Do you believe gay people should have the right to get married?

Question

Now before you answer the question please keep in mind that Religion is suppose to be kept apart from state. Not all people who get married are Christians. People of all races and religions get married.
Someone else just asked this question and almost all of the "Christians" who said no, said no because the bible says no. Well I am not a christian and the bible says because I don't accept god I am going to hell. Does that mean since I am not a christian I can't get married neither?? Too bad I am already married! The bible don't control my life and it should not play any part in our laws for society.

"Mari10210" You clearly don't understand my question and you seem to lack common sense. NOT EVERYONE is a christian and they still get married. Your bible is NOT suppose to have anything to do with the laws. (the State). So if you say no that is fine but find another way to answer with out using the bible or god. Cause it is not suppose to have anything to do with state!

"jimmywall..." Good Ideal I might ask that one next!

"Lo!" Guess what I am a women married to a man. I do not believe in god so I don't give a rats @$s if he would think I am married or not. I don't recall asking for his apporval nor yours. Why don't you cut our your religious BS when married is for all people it don't matter if they are christians or not and it's about state not religion!

I see there are still some christians around on here who know how to read and have common sense.
I see so many christians on here who can't read and lack common sense. If gay people don't accept your god then why should they have to follow your god? news flash they dont!!! Learn how to think for your self. I am glad to see some christians who said no gave their reason which had nothing to do with the bible. (They are smart in their own ways and at least we know they can read my question.)
I personally think gay people should be allowed to get married!!!!!!!!!
Thanks to everyone who gave an answer even for the ones who can't seem to read and lack common sense.

Answer 1

YES!!!! i do believe that gay people should have the right to get married. as you pointed out, seperation of church and state.
a person can have the best argument about what god would hate gays getting married but as a judge you have to follow the law. whatever that person just said about how much it would make god angry has no weight in court! it will be dismissed.

and just for fun, i posted this thing a lot cuz i just find it funny

12 reasons against gay marriage

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we only have one religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.


and before anybody starts bashing me, please read my screen name

Answer 2

Yes, I believe that gay couples should have the right to marry. Good luck with not getting answers based on religion though, the Religious Wrong are single-minded and have tunnel vision, in their world everything relates to religion, even the secular Constitution. This is a long answer, but bear with me here :).

But anyway...I do believe that they are being denied their civil rights. To be more specific, in Loving vs. Virginia (1967) the USSC ruled that marriage is a basic civil right. This is conveniently ignored by those who wrongly point out there is nothing that constitutionally guarantees marriage rights for every citizen. Interestingly enough the lawsuit was based on the 1924 anti-misceganation statute of Virginia. Naysayers tried to use Bible babble speak to support their cause then too, it didn't work.

I find it very strange that those who speak of the sanctity of marriage and stability of the American family being threatened are trying to stop people from formalizing their relationships and pledging their commitment to each other. Is it not stabilizing to wish to commit yourself to another person for the rest of your life?

Being a Christian is a choice, being gay is not. That's another little hypocrisy that amuses me. This is a civil issue for this country, as you have stated - not everyone is a Christian and certainly no one is required to be one to get married. Massachusetts is a great example of constitutional law in action. That state's supreme court could not get around the fact that there was nothing in their constitution to prevent the marriage of two consenting adults, whether gay or straight. Of course they are called activist judges lol. If they had ruled in the RW's favor, they probably would have been given a parade. There was nothing activist about the strict interpretation of their state's constitution. MA hasn't gone up in smoke or caused any decline in the number of straight couples who have applied for marriage licenses, despite all the dire predictions of the destruction of marriage as we know it.

There's a lot of debating ahead on this issue, and many lawsuits that await the USSC regarding Full Faith and Credit and the unconstitutionality of folks voting on civil rights in the states that have done so. We'll see same sex marriage nationwide in our lifetimes, I have no doubt. Just don't expect it next week.

Answer 3

Personally, I think that the government should get out of the marriage business entirely. Why should people get special benefits for making a lifetime commitment? The benefit is supposed to be the relationship itself and the blessing of God if you are a believer. The Bible says nothing about Caesar rendering anything to those who keep God's laws. Now we reward hypocrites. A man can live with as many women as he wants as long as he doesn't claim to be married to more than one. Gay people can do whatever they want as long as the word marriage isn't used. Marriages happen where there is no real marital relationship for the purposes of immigration, insurance and retirement funds. Marriages are recognized in which neither party has any expectation of permanence. I think if the government would stop treating people as extensions of the spouse, it would be good for everyone.

