It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

What are your views on Gay marriage?

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
My view is it doesn't bother me in the least if two gay people marry. I say go for it. In fact, I have to wonder why anyone would be so bothered by two people who are in love and happy.

Also, besides it being normal to marry the person you love, during that marriage you both work together to build your life and save for retirement, and you want to make sure your spouse is taken care of in the event of your death. Why should it be any different for same sex couples?




posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
I think that there is too much confusion as to what exactly do gays/lesbians/transsexuals want?

Do they want religious centers to be forced by the law to perform gay/lesbian/transsexual marriage ceremonies inside the religious centers?

OR

Do they want to be allowed to have a civil union performed by a judge at town hall and to receive the same tax and health benefits as straight partners married by a religious leader?

There is a big difference.

I do not think that any religious center should be forced to compromise on it's religious beliefs. If a certain branch or denomination of a given religion wants to say, only have male religious leaders, or say separate the religious institution into a male/female congregation/worship area than that is their right.

You cannot FORCE religious institutions to accept something that they do not believe in.

At the same time I believe that a civil union should be completely equal to a marriage in regards to tax benefits and work related partner compensations.

My personal belief is that there is no harm in gay/lesbian/transsexual civil unions. Two consenting adults who love each other is something we could do with a hell of a lot more of in this world. But do not expect to get recognition from religious institutions that consider what you do to go against their teachings.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by idonotcollectstamps
I think that there is too much confusion as to what exactly do gays/lesbians/transsexuals want?

Do they want religious centers to be forced by the law to perform gay/lesbian/transsexual marriage ceremonies inside the religious centers?

OR

Do they want to be allowed to have a civil union performed by a judge at town hall and to receive the same tax and health benefits as straight partners married by a religious leader?

There is a big difference.

I do not think that any religious center should be forced to compromise on it's religious beliefs. If a certain branch or denomination of a given religion wants to say, only have male religious leaders, or say separate the religious institution into a male/female congregation/worship area than that is their right.

You cannot FORCE religious institutions to accept something that they do not believe in.

At the same time I believe that a civil union should be completely equal to a marriage in regards to tax benefits and work related partner compensations.

My personal belief is that there is no harm in gay/lesbian/transsexual civil unions. Two consenting adults who love each other is something we could do with a hell of a lot more of in this world. But do not expect to get recognition from religious institutions that consider what you do to go against their teachings.

I don't see any problem with civil marriages. If a religion wants to allow a gay marriage to occur, they can, but civil marriages should be able to happen.

Religion doesn't control marriage.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
As long as churches and private institutions are not forced to hold the ceremonies (it's an infringement of their rights of free enterprise) then I'm for marriage of any two or more consenting adults.

14th amendment guarantees such rights, polygamists and gays aren't receiving said rights, thus they should get them.

It's not a moral thing, it's a legal thing.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by WolfofWar
 


Funny how not all things that are Legal are Moral; and not all things that are Moral are Legal. Kinda makes you think, doesn't it...



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Well according to the bible the moral thing to do with a child is have the town discipline them, permanently, by stoning him to death.

It's better that not all "moral" things are legal.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
As long as churches and private institutions are not forced to hold the ceremonies (it's an infringement of their rights of free enterprise) then I'm for marriage of any two or more consenting adults.

14th amendment guarantees such rights, polygamists and gays aren't receiving said rights, thus they should get them.

It's not a moral thing, it's a legal thing.



Churches/Religions are the ones who try to use that argument.

There are plenty of churches who will willingly marry gays. There are many who've been doing "Joining Ceremonies" for years.

There are even Priests who've been excommunicated for "marrying" gays - - who do full mass weddings.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel
 


For me, the issue is tax equality. If two people live together and comingle funds they should have the same tax benefit. Otherwise, I really don't care. Laws do not affect love, romance or life together. I really don't care if people approve of my 11 year relationship or not. We currently have a Registered Domestic Partnership in California mostly for insurance purposes.

Overall I support marriage for two people, mostly because other gays and lesbians want to marry. A minority must stick together for mutual benefit. If they feel they need this, then I want it for them. Whether I ever take advantage of the situation and choose to marry my lady, I want marriage for those who want it.

