To those of you who are against gay marriage?

Question

why? and don't use the arguement "because marriage should be between a woman and a man" - that doesn't really say much does it? WHY should it only be between a man and a woman?

I'm trying to understand why some people are so closed minded about it.

And how does if effect you?

Also, please state how old you are.

(I'm straight, but I support gay marriage)

look, If you have a good argument, I will choose you as best answer, whether or not I agree with you. but for those that are making stupid comments...stop wasting my time

Answer 1

Some people don't understand that marriage is a legal contract, not a religious "sacrament." This is why some people are okay with gay marriage as long as a different word is used. These people are also unfamiliar with the word "semantics," as well as the constitutional guarantee of equal treatment under law.
.

Answer 2

This is a full response given to a question directly related to your inquiry, I do not in any way take responsibility for the points made, valid or no------

l Respectfully, for the state and Federal government, the principle of federalism is at the heart of the gay marriage debate.

If fact, it is considered as important, if not more so (in light of the principle of separation of church and state) than the religious/moral debate on the issue. Here's why:

As 'federalism' is the concept of how power is shared between the states and the Fed, it has become a general principle that when there is a conflict between state law and Fed law, Washington D.C. wins.

Federal courts operate on this idea and the Civil War was fought over it and helped to cement it.

Allowing states to recognize and license gay marriage cuts to the core of the balance of power in our federalist system.

If a state recognizes gay marriage, but the Fed does not, is the state thus superseded? If so, a significant 'weight' of power has been 'slid' over on the 'scale' of federalism to the Fed's side.

The states and the Fed are in a constant tug-of-war when it comes to their own autonomous power, whether we realize it on a daily basis or not. Anytime the power to "decide" the status of something (like gay marriage) is gained by one side, it is lost to the other. Rarely is there a true compromise. There is never a stalemate. Federalism is a constant work in progress.

Consider the example of equal employment. If a married gay couple lives in a state that recognizes their marriage but the fed does not, does the company they both work for have to offer them the same benefits (health, otherwise) as a straight married couple? Assume the company has branches in many states - some that recognize gay marriage/some that do not.

Who decides in court? Let's say the state court decides for the gay couple. Appeals take the case to the fed district courts who decide against the gay couple. If the debate makes it to (aka - is accepted to be heard by) the fed Supreme Court, they will not be having a debate about what is religiously/morally right or wrong. They will be in a hotly-contested debate over one thing:

Federalism.

Answer 3

I am 49 and I am straight. I have a gay daughter who did get married to her lady lover ... they calling it partners for life ... not wife to wife. When i first heard from her own lips she was gay ... I thought maybe a phase she was going through. Years later ... I understood it was just who she was. Gay marriages are premitted in some states and not in others.
I don't know what all the fuss is about. There is a law out there that states ... right for lifestyle. If someone's life style is not harming anyone ... then why harp on it? It is a choice and life is full of them. Who says a man must choice a woman and a woman must choice a man? Is it a law? I think not. It is society that tries to convert everyone over to what they think is right ways! Ethics..... well let's take a look at what society is: the relation between the sexes is not, as such, a social relation. When a man and a woman come together they follow the law which assigns to them their place in Nature. Thus far they are ruled by instinct. Society exists only where willing becomes a co-willing and action co-action. To strive jointly towards aims which alone individuals could not reach at all, or not with equal effectiveness — that is society.
The idea of human destiny dominates all the more ancient views of social existence. Society progresses towards a goal fore-ordained by the deity. Whoever thinks in this way is logically correct. It is ruled by ethics....ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. Feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct.ethics refers to well based standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. So I really don't know why so many are against what they believe!

Answer 4

Marriage is more than just for love, or for companionship.

Marriage is the base of a family. A family that brings about the next generation. Same sex cannot procreate.

Some may argue that some family still survive without a mother or a father, but you should note that those single parent families, although functional in some way, but they are lacking what a perfect family that have both the mother and the father working side by side have.

My main opposing reason: human extinction.
"Two keys just doesn't work together.
But a lock and a key would work"
Age:45

Answer 5

I think this depends on the situation. I am neither gay nor religious but I think that both groups should be entitled to their views. I would say that marriage on paper is up to the gay couple. They should have the right to live together and create a loving relationship. On the other hand I don't think that they should have the right to marry in a church as the religious groups say that the bible doesn't permit this. If this is the case I don't thing that they should be forced to rewrite the laws of their religion. Everyone is entitled to their view and I think that marriage is fine as long as you don't upset people by trying to force them to change.

Answer 6

I am against gay marriage because I believe marriage is sacred and gays being married violates the sacredness of marriage. Also, I am against it because the benefits would be stretched if every body could marry everybody. However if gays want to have a civil union I would be OK with that even though I feel it is wrong.
How does it affect me? Like I said eventually the benefits would be to costly and in my close minded beliefs gay marriage is unsacred and should not be legalized.
I am 30 years old.

Answer 7

I am 32, the Bible states that a marriage is between a man and a women, not 2 people of the same sex! That is why I feel it is wrong and don't support it! If needed I could go look up the verses for you!

Answer 8

I have no problem with two gay people getting together, but DON'T call it marriage. Call it a commitment, or domestic partnership. Yes, marriage is between a man and a woman. So like I said, I'm not against two men or two women having a partnership.

I'm 31 years old, and no gay partnerships don't bother me or affect me. I just don't like the fact that they want it to be called marriage.

Answer 9

to sanction marriage between homosexuals is to say that right and wrong no longer matter, just do whatever feels right. whether anyone likes it or not, every society and culture throughout history has deemed homosexuality as abhorrent behavior. i have no problem with folks doing whatever they enjoy behind the walls of their home, but i will not accept my government saying debauchery is ok. if we allow this to go on, then there can be no justification for any rules when it comes to marriage. polygamy will be ok, marrying minors will be fine.
oh who cares about society?! go ahead and live like animals.

Answer 10

Well to start off with..........GOD said it's meant to be Adam & Eve!! Not MADAME & Eve or Adam & STEVE!
Next is that it's totally and utterly DISGUSTING. How can you be with it? It's honestly not on man. GirrROSS!
K thirdly, and most importantly you can't pro-create when you're a woman sleeping with a woman or visa versa. The power of procreation is a VERY sacred power and isn't to be reckoned with. It was made specifically to be shared between a man and a woman. NOT a woman and a woman or man & man! Ewwwww YUCK!!!
Gays deserve to be frowned down upon in society & anyone who's with it is pretty much just as thick if you ask me.