Why are people against gay marriage?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:48 AM
link   
Why are people against gay marriage?

You don't need to be a Rocket Surgeon to see that it ain't normal. If you look back to the "leave it to beaver" days this type of subject would not even come up. People are getting condition to accept almost any un-normal and really sick things that people do (not me and some others) I will take the customs I grew up with over all this weird/perverted stuff thats going on now-a-days and put it in the mind bank. Thats all folks!




posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Echo3Foxtrot
 


actually certain sects of the christian church are allowing gay vicars so they could get married in a church. I mean if the vicar can be gay i'm sure he/she wouldn't mind marrying a same sex couple

philjwolf

I'm not quite sure what the point of your post was. Was it a serious post saying people should be allowed to marry children, or was it trying to say that if you allow gay marriage you may as well allow the other things becuase they're as bad? Or was it a straight attempt to annoy people and get an angry reaciton?
Clarification please.

Originally posted by RUFFREADY

You don't need to be a Rocket Surgeon to see that it ain't normal. If you look back to the "leave it to beaver" days this type of subject would not even come up. People are getting condition to accept almost any un-normal and really sick things that people do (not me and some others) I will take the customs I grew up with over all this weird/perverted stuff thats going on now-a-days and put it in the mind bank. Thats all folks!


Amazing how ignorant people are. This behavior isn't new, homosexuality has been going on throughout history! The absolute classic example is the greeks, but the romantic period also was a big ol gay time. Animals also have been shown to express homosexual behavior, well we're animals as well but i mean wild animals. Primates especially certain monkeys have been shown to be bisexual to assert dominance and as social bonding.

It's not wrong unless you're religious and a book tell syou it's wrong. There is no logical reason against being gay, sorry but there isn't, there is only a religious and ignorant bias.

[edit on 30-5-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:58 AM
link   
What happens if this # does become acceptable and in 20 years theres fags everywhere and pansy little boys running around kissing other boys on the lips when there 12 years old because its acceptable. It would completely # up nature, sex ed, think of the STD levels, would go through the roof. I personally don't mind the gays, just don't flaunt it, and don't try and change the world.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by gnosis111
 


There is something about the behaviors, life styles..whatever you wish to call this "Gay" movement that frankly most people find uncomfortable, unnatural. Sexual behaviors are endless in how humans have this need to find expression through odd sexual acts, reguardless of gender. The main purpose of gay expression is through sex, go to any gay bar and watch how they express themselves...it most always is uncomfortable for most straight people.
Frankly I donot care how, when, what or where one whishes to express their sexual desires, its when they try to make it a law..or attach Marriage to something that is unnatural to begin with. The human body was not intended for same sex...anything let alone marriage. If gay people wish to have rights for their partners, they should do what many straight couples do, put it in writting. You can leave you dog your entire fortune in a will. Women who choose to live with a man without marriage are not entitled to special benifits, unless its in writing.
There is a defect in the process when certain children are born, someday science will be able to stop the defect and their will never be another "Gay" person, or another deformed child. Put aside all the gay issues, it will always come down to the human body and its function and purpose. Either you are a apple, or you are not.











'



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Why is the number of Male molesting male kids higher than Male molesting femals kids?



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 07:13 AM
link   
It's fear. They're just scared that's all.

You have to remember for a lot of people, they never really have to evaluate much in their lives. The social structure of our culture and history supports and re-inforces them, constantly. Everything they see and hear around them from birth tells them they are doing it right.

Then they see people who are living different ways of life, taking different choices or having to make a different choice because of factors outside their own choice (sexuality). This scares them. People doing something not part of the masses, but outside it, either alone or as a smaller group. It makes them think 'what if it was the other way around and I was in the smaller group?' -- Well they've never experienced that feeling before, and it terrifies them. So the easiest way to deal with this kind of fear, is to project it onto the people who are mirroring back these feelings of fear, they think to beat down these outsiders, their fears will go away.

People need that boogeyman to project their fears on to, to blame it on someone else so they don't have to look inside themselves for the answers to their questions and doubts. A lot of smart, but unscrupulous people in the media and politics exploit this dynamic for their own gains. This is why everything from muslims, homosexuals and single mothers to the internet, video games and pop music are demonised and blamed for all kinds of social problems. It is easier to blame someone else.

