Gay Marriage, Do you support or oppose? Options

[highly_evolved]

ok lets see here. . .


yes i think it should be allowed. marriage is the joining of people bonded by love. we must accept the fact that in our society today that there is same sex love. and if these people are bonded by love and want to get married they should be allowed. why do we think of them defferently just because of who they love? are they not the same blood as ours? do they not have eyes ears and noses just like us?

[BeyondElite]

I oppose Gay marriages. Marriage exists solely between a man and woman. Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy.

[sadolakced acid]

  I oppose Gay marriages. Marriage exists solely between a man and woman. Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy, or any form of sexual involvement.

really now?


i believe marriage originally ALLOWED POLYGAMY... and it was law that got rid of it.

rejecting sexual involvement?

you sound like you just quoted someone...

what's sexual involvement? <- big words, me no understand.

involvement with what, may i ask? i understand sexual, i understand involvement. i sort-of understand them together. what i don't understand is the two of them together in the context of marriage.

do you even understand what that means?

[xXYouMeBedNowXx]

I support Homosexual Marriage. There are a few issues I'd like to address here:

ONE
Homosexuality is wrong
For those of you who just find homosexuality wrong on the few annoying points (ITS ICKY, that's wrong, it's not right, blah blah), well there's not much we can do to change your will of preference. If you think it's because of religion, here's a short history of our time:

The Bible states that women are inferior to men
The Bible justified slavery towards blacks in America and reinforced it

Now, unless you've been living in a bubble all your life, you know that these things are FALSE. Thereto: *BUZZER* wrong.

TWO
Homsexuals choose to be homosexual
The causes for homosexuality still haven't been proven (ie. Genetics, Environment, both, etc.). Nonetheless, we still can't override the fact that homosexuality exists. There have been reports that heterosexuals have converted to homosexuality and vice-versa, however, there is no evidence that it can be done as freely. Probably the most accepted right now (for the most part) is that sexual preference is a genetic matter, that they are born with it. And again, there is still no evidence that this may or may not be true, but it is the most accepted.

THREE
Marriage is constituted by Religion
There is evidence that marriage exists before Religion. Tribal bondments between two people have been around MUCH longer than almost any religion. Constituting marriage with religion can transitively cause Love to be in correspondance with religion, which (by the way), is completely ridiculous. One of the largest problems, and possibly the largest cause of this is the taboos set by religion itself. Now, I'm not saying that Religion is wrong, but there are many points which cause dismentalities within the sects.

FOUR
Fags.
This is one of those things that can just...set off explosions. I don't even like to use the word "gay". Now, "fag" would be the same level of calling someone with African heredities a "nigger" (excuse my language by the way). Using the word "gay" is also the same level of the correct situation of "negro".

A MESSAGE TO ALL PEOPLE
Don't use the word "gay". Don't say "That's gay" or "This test is gay". By doing so, you are automatically putting homosexuality into a negative limelight. So, stop.

FIVE
Allowing Homosexual Marriage will lead to other things also
Now, really, there's not much to argue about this since there is no way to predict what may or not happen.

There are two possibilities:
One, disallowing Homosexual marriage will prevent the needs for other things such as multiple marriages and marriages with animals. First of all: marriage we can assume that it is of two people , correct? We can probably debate this some other time. As for multiple marriage, that is a will of free choice. True, it may be a little odd to have more than one wife (or possibly husband), but I do understand the fact that someone can love more than one person, although it may seem just a little morally wrong.

Two, allowing Homosexual marriage will possibly cause the above things. However, there are other following consequences. The way I see the Homosexual Rights Movement right now is very much the same as the Civil Rights Movements. We don't want to see that all over again.




That's all for now, there might be a few other points that I missed.

[c0oki3_m0n$tah]

i completely support it. if two people love each other then they should have the right to get married. you know how some christian people that are against this say that god made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Adam? well...if god forgives all people, why wouldn't he forgive the gay people that want to get married? there isn't anything to forgive, anyways, since they havn't done anything wrong.