This is my position only. I hope it is readable and understandable.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman, anything else is an abomination in the eyes of the Lords. I say let them get married, and let them pay the price for it later because I can prmoise you they will.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman, anything else is an abomination in the eyes of the Lords. I say let them get married, and let them pay the price for it later because I can prmoise you they will.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by clever024
marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman, anything else is an abomination in the eyes of the Lords. I say let them get married, and let them pay the price for it later because I can prmoise(sic) you they will.


I'm sure any gay man or woman is willing to take the risk to fight against your invisible boogey-man. Good to see you have their support.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
I too am opposed to Gay "Marriage". Marriage is between a man and a woman and was ordained by God. Children born into the covenant of marriage are a blessing, not necessarily a requirement.

I really don't understand why a civil union is not satisfactory at all. It gives all the legal rights.

What I am vehemently opposed to is changing the God given definition of marriage! In this day of political correctness run amok, I worry that this movement may attempt to force religions to accept and even perform gay marriages.

Marriage is the cornerstone of society and it should not, does not and need not be changed for a small minority of people. If they have the right to civil unions that should be sufficient.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhead57
I too am opposed to Gay "Marriage". Marriage is between a man and a woman and was ordained by God. Children born into the covenant of marriage are a blessing, not necessarily a requirement.



Well just great - - you live by your god and leave everyone else alone.

This is not about belief - - it is about Full Equal Rights for all.

I do not want your god any where near me or my family.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 03:38 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.


This exact argument could be applied to straight people, why do they need to get married to love one another, and yet they still do it. I've never understood why, marriage to me seems outdated and nothing more than a financial contract.

Actually that's a good reason gays want to get married, the various financial benefits, tax breaks along with the legal side of when a partner dies they get the same rights as a straight couple would without having to jump through hoops. Oh and i agree on polygamy but as it's difficult to get gay marriag recognised i can't imagine trying to get polygamy legalised for all people. Not that i'd want to marry multiple individuals but if someone else wants to then i say let them.

Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone and to stop them from doing it suggests we as a society are being ruled by religion and i thought that isn't supposed to happen anymore.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I don't have the time to read every post so if what i say is covered then im sorry for wasting time and space.

I do not agree with homosexuality i do not think a man and man or woman and woman should be married or in a relationship.

But thats my opinion and with that said let me say this.

I feel gay people have the right to be married just as i have the right to be married to a Pakistani woman as a white man or just like a black woman can marry a white man.

They are gay, so what? We have no right to judge them or anyone, and is it not a violation of the US Constitution to not allow them to marry?

Other then religion (witch has nothing to do with state/fed. law) why can they not marry?

How is this not discrimination? Is it a moral thing? Who/what is the moral console? Who makes up what is or is not moral?

So if its not religion or a moral issue and not discrimination then why can they not get married?


Again i do not agree with it but i cant judge them or take away there rights just because " I " do not agree.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   
I would have to agree with an above poster. As long as churches are not forced into marrying gays then let gays do what they want. If my church started marrying gays I would leave the church I belong too. I know that universialist churches would have no problem with it.

I think the problem comes in when gays want to move in on traditional forms of Christianity and try to get them to conform with there lifestyle instead of gays conforming to the church.

Why would gays want o be apart of traditional Christianity anyway?
Or traditional Islam for that matter. People bash Christianity on this subject but I know full and well Islam would not have gays in there membership, and in there countries they would put you to death.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   
It's a non-issue to me. This gif explains my stance:




posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
I'm not sure any marriage could be considered "gay." I've been married and it was anything but gay. True, there were, and I'm sure there always are some joyful moments, but in general not the happy, carefree situation implied by the word "gay." My divorce, however, that was a truly gay day for all concerned!



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhead57
I too am opposed to Gay "Marriage". Marriage is between a man and a woman and was ordained by God. Children born into the covenant of marriage are a blessing, not necessarily a requirement.

I really don't understand why a civil union is not satisfactory at all. It gives all the legal rights.

What I am vehemently opposed to is changing the God given definition of marriage! In this day of political correctness run amok, I worry that this movement may attempt to force religions to accept and even perform gay marriages.

Marriage is the cornerstone of society and it should not, does not and need not be changed for a small minority of people. If they have the right to civil unions that should be sufficient.


"god given definition of marriage" wow!...so a mythical being, 2000 years ago...gave a definition of marriage???? ....and to question this is "political correctness"?? ...mind if i ask you, what is going to happen when gay people marry? