Gay Marriage

[dwightfry]

There has been a lot of talk about Gay marriages in the news lately. A poll said %60 of Americans are against it. I don't understand why people are making such a fuss, and how the government can even begin to think they would have the right add that kind of intolerance into the constitution.

I was talking to my boss today, and he had two reasons for being against it. He was raised to see it as a sin, and he said that if you allow gay marriages then next we will be allowing polygamy, and then pediphelia and beastitiality which would cause the downfall of the entire country. He based this on past governments that failed, like the roman empire. I think this is rediculous.

First off all, if it a sin, then that's religion, so the gov. can't use that reason anyways. Also, although some do decide to be gay, many others don't have a choice, they just are. How can you deny a basic right to someone who is born differently from others? Do the retarded have less rights? As for saying it would be the downfall of our country, I didn't know how to respond. I can understand allowing polygamy. If that is what works for people then I see no reason why they can't. But pedophelia is usually without the consent of the child, there is no good argument to allow it so the line wouldn't not continue to be pushed back as he said.

Perhaps someone can give me a better insight on where he is coming from, and I would also like to see a poll as well.

GAY MARRIAGES

1. COMPLETELY AGAINST GAY MARRIAGES AND CIVIL UNIONS, AMMENDMENT SHOULD BE ADDED TO CONSTITUTION
2. AGAINST GAY MARRIAGES AND CIVIL UNIONS, AMMENDMENT SHOULDN'T BE ADDED TO CONSTITUTION
3. AGAINST GAY MARRIAGES BUT FOR CIVIL UNIONS, AMMENDMENT SHOULD BE ADDED
4. AGAINST GAY MARRIAGES BUT FOR CIVIL UNIONS, AMMENDMENT SHOULDN'T BE ADDED
5. FOR GAY MARRIAGES, THEY HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS EVERY ELSE, BUT IT MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE
6. FOR GAY MARRAIGES, THEY HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS, IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL

[Nogimics]

First of all lets get this outta the way ? Are you gay ? (And im not trying to be funny)

Personally I think gay men should NOT be allowed to get married in a church or under any other religious faith. Because as far as I know, no religion has ever supported this.

However I think they should be allowed to get married under law as it is a way of them having equal rights to each others assets after they die and being the next of kin. If they want to live together then that's fine. As long as they don't bother me or flirt with me then I couldn't give a shit.

But we should not set the example that being gay is normal, by allowing them to get married in any church's or in public ceremonies. This should be more of a contract for them.

Sorry if my view offends you or anyone else. Maybe because im straight I am being unreasonable but it isn't right.

[dwightfry]

No, I'm not gay, just liberal. I'm not scared, nor offended by seeing 2 guys kiss. At one point, I too said "let them do what they want, just not in front of me", now I just don't care.

I can understand your views about keeping it out of the church, I don't agree with it, but understand it. I disagree because someday I am going to be married in a church, yet I completely disagree with religion. I am a deep spiritualist, and I believe that I should listen to what my soul tells me is right rather than what the church says, the church has been wrong many many times before. One of those things being the idea the homosexuality is a sin, yet that shouldn't stop me from experiencing a ceremony.

Also, I don't think your opinion is offensive in less you make it offensive. Attacking there lifestyle is offensive, while being against marriage is just an opinion. A couple months ago, a guy walked into a restaraunt wearing hair curlers, and a friend's mom immediatly said "He's probably a fag, they disgust me". I have never in my life heard her say anything like that, and I've been very close to her for over 14 years, and a couple of weeks ago she said that she wouldn't let my friend watch Mister Roger's growing up because "he's a fag". That I find very offensive.


(I don't want to try to change anyone's veiws, I am curious on the reasons why people feel the way they do.)

[ilw]

Could someone clarify the difference between marriage and civil union, is it a religious or legal difference. If its a religious thing then obviously the religion has to choose itself, its almost inconceivable to force a religion to accept something of such a magnitude. If its a legal thing then what does the difference entail, i'm assuming its tax, benefit and some other rights eg next of kin.
.
As far as i'm concerned there is a difference between a heterosexual and homosexual union, but only so far as the fact that heterosexual couples can have children, as such the only difference in the way the law treats the different kinds of couples should reflect this. I think in Britain married couples have a different tax status, i'm assuming to encourage the formation and stability of families and this presumably to help in the raising of children. Therefore imo homosexual couples should be eligible to attain exactly the same legal status, but their tax status should probably be different.

Poll please. :smilie3:

[Rat Faced]

I have no problem with it.

Religious people may, due to their belief in the nature of marriage.

[Biggles]

Can't say it is really something that will keep me awake at night.

Obviously, there are certain religions hostile to the idea and it would be wholly wrong to force them to accept such unions on their premises against their will. However, as Gays pay taxes and being Gay is not illegal then they have as much right to use civil facilities as anyone.

Come to think of it, people declaring their fidelity is something of a rarity - it should be encouraged.

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

To keep it short and simple there&#39;s suppose to be a separation between church/state that takes the philosophical aspect of marriage off the table.

All marriage is in legal terms to the government is the mingling of two individuals property and assets, nothing more than a simple contractual agreement big deal. It simply isn&#39;t rational to outlaw this type of contract on the basis of gender in the land of the free.

Land of free is defined as the ability to pursue your own pursuit of happiness, whatever that may be with certain boundaries set by populous.

[Agrajag]

1. Gay people want to get married, cool nothing to do with me, a civil ceremony is only a contract so why not let them ? Give them the same legal rights as any couple.

2. Gay people getting married in a Church, that&#39;s up to the Church. though I am not aware of any Christian Church which would do it. I believe most preach that carrying out homosexual intercourse in any form is wrong. It is the act which is objected to. So it is unlikely they would perform a religious marriage ceremony.

3. Division of State / Church. Not in the UK, which is a constitutional Monarchy. The Queen is the Head of State. She is also the Defender of The Faith. The Bishops sit in the House of Lords. The State and Church, in the UK are intertwined.

[Rat Faced]

I know 4 is not a sample to base anything on, however if the polls on public acceptance are to be believed, either:


So far we are very enlightened to give it our wholehearted blessing which says a lot for the frequenters of this area or;

You 3 are lying through your teeth


Edit: Make that 5 enlightened souls, while i was posting





Remembering the debate on this subject a few months ago, I expect the poll results to change drastically later

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@17 February 2004 - 17:02
I know 4 is not a sample to base anything on, however if the polls on public acceptance are to be believed, either:


So far we are very enlightened to give it our wholehearted blessing which says a lot for the frequenters of this area or;

You 3 are lying through your teeth





Remembering the debate on this subject a few months ago, I expect the poll results to change drastically later

I think people of differing beliefs are more or less inclined to take part in a poll. For example a bunch of parishioners who just received a sermon on the evils of gay marriage might be more inclined to take time out to be part of a poll than someone who hasn&#39;t thought about marriage all month because no one got there blood boiling over sexual preference based legislation.