[d0rkbaby]

i'm 100% against it.. i think its wrong (not eww wrong). but then since it is starting to get leaglized, there is nothing you can really do.

[cool_twin]

Yeah I believe that gay marriage should be allowed...... if guys and girls can get married as an oath of their love..... why shouldnt a gay couple be able to share their love for as long as they both shall live?

[xXYouMeBedNowXx]

i'm 100% against it.. i think its wrong (not eww wrong). but then since it is starting to get leaglized, there is nothing you can really do.

Is there anything you can say to support you claim?

[innovation]

if two people love each other then they should have the right to get married.

i disagree. marriage is not based solely on love; many marriages don't even include love as a factor at all. the point is to promote the conventional family unit in order to ensure some sort of social stability.

oh yeah, and morally/socially, i'm against gay marriage. legally, i'm for letting the individual states decide. does that make any sense?

[racoons > you]

^^

why should marriage be about promoting the conventions? if the convention is 2.4 kids or whatever, does that then invalidate heterosexual marriages where the couple choose not to have children, but love each other as much as the couple next door expecting their third child?

in america, its conventional to be a christian. does that mean that the point of all religion is to promote christianity?

[Spirited Away]

I take no stance on this topic but I was just curious on a couple of points that were made and would like to see if they can be cleared up.

TWO
Homsexuals choose to be homosexual
The causes for homosexuality still haven't been proven (ie. Genetics, Environment, both, etc.). Nonetheless, we still can't override the fact that homosexuality exists. There have been reports that heterosexuals have converted to homosexuality and vice-versa, however, there is no evidence that it can be done as freely. Probably the most accepted right now (for the most part) is that sexual preference is a genetic matter, that they are born with it. And again, there is still no evidence that this may or may not be true, but it is the most accepted.

Because it hasn't been proven either way, if one would like to argue that homosexuals choose to be homosexuals, it would make sense that he/she can... so then, what's the problem?

THREE
Marriage is constituted by Religion
There is evidence that marriage exists before Religion. Tribal bondments between two people have been around MUCH longer than almost any religion. Constituting marriage with religion can transitively cause Love to be in correspondance with religion, which (by the way), is completely ridiculous. One of the largest problems, and possibly the largest cause of this is the taboos set by religion itself. Now, I'm not saying that Religion is wrong, but there are many points which cause dismentalities within the sects.

It is true that marriages aren't dictated by religion, but its standards can be set by morality. Would you say that one person's moral standards are more "right" than another person? As in, if my morality tells me that homosexual marriages are wrong, what laws/principles tell me that my morals are amiss?

There are two possibilities:
One, disallowing Homosexual marriage will prevent the needs for other things such as multiple marriages and marriages with animals. First of all: marriage we can assume that it is of two people , correct? We can probably debate this some other time. As for multiple marriage, that is a will of free choice. True, it may be a little odd to have more than one wife (or possibly husband), but I do understand the fact that someone can love more than one person, although it may seem just a little morally wrong.

Two, allowing Homosexual marriage will possibly cause the above things. However, there are other following consequences. The way I see the Homosexual Rights Movement right now is very much the same as the Civil Rights Movements. We don't want to see that all over again.

I'm not quite sure what this comment means, but I'll take a stab at it... let me know if I got the idea completely wrong...

Let me address this part: "... I do understand the fact that someone can love more than one person, although it may seem just a little morally wrong". Not only is it "little morally wrong", it is very wrong. Period. The ultimate humiliation and feeling of uselessness as a mother and a wife is a torture no woman should endure in this century, or at least, not in in a society where a woman can earn her keep just as well as any man. There is no way to look at polygamy sympathetically. If you're wondering how this can be proven morally wrong, please don't hesitate to put me up to the challenge.