Answer 4

Yes I believe that any two people who want to make a commitment to stay together in the legal sense as married partners and to enjoy the responsibilites and privileges traditionally accorded to married couples should be able to do so, regardless of any other issues.

Both, of course, should be adjudged to be of sound mind and of an age to be capable of making that decision.

Marriage is a special kind of civil legal contract. It actually has nothing to do with the Church. Legally, churches are recognised by the State as able to perform the marriage ceremony. The religious part of the service - the blessing and so on - have nothing to do with the legal aspect of marriage. I don't agree that the State should in any way co-erce a Church into performing same-sex marriages (and nor could they do so, under the Constitution), however, individual members of a Church, in their capacity as citizens would be bound to accept the legal status of two people as married, regardless of whether they were a same-sex couple or not.

Edit: I just have to applaud 'gets flamed'! Those 12 points say it all, really!

Answer 5

Yep. Everyone who says the bible says this, well, bible also says pi = 3. Also says if a kid disobeys his parents, they should have their skulls crushed by a rock at the river. Don't see people having calculator burnings in the street. In short, bible says a lot of things. People make a habit out of ignoring most of that 1800 yr old book, and suddenly they think this is important?

As for marriage, well, we have 60% of kids growing up in a single parent household, 50% divorce rate and 1/4 boys and 1/6 girls sexually abused. 75% of abuse done by a family member. Seems like gay people getting married would only improve the numbers. Because gay people WANT to adopt. How many of those one night stands that turn into paternity cases want the kid? Sexual predators are 95% straight, so don't see that problem.

And lastly, for that tired old argument that men and women are made for eachother. hang around a women during their friendly monthly visator and say that w/ a straight face.

Answer 6

:) Well I've simply rather gotten into politics and such... But what you could have typed out has stimulated me such a lot! Gay marriage must be authorized, however sadly I reside in a state that bans it. : It's in most cases been demonstrated as ordinary, additionally we as Americans welcome a wide variety of persons- now not lengthy in the past African/Native Americans have been kept away from and seemed down upon and used as slaves, however as so much persons recognize now that is a factor of the beyond. One day- confidently quickly- extra will see that being Homosexual should not have an impact on your lifestyles and others- it is not my trade what faith, race, or sexuality you're the least bit. one hundred years from now, probabilities are that it would possibly not subject. Either by way of then it will be as ordinary as filth or the the apocalypse could have dawned upon us. Instead of lingering in this trivial quandary, I say we must legalize it and transfer onto far more main concerns. These discussions are ridiculous!

Answer 7

Married is such a religiously binding term. We are supposed to have a seperation of church and state but we don't and I believe therin lies the problem. At the time our government was established, 'married' was a term to describe someone bound together under a religion. Today, it's not quite that but the legal origin still reflects it. Should 2 people of the same sex have the right to be unified? Yes. Should they be married as per the terms of law? well, that is a problem that not too many states can agree on.

Answer 8

While I agree with the first poster that marriage is not a right, it certainly *is* a right for gay people, as long as they're paying taxes, to be treated equally by their government. I believe that the best way for this to happen is for The State to get entirely out of the business of blessing and categorizing intimate relationships -- to get out of the marriage business entirely. Until that happens, I absolutely believe that gay people have a right to insist that the government recognize and protect their relationships in exactly the same way it recognizes and protects straight ones.

Answer 9

I suppose you have nothing to base your laws on. Suppose I say my law says I could kill all non-Christians. That would be ok cause there is no ultimate reason for law other than what someone says it is. And who is going to make the laws? Who gets to say " this is right or that is wrong" hmmm? Obviously humans are fallible and make mistakes. So you might say' hey, it depends on the circumstances'. Who's circumstances shall we go by, yours or mine? Is it not better to have an ultimate authority outside of human subjective decisions? Is it not better to have a line in the sand, so to speak, where you can tell right from wrong? For hundreds of years the people have been living by God's laws as indicated in the Judeo/ Christian influence. Shall we change now? I wonder what it would be like with no concrete law, just do what you feel is right. I hope there aren't any really bad people living next door.

Answer 10

I think the better question is why shouldn't gays be allowed to get married? And tradition is a poor excuse because slavery was tradition. Also for all of the "Christians" out there, the Bible also forbids pork, multi-fiber clothes (blends), working on Sunday etc. Yes, it is the same book with the anti-gay stuff. So you give up pork and I will give up being a sinful homosexual.