Gay Marriage question.?

Question

There are certain things I don't understand the debate about gay marriage.

To People who defend gay marriage: Why are stuck upon the word "marriage"? Isn't equal rights enough?

To people who oppose gay marriage: If you intention is to protect the institution of marriage, why are you opposed to giving gays equal rights?

This is my solution. Let's abandon the use of the term "marriage" by the government. As far as the state and law is concerned, the issues are legal and the term "domestic partnerships" or "unions" could be used for both homosexual and heterosexual marriages.

Each individual church/organization/group can have their own defnition of what marriage is, and of course others need not care about them at all.

What do you think?

Some people still don't get it! I am not asking you to stop using the word marriage. You can use it as much as you want inside your church, home, etc. But if you want to use it in a public place like a court of law, you should provide equal opportunity for everyone to use that word.

Your church, temple or mosque should be able to define marriage as they like. You can limit marriage to the union between popel of same race/class/caste etc or broaden it to include everyone - it is upto you and the government should not intervene. But at the same time, the law is for everybody and people should not be excluded

Answer 1

The argument for "isn't equal rights enough?" There is a large legal difference.
A lesbian acquaintance of mine had a partner. This partner, when she came out to her family, disowned her and her brother beat her nearly to death and left her on the front lawn of their home. She didn't hear from her family for over a decade. During this time, she and the spoken acquaintance spent a lovely life together, with good times, hardships, holidays, travels, like any loving partnership.
The partner called her family to tell them she was terminally ill. Still no response from her family.
When the partner died, the family came and cleaned out the house of all the partner's belongings. There was nothing my acquaintance could do but let them because she was not married to her partner. This "family" came in and removed a very special part of her life out of pure selfishness.

Your idea about exchanging marriages with civil unions is a good one, and would probably work if enough people went for it, but we have a long way to go.

Answer 2

Great question and very eloquently phrased! :-)

I'm one of those people that agree with you, and every straight, bi, and gay friend or acquaintance I have agrees with you, too.

The popular belief amongst my peers is that "marriage" is just a term. It was originally a term with religious conviction, but has melded and become corrupted with the loss of separation of church and state. Many religions now "authorize" gay unions. Many states now accept gay unions. Many state, county and city government agencies extend more liberties to their employees with a domestic partnership than the government does. But most people seem to want to allow the religious zealots keep their term of "marriage". The rights are what's important, not the technical jargon.

I doubt anyone will ever equal the playing field so that gay couples can be legally "married", and I doubt that the religious Reich will ever abolish gay relationships from being legally recognized in some form or another. Heterosexual Marriage, Homosexual Union - same difference. It might be interesting to remember that regardless of what it's called, it's not the same sanctum it once was. Divorce is as common place as the wedding now-a-days.

To those of you who answered with hatred or disgust; get over it. It's just a word, and these are people your God loves, too.
"...love thy neighbor..."
Pride and Vanity are cardinal sins.
You might do well to remember that.

Answer 3

People probably had a similar argument over interracial marriage some time back.

It's about seperation of Church and State. The Church should not tell the Government how to define marriage. And the Government should not be able to tell the Church to accept Gay Marriage if the Church is unwilling.

As for changing the name, people might then complain about "Gay Unions" instead of "Gay Marriage".

Nice idea though, glad someone is trying to find a solution for all parties.

Answer 4

I do agree that the term "marriage" should be limited in government however, equal rights is not always enough. The way it is now, homosexuals are not allowed to marry- this means there are very few legal rights one partner has with the other AND, in the event that a partner dies, the family can claim all of their assets and leave nothing for the surviving partner.
Its also not necessarily the term as it is the emotions that go along with it, everyone else can have a wedding...they can't.

Answer 5

It is kind of late in the game to change the definition of marriage now after years of that regular traditional marriage between the two sexes. Like yourself I see no problem with gays marrying and using the term "unions" or "domestic partnerships". We in Canada passed a law allowing these unions to be recognized legally a couple of years ago. There are still a lot of people who refuse to open their minds to this type of relationship but we are in a new millennium and as such must learn to evolve with society's norms and morals.

Answer 6

I have so many different conflicting ideas. lol

One, I think any one who wants to get married at the legal age, should, it's their life, their partner, their lover. WHO are we to stand in the way. WE don't like others getting in ours.

Marriage is and has been the term used in the union of 2 people whom exchange life long vows.

We have enough changes and laws going on to turn around and change "marriage" to" union "or domestic parnerships".

I'd like to know why so many that are against gay marriage, and strongly support hetro marriage, sure don't argue and do allow the term and action of "divorce".

Answer 7

Remember, the people do not want gay marriage. It is the activist judges that brought this thing to the table: illegally! They ignore the rules and pass new ones, based on their loose morality.

Look, by allowing gay marriage, they are saying, God is alright with it. People with any relationship at all with the Lord know that it isn't alright with Him. Some still see right and wrong clearly. Gays see it all backwards: they call right wrong, and wrong right.

I think you may benefit from this www.homosexualityexplained.com

Answer 8

I OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE and YES I do want to protect the institution of marriage...you know, what God developed for a MAN and WOMAN. Obviously gay marriage is wrong if you have to "change" how you call it just to make it right. I don't care how many definitions you have, what's wrong is wrong and that's two people of the same sex being together!

Answer 9

I think you're an idiot. Why should so-called gays get to make us quit using a word that has been part of human culture for thousands of years? Can 2 gay men get married and bear children? NO! Because you need a man and a woman to create children. Marriage is the union of 2 people for the purpose of bearing children and raising them. It doesn't always work out that way, but that's what marriage. 2 gay guys are living in a dream world. They're sick, and they want to change human culture to conform to their sick perversion.

Answer 10

It doesn't really matter what you call marriage, it's still going to mean different things to different people.

To me, marriage means be with your "soulmate" (if you will), forever. To some others, marriage means you live in your own house, they live in their own house, seperate bank accounts, prenup's, basically living as friends who have sex.

Call it marriage, unions, partnerships, what ever, that doesn't change anything.