America was founded on the principles of personal freedoms. If these freedoms do not impose upon the freedoms granted to others, there should be no debate, consenting adults should be free to join lives with whomever they choose.
What right do you have to tell consenting adults how to live their personal lives that do no affect you or anyone else negatively?
2007-07-02
07:14:25
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Jimbo, your dichotomy is wrong. Raping babies is a crime which creates unwilling victims. These are not freedoms granted. It is not comparable to the joining of two consenting adults in a partnership.
2007-07-02
07:26:00 ·
update #1
Also, America wasn't founded by Puritans, those were English settlers rejected from England. When America was founded, with the Declaration of Independence it was done so by those with the principals of personal freedoms.
2007-07-02
07:26:55 ·
update #2
Brian, your answer is under the assumption that the entire country believes your religion. When that is entirely opposite of what the basis of America is. Freedom. I think you also missed a few US History courses.
2007-07-02
07:29:02 ·
update #3
Scripture has no place in Government. Your morals aren't the morals of the populace. Others personal decisions should be none of your concern.
Why does that mean marrying animals should be allowed? Animals do not have the intellect to be consenting. Or do you don't understand that?
2007-07-02
07:32:21 ·
update #4
Correction: Or do you *not* understand that?
2007-07-02
07:33:03 ·
update #5
How are things the way they are even working out? 52% of marriages in the US fail. Two consenting adults are not equal to a man and an animal as I've explained above.
2007-07-02
07:34:16 ·
update #6
Yes.
American patriotism seems to be at an all-time low. For example, Brian (below) writes "Government has no rights, but those given by God". That's not only false, it's as anti-American a statement as can be made.
In fact governmental powers are derived from the consent of the governed. The notion that the government's powers come from a god is a theocratic, not democratic notion, and again, directly anti-American.
2007-07-02 07:18:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
3⤋
It seems that many of these arguments put forward are an echo of those shouted in the 60's against the Black Civil Rights movements.
Perhaps those who think homosexuals should move to a more liberal country should ask what gives them more right to live in the US than anyone else? Or perhaps they should consider moving to a more conservative country like Zimbabwe?
If you believe your country, and what it stands for, is freedom and equality for all, then no, "gay" partnerships are not unpatriotic.
2007-07-02 14:50:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by gemaltenarbe 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Quite the contrary. All religion aside, there are two problems with homosexual marriage (just off the top of my head). First, homosexual marriage is an unfruitful union. The government rightly encourages marriage by providing incentives. If homosexual marriage is provided the same incentives this form of union would be a net loss for society, as it provides no benefits to society in the form of new memebers. Second, homosexual marriage cheapens the idea of marriage. If we believe that anyone and their dog can get married because they feel like it, it will change the idea of marriage in the american psyche. This will lead to an increase in divorce. Statistics have proven that divorce is almost always a bad idea. And people who get divorced have an extremely high chance of getting divorced again.
2007-07-02 14:32:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Thom 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't understand how this became such a hugely religious issue. I won't claim to favor gay marriage, not do I favor a constitutional amendment defining marriage. It should be left to the states. It became such a huge issue purely out of economics. Gay mariage would extend certain legal and financial benefits to gay couples (social security spouse benefits, inheritance, the right to make medical decisions when the spouse is incapable of making them him/herself, etc).
2007-07-02 14:29:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by duker918 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I dont think it's "unpatriotic" really since this country itself likes to tell people what they can and cannot do. You can't smoke in bars or restaurants in many states here, you HAVE to wear a seatbelt even though it would only be you who might get hurt if you dont. You HAVE to pay school taxes regardless of if you have children that go to school.... so to me it seems very American to tell someone what they can and can't do ;)
I personally I'm not enough of a jerk to want to control anyone elses life.
2007-07-02 14:24:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by impossble_dream 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
What is unpatriotic is allowing a group of people to "force" lawmakers to change laws just so they can "fit in".
Our founding fathers understood what constitutes a marriage, one man and one woman. This concept of marriage has been in place for thousands of years and was originally instituted by God in the Garden of Eden.
Now within the last few years, we are being told that we must accept a marriage that is (currently) unlawful, unnatural and unscriptural.
"Politically correct" does NOT equal patriotic. Homosexual marriage is not something that we should be forced to accept.
2007-07-02 14:26:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by TG 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
I say: Let whoever wants to marry - marry! Be happy, get your groove on and keep what happens in your bedroom - in - your- bedroom!
And keep government out of the bedroom! Who cares who you're using your whips and chains on as long as that person likes it?
2007-07-02 14:22:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Opposing gay marriage itself isn't unpatriotic because it's exercising your freedom of speech. (I am 100% in favor of gay marriage but I'm also in favor of people being able to express what they believe.)
However, creating laws against gay marriage is unpatriotic.
But then again, so is creating laws against polygamy. That's also telling consenting adults how to live their personal lives.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsL92vzuv0S09o..Ui0Iz8fsy6IX?qid=20070702105734AA3x3hV
2007-07-02 14:19:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Because this country was also founded on Puritan ideals. However far we are from those first colonists, the majority still holds to these standards. Theoretically we are still in a Democracy where the majority is supposed to rule. Since we are not in an official theocracy, you can't completely blame it on the church. It is up to the leaders to decide whether or not to allow their own personal convictions to rule their legislation.
Let's play devil's advocate. What if there's a group of people who think that raping babies should be illegal. I think most people are against that. OK that's a bit of a hyperbole.
If your agument is true, then we should also abolish drug laws (although as a non-church member you're probably in favor of that anyway), seat belt laws, smoking bans, age restrictions on alcohol, etc. Where does it stop?
2007-07-02 14:18:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by OBMIJ 2
·
2⤊
7⤋
My pastor said that this country was founded as a Christian nation, and he also says that homosexuality is wrong since God disapproves of it since babies aren't made in those relationships. Since this nation was founded and IS a Christian nation, and homosexuality is wrong in Christianity, then it is patriotic to oppose homosexuality because supporting it would only help Satan destroy the Christian White men and families in this nation.
2007-07-02 14:21:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