"GAY Marriage"-should it be legal?

Question

Give an agrument in favor of Gay Marriage that can't be turned around in order to give poligomers and people that want to marry pets a right to marry as well.-Serious answers only.

Answer 1

I want you to look at the human anatomy . God or whatever your creator is ,,did not intend for 2 men or 2 women to hook up.
If you look at 1 man and 1 woman ,the simplest of minds can see where this combination is meant to be joined.
After the examination it will be almost impossible for anyone to argue that gay marriage is acceptable in any way.
I say almost because some people out there , just can't see.

Answer 2

The function of marriage is procreation of children. Since two men or two women can't produce children they can't get married. It is the natural law.

By this same argument women over 40, those with reproductive/fertility issues must also be denied the right to marry. Men with low sperm counts, same thing. People who don't intend to have children, don't even think about it. Divorced individuals can NEVER remarry and the punishment for infidelity is........

OK, by now you get the drift. When you dissect the arguments against gay marriage..... they just don't stack up. As a religious institution, marriage should be governed by the dogmas of the particular faith. However, like it or not, marriage IS a legal definition.

Literally, millions of people in this country who live in loving, committed, long-term relationships are regularly and routinely marginalized by these puritanical and outdated laws. It is one of the few refuges left for those who value legalized discrimination.

Just like the freeing of the slaves led this country to civil war, gays will not achieve equal and civil status without a very penetrative, violent, transition that will leave behind chaos and mayhem. Those who hate homosexuals would rather see them all dead than to have them be equal under ALL laws of the United States.

Or we could all go to one big drag show and get campy together.

Answer 3

Two consenting adults should be able to choose their own destinies (unless it negatively affects third parties). Therefore gay marriages (which are none of anyone's business except the couple's) should be allowed.

Pets cannot consent to anything so it cannot be argued that it would be between consenting adults.

Not that I really give a twit if somebody wants to marry their pet. I mean it has no affect on me whatsoever so let em do what they want. Dumb, but I've seen dumber.

And polygamists should be able to do what they want too. How can their behaviour possibly affect anyone else (except for those that think since they don't do something, no one else should either). Although how a guy could possibly support more than one wife is beyond me.

Answer 4

i visit work out by ability of the solutions, human beings do not realize this idea. they have already finished this to the Catholic church on the problem of adoption amenities to gays in distinct states. They lost their authorities funding. some may argue it truly is honest. (1st change rights?) the authorities is making an attempt to emphasize Catholics and Southern Baptists to pay for birth control, sterilization, and morning after pills for his or her workers. The S.Baptists also own an coverage corporation. there is not any thanks to get out of it without some style of waiver which i have self assurance is the reason they're suing the federal authorities. they can ought to close their coverage corporation if this mandate isn't over became. Even nurses in some places are fired in the journey that they decline to participate in giving abortions. medical doctors will be next if the concscience claus is bumped off. i'd guess many medical doctors may go out their occupation if compelled to finish unnecessary abortions. what's seen as more beneficial major those days? women human beings's "rights" or physician's oaths? All it may take is for gays to declare discrimination at the same time as the clergy refuse to marry them. this isn't the reason gays want to be married in spite of the undeniable fact that that's yet another chance to attack faith and my guess may be the authorities may area with the gays on the muse of civil rights vs non secular rights. Interracial marriage isn't a similar. that really replaced into in accordance to discrimination in state regulations yet rejecting gay marriage is in accordance to very defined statements in the Bible. Its also depending on the definition of marriage as being between a guy and a woman because the starting up of time for obtrusive motives. so a procedures as i'm in contact, even immediately couples no longer married in church should be called civil unions and in undemanding words those weddings finished by ability of ordained clergy should be called marriage. yet now there are even "religions" that do not use the Bible, at the prompt are not Christian. they're secular church homes. i do not see Muslims marrying gay couples both.

Answer 5

Yes, but we have a conservative government in Australia and I can't see them "coming to the party". My opinion is that if two people love each other they should be allowed to marry - despite their sexual orientation.

Because they can't marry in OZ a lot of couples go abroad, but it's not recognised when they return. Couples have commitment ceremonies - these are the closest to a marriage ceremony without the legalities.

I just looked at the previous answers - boy! Did you open a can of worms or what!!!!!! You must have a lot of religious people on line right now...... I shall watch this question with baited breath!!!!

Answer 6

marriage is supposed to be a union between 2 people that love each other. what i dont understand is why people have to have a certificate and pay a fee to do so. you want to be married, ok, then say so and you are if you feel it. others thoughts and opinions should have nothing to do with it. somewhere down the line, love was put on the back burner for money. the benefits and exemptions came into play. recognition is also a factor. it makes me wonder sometimes. its like everything else, driving down the right hand lane. you open your door into traffic. stupid. i could go on and bore you, but ill end with why is polygamy wrong? its been practiced for years in other cultures. as far as pets go, the minute they learn to say i do...............

Answer 7

Marriage is a religous state of being in the bible. most laws are civil in nature. with civil privileges benefits and drawbacks. under civil law and the constitutions provisions of seperation of church and state it should be a no contest argument. a contract is a contract whether it be a man+woman, man+man or woman woman contract. Marriage under non sectarian or sectarian law is not religous it can only be dissolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. therefor a judge could solemnize a gay marriage because a judge can dissolve it if it becomes necessary. A marriage license fee is just a tax people pay to get married and record it with the state. be it a civil ceramony or a church cerimony.

Answer 8

It's legal for adults to get married in the United States. That should go for any two adults, whether they are gay or straight. Since someone can get a sex-change and then get married, why can't they before the sex-change? Also, since some people are hermaphrodites, they get to pretty much CHOOSE the sex they would like to be like and marry who they want. Why is THAT fair?

Answer 9

i see no reason why to consenting adults loving eachother should be equated with between an adult and a creature not capable of giving consent.

unless you believe that guys are dogs and therefore don't see the difference.

the whole "one act i don't think is right will automatically lead to other acts that i don't think are right" train of thinking is a rather fallacious form of the slippery slope arguement.

it's a poorly construed position used to back up the enforcement of a primarily religious value on a growingly secular society.

freedom isn't meant only to fit the desired parameters of a select few.

everyone should have the right to legally demonstrate their commitment to their monogamous relationship.

Answer 10

Two consenting adults should be able to marry each other. Its nobody else's business who they marry or whether it is moral or not.

A pet cannot consent to the marriage, so that's out.

Polygamy is illegal for heterosexuals, so as long as that's the case, it's perfectly consistent to make it illegal for same-sex marriages too. They would be treated the same.

There, that was easy.