Amendment to the constitution supporting gay marriage?

Question

I am personally against it, and the reason why is too long to fit here. But check out my blog if you are interested!

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-riMyW3YwaK34MLyIWgoR2i3UmPvQOQ--;_ylt=An8T0ONpTDnCopUl58Q7c5ysAOJ3?cq=1

So now I have to ask the question... where do you stand on this issue and why?

I defended my argument in my blog, in case you thought I was just randomly advertising my blog. I wasn't. I needed a public space to properly state my case.

I'm so glad no one read or responded to what I had to say. Why should I read your responses and comment on them if you didn't give me the same courtesy?

Answer 1

The problem is, there are thousands of specific legal benefits that people get from being married. Currently, in the US, those benefits are being denied to some couples based on the gender of the participants. That's gender-based discrimination. So, if the government is going to provide legal benefits based on a civil/secular status, those benefits should be available without discrimination.

Now, if you think the government should not provide any legal benefits for being married, and keep it purely a religious status, that's also fine. But what the government cannot do is approve marriages recognized by some religions, and deny approval for marriages recognized by other religions. And that includes making a legal distinction between opposite-sex and same-sex marriage.

You also say children need a male and female parent. That's your opinion. Fine. But there is no scientific evidence that says two opposite gender parents are the only situation that results in a healthy child. And lots of evidence that children raised by one parent, or two caretakers of the same gender, are just as happy and healthy and well-developed. Every major neutral scientific study has shown that love, and affection, and proper care, and a stable household are more important than the couple's gender.

What you appear to be arguing for is different statuses based on gender and sexual orientation. Centuries of law have proven that "separate but equal" are never truly equal. So, what you want is discrimination. Plain and simple. But what is really sad is not that you want discrimination. It's that you want to laws to be written to enforce discrimination.

There are many arguments against same-sex marriage. However, the only ones that are rational or internally consistent are the religious arguments against. And in the US, secular laws cannot be solely based on the tenets of one particular religion.

Answer 2

Hello Daniel,

Since you are already against it, I'm sure my opinion will not be picked. However, will leave it here anyways in the interests of presenting a more balanced view of the issue. Having been married over 20 years, it was easy to take it all for granted: find a special person, fall in love, get married, buy a house together, have children. For gay couples though, it's much more challenging. Most other people probably never think much about them because it doesn't effect them or their lives.

Well, they find somebody special too, and they fall in love, and sometimes they want to validate that relationship in the same ways that the rest of us do. I'm in favor of gays having the same rights to marry that everyone else has. I'm not sure we need an amendment for that any more than when bi-racial marriages became more widely accepted. But if it takes an amendment to assure that all minorities of society enjoy the same rights as the majority, then we should strive for fairness for everyone, not just for those with the same sexual orientation as ourselves. Fighting for the rights of any minority often means supporting those who are different from ourselves. That is important in a country like the U.S. because we are not all the same. Yet, we are all equal as humans, and that should be recogninzed. People cannot help who they are attracted to, who they fall in love with, & with whom they want to spend the rest of their lives.

Some day, for whatever reason, you may find yourself in a minority group, and you would expect the same protection that others in the majority receive. Will others be there to stand up for you? We like to think that others will do the right thing even if it's not the most popular thing to do at the time. If everyone always followed the crowd, then slavery might still be around today. Women might not be voting yet. Society evolves and we must embrace change, not fear it. In retrospect we are able to see the value in the changes.

As for those who say gays wouldnt really have a real marriage because they cannot have children, i have a question for you: Does that mean that heterosexual marriages that don't involve children are any less valid than those with children? Should we revoke their marriage licenses? Of course not. They still love each other & want to spend their lives together. Parenting & sexuality are two different issues. Children are not the only reason people choose to marry. Besides, plenty of gay & lesbians have raised children in loving home environments.

Marriage is more about commitment to another person, loving that person, sharing your life with that person, & protecting that person in the event something happens to one of you.

Stable, loving homes are good for our communities regardless of whether those people are straight or gay. I think I would be far more concerned about a heterosexual marriage that was troubled or violent than a gay couple who only wants the chance to have their loving relationship recognized in the same ways as everyone else. That does not mean, that YOU, yourself is saying it's right for you. It is only recognizing that that it might be the right choice for others.

Think honestly for a moment if a motive for being unsupportive towards gays is rooted in any way because of a fear that others might doubt YOUR sexual preferences? It takes security in one's own sexuality to accept others for theirs. Do the right thing, & accept others for the way they are. Thanks for listening.

Peace out

Answer 3

Gay marriage threatens the institution of marriage as much as inter-racial marriage did back in the 1960s and 70s.

I for one, do not want BIG GOVERNMENT dictating who I can and cannot marry. And I know some male-female marriages which are particularly detrimental to the "ideal" of marriage, so I don't think the genders of the partners has ANYTHING to do with the sanctity of the event. Gay unions will happen in one form or the other. It may as well be in a form that's taxable, and helps out the wedding industry. Aren't conservatives all for helping out small business? :)

As for the politics of this matter, I am saddened that social and "moral" issues are dominating the elections more than aspects that are actually involved in RUNNING a country, like the economy, jobs, welfare, health care, social security, etc. They aren't as provocative or galvanizing as gay marriage, but they are certainly more relevant.

Thanks for the opportunity to share my opinion, and stating yours.

Answer 4

My position is based on the biblical definition of marriage which is 2000 years old. I don't think a minority should be able to legally redefine a holy union which is already defined in the Bible.

Second, there is no reason gays cannot accomplish the same benefits by simply consulting a lawyer and drawing up the right papers.

Answer 5

I think the constitution is pre-ambled with recognizing the power of a supreme being. As God instituted marriage between a man and a woman, we should not try to change this, as we are not greater in wisdom than the Lord our God.

Answer 6

If 2 people love each other, regardless of gender, who does it hurt if they marry? I don't see why the government should be involved from either side.

Answer 7

Since this nation was founded on Biblical principles.........1 Corinthians 7 : 2 - 3 .......... Nevertheless , to avoid fornication , let every man have his own wife , and let every woman have her own husband....Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence : and likewise also the wife unto her husband..........Leviticus 18 : 22 - 23......Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind : it is abomination...Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith : neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto : it is confusion ..

Answer 8

Boys can never be girls vice versa. Gay marriage is not possible because of the same gender impossible to procreate another person.

Answer 9

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvSmd2jNuBRh1qH1CAggULrsy6IX?qid=20060815232314AAO5yEs

Answer 10

coragyph is such a moron