2006-11-13 07:09:42 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
Wouldn't it be easier to just allow gay marraige instead of thinking up ways from keeping us from getting married? What is the big deal? Straight people get divorced everyday and everyday someone gets drunk, married by Elvis, and anulled the next day. Us as a society has already disturbed the "sanctity" of marrige, this still might happen with gays because we are all human, but if straights are allowed to have the opportunity to do it why can't gays?
Marraige has to do with your religion, therefore it should be a religous decision not a political one. It should really be up to the person preforming the ceromony but I doubt a priest will ever be allowed to perform a gay marraige in America.
Unless you're in the situation or know someone who is there is really no way of knowing or feeling what two people of the same sex have to go through to gain extra rights towards one another. You have to get lawyers and make your partner the person in control when you die. It's so much messier and so much longer and it still doesn't feel the same because your not being recognized as a lover you are being recognized as just another person... that's what the real issue is about to me.
**And to people pushing YOUR religous beliefs on everyone, you're not going to have anyone wanting to go to church with you when you act like that**
2006-11-13 07:32:55 · answer #1 · answered by IceyFlame 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Giving us homosexuals the right to marry is not a legal issue. None of the agruements against it has anything to do with legal issue. The arguements are religous ones only.
Today homosexuals can get most of the legal benefits as a marriage (MOST). Those we can not get could easily be givin to us with other names such as civil union. This not the issue for most. It is a matter of equality to allow us to marry and call it marriage. If a church so deams it with in thier rights to "marry" us, and there aer some that will. Then why does the goverment try to prevent us. They don't. It is the chatholic and other churches that do. They still insist on thier reading of the bible to be true and correct, while other now say it is not.
It is a religous battle, not a legal one. The country was founded on freedo of religion. They should allow marriage in ALL states, and recognized by the federal goverment. They should allow the churches to decide if they will marry us. Otherwise it is an infringment on freedom of religion. NO ONE RELIGION rules this country. When the religous right recognize this, and the goverment understand this again, our freedoms will be gained.
2006-11-13 07:24:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, there isn't.
I think the most interesting thing is that many states with anti-gay laws those laws also hurt heterosexual couples that aren't married. Little things like Domestic Violence laws that only apply in cases of married couples so the boyfriend can whack his girlfriend around and be out and back at it as soon as he can bail out of jail...There have been just such cases in Ohio... So if you think anti-gay legislation is a good thing perhaps you need to actually study the full ramifications of those laws.
2006-11-13 07:34:04 · answer #3 · answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am sure there are plenty of ways to do that..Hard ways that will take forever..Just let them get married..Why would that hurt you or anyone else..I do not and have not and probably will not ever understand this argument..They are human, they fall in love just like any other human, They want the same things out of life as every other human, Why should we shove a bible in their face and tell them they are wrong? Does the bible not teach love and forgiveness and acceptance? I simply do not understand! Sorry!
2006-11-13 07:14:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
you're precise, this difficulty is crucial. Kerry lost the election in this difficulty on my own. i'm a Christian. i think like different Christians that homosexuality is a sin. yet, so is intercourse outdoors of marriage, etc. maximum genuine Christians be attentive to to no longer solid the 1st stone. What this suggests is tht we ought to continuously no longer condemn you whether we believe sodomy is a sin. God is the only one that can condemn or redeem you. That being suggested, gays shouldn't seek for to be legally married. Marriage is a organization prevalent via God between a guy and a woman. it is the cornerstone of society. I ought to consider dragondoug, call your residing arrangements some thing else. Have a residing will set up or some thing, yet do no longer call it a marriage. stay your existence and don't attempt to impression or exchange mine via changing the regulations of the land. i think of it is why Christians pushed decrease back on the elections. Please do no longer study gays to minorities. that extremely irks me. Homosexuality is a decision, race or gender isn't. Take accountability on your determination. in case you have been born that way, God does not call it a sin. maximum Christians desire to stay in peace. Christ instructions us to. do merely no longer attempt to alter my way of existence. do no longer attempt to instruct gay intercourse some thing wide-spread to my babies. Medically and bodily it is not any longer. stay your existence in peace. **so an prolonged way as changing the regulations to accomdate "2 consenting adults", what approximately 3 consenting adults? What a pair of woman and her puppy? the place do you provide up? Please look on the worries in Amsterdam. they have allowed same intercourse marriages and actually have a political team lobbying for criminal pedophilia (btw,no longer comparable to gays). the 1st step down the line is what we don't desire. Please!
2016-12-14 06:31:09 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think "legal marriage" in the US is just a contractual agreement based on an ancient need to provide for the woman in the event the husband leaves. Nowadays in the US, I don't even see the need for it. If two people want to stay together, the paperwork has no effect. So, as far as "legal rights" for couples, I see little difference between same sex and opposite sex domestic partnerships, especially now that equal health & welfare benefits are typically offered to both. That's my two cents!
2006-11-13 07:14:17 · answer #6 · answered by Zebra4 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
separate the institutions of church and state.
if ANY couple wants a group of rights bestowed upon them due to a lifepartnership they should get civil unions. in most states this is allowed automatically to unmarried hetero couples living together as common law marriage.
as a religious institution you should have the right to apply or deny services to any group based on the doctorines of the faith. if a couple wants to prove their union before their god, they can have a marriage in the institution of their choice. this should not come with legal contracts or ramifications. it is only a ceremony.
it is not the purpose of government to define religious terms or upold religious traditions nor to unilaterally apply them to all citizens. it is not the right of a church to define for the law a "relationship".
2006-11-13 08:44:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No one cares abot the "rights" and etcs. Im not gay, but youd have to be thick headed to realize that what a gay couple really wants is the freedom to marry. Its a symbol of love, Its a right to be happy with the person you love for the rest of your life.
I just dont understand how someone can call themselves a loving person, and turn around and tell someone else "No, it is wrong and you are not allowed to marry the person you love"
ProLove!
2006-11-13 07:16:53 · answer #8 · answered by Christian M 2 · 7⤊ 0⤋
yes and no. Some homosexual couples would agree to a kind of civil union that had the same benefits as marriage but did not include the religious connotations.
2006-11-13 07:12:44 · answer #9 · answered by QuestionWyrm 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The next time you want to ask that question, stop and ask an African American how well "separate but equal" has worked historically.
If you're not allowing them to marry you're NOT giving them the rights they want.
2006-11-13 07:46:32 · answer #10 · answered by Popppy 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