It's easy for the media, religious fringe and politicians to exploit this. A tactic always bound to work is linking these fears with children. Think of any boogeyman and you can bet it will have been used to exploit fears in parents they have for the safety of children.

I could list dozens of examples, but I'll stick to one relating to gay marriage and parenting. People often express the opinion that children of gay parents will be bullied at school. Well first of all, bullying didn't begin with gay parenting. Kids get bullied for being fat, thin, short, tall, poor, rich, too stupid, too intelligent, anything. How would you combat bullying of kids with gay parents? By eliminating gay parenting completely, or making it more acceptable, thus eliminating the fear of the unknown? You can't elimate gay parents - people have kids, people feel the desire to procreate, regardless of sexuality. Making gay parenting more acceptable doesn't negate heterosexual parenting. Difference is nothing to fear, someone who is different doesn't belittle you.

See it all comes back to fear. These kids who bully, they're experiencing the exact same fears as those adults who discriminate and name call.

Fear is not hate. You can't fight fire with fire, so getting angry at these people is useless. Your anger justifies their fears. Fear is borne out of ignorance, so you fight fear with education.

Stop listening to the media and politicians, they want you scared so they can offer the solution to your fears. But I think we all know their solutions are lies.

Social changes like gay civil partnership and equal rights are slow and they take a long time, longer than a generations lifetime, longer than 2 or 3 maybe. We still have racism, we still have sexism, we still have all kinds of intollerance and discrimination. But, we have to keep trucking on. Educate the people around you, simply just through living your own life, they will see that we're all the same, and there's nothing to be scared of. And I also think sometimes people just need to hear that they're OK. You're OK. We're all OK. We're all just trying to live our lives with the people we love and find a little happiness in our short time here.



[edit on 30-5-2008 by VelvetSplash]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Because Marriage is a christian thing - the union between a man and woman, and homosexuality isn't accepted.
I am sure if it's under another them (like we do in europe) there may be less resistance.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Phobia= a fear of something. i dont like brussell sprouts does that make me a brusselphobic? No it means i dont like it. Same with the gay lifestyle. all because I dont like the lifestyle doesnt mean i fear it. My "fear" if indeed it is a fear is that once this is accepted as a norm then what's the next step or evolution in the love chain. Search for the man-boy love association...should we accept their lifestyle? what about other less publicized but no less real lifestyles, incest, beastiality? are those peoples "rights" to be addressed next? should they be allowed to receive government funds, benefits as this seems to be the issue? hell if we're gonna open the closet door lets really open it all the way and reveal EVERYBODY at one time and not just one small group.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


Yeah, I can agree with that. Its the norm of the ages , it is. I mean think about it..........Ok, now think about this: going back in time (and even in the present) you would never see the Zulu nation (for an example of a great nation of folks) let same sex unions get on. I'm sure some other folks can give other examples of this.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
I'm going out on a limb here and stating that, in my opinion, the problem here isn't the 'gay' part. It's the 'marriage' part.

Marriage is an institution. It's existence in culture bestows a certain 'status' on it's members (for lack of a better term). The development of the notion of the institution of marriage (and family I suppose) is something that has evolved with mankind, in many cases independently, across the planet. I find that very important to factor into the argument regarding the 'form' of the debate.

You see, I feel that it is more natural to resist the inclusion of homosexual unions in the institution than it is to accept it only because of cultural and social inertia. The cause for people adhering to a society-driven monogamist marriage model must have had something to do with cultural survival. I suppose you can't have people mating like hamsters if you want to be able to know who your friends are and for whom you should be expected to die in a dire circumstance.

But now, I see this impetus to struggle for the universal acceptance of gay marriage to be focused on something much more mundane. Equal economic opportunity. Benefits granted by society to married couples can be, and in many cases are, denied to the gay couples because of their inability to legally marry.

If that were the only real reason to accept gays in the institution of marriage then I personally must object and decline to support it. Why? Because, contrary to popular (TV/Media) representations, I do not believe that marriage is a convenience to the couple. It is not about societal support or recognition, it is not about status. Personally, marriage is a promise, a contract between lovers to are so firmly committed in the strength of their love, that the permanence of the union is declared openly and unreservedly. Money doesn't enter into it (until a third party gets involved).

