Why are you against gay marriage?

Answer 1

I'm not against it...

Answer 2

I'm against gay marriage simply because marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not against Gay people being given the right to have a marriage-like union. I believe gay couples should have all the right of a married couple and if it must be called marriage then so be it but I believe they should be given the right to stand by each others hospital beds for one thing.I don't see how that violates any constitutional principle and the fact that Bush and others have brought the "sanctity of the union of marriage" into the debate just proves that they don't fully understand that little idea of "separation of church and state" which is outlined in great, easily understandable detail in our nations constitution.

Answer 3

The truth is that gay marriage is what politicians call "a wedge issue." That means they use it to get voters all riled up, the voters dutifully turn out at the polls, and then the politicians never do a darn thing about it.

The current-day Republicans are particularly expert at this tactic. They were able to convince enough voters that gay marriage (which really doesn't harm them) and abortion (which only affects a miniscule percentage of people) were huge issues in their lives, and thus they were distracted from issues that ARE actually meaningful, like all the jobs being outsourced, the fact that most families are one medical emergency away from bankruptcy, the cost of gas, the degradation of public schools, etc.

It's exactly the same as the magician distracting your attention while he takes the card out of his sleeve.

Answer 4

I'm against anyone telling someone else's children what is morally OK, and not morally OK.

Mostly, with the gay marriage thing, I worry that the schools (liberal teachers) will think its appropriate to tell public school children that it is OK to be gay (were we to legalize it).

I think that would be a violation against the rights of the parents of those children. That is my primary concern, the rights of parents to teach morality as they see fit, not the schools. I very much respect the rights of parents to parent!

Maybe, if we legalized the marriage but made it a crime for schools to EVER discuss the issue, period, then I could vote for it based on my own principles, and without fear of stepping on the morals of other people, and their right to raise their children as they see fit.

Myself, I support the rights of homosexuals, or heterosexuals to marry whomever they wish. And I will teach my kids that it's OK to be gay, if that is the direction your heart takes you, although it's not natures intention, in general. But God loves all his children (and makes us all who we are).

Answer 5

Absolutely maddening how "gay marriage" could even be an issue in government. To find justification of its ban through religion in the realm of politics defeats 250 years worth of blood spilled by our patriots. We fought against a king who was "ordained" by God. We set up separation of church and state but yet public policy is governed by religion! Government should be void of religion, there should not be discussion on this matter for it does not relate to the purpose the function of our government rather this issue should be a philosophical/social "issue" discussed by average people. I cannot believe that religion (specifically Christianity) is a merit, a plus for a presidential candidate. Whatever happened to education (and I mean real education not the son of the President free ticket pass), logic, and reason! Now all I hear is "Obama is black/white" "Hillary is a woman" "he is a Mormon." The American people are not sophisticated, what we have today is just the modern day equivalent of the Roman mob only a bit more jazzed up.

Answer 6

Because I believe the long-standing traditional definition of marriage does not need to be changed.

That being said, let gay couples have domestic parterships with similar rights, just don't call it a marriage.

Answer 7

I'm not, I think gay marriage would be a wonderful thing. The opposition's arguments never add up to anything that smacks of logic.
1) They can't have children:
Forget that, many already have children, and many more gay couples adopt, or use science. People DO NOT get married anymore for the sole purpose of having children. Thousands of couples marry every years who have no intention of conceiving or cannot conceive.
2) It's offensive to God:
Not their place to judge others - not to mention they need to acknowledge in general not everyone believes as they do. This seems to be an especially hard one for them to deal with.
3) What about the children?:
The children have been cleared time and again by every unbiased children protection and service agency. The children of gay couples do wonderfully in all developmental areas, often times exceeding that of their peers.
4) We don't want our kids to think it's normal:
I suspect if they feel this way their children are already painfully aware of the narrow spectrum their parents consider as "normal." Hey, they are going to meet a LOT of gays, they aren't staying in the closet to please bigots anymore. It's up to you how you teach your children to deal with it. Create monsters, or loving human beings - up to you.
5) They'll ruin the sacred institution of marriage:
Yeah, with a divorce rate above 50%, and higher in the Bible Belt than anywhere else in the country, talk of marriage being sacred is ridiculous. Not to mention that marriage is a civil contract, and only has religious meaning if you choose to have it. That couple that got married by a judge? They're every bit as married as those that went in front of a preacher.
6) It's immoral: With all their talk of morality the dissenters never acknowledge that a gay couple wishing to marry is seeking to do all those moral things the Right talks about - being monogamous, building a life together, being a part of your community, raising families. That's a pretty evil dream to have isn't it?

Sorry to be so long, but this is one of my favorite subjects.

Answer 8

I'm divorced and it cost me a great deal of money. So I'm not real happy with any kind of marriage right now.

Answer 9

No.
There are legal benefits to "marriage" that should not be denied to any persons choosing to commit themselves to one another.
While churches should be able to specify who, in their opinion, can marry one another, the government (remember the separation between church and state? the Constitution?) should make no laws prohibiting marriage between any two consenting adults.
Someone gave an answer that included reference to "procreation", but I don't remember that being a requirement for "marriage" in any laws. (That would be very foolish, as many "couples" choose NOT to have children, or cannot have naturally conceived children. Many gay couples DO have children--their own, biological children and/or adopted.)
Further--with the rate of divorce being what it is, where is the "sanctity" of marriage anyway?

Answer 10

Because marriage laws are based on gender and religion. Since it is a union based on religion with specific references to gender, gays cannot be "married." I have no problem with civil unions.

Answer 11

Lets stop REDEFINING things
Gay originally meant happy...now...
Marriage is between a man and a woman...give them civil unions with all the same benefits..but do not demean my relationship by equating it with the union of homosexuals..they are different..so should the term of the relationship