Why would anyone support Gay marriage?

Question

Marriage is a tradition in this country between a man and a women. If you change the marriage laws and open them up to more people, it because a slippery slope. The next thing you know, people are trying to marry their dogs. The marriage laws have never been changed in this country for this very reason. When you expand rights to a new groups of people, other groups move in and try for the same rights. Maybe we are preventing one group from the same rights as other groups, but that is okay as long as sacred tradition is saved.

God Bless

Answer 1

As of right now the federal government recognizes marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Answer 2

As you can tell new religions are coming forth and Christianity is ridiculed because of so many contradictions within, especially the bible. People don't respect the sacred laws anymore and besides, it's the twenty-first century. Look at how far we've come in changing what everyone thought was normal and accepted? Our world is changing and I believe people should have a right to do what they want and not what a church or religion tells them. I'm all for gay marriage and always will be. Why make people suffer just because religion thinks they are "bad" or sinners? If they are in love, who cares if it's with a man and a woman? When will people learn that being prejudice against gays is plain ignorant. Gays have been around as long as we have and some great people in our history books have been gay. Think about it, stop being all high and mighty with your religion and realize people don't see religion the same anymore.

Answer 3

If you replace the word gay with any other racial group you will see how ludicrous that argument is.

You said "next thing you know, people are trying to marry their dogs" - The problem here is that you equate some people because of their sexuality to dogs. Pretty sad really. People are entitled to equal protection under the law regardless of their sexual orientation, race, creed or sex.

Marriage as administered by the state CAN NOT be a religious union. Otherwise the state would be in violation of the first amendment as they would be establishing religion over no religion.

My wife and I are married. We got married by a judge. We are both opposed to organized religion. According to the many arguments I have read, we should not be married either.

Violating any one persons rights for the sake of tradition is JUST PLAIN WRONG. We traditionally discriminated against many races before. Lets hope we can put an end to that tradition.

You said: "When you expand rights to a new groups of people, other groups move in and try for the same rights" - Every person in the United States already have the same rights. The goal is to stop discrimination and denial of rights.

If a church does not want to marry a gay couple (or purple and green people for that matter) that is their business. They are not bound by the same principals that bind the government - equal protection under the law.

Answer 4

Whether or not it would be a slippery slope would depend on HOW gay marriage is legalized, not WHETHER. I am against finding that there is a general constitutional "right" to marry whomever we want. The Constitution does not support such a conclusion, and were a court ever to make it, that WOULD open the door to people marrying their goldfish. But merely amending our family law statues to allow same sex marriages would not put us on a slippery slope.

Incidentally, legalizing gay marriage would probably make gays less of a distinct group. I recently read an interesting article in the Economist to the effect that, where gay couples are accepted (such as Massachussets), such couples are really starting to blend into the mainstream -- moving into suburbs, even voting conservative.

Answer 5

I am not gay nor do I condone this type of marriage, but I would rather see that than a traditional marriage in which one of the spouses hurts and or is abusive to the other. Same with kids in that sort of relationship. If the child is loved and taken care of then again better that than a man and women in which one or both is abusive toward the child.

Answer 6

I'm a woman married to a man. I kept my last name. I'm bisexual. I have a great deal of kinky sex with my husband. We don't intend to have children and if we did, we would raise them as atheists. We don't have a "traditional" marriage. Does my marriage somehow break this "sacred tradition"? Does it hurt people who have traditional marriages somehow?

Traditionally, marriage was between a man and a 15 year old (or younger) girl. She became his property, who he could rape, beat, and force into domestic servitude. She'd pop out about 14 kids and then die. Is this the kind of "traditional" marriage that you advocate? But I guess that's okay so long as we preserve the "sacred" tradition, right?

Maintaining something which is traditional just because it's traditional is the antidote to progress. Hooray! Now we can all go back to pissing outside and child labour and maybe if we're really lucky, Polio! Now there's a "sacred tradition" that we Never should have messed with.

Answer 7

As long as it is between 2 consenting adults, who are we to say who can marry and who can't. A little ignorant are we?

Yeah, maybe I should have said bigoted. But regardless I struck a nerve:

From: Triple C

Subject: Gay Marriage Answer

Message: How is it that you called me ignorant? Do you know what that means? If anything, I am bigoted, but not ignorant. I am aware of the information, but I choose to make opinions some call bigoted. Not knowing the information is what ignorant means.

You could say that I made some opinions myself. No reason to go and email people if you ask a public question. You opened yourself up to comments like mine.

Answer 8

We live in what is supposed to be a free country. This is supposed to mean that we can make our own decisions. Two people of the same sex are not doing anything wrong. People can not help who they fall in love with. I am married the "traditional" way, but I have many friends who are gay and live perfectly normal lives. A very good friend of mine has been with her partner for over 10 years and has 2 beautiful well adjusted children. To each his own. You have the right to feel one way and they have a right to feel another. I think what bothers me the most about your post, is why you even care that someone is gay. Their life does not directly affect you so you shouldn't even be thinking about it. Being gay doesn't make you a bad person. I also think that referring gay marriage to a human/dog marriage is absurd.

Answer 9

If any two people want the same recognition as a conventionally married pair...why not?
Marriage is the social approval of a pairing. Wrap it in pretty
flowers and all the rest, it's just that, nothing more.
It's my suspicion that you may be more concerned with what
gay people do behind closed doors than any 'sacred tradition'.

Marry your dog? Someone better ask the dog's opinion first.

Answer 10

Amendment 1 of the Bill of rights regarding religion states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

This should also include making laws that are based off of a certain religion's beliefs, banning gay marraige is a christian idea as such Congress cannot by law make a law respecting this idea or any similar ideas by the church, such as abortion and stem cell research. They cannot prohibit the free exercise of what the church believes but they cannot make laws about it either.