gay partner does not get the same benefits a marriage partner would -- insurance, free education to family members of a college, a non-will automatic inheritance (if that's the right word for getting all the stuff).

And individual states cannot agree. Some cities want it and their mayor's support the people. Some cities would find it an abomination.

So many of my friends in los angeles went to SF to get married when the opportunity arose.

Solutions? The best solution would be to let individual states decide by voting -- and it should be a public debate with television coverage. If an anti-gay state exists, maybe someone might move simply for that -- maybe not.

Solutions? I am afraid our President might just decide and make it such a tight law it would take decades to change.

Answer 3

The two issues are :

1. Gays and Lesbians are human beings and those who are American citizens deserve the same rights as anyone else under the constitution.

2. Many (straight) people believe that same-sex marriage is a travesty. Marriage should be between male and female. The idea is to raise a family. I am purposely ignoring religion because we are talking about law, not religion.


I believe the best scenario is to make Civil Unions legal for anyone who cannot marry in the traditional sense. These unions should have identical rights and provide legal rights to adopt unwanted children. This will also ease much of the problems caused by the anti-abortion people.

Answer 4

If you are so worried about a gay man getting married, then don't marry one. The solution is simple. This should not be an issue. I'll give you something to write about. Picture this: a nation, the third largest on Earth. It is the birthplace of democracy. 300 million people, of all walks of life, from all back-rounds in regards to religion, race, etc.., call it home. Now, with all of it's infinite diversity, though financially and ethically successful, in a world of utter pain and immorality, people in this culture still think like morons. They still attempt to bring bigotry into it's laws. In a world of sheer darkness and despair, people in this country, the best on Earth, feel it is imperative to bring forth such ignorance, and have the gull to call it an important issue. People are dying in a war we started but apparently can't finish, but they insist that the gay issue is more important, when the issue shouldn't exist. Who the hell cares about who I marry? Why do people feel that it's their job to stop gay people from tying to live a moral, decent, married life? Write a paper on that,. That's the biggest issue, I think. And that issue is AMERICAN PRIORITIES. Gay marriage is no big deal in the big picture. It's a right everyone should have. It's not like I'm marrying a child or a horse.

Answer 5

Just like the abotion issue there will aways be people for and against it. This debate will go on forever. I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. In fact I think having that little piece of paper makes you want to try harder keeping the relationship going. When you just shack up it is too easy to just walk away when things get rockey. I asked a Canadian friend in Toronto what the deal was as far as divorce up there with gays. And she said it was the same deal as the straight couples. Everything gets split 50%. I didn't know that?

Answer 6

Write this:

Powers of attorney give individuals the right to speak for others.

Medical Powers of attorney work likewise as do living wills.

You can change your name legally.

You can purchase things as a couple.

I am not sure this one will fly but you can call yourself Mr and Mrs and in one respect the IRS has to consider you a maried couple in common law states.

You can adopt as a single then grant guardianship to your mate.

For every door closed to you there seems to be a window to step through to get where you are going so why not just go there.

And as for the marriage license, that is not a marriage. All it is is a piece of paper that says you were married. Until you can get a major religion to stand up and say we recognize gay marriages, the government is not going to accept them. That would be to create a state church and to interfere with non state churches . That is unconstitutional.

So, either get the churches to change or accept door number two.

Answer 7

I support governmental recognition of all marriages performed by recognized religious groups, and that is the secret about the gay marriage question.

The gay marriage fight is really a battle between two groups of religious denominations - Christian and other in both cases. That battle is being missed by the media, and I believe that the battle threatens democracy in America.

One of the reasons for the Revolution, in which ancestors of mine fought -- was to establish freedom of religion in the new nation. Now, we are throwing that away, because contrary to what those on the Right would like you to think, this is not a battle between "people of faith" and "atheists" or some such -- this is a battle between two groups of people of faith, using the government to establish one side’s views -- the EXACT THING that the anti-establishmentarian clause of the Constitution is there to prevent.

Of course no one should "make" those whose faiths oppose gay marriage perform such marriages, and no one ever would. So ministers from the Southern Baptists and Assemblies of God and Ultra-Orthodox Jews and Fundamentalist Muslims should never be asked to perform gay marriages, and certainly not forced to.

On the other hand, why should faith groups that support gay marriage -- such as the United Church of Christ, the Unitarian/Universalist Society, the North American Spiritualist Church, Reform Judaism, and the Correllian Tradition of Wicca -- all recognized Churches and 501c3s be barred from practicing their religious faiths, which say it is ok to marry same sex couples?

The first group of faith groups is realistically using the government to prevent the second group of faith groups from practicing what they believe and having it legally recognized. The founders tried to prevent this, for the stability of the country. It doesn't matter that everyone "thinks" they are right and others are wrong -- it matters that we are plural as a society and the government should recognize everyone's ceremonies the same -- which means that gay marriages committed by churches and faith groups that believe in gay marriages, should be honored by the government regardless of what groups that don't like it say.

Everyone's beliefs can be honored, thus preserving the values that my 12 times removed Great Grandfather died for -- but not if we allow one side to legislate away the rights of the other side.

Since I do not believe the government should be used to control religious belief -- I think that the government should recognize gay marriage, when performed by members of clergy -- and should create a civil union equivalent for those interested only in secular marriage.

Otherwise we should stop saying we don't have an establishment of religion. And since we do say that we don't have such an establishment, I think the best thing we can do is recognize all religious marriage equally, and stop letting a single gropu of religious persons dominate the debate and the legal recognition of the religious beliefs of religions to which they DO NOT BELONG.

If you write on that however, you will be writing far outside the "accepted mainstream" on the topic -- the media after all prefers to present the debate as being religious versus non-religious, and nothing could be further from the truth.

If you want someone to read your paper over, or you need to talk, email me at [e-mail]

Regards,

Reynolds Jones
http://www.rebuff.org
Albany Justice service announcement: http://www.rebuff.org/justice/

Answer 8

The solution is easy.... STOP CALLING IT MARRIAGE. The whole problem is that once you refer to it as marriage it has religous implications and you all know what the religious bigots are like on that score (and religious bigots need not respond to that either). The ISSUE was only ever about ensuring that same sex partners had the same legal rights as their hetrosexual counterparts. That's all that really matters at the end of the day, the non discrimination of same sex couples under the eyes of the law. And since church and state must be separted to me they are two very different issues. I will fight for my legal rights, but I don't have to fight for my religious ones (God and me have an understanding on that score).

Answer 9

I just posted this to someone else. Love makes a family is a non-profit organization lobbying to get gay marriage passed. I volunteer for them when I have a moment. The issues are well explained. Check out their site.

http://www.lmfct.org/splashpage.html

Answer 10

The solution is to allow same sex marriages so that all citizens have the same access to legal issues such as inheritance, joint property, joint health insurance etc.

Recently I had occasion to hear George McGovern comment on this issue. He said he was old fashioned. That if folks were going to live together and sleep together, he thought they ought to get married.

Legalizing same sex marriage does nothing to degrade the institution of marriage, it only allows everyone the same access to the benefits. (filing joint income tax returns etc.)

It should not even be an "issue."