English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Look at it from a political & social viewpoint, not a religious one.

2006-09-15 05:19:05 · 61 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

61 answers

Yes,if me being married to my wife does not effect them,why then should two woman who marry one another effect me?I mean hey a man who abuses women can marry them why can't two people who love one another marry,even if they are the same gender

2006-09-15 05:21:05 · answer #1 · answered by william b 3 · 2 1

Yes! They have as many rights as everyone else. Politics and people in the public say no because they think it is religiously and morally wrong. Well, no one asked them!! People can only do what is right for them and if someone is against gay people getting married then don't marrie someone of the same sex!! But don't try to stop anyone from doing that if they want to! It shouldn't be up to politics to decide what people can and can't do because of what the "public" believes is religiously wrong. If it goes against their religion that's fine, but not everyone believes the same things.

2006-09-15 05:30:38 · answer #2 · answered by sunnychick 3 · 0 1

Christianity aside, marriage has always been a historic social mechanism for the production of children and the protection of the mates and offspring of a progenitor male (which is why the women take the man's name). Marriage has always been an inheritance contract that extends beyond the man to his family.

Same sex marriages are inherently non-productive unions--there are no children, there is no generational carry-forward. Even if the couple adopt, it is a non-perpetuating union, the biology of the two partners ends when the partners die.

Whether evolutionary (non-selfperpetuating), or historically, even without consideration of religion, same-sex unions, while often present, are distinctly different from the purpose, function, and utility of marriage. The only sense in which "marriage" applies to such a union, the term is only in a mechanical sense of fixing one body to another body, and as with mechanics male parts fit with female parts, unlike fitting male parts with male parts or female parts with female parts.

2006-09-15 05:35:28 · answer #3 · answered by Rabbit 7 · 1 0

I think it is ok for homosexuals to marry each other as long as theres love. But that doesn't mean that I support or I'm on the side with homosexuals. I think homosexual is wrong and it is a mental disorder. People cannot be borned gay.

You will only hear from those who are (homo/gay) that will argue and defend homosexuality.
I've heard many arguments saying that some people are born gay and it is not a choice. But those excuses are made up for those who feel sorry for themselves and it is just an excuse to make them feel more acceptable in society.

If it is OK to be gay, and suppose right now every living person on earth is gay, how are we suppose to reproduce? Human race will be extinct. It is just wrong.

And I think gays should never adopt a child. It might ruin a child's life of not having both a mom and a dad.

2006-09-15 05:40:21 · answer #4 · answered by realazn2 2 · 0 1

You haven't done well by relagating religion out ot it. There can never be a most appropraite answer to your question than from religion and by religion i mean wholesome counsel of God the creator and abiding by his timeless wisdom. May i say however that every body already have the right to do what he or she feels lesbians inclusive but even so everybody most be ready to bear the consequence of his or her actions. my candid submission is NO to lesbians getting married to each other on the bases that it teaches human beings to rebel against God and you know that anyone who could have the guts to spite God is capable of abusing whatever people,authority or moral laws sooner or later.For the purpose of clearity, let lesbians marry themselves(they are propagating their assignment-whether good or bad posterity will judge) but even so let those who believe that lesbianism is acursed be allowed to speak their minds and not be banned by any law

2006-09-15 05:56:26 · answer #5 · answered by flourish green 2 · 0 0

I think that when you say to look at it from a political view and not a religious view is a bit strange. Because as far as I can see then only political reason for saying no would be because of religion. Now please correct me if i'm wrong with that but that's what I've seen. I would say yes. I think it's fine.

2006-09-16 04:09:47 · answer #6 · answered by izzy k 2 · 0 0

No. There is no viewpoint but Scripture. Political and social viewpoints are just human opinions. They carry no weight in true law or in reality. Most "rights" are a figment of the human misunderstanding.

2006-09-15 05:35:10 · answer #7 · answered by Tommy 6 · 1 1

Definitely! Did you ever see "If these walls could talk"? There was this lesbian couple who had been together for over 40 years. One of them died, and nothing was written in a will or anything. They had shared the expenses of the house, and it was their verbal agreement that if the woman whose name the house was in died first, the other would stay there. However, since nothing was in writing, the woman's nephew came, made the lady leave, and sold the house.

Love is love dammit! They should have the same rights as heterosexuals!

2006-09-15 05:26:17 · answer #8 · answered by cey12000 3 · 0 1

I believe that lesbian and gay couples should have the right to enter into legal domestic partnerships. Further, I certainly make no moral judgments on such a relationship. I know more than a couple of homosexual couples who are in more loving long term stable relationships that many of the heterosexual couples I know.

That being said, there is one small, but very significant difference between homosexual and heterosexual unions. Homosexual unions can not (naturally) produce offspring. Since the survival of our species depends on heterosexual partners entering into a union that will result in the production and subsequent nurturing of children I believe it to be both reasonable and sensible to keep the concepts of marriage and domestic partnerships as separate entities.

2006-09-15 05:28:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Yes, I really do.
However, I am afraid the exact term "marriage" might need to be reserved only for heterosexuals, to begin with. This is only because it has had that precise definition, in the legal sense, for many, many years. So a new category of marriage should be created. Courts can work out the details regarding redefining the term "marriage"

2006-09-15 05:29:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Yes. As a matter of fact, in Holland they can marry already. Civil law in the Netherlands does not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference. From a social standpoint this is favourable, because it enhances acceptance of lesbian and gay couples.

2006-09-15 05:23:29 · answer #11 · answered by Enduringwisdom 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers