2006-10-09 16:38:07 · 32 answers · asked by aprille_twiter 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
No. And Wisconsin is putting it to a vote this November. And guess what? It "will" be voted against legalizing same sex marriages.
Oh, and for the people who think we are "forcing" our beliefs or laws onto others, get this. Every day people make laws that are forced upon all of us. Traffic laws. Drug laws. Etc, etc,etc. We vote these people into office and hope they make the right choices. And same sex marriage has been categorized as"bad" for the human way of life. Not just religious, but "immoral" in every sense of the word.
2006-10-09 16:41:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Gays should have equality under the law. This means that they should be afforded the same legal benefits of marriage as straight people. But the term "marriage" is a religious one. And the bible, however contradictory and hypocritical it may be, denounces Homosexuality. So the term should be something else, like Civil Unions or whatever. They get all the same benefits (and detriments) of a legally binding marriage contract, but they don't get to call it marriage.
If you're straight and you're not ok with that, then you're forcing your beliefs on others through denying them their rights by law.
2006-10-09 19:16:17 · answer #2 · answered by GobleyGook 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Marriage is between a man and a woman... The whole wedding ceremony and everything else is based on a union between man and wife and was started by religion.
As far as I know, no religion marries same sex couples.
Gay couples can live together and get the same or very similar benefits are married couples.... I don't see why they have to break into the institution of marriage. Isn't it enough to be able to live with the person they want?
2006-10-09 16:42:25 · answer #3 · answered by spanish kitty 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
no. Married people get benefits from the government so they can raise families and such. same sex people cant (or at least have no buisness) raising kids. therefore they shouldn't be recognized by the government with a marriage status. they can call themselves married if they want.... i don't give a ****... but marriage is defined in the const. as "a joining between a man an a woman in holy matrimony" our fore fathers did that intentionally so queers couldn't take advantage of tax breaks etc.
2006-10-09 16:42:30 · answer #4 · answered by scottishchristiansen 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Yes, and no. Yes, I do think that anybody should be able to marry anybody else and have full access to any benefits or drawbacks of being married. However, really, I think that marriage should be taken out of our laws entirely. I think that "civil unions" should replace any references to marriage. That way we can officially limit government's role in marriage to only the financial and legal responsibility of those entering into such a contract.
2006-10-09 16:39:27 · answer #5 · answered by nondescript 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Of course it should.
There is no reason at all that people should have the right to tell two people who are in love what they can and cannot do, just because those two people happen to be gay/lesbian.
It is the christian hate mongers who spread hate and distrust of gays and lesbians in the US.
Most of us "Normal" people relalise that they are human too, and under the constitution, it says the freedom to persue happyness. Well, that is what they are trying to do, yet the church has managed to get so many of their brainwashed, mindless, can't think for themselves, hate spreading followers to go against these people because they're different.
Shame on all of you. Shame on you for being so closed minded, and so judgeful of others. You do not follow your own teachings, you spread hate, you judge when you should not, you do not treat them with any love or respect. Shame on all of you.
If you truly believe in heaven and hell, and if your god is anything like what your precious bible says he is, I hope that when you die, they fill your coffin with marshmellows, because where you are going, you will need them.
2006-10-09 16:42:26 · answer #6 · answered by iswd1 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Sure . Why not. I think some man and woman marriages shouldn't be legal but they are.
2006-10-09 16:40:22 · answer #7 · answered by Sasasa 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I don't think there should be any statute anywhere that defines who can and/or can't participate in a marriage. I don't think it needs to be legalized; I think it should be left alone and not banned.
2006-10-09 16:39:54 · answer #8 · answered by Blunt Honesty 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
sure. Its safer (physically and emotionally) for homosexuals to make a life commitment with their couples. Its not our business whom they choose to live their life with. Everybody has the right to be happy and to be respected.
2006-10-09 16:43:46 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Why the heck should some people be able to decide if some other people can get married or not?
2006-10-09 16:40:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