What are your views on Gay marriage?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Myself I don't support Gay marriage unless Polygyny becomes legal. This is just my opinion on this issue. I don't see why Gay's have to get married to love one another. Tell me your thoughts on this issue.



+5 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
Myself I don't support Gay marriage unless Polygyny becomes legal. This is just my opinion on this issue. I don't see why Gay's have to get married to love one another. Tell me your thoughts on this issue.


Why shouldn't gays get married? What harm can come of it, and what business is it of anyone else's? Especially a religious-based argument...you don't like it...fine...then don't marry a gay.

It's as simple as that, and I am pleased that it is sanctioned up here. One need not bring polygamy or anything else into the debate.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


IMHO,marriage is a joining of a man and a woman with the sole intent of starting a family..Something a gay couple can not do alone..

I know I'll get flamed (as usual) but I am NOT against Gays or them being together..

Just let them use a different term for their partnership..



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
The legal union (recognized by government) between two adults of either sex should not be banned; and should be recognized with all the same benefits befitting a heterosexual "marriage".

From there, if they want to call it marriage let them call it marriage; but these unions may never be recognized by religious institutions and you can't force those institutions to recognize them or preform them.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


There are sperm banks and women or lesbian couples who wouldn't mind becoming pregnant like that. Also there's adoption and I know how hard it is for kid's to get adopted.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


So should people who are unwilling or unable to have kids not ever get married? That is silly; marriage is a union, for companionship. If people, gay or straight, want to be together, what right does anyone have to stop them?



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 


I was thinking that earlier. What would happen if Churches, Mosque and other religious temples were forced to hold marriage ceremony's for gay and lesbian couples. Can you imagine murders of same sex couples being murdered by religious adherents. That would be terrible.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 



Something a gay couple can not do alone..


Yes I know all that..I defended the rights of Gays to have children in another thread that was argueing who made the best parents...



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I say let them get married. At the very least, it will help the economy. Just imagine how many industries it would affect in a positive manner.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
It doesn't bother me if they marry, no big deal. It's not like marriage is some sacred thing, half of them end in divorce anyways.

If a couple, gay or heterosexual, isn't religious, what really is legal marriage other than a business deal? The real promise to one another comes from the heart.

For some people, it's just a piece of paper, handy for legalities. Easier for wills and estates to pass on to the partner, easier to collect pensions.

For those that want to marry for religious reasons, I'm sure marriage would hold the same meaning for them as with hetero couples. Why should people be denied that just because they're gay? It's not like it effects anyone else.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by InvisibleAlbatross
 



If people, gay or straight, want to be together, what right does anyone have to stop them?


I have already said I have no issues with that..

It is just my opinion that the term "marriage" should be between a man and a woman...

Sheesh, no amount of argument will change my opinion on this, it's just how I was raised..
Afterall, its just a term that we all can choose to define as we wish..



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


IMHO,marriage is a joining of a man and a woman with the sole intent of starting a family..Something a gay couple can not do alone..

I know I'll get flamed (as usual) but I am NOT against Gays or them being together..

Just let them use a different term for their partnership..


That's like saying I'm not allowed to legally marry my common law partner, because I already had my son, and have taken measures to not get pregnant ever again. Plus I am getting older now, so no more babies.

So I can't marry my common law husband, only because a family is not being started.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


Unfortunately, it's also a legal term that carries with it certain privileges that are recognized at a federal level.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by eNumbra
The legal union (recognized by government) between two adults of either sex should not be banned; and should be recognized with all the same benefits befitting a heterosexual "marriage".

From there, if they want to call it marriage let them call it marriage; but these unions may never be recognized by religious institutions and you can't force those institutions to recognize them or preform them.

You do realize that religious institutions are not the only institutions that can preform a marriage, correct?

Haven't you ever heard of a CIVIL MARRIAGE?

Gay marriage should be legal. I hope to God we see every state in our lifetime allow gay marriage to be legal.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Well, my mother is a lesbian so how I think about this issue is quite obvious. Yes, they should be allowed to marry!

Seriously, they have the right to feel just as happy (or misserable) as the entire population! My mother did get married and I'm glad she was able to have that experience.

But nooooo. When it comes to this issue people start yelling that it's sacred, and oh yeah, they even mention the church too. Usually they think the church is garbage, it's brainwashing, it's controlling people's lives (it is). But when it comes to this, they have to name the church. It's all extremely sacred, but what happens in vegas is ok, right?



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Mak Manto
 


What is a civil marriage? Do marriages necessary have to make place in a religious temple? I do know their are chapels in Nevada.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Who gives a crap who marries who.

Seriously. Who cares?? I have never seen one legitmate reason why any of us should care who wants to marry who.

And the government needs to butt the heck out of it.

Period.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Marriage is an institution of the Church, it always has been. I am against Gay Marriage because it involves people who want to shove this down the throats of the Church and mock them in it. This need to have a "Marriage" is vindictive and based on anger.

I am Gay, I have been with my partner for 22 years, we do not want to get Married because for all intents and purposes we are already committed to each other.

What would be correct and legal would be to allow us to register as Civil Union so the State and Feds recognize us as such. I am now nearing 50-years-old, as is my partner, we met when we were in our early 20's while serving in the Military. It is such an odd thought that if one of us dies we will have to pay additional taxes on those items we absorb, such as cars, homes, and other investments. We will not have the luxury of saying, well he is my Spouse, because the law does not recognize that. Doesn't this make sense?

Furthermore, as a Spouse one or the other of us should be entitled to any Social Security if that should be required. Why? Because that is what Heterosexual couples employ and some of them do not have a Marriage and are only "Common Law", but that doesn't even pertain to same-sex couples.

Now don't get me wrong, personally I do not think Social Security will last any longer than any other Government Bureaucracy. I am an "end-times" person and I am not betting on them! LOL

Wake up Homos, Girlfriends, Sisters, and Butch Muffies alike; wake up to the foolishness of a bunch of bitter Queens wanting to play Religious Police because they are not acceptable in the eyes of the Church!



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 


Yes, thats really the crux of the problem, not the term "marriage"

The law SHOULD recognise the partnership of two people regardless of their sex..

Many pollies are too scared of the backlash from the church..
Thats the issue, not the name on the certificate, IMHO...



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


I wished they said that during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Even though marriage wasn't evolved in the issue. Gay's and Lesbians are alright people. Marriage is marriage. I think what is different is that in America adult themes have already been too much that having same sex themes is not about love but more about adult nature.





 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join