marriage is an institution from God and is designed for a Man and Woman. not a woman and woman or Man and Man. I find that disturbing and wrong. it say Clearly in the bible that a man shall leave his father and mother and like wise for a woman and be joined in marriage(Man to Woman) therefore become like one spirit and flesh.
2007-03-14 12:05:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cutie pie 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Sounds logical, but no. But then I'm a hedonist by nature and don't believe in saving anything for marriage, gay or straight. I notice that most people pushing for abstinence are already married and old and can gave sex whenever they want, if they can still get it up. Sex is for the young, in their sexual prime. Why waste it leaving it sitting on a shelf? Use it or lose it. Anyway, most gays aren't interested in marriage because they grew up being told they could never marry, so it isn't in their plans. Not even straight people are much interested in marriage, it seems, with all the casual shacking up they do, not to mention cheating on their spouses when they do get married. I think the whole idea is overrated.
2007-03-14 19:40:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that if homosexuals are allowed to marry, then yes pushing abstinence until marriage is a wise thing. As it is, marriage doesn't exist in most states for Gays, so insisting on waiting for marriage could be a long wait and hardly worth the effort.
2007-03-14 19:43:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Whatev' Yo' 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I push for abstinence for all youth until they are old enough to make rational, mature sexual decisions and I encourage everyone, no matter what age, to seriously think about why they want to have sex before they do it. I don't encourage abstinence until marriage, necessarily, but I do think it's a wise decision for most people.
So yes, I would.
2007-03-14 19:35:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Abstinence is pushed simply because that is the only form of STD protection/Birth control that Christofascist will endorse. Considering the public records that show your endorsement fails simply because in the real world even those that sign the Virginity Pledge are still getting STDs because of a lack of realistic sex education and knowledge on how to prevent std/pregnancy.
NO. I wouldn't support your failing policies.
2007-03-14 22:03:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I encourage all young people, of any orientation, to wait for the right person to have sex. Sex is too valuable to be squandered at the first opportunity.
I, however, would never "push" or require such a thing. I prefer to educate and inform, and let people make a logical decision. Whether or not they choose to use logic is up to them. I cannot legislate a moral or ethical sensibility into others.
2007-03-14 19:03:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Most definitely. Regardless of orientation, I'd encourage gay youth to remain abstinent. It's about morals and taking responsibility for your actions. If you are unprepared emotionally, physically or mentally before or during intercourse, life's hel| afterward.
2007-03-14 19:13:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Renee 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Heck yes, They should be allowed to be married. I am a lesbian and I don't want to spend my life alone. Always get blood work done before the fact, so you can have safe sex. Also If you are having sex with a guy, always use a condom.
2007-03-14 18:56:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by Rory a 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
You know what if a person is gay and wants to get married then let them. I don't give a crape about it having to be legal or not. If that makes them happy good for them.
2007-03-15 00:10:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i hope this answers your q. I have no prob w/ teen promiscuisity. only married ppl i have a problem w/ promiscuity but gay marriage should be allowed
2007-03-14 19:18:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