The effort to promote the acceptance of gay marriage seems focused on societal support. I find that a troubling focus point. If it is true that one's life can be dominated and defined by sexual conduct (I resist this notion as well) then one should accept that such a narrowing of the definition of the self will lead to less broadly available support.

Now that doesn't really translate well from my mind to the posted entry perhaps, but the point I'm trying to make is the following: Gay marriage rights should not be 'based' on the notion of equal economic opportunity, or even availability of social services. It should be based on LOVE.

We should consider that we cannot now, nor will we ever, be able to peer into someone's heart and say 'he loves her truly' or 'she loves her truly'. This is something that transcends cultural and societal reach. As such, and not being in a position to judge the depth of one person's commitment to another, I cannot rightly declare that "it's not love it's lust" or "they just want the state to legitimize their sins" without the risk of becoming a bigot.

I suspect we will find that homosexual unions are no more or less permanent than heterosexual marriages. And all the objections given against the idea of acceptance are based on bias or simple traditionalist thinking.

I suspect that, as usual, tradition is out of step with reality and whether those who have the power to decide accept it or not, eventually it will be accepted.

Just my two cents.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
In the eyes of its detractors, put simply, gay marriage fundamentally undermines the church. As one who spent years in fundamentalist circles (oddly enough, September 11th marked the beginning of my exodus from Christianity, but that's another story for another time) I can tell you that those who disregard the essential humanity behind the idea of gay marriage are those who—for evangelical, moralist, legalist reasons—willfully debase the value of humanity itself.

It's not a universal attribute of Christianity that gay marriage is abhorred; particularly in the West, this attitude tends to permeate the more puritan, Biblically-fundamentalist denominations. In branches like the United Church, for example, the Bible is recognized as a guidebook at best, one written by human hands: while the text still forms the heart of faith, its interpretation is more personal and less driven by the edict of church authority. On the other side of the fence, the Bible ischurch authority, infallible and unchanging. Add to this mix the idea of something so purely good and right and worthy as two consenting adults uniting in love with whom they will, and you can understand the childish tantrums dripping with cries of, "It's unnatural!" or "I just don't want to see it!" or "Not with my taxpayer dollars!"

With the Bible's many Bronze Age exhortations against suffering witches to live or a man laying with another man, the callow subservience of many churchgoers, and the preoccupation of fundamentalist clergy with sexual "morality," it's not hard to see how this became a cornerstone issue. Strangely, the same devout faithful who decry the evils of Xy marrying Xy are the same who would dismiss the human disaster in Iraq, or fluff the likely holocaust waiting for an invasion of Iran as "God's will."

The same twisted rationale left innocent women bound to posts and burning in the Medieval period.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
ignorance and nothing more, failing to love every human equally regardless of their beliefs is the problem. if two people are in love who cares if they are the same sex, its their lives, not ours, gay people are incredibly nice and i have had friends in the past who have come out and turned gay, didnt change anything, its dis hearting that this is really an issue in our world today, everyone needs to stay out of everyone elses personal business, there is a reason they call it that, its personal!



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 09:40 AM
link   
People are against gay mariage because they are ignorant and can't think for themselves and want other people to think for them. Rather than see that all people should have the same rights, they let others tell them that cerain people don't deserve certain rights. Remind anyone of the pre civil rights era?



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I am for gay unions but mariage is a christian term and must be respected
Call it whatever you like and we all happy.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I work at a Boy Scout office and many of you, I am sure, know their policy on homosexuals. (They are not allowed in the organization).

I thought many people who work here felt the same way as I do. Which is: Its none of my business what gay people do. Most of the people here actually feel the same way as our policy makes us sound.

A district executive (recruiter) was talking about gay marriage and how he cant believe its come to this. I asked what do you care if homosexuals get married. He was shocked so he spat back at me, How do you NOT care?! I told hime that it really doesnt affect me... I hate to see oppression and discrimination so naturally i would like them to get their rights. He so intelligently countered, Well i want to marry my sister... that should be legal right... i mean it doesnt affect you so what do you care? I said, I dont that makes you a wierdo.

