2007-09-07 06:26:49 · 44 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It doesn't really, it's just a really stupid idea. I can't even believe there is a serious discussion on this topic..........
2007-09-07 06:31:35 · answer #1 · answered by Brian 7 · 4⤊ 12⤋
In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court "redefined" marriage in America by ruling against the continued EXCLUSION of interracial couples by the states that still were involved in such bigotry.
Prior to that ruling, the bigots who opposed interracial marriage screeched so loudly that the sky would fall if it were permitted, the din was almost loud enough to knock the sky down.
Now it's 40 years later, and the Court's ruling has done NO damage whatsoever, and the sky never fell. And the USA is a more FAIR country, for removing that hateful and pointless exclusion.
One way or the other, the end of the EXCLUSION of gay couples from marriage **will** come to an end. Forever! And after that's happened, America will have become an even MORE fair country... for having gotten rid of *that* hateful and pointless exclusion. (And the sky still will be up there, just fine.)
2007-09-07 09:55:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't. Many will say it undermines the instituion of marriage, but marriage has pretty much been underminded by straight people! The divorces and the cheating that goes on, have we done right by marriage? How does two women or two men marrying affect me? I really don't care if gay people marry, I think it shouldn't be the government's role to determine who should marry.
2007-09-07 08:14:11 · answer #3 · answered by cynical 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Good question. I always wondered why Dignity of Marriage advocates concentrated on gays. Aren't people like Britney Spears and Dennis Rodman doing enough to bring down the dignity of marriage? TV shows like Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire, Temptation Island, The Bachelor, and Wife Swap are turning marriage into a game show. I think we straights should start cleaning up our own side of the street.
2007-09-07 06:47:00 · answer #4 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
It might risk showing straight people what low divorce rates look like... eek!
But it only "adversely" affects other people if they don't want gay people to recieve the same rights as everyone else:
The right to visit your family in the hospital
The right to leave your inheritance to your spouse.
The right to get financial aid for school.
The right for your spouse to get your military benefits.
The right to share a checking account.
The right to leave your kids with your spouse if you die.
There are many, many more....
It's funny - people who protest gay marriage say that it will unleash all sorts of terrible behavior like "marriage to goats" and "polygamy" and "child molestation".
Maybe someone should show them the numbers... these things are all far more common per capita among HETEROSEXUALS...
Mormons lost the right to have polygamous marriages and that law would be tough to reverse... funny that the Prez candidate who hates gay marriage the most is a Mormon... Hi kettle! I'm pot...
2007-09-07 07:07:25 · answer #5 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It does? And all this while I thought marriage is about the union of two hearts, making a commitment to be with each other and only each other for life.
Where does another male, female, straight, gay, transgender, bisexual, multisexual or try-sexual fit into the picture? If people want to get married, they can do it anywhere, it's just better to know that other human beings are rejoicing in your happiness or giving you hope and moral support, pretty much like how during our grade school school-plays or concerts, having mom, dad, nanny or someone we have faith in sitting in the audience empowers us to do our best. The same goes for a God/Goddess that claims to LOVE ALL BEINGS great and small Unconditionally but sure looks like that Divinity has conditions too.... how unconditional is that?
2007-09-07 07:57:51 · answer #6 · answered by Sheena 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
"Gay marriage" and domestic partner laws (a euphemism for gay marriage to avoid religious and political debate) do nothing to "weaken" conventional marriage!
Give me one example how. Other than a lot of closet gay, far right conservatives finding it harder to suppress their true feelings (which will be let out anyway in airport restrooms and other places) I don't think it affects anybody!
Why shouldn't gay couples have the same legal rights as straight couples, regarding inheritences, rights to visit at a hospital, common property laws, you name it! Why should they be second citizens?
I am straight and have been married for 15 years, and unless somebody comes knocking on my door and makes me marry a guy (which I don't think will happen) I could care less!!!
Let them marry each other - I'll even bake a cake!
2007-09-07 06:40:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is a straight tradition which we don't want coopted by people who want to change it's meaning. It's not meant to hurt anyone. It's just that it already has a meaning and purpose and adding the word gay to it changes the meaning and purpose.
The original purpose of marriage was a contract that protected the rights of the people within and supported by that marriage, specifically families. It's supposed to be the instituation by which families are made. A family is a parent and a child, specifically the mother, the child and the mother's mate. A Dad, Mom and kid(s) are the natural family. Many people don't fit in with that ideal but that doesn't mean they need to change the definition of marriage. It means they need to come up with their own arrangements and they have. They don't need to coopt the traditions of others.
2007-09-07 10:45:54 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
While it may not affect marriage, it establishes gay relationships as equal with straight relationships, a notion that some people have had trouble accepting.
2007-09-07 06:35:43 · answer #9 · answered by blindcuriosity 2 · 8⤊ 1⤋
This is a simple question. People who actually believe this is a moral question are the sheep in this country. The actual reason anyone cares and why this is political is the same as every other issue...
Someone is going to have to pay benefits for these couples and they want to save money.
2007-09-07 06:54:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Makes it meaningless. Marriage is between people of opposite sexes. Why bother to have marriage at all if there is no speciality to it? As for Gays I favor a domestic partnership or written agreement done by a lawyer specifically stating who is who and what their rights etc are. In the end it may resemble marriage but would be without a license and without the ceremony.
2007-09-07 06:42:57 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