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

20 answers

none

2006-11-06 17:04:27 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0 4

Anthropologically, Same Sex Marriage has been around as long as any other kind. It was quite common throughout the world until it was banned by the Pope in the 10th century. If you take a look at History you will find that the term "marriage" as been used to describe a wide variety of things, same-sex, polygamy (both polygyny=1 man+many women and polyandry=1 woman+many men), line marriages, open marriages, even marriages with expiration dates that have to be renewed, like a drivers license. All have been considered normal in the past. Many still are. Lifelong monogamy is only one type, and it is not even one of the more common or success full types, look at the modern divorce rate. Gay people want the same legal protection for their union that hetero people get, that's a matter of Human rights, not of Gay rights.

2006-11-07 03:04:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0 0

Marriage is not a concept unique to any one culture or religion. Since our country was founded on the idea of freedom of or from religion this automatically voids out religious arguments. Many cultures throughout history have accepted many different views on marriage, including which genders should be involved.

Marriage should be based on love and commitment. If two men or two women love each other then they have as equal rights to marry as any other couple. Love is love no matter where you find it.

There are more but I don't feel like typing them right now. To sum it up, equal marriage is just common sense.

2006-11-07 01:10:57 · answer #3 · answered by Rageling 4 · 3 0

The best argument that I have heard for gay marriage is for equal rights. The problem with this argument is that there is no equality. Marriage as commonly accepted, is for a couple, who can share their bodies and create a new human being. I am for allowing anyone who can do this, to be married under the law. Two women or two men cannot join their bodies to creat a new human being. As far as the legal aspects of marriage, lawyers can do those things for for any two people who choose to enter into such an agreement.

2006-11-07 01:24:56 · answer #4 · answered by tmarschall 3 · 1 2

1) right is just right. If straights can marry then so can gays (and for the people marriage is for who can create life just shove that right back up your @ss since you would NEVER say a heterosexual couple who were both sterile did not count as married)
2) The religious right and the government has NO authority to determine what consenting adults can form a family
3) Even if you think govt has the right do you REALLY want to grant govt the power to decide what couples count as "a real union" since what would be next? international couples no longer valid..think about it

2006-11-08 11:01:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

My argument would be that I got married to the guy I loved (who by the way turned out to be a worthless pile of crap).But no one had the right to tell me I couldn't marry him. You can't help how your heart feels. I've never heard of a vicious nasty gay/lesbian break up yet mine was the worst. Maybe the gays just have more class than me. But all they want to do is be happy yet so many people hate them when they've done nothing wrong

2006-11-07 01:18:39 · answer #6 · answered by gitsliveon24 5 · 1 0

My main argument is basically just a reinterpretation of the 'traditionalist' argument: that the government has no right to define or redefine marriage.

I just take it in the other direction, and call for the government to cease declaring as invalid the union of any two consenting adults.

2006-11-07 01:56:01 · answer #7 · answered by angiekaos 3 · 0 0

This would be my argument:

A healthy, 23 year old female US citzen is eligible to marry: A child? No. An animal? No. A family member? No. More than one person? No. An incompetent? No. A foreigner? Yes. A different race? Yes. A different religion? Yes. A 23 year old adult male? Yes.

And, a healthy, 23 year old male US citzen is eligible to marry: A child? No. An animal? No. A family member? No. More than one person? No. An incompetent? No. A foreigner? Yes. A different race? Yes. A different religion? Yes. A 23 year old adult male? No.

Double standard? Yes.

2006-11-07 01:16:40 · answer #8 · answered by HandsOnCelibacy 4 · 1 1

there are no arguments they cant live together they go to each others funrals cant go pay bills together there is nothing for them expect a union not a marrige and i hate that i support gay marriage not a union

2006-11-07 01:50:27 · answer #9 · answered by jthizz_06 2 · 0 0

I don't have an argument, coz for me it is not a question. Why should we not be able to marry? What makes heterosexuals so special?

2006-11-07 04:10:27 · answer #10 · answered by Nut B 4 · 0 0

i support gay marriage

2006-11-07 01:05:02 · answer #11 · answered by Dont call me retarded 1 · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers