It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Should Gays be allowed to marry?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 30 2002 @ 10:43 PM
I am curious on your guys opinions, but I want to know why, not just "YES//NO" but what are the reasons they should be allowed to or not to?

no signature

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:34 AM
You need a beating


posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:40 AM
whats with the homophobe attitude Tyler?
I am not gay myself, but i see no reason why people shouldn't be.
If two ppl love each other then thats that. It shouldn,t matter bout if its two guys, two girls whatever. It has been socially and religiosly (a reason why i stray away from popular religion. If God supposedly loves all- why not gays?) rammed into ppls heads that it is wrong to be gay. Why should it be? There are plenty of great couples out there that have to hide away to escape cruel society. Of course they should be able to get married

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:49 AM

Originally posted by kim
whats with the homophobe attitude Tyler?

Have you left your brain on your night stand? Maybe you should look at the top of the page where it says SECRET SOCIETIES DISCUSSIONS


posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:57 AM
ah, well im new here dammit!

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 07:22 AM
..was the tricky word "secret" or "society"?

And less humorously, Kim -what is the "conspiracy" angle?
What do you mean by "marry"? Civil? religious? Both? The power to overturn a previous will? What God has joined together let no man put asunder? 'Til Death us do part -the right to be called "Mrs"?
Is this not dull old drumming-up-trade surf-for-pay-ing?
What do you mean by "should"? Or "allowed"?
Who doesn't allow it -Church and State don't but is anyone else stopping them?

I'm not sure that this will do, Kim.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 07:33 AM
This is an interesting topic though it has nothing to do with Secret Societies etc.
If one says they are for it, they are seen as a homosexual or a sympathizer. If they say they are against it, they are seen as a conservative traditionalist that are insensitive. It's a double edged sword. I for one am against the notion. I have my own reasons though, and I do not feel it necessary to expound on these.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 07:54 AM
...shared your commendable sense of decorum and self-restraint, blahblahblah.
As you point out -this is instant controversy (just add imbecility and stir) and more of a two-headed penny than a double-edged blade.
About number 4 in Estragon's Guide to Desperate Posters.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 03:29 PM
I am not gay, and I have no problem with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transexual people getting married.

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 06:46 PM
Why can't your answers all be like Jedi's straight forward and to the point, you all make to big of a deal out of things
(looks in Tyler's direction) dun Dun DUN!!!

no signature

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 08:27 PM
Personally, I'm pro-choice (In many things besides mere gay-marriages). As long as I have the freedom of choosing my own life, what would give me the right to deny that same freedom to others? I may not agree with their choice, but I couldn't find any room in my morals to deny the choice to them.

As far as connecting this thread with "Secret Societies", don't people who support the condemnation of such people comprise it's own splinter-society? Then again, this "splinter-society" is not wont to keep itself "secret"...But it does force its *targets* to adopt secrecy.

[Edited on 1-11-2002 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 11:51 PM
Three cheers for "pro-choice", Midnight-D, whatever it means>
The proble is, as I suggested earlier, that it all depends upon what you mean by marriage: I have little doubt that most of the mattres cpncerning money can be arranged fairly easily: wills, property, joint bank-accounts, mortgages and what you will.
I am equally sure that pairs of homosexuals have been living as couple since time immemorial.
But: when you want such arrangements in some sense sanctified or treated as sacramental you run up against the views of millions: and it is no longer a simple issue of individual freedoms. How can any individual justly demand that a religious sect/faith or a body of law makes an exception just for them.
It is this business not of "equality" treatment but of insisting that an individual (couple) has some sort of right to deny the views of millions.
If Christians don't want you -too bad. See if the Jews or Muslims want you.
As I said earlier such issues are potentially very interesting in social/legal/religious terms: but on ATS we never quite manage to do that.

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 12:24 AM
personally i am not gonna burn a fag at the stake for marrying another dude or whatever how ever they want to do it ... alot of my friends are gay... and they all know i do not support it... i beleive that some people are born genetically gay but do not have to follow it if they do not want to and morally i do not think they should... its not in the animal world there for it shouldnt be in ours... its not natural and its are fault screwing around with nature acting like god that there are gen-gays anyways...
but i aint gonna throw a beat down to one either... i still hang out with them and protect them cuz thats what i was born to do...

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 12:44 AM
All I have to say about the QUESTION, is we all do have a free will. Why not?

Just like people might assume from my answer above, that I am for being gay... on the contrary, that is a different question entirely. I might use this example as the notion most people 'attach' the word gay as that person. No... it is a PART of that person as we all have different parts in each of us. For instance, I might like to dance, but nobody refers to me as a 'dance man' everywhere I go. The seed has been planted in hearts of man to hate gay or not hate gay. We must not let it grow any furthur is all I have to say.


posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 06:52 AM
ah y'see! Why has this been put on secret societies discuss? i put my views and Tyler has a big stress!
I will now leave before my head gets chewed off

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 07:20 AM
NO ! They don't have to be allowed !

Otherwise, the next step will be : " Ooooh, look, I'm a zoophile and I would like to marry my dog. Who want to be my witness ? "

And don't forget the childrens. For some of you, it's sound stupid and " retrograde ", but a kid need a mother AND a father. Not 2 fathers or 2 mothers.

Are you all crazy ????

A society need some moral fences, otherwise this society will collapse !

Call me an homophobe if you want, I don't care !

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 12:41 PM
UP has a good point... although my dog is pretty cute... haha JOKING

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 03:07 PM

Originally posted by wetdog

although my dog is pretty cute... haha JOKING

" Wetdog "....Wet....Dog......huuuum.....and you find your dog cute...?......weird....weird....

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 05:26 PM
Because of my faith in christ and what the bible says, I am firmly against gay relationships let alone actual marriage.
But I do believe in treating them as people and I do not look down on them. For christians we have to respect that people do have free will and we must not forget that god still loves them despite what they do.
Marriage comes from God, it was not invented by man. the bed of the married wife and husband is not defiled. But those of fornicators and whoremongers and gay couples is a complete abomination in the sight of God. Does not even nature tellus what should be in these matters. God put together Adam and Eve, and they became as one flesh so that they could bring forth children.
Gay couples cannot bring forth children so this is what is to be taught to the children so that they will not be confused.
What was it that brought forth AIDS, was it a man and wife married couple or gay sexual activity?

Gay practice has been going on since near the dawn of time, and these practices were found to be going on in the original cities of Sodom and Gommorah. After God seeing these things going on he decided to destroy the cities and its inhabitants.

We must understand that for society to be civilised and to help mankind fight against disease, and to teach the correct education to the younger generation we must stop this wrong action. But most of all those who do this must repent, for God will judge.

posted on Nov, 2 2002 @ 04:18 AM

Originally posted by ultra_phoenixAnd don't forget the childrens. For some of you, it's sound stupid and " retrograde ", but a kid need a mother AND a father. Not 2 fathers or 2 mothers.

And precisely *how* can a same-sex marriage produce kids?

The only way I know of would be adoption or, in the case of a female-couple, a trip to the sperm bank. In the future, genetic engineering perfomed on a clone (to preserve genetic diversity) might come into play.

Even so, it can't accurately be said that these kids belonged to both parents (Unless the gengineering utilized some DNA from *both* parents)...

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in