Would gay marriage rights arrive sooner . . .?

Question

If members of the Republican party, and right-wing Christians like Ted Haggard could just be more comfortable with themselves?

How is making gay marriage legal "forcing it on the majority"?

IT'S NONE OF YOUR ******* BUSINESS!

Answer 1

Believe it or not it has not been very long in our historic past that people married for "love." It has always been an economic and genetic function in human history. I think that if "Gay" marriage is to be based on legalizing their economic unity and creating responsibility for the care of their children etc... who am I to say no?
In some civilizations in history, before the colonizations of the European Catholics and Purists, there were many societies who recognized the tendency of some humans to desire to be unlike the physical body they were born into. These people were an acceptable part of their societies and were not looked down upon for their differences. I believe that if people used their brains to really think about this topic, they would see that there is room in society, especially one that claims to be tolerant, caring and loving, to allow for people to function within our society who are different than themselves.

Answer 2

We've had gay marriage in Ontario now for a number of years.The hand of God has yet to come down and smack Canada one because we do. We've had two government ministers, one provincial , one federal marry their respective partners this summer, no plague of locust has hit yet.

Love is love and the way I look at it the heterosexuals haven't done really well at marriage with a 50 per cent and growing divorce rate. Gay people who marry tend to have been committed to their partners for a very long time.

I just find the hypocrisy in the GOP and in the compassionate conservatives very funny, screaming family values, then soliciting on the side homosexual sex, Foley, Haggard and now Craig. How many more are cowering in the closet somewhere hoping they don't get found out.

Answer 3

I don't think that would do anything for gay marriages. According to what I heard on the radio interviews today, they opposition to gay marriages refer to case studies regarding the affects on family values, etc. So, even if there is some support in the Republican party for this issue there is support against it also including some kind of statistics, I dont know what they are though.
I would like to add, that I thought a marriage was something done inside a church, therefore, the government does not have the right to change the church's view on anything because of seperationg of church and state. Somehow, being married has become a legal issue including over taxes and I think possibly it should not be a legal issue. Who knows where this will go.

Answer 4

AS a gay woman I would love to see our relationships given the same credibility as the ones given heterosexual couples but I fear that it will take something out of the ordinary. Such as when the public found out that a lot of the stars that they thought were heterosexual were actually homosexual and the reason that they died was from aids. That was the beginning of the turn around for most of the people about aids when that sort of thing happens and people realize that gays are just like them than we will get the right to marry until than it's something that we will have to fight for.

Answer 5

Would gay marriage rights arrive sooner . . .? Perhaps if we closed airport restrooms it would arrive sooner. possibly now the facade will fall off republicans...and Jeff Gannon will be the new press Secretary at Bush's side, cowboy style, Yeee-Houuugh

Answer 6

You want gay marriage rights sooner?

Pass a law allowing some states to recognize gay marriage and other states not allowing it. It is a fact that the majority of this country won't have gay marriage forced on them. They have voted repeatedly to repeal those laws.

So, you get a state with a pro-gay majority and you make it legal there.

Leave the other states out of it. Like Nevada has gambling and prostitution, and other states want no part of it.

You can have your liberal paradise, but leave the rest of the country out of it. We don't want to talk about it, debate about it, or think about it, because it's not our fight, our issue, our problem. It's your fight, fight it on your home turf.

If California, New York, Mass and other states go gay, fine. But you'll never get it passed if you insist that all states follow such laws.

Personally, I don't want to stand in your way. I don't agree with it, but I really don't care too much about it because it doesnt concern me. However, if you force the law on the majority by using courtroom shenanigans, with judges legislating from the bench, no one will respect such a law as being valid.

I'd rather be left alone about the issue. I don't want to know about gays, polygamists, incest, or other sexual relationships that are outside the norm. Don't force it down my throat (no pun intended) and I wont have a problem with it.

Answer 7

pizzaguy-

The main problem with your solution is that federal law requires that all states recognize marriages from other states. This was done to avoid people having to re-marry in every state they move to (or just pass through). So if, say, California begins allowing gay marriage, all other states would have to recognize the marriage as valid, even if they won't issue licenses for it in their own state.

Answer 8

yes.

its a vicious cycle. they hate gay people because their familes did. and when they figured out they were gay they hated themselves.

if you have a religious issue with homosexuality- good, keep it to your self and hold on to your beliefs.
but there is no legal issue here. if one groups can marry an adult of their chosing than the other group can to.
the law also recognizes science and medicine not religion while evaluating subjects.
sci/med says there is nothing wrong with gay people or gay families. some religions disagree.

it is unamerican to deny someone rights or fair treatment based on your beliefs
(yes I just typed that)

Answer 9

individually a million. i'm extremely homophobic, yet I dont act like an fool around some gay people. i think that as a society, we nevertheless aint used to homosexuality. Eastenders is attempting to sell this with the 'Sied, Christian' project, yet I see it as greater of a detraction, and on a similar time as that could be a sturdy lesson for some people, I purely does not sense suited letting my sister watch those scenes. besides, if homosexuality replaced into promoted a while a flow, then there could be a special loss of little ones, in spite of surrogate mothers. 2. If i replaced into acquaintances with my neighbour, i could furnish my help. If i did not seek advice from them, then the substantial project in our society is purely to nostril approximately and locate information. i think its basically a human desire to expand information inspite of the quantity of embarrasment. 3. Ethically some people could. I continually sense ill looking on the undesirable African (no racism meant if incorrect on race) little ones on comedian relief and classified ads, by using fact its frightening to be sure little ones like that. Its not extremely the obese persons fault for eating, which does whip up a feeling of emphasis.

Answer 10

Just because a select few choose to be Sodomites, does'nt paint the whole party as such ... The majority of the Republican part does not embrace it, and furthermore, the country as a whole (including myself) also opposes it.

I pray to God that we never see the day when and if it is legalized.

God help America!!