Another argument i have heard was: Well if gays can get married whats to stop two dudes who are just friends from getting married just for the benefits(i.e. tax breaks and whatnot). Simple response: Whats to stop a guy and a girl from doing that right now?

The fact of the matter is that people ABSOLUTELY LOVE to make decisions that affect other people and have no real consequences either way for them. As long as people stand for something there will be people who stand against them. People also dont understand that love can exist between two men or two women. To them homosexuality is synonymous with perversion.

I cant think of a good way to wrap this up.

-H.P



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


I must respectfully disagree with that statement as their were marriages in Ancient Egypt just as well, Only they were used to protect bloodlines instead of having two people who love each other. So marriage wasn't always a christian thing. It has just been deemed a christian thing throughout time.




The marriage of Hatshepsut and Thutmose II was an arranged marriage to ensure the legitimacy of the royal line.

Marriage:
Following Egyptian tradition requiring the marriage of a Pharoah to a royal woman in order to ensure the legitimacy of the royal line, Thutmose II married his older half-sister, Hatshepsut.

marriage.about.com...



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Morals and Love cannot be regulated.

the issue is not "gay marriage" the issue is the finances that go along with the union.

Kurt Russel and Goldie Hawn are not married, yet they are together, and "everybody" likes atleast one movie they have done. I have yet to see them getting picketed because of imorality. I'll even go out on a limb and say some Christians like some on the movies they have made.

I do not go out and walk in a parade screaming about my hetrosexuality, Nor do I have a parade for ADHD ( which some folks think is a made up affliction, try living with it, it took me 20 minutes just to type this much because I have to go back and rethink what I was going to type in the first place) I have no problem with two lovers giving a kiss hello or goodbye, I do have a problem with public makeout sessions on ANY SEX.

I have had both gay men and women tell me their sexuality, upon being introduced. I have no need for that information, that would be like telling everyone how much money you make, " Hi my name is so and so and I make $1500 a week"

I have no problem with gay unions, but the real reson behind the complaints is not "spiritual" it's plain old Money.


I would love to see an equal rights amendmant for gays with two riders, one stop all the "for the children" crap, and make Hemp legal again.

Maybe I'm more jaded then others because gay man have hit on me most of my adult life, I don't know why that is ( maybe cause I'm tall and lean?) I treated them as I would any woman I was not interested in; "Thanks, I'm flattered, really, but no thanks" Invariably, the response is "try it, you might like it" well, My standard response is "I don't need to fall off a high building to know when I hit the ground it will be unpleasent"



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by 888LetsRoll
I dont see the point to them getting married...
Marrage is a household for raising children in a wholesome environment.

If you can show me a Man that can have a baby - I will change my Views on Marriage... Tax benefit is help grow the population... whats so special about one dude giving up his last name for the other dudes last name..
it seems they want the fruit and the framework for raising children in which it was built. I just think Gays have been in the closet for thousands of years... Just keep it there, in the closet.. now I do support domestic partner rights. healthcare, death benefits etc... but not the same status as a Household to raise children. call it something else and the same benefits of husband and wife without the Kissing in public crap.


[edit on 29-5-2008 by 888LetsRoll]


I couldn't have said it better!



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Ok well you're saying being gay is right and it's completely natural??? I'm not bashing people who are gay, what they do is their business but I don't want anything to do with it.... Sooo a man has a penis a girl has a vagina last time i checked, and these 2 sexual organs were put their for a reason, don't rebuttal with "reproduction" cause it's not the same.... So we agree that a man and a woman having sex is like a childs toy of blocks, the circular piece goes inside the circular hole cause they're a perfect fit, well being gay is like trying to fit a square piece inside a circular hole.... It just isn't right! even kids know thats not the way its supposed to be! Also what is right about having sex with someone through the part of the body that delivers fecal matter?? hahaha I don't know last time I checked things are supposed to go out that way, NOT IN! So that's my whole take on the matter, I don't care if I get flamed for this, it's just my opinion....



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Gays are a minority, and all minorites are picked on nowadays because it is a way for the people to become distracted from the actually serious issues that poses a threat to society nowadays.

Government imposed distraction. They want us to hate something.





top topics
 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join