What do you think of Dear Abby being in favor of gay marriages?

Question

http://www.examiner.com/a-980006~AP_Exlusive___Dear_Abby__announces_support_of_same_sex_marriage.html

Now that she has gone down this road, will she support men marrying their dogs next?
Marriage is a Sacrament between one man and one woman...period.

Answer 1

Im thinking that the guy that married Abbey may have metaphorically already ventured into the realms of beastiality...

Answer 2

I've said this before-
If "Marriage is a Sacrament", it is a religious ceremony. Therefore, the government has no authority to legislate on it (survivor benefits, married tax deductions, Constitutional Amendments, etc).

As far as Dear Abby goes, good for her. Just because she supports people marrying people doesn't equate to a support of bestiality. It is about "all men are created equal". The government cannot deny one group of people the right while granting it to others, as long as they comply with the law (God's Law notwithstanding).

Answer 3

Well, I certainly won't be asking that pervert for relationship advice....

a question posted on here a while back asked what is truly perverse..... This is whats truly perverse "ANYTHING PERVERTED" including the perverted newspapers columnist better known as Dear Abby (nothing Dear about her, if you ask me)

Answer 4

Marriage, dear, is whatever you want to make it.

It's the relationship that counts; not some piece of paper or someone's idealistic concept of what it SHOULD be.

Presently, the average length of first time heterosexual marriages is about 8 years.

Oh yeah, we heteros REALLY have a handle on this marriage thing, don't we?

Any couple of ANY gender than can keep it together for more than 8 years is beating the current odds and deserves respect.

Opponents of same-sex marriage talk about marriage as if it's been an unchanging institution for thousands of years, one that can't be altered even a little without risking its destruction. But this is clearly absurd. Marriage has been many different things in human history -- radically different things. A property transfer from father to husband. A political and military alliance between nations. A means of producing and caring for children. A means of preserving a religion or race (think of the intense resistance throughout history to both interracial and interfaith marriage). A practical arrangement for keeping a family farm or business. A romantic love match that's meant to last until death. A spiritual bond that's meant to last for eternity. And more. And any combination of any of these.

And marriage has taken many forms in its checkered history. From the hundreds of wives of Solomon and others, to the passing down of a wife from brother to brother (also described in the Bible), to a permanent inescapable contract with mistresses and lovers on the side, to the serial monogamy-in-theory that seems to be the contemporary model... the literal, practical shape of marriage has taken wildly different forms over the centuries, and will no doubt continue to take more.

So the fact that the institution of marriage is changing ... that's hardly devastating news. People resisted the legalization of interracial marriage with every bit as much fervor as they resist same-sex marriage now, and for many of the same reasons... and yet the institution of marriage has absorbed that change quite handily, and has soldiered on. The institution is changing, it has always been changing, and it will almost certainly continue to change.

Answer 5

Very wise of her. Slippery slope arguments like people will want to marry their dogs? Not so smart. Sorry, but it's not man and woman PERIOD. Gays have been getting legally married in Massachusetts for years now. And no one has applied to marry their pet, imagine that. God hasn't struck them down in His wrath, no one's petitioning the MA government for the right to be a polygamist, no decline in heterosexual marriage applications (hmm...guess they don't feel that marriage has been besmirched), and life goes on as usual in Massachusetts. Must be disappointing for someone as "tolerant" as you are, huh? And just a little tip. Marriage is only a "sacrament" if the couple wishes it to be religious. Marriage is a civil contract, try to understand the difference.

Answer 6

Well, a question from the theocracy crowd

I don't think the word "sacrament" is in the constitution

And dogs are not people the last time I checked

Lookee here - at least 2 people think either that dogs ARE people OR that the word "sacrament" IS in the constitution

Answer 7

I completely agree that marriage must be between one man and one woman. That being said, the writers of Dear Abby have a right to their opinions. (It says right in the U.S. Constitution that everybody has a right to free speech.) If you don't agree with Dear Abby's views, don't read the column.

Answer 8

I rarely think about her but I don't approve of gay marriage. It's repulsive and she's posting her thoughts in public paper where our children will think it's all right to be homosexual.

Marriage is a sacred bond between two people - a man and woman. Two men can't make a baby & neither can two women.

Answer 9

What liberals like dear abby don't understand, is that homosexuals already have the same rights as everyone else, in that they may marry anyone of the opposite sex, anytime they wish. What they are really asking for are "special" rights, which should be given to no one..

Answer 10

A dog cannot legally consent to marriage.

Answer 11

Posters are getting cranky because of the dog reference, but it's not too far fetched, there is a woman who married a dolphin!! Good for you for standing up for values, it's rare...

Elway, yes, someone did marry their pet, see below...