What's the big deal about letting Gays and Lesbians marry, and should there be a law just for them?

Question

Arn't they people? Just because they're different, doesn't mean you can just presicute them and call them evil. And besides, government shouldn't be albe to pass laws about it, because in the Constitution it states that there can be no law that interferes with the life of the people. But I want to know what other people think on this issue, so let me know what you think.

Answer 1

I think they should be able to marry...you can not help who you like and who you fall inlove with_

Answer 2

There is no big deal about two people getting married, regardless of what their gender is. The only reason it's a "big deal" is because some people are too obsessed with what other poeple do in their own lives.

Gays should be able to marry the person that they love, just as straights do. This "let's call them 'civil unions'" garbage is for the birds. "Separate but equal" didn't work for the blacks in the 60s, there's no reason to try and do it again.

And before someone brings up the "gays will jeopardize the sanctity of marriage" line - they couldn't possibly screw up the institution any more than straights have already. Fix your own house before you start b*tching about someone else's.

Gays can't make children? So no one who is infertile (either naturally or because of a vasectomy/tubal ligation) should be allowed to get married then, either? And if you're over child-bearing age, screw it, you can't ever get married again?

Who gets the last name? Who cares - that's for the couple to figure out. It's not like every straight married couple in the world shares the same last name as it is...

As far as the argument that it's just "not right" - what's "not right" is dictating to someone else how they can live their own lives.

Answer 3

Civil unions. Have you ever read the constitution? Marriage isn't in it at all. Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness. Here's the real issue with laws dictating marriage. Laws are voted on, not mandated by judges. If you could convince the majority of people to vote for gay marriage and abortion, we have a law. The problem is with a lot of these proposals is that a majority vote can't be reached and they try to rely of Liberal judges (Activist Judges) to magically see the constitution in a way that they want that allows it. Congress makes laws and judges interpret laws. If Massachusetts wants gay marriage they will vote a constitutional amendment and that's fine. They just won't be married in Ohio

Answer 4

Of course they are people, but what has that got do do with marriage? Babies are people too, should 2 3 year babies be able to marry? How about a 40 year old guy and a 5 years old little girl? Some people love their pets, so why not let a person marry their dog or cat? Should people be able to marry their car? Should a Father be able to marry his daughter or son? Since we are discussing elimination of gov't limits, why just two people? Why can't a person marry a dozen men or women? Or farm animals? Can we marry sheep or cows? Marriage is one man and one woman. No person has to marry, but if they marry, why shouldn't the same standards apply today, just as they have for centuries?

Answer 5

The law and the Constitution were written by people, for people, and interpreted by people. Since there are no athiests in government, assume that just about everyone up there (on capitol hill) has some religious agenda, or at least their constituents do. For right or wrong, this anti-gay bias reflects the 'nations' attitudes... as interpreted by our 'leaders'.

How to change that.. use your head, play the game, be involved, and work for some change!

Answer 6

Someone could make a case for just about any law "interfering with the life of the people" (or some people).

There shouldn't have to be a law that says gays can marry, because it shouldn't be an issue...it's sad that we even need to debate and argue about it...I guess everyone isn't created equal after all....

Answer 7

We already have laws concerning marriage. Gays and Lesbians are just asking for the same protection and rights as heterosexuals have when married. And apparently there does need to be a law to allow it because may people are not recognizing their right to marry.

Answer 8

My concern is with the use of the words "marriage" and "marry". I don't think it's right to change the proper definitions of words just to suit a minority. Let there be civil unions, or come up with another name - I like "pairage", that I heard someone suggest once.

Answer 9

I dont think that allowing homosexuals to marry will decrease the population. What about the male and female marriage that agreed they want to get married, but decided hey, i dont wanna have kids, should they have to forfeit their marriage bc they are not producing offspring? what about the men who cant produce children, should they be cast off of the earth? and the women who cant produce children, should they be cast off the earth as well? Not all str8 couples want children, but yet they are still allowed to marry. Let the homosexuals get married, they deserve the same rights as everyone else, it wont enfringe on anyone or anything, if you dont like, guess what you dont have to live or sleep with them. JMO

Answer 10

we have laws that interferes with our life everyday,no they should not be able to marry it is not right,i don't mean by the bible,I mean it's just not right.More people are not going to accept that kind of marriage than people that will.

Answer 11

I really don't think they would like each other. Maybe only to keep up appearances, otherwise they shouldn't marry. Gays with gays. Lesbians with lesbians works ok though.