Moving back to your comment, Perplexism already pointed this out in this thread, and I have pointed this out in an older thread... if homosexual marriages are accepted, it would be hard, if not impossible, to set standards for the constitution of marriage. If we all say that anyone who loves another should be able to marry, then what is there to prevent incestuous marriages or marriages between man and beast?


As for using "gay", "fag"... etc as degoratory terms, I completely agree with you.

I oppose Gay marriages. Marriage exists solely between a man and woman. Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy.

No. Even if the homosexual marriages are accepted, pologamy would still be wrong. Need I elaborate?

[*StanleyThePanda*]

people ARE born gay, they just don't realize till their hormones start kicking in, just like you didn't realize guys don't have cooties and they aren't so bad till your hormones started kicking in.

People arent born gay, they may try to tell you that, but they arent. thats impossible. the reason most gays claim that is because they are in denial about family problems or problems with the oppisite gender that makes them feel hurt and dont want others to know or ignore the fact.

I oppose Gay marriages.  Marriage exists solely between a man and woman. Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy.

I agree

i disagree. marriage is not based solely on love; many marriages don't even include love as a factor at all. the point is to promote the conventional family unit in order to ensure some sort of social stability.

oh yeah, and morally/socially, i'm against gay marriage. legally, i'm for letting the individual states decide. does that make any sense?

Agreed

[iwalkbackwards]

I am completly FOR gay marriage.
Marriage is about LOVE not anything else.


I think the government goes way to far in telling us who we can marry.

[*StanleyThePanda*]

I am completly FOR gay marriage.
Marriage is about LOVE not anything else.
I think the government goes way to far in telling us who we can marry.

Marriage isnt all about love.
haha its about other things.
whatever...I dont feel like going all into it right now...i might later

[iwalkbackwards]

Marriage isnt all about love.
haha its about other things.
whatever...I dont feel like going all into it right now...i might later

What about the gay marriages that are about love? I don't think love is about a man and a woman, lets put it that way.

[racoons > you]

People arent born gay, they may try to tell you that, but they arent. thats impossible.

thats silly, as sammi said, homosexualtity is caused by hormone imbalabce, i.e. something out of peoples' control

[Tung]

i support. theres nothign wrong with expressing how you feel.

[sammi rules you]

what the hell? problems with family or opposite sex? that is NOT what makes people gay. i've had my share of problems with the opposite sex, but look at me, i'm STILL not the least bit attracted to other girls. go poll all the gay people in the world; what age did they start getting signs within themselves that they were gay? oh, ages around PUBERTY? when your hormones kick in? when you were a little kid, you much preferred being around the same sex, since you thought the opposite was gross, and if not, you were thought of as weird. however, as you got older, you started to see "ooh..he/she isn't looking too bad over there.."

marraiges end about people being gay. being gay may CAUSE problems with the opposite sex, but it's not a reprecussion of problems with the opposite sex. that's even more illogical to me than when people say it's a choice..

[sadolakced acid]

likewise, gay boys are not caused by overbearing mothers and distant fathers, as was thought before, but the boys, because they are gay, cause the fathers to become distant. The mothers become overbearing in response to the father pulling back.

It's like more people drown when watermellons are ripe. Therfore, watermellons cause water to be evil and should be banned. It's actually because it's summer and that's when people are more likely to be in the water. But it's a logical conclusion from correct facts.

you have to be careful how you interpret this data.

[xXYouMeBedNowXx]

Because it hasn't been proven either way, if one would like to argue that homosexuals choose to be homosexuals, it would make sense that he/she can... so then, what's the problem?

I'm simply putting the fact down. I can't argue with that.

It is true that marriages aren't dictated by religion, but its standards can be set by morality. Would you say that one person's moral standards are more "right" than another person? As in, if my morality tells me that homosexual marriages are wrong, what laws/principles tell me that my morals are amiss?
I'm not quite sure what this comment means, but I'll take a stab at it... let me know if I got the idea completely wrong...

True to an extent. There are many things that can constitute morality within itself. I didn't explain all of the points, but religion comes in as one of the major ones. And as for plain, unbiased, morality telling you that homosexual marriage is wrong, there isn't much that can be done to change that will, except self-realisation.

I'm not quite sure what this comment means, but I'll take a stab at it... let me know if I got the idea completely wrong...

Let me address this part: "... I do understand the fact that someone can love more than one person, although it may seem just a little morally wrong". Not only is it "little morally wrong", it is very wrong. Period. The ultimate humiliation and feeling of uselessness as a mother and a wife is a torture no woman should endure in this century, or at least, not in in a society where a woman can earn her keep just as well as any man. There is no way to look at polygamy sympathetically. If you're wondering how this can be proven morally wrong, please don't hesitate to put me up to the challenge.
Moving back to your comment, Perplexism already pointed this out in this thread, and I have pointed this out in an older thread... if homosexual marriages are accepted, it would be hard, if not impossible, to set standards for the constitution of marriage. If we all say that anyone who loves another should be able to marry, then what is there to prevent incestuous marriages or marriages between man and beast?

Well, like I said before, there isn't much to say about knowing what can or cannot happen. Polygamy, yes, indeed, is wrong. I can now agree that what I said was an understatement. As for marriage between a human being and an animal, we can somewhat assume that it is between two human beings; in our sense. Think of it this way:

Homsexual marriage may be a taking a step down the hill, but we're not sure if we might stumble and fall all the way into chaos.

As for using "gay", "fag"... etc as degoratory terms, I completely agree with you.

THANK YOU! FINALLY!

[innovation]

i'd just like to reiterate that morally, i am completely against homosexual marriage, for previously stated reasons. however, i realize that such a controversial moral issue should not (and cannot) be imposed on the entire nation, for we don't even have somewhat of a consensus and there most likely won't be one in the near future (if ever!). therefore, legally (and realistically), i'm for leaving it up to the states. anyone in the same position as i am?

edit:

It's like more people drown when watermellons are ripe. Therfore, watermellons cause water to be evil and should be banned. It's actually because it's summer and that's when people are more likely to be in the water.

nice analogy there, derrington

[*StanleyThePanda*]

what the hell? problems with family or opposite sex? that is NOT what makes people gay. i've had my share of problems with the opposite sex, but look at me, i'm STILL not the least bit attracted to other girls. go poll all the gay people in the world; what age did they start getting signs within themselves that they were gay? oh, ages around PUBERTY? when your hormones kick in? when you were a little kid, you much preferred being around the same sex, since you thought the opposite was gross, and if not, you were thought of as weird. however, as you got older, you started to see "ooh..he/she isn't looking too bad over there.."

marraiges end about people being gay. being gay may CAUSE problems with the opposite sex, but it's not a reprecussion of problems with the opposite sex. that's even more illogical to me than when people say it's a choice..

uhm, yes actually that is why.
and if you go and poll gays they will probably not say so because they are in denial or ignore that fact. I actually know a few gays and that is why....

Why dont you go poll gays?

and no one is born that way! you cant be born that way....

[sadolakced acid]

uhm, yes actually that is why.
and if you go and poll gays they will probably not say so because they are in denial or ignore that fact. I actually know a few gays and that is why....

Why dont you go poll gays?

and no one is born that way! you cant be born that way....

cite your source.


"no one is born that way! you can't be born that way. I mean, it's not like your GENEs can cause you to have retarded mental capabilities, right?

it MUST be the water. because i asked someone and that's what they said. "


you can make claims, but back them up with facts, not stats. and if you were to use stats, at least use real ones with a sample size of 1000 or more.

[*StanleyThePanda*]

People are not born gay. Many people think there is a so-called gay gene. Research has been done to find a genetic link to homosexuality, but actually some research has proved just the opposite—that homosexuality is not inborn. Its causes are varied but often include childhood trauma such as sexual or emotional abuse, early exposure to pornography, unmet emotional needs, and a breakdown in the relationship with the same sex parent.

[myheartxbandages]

um i think stanley won that one.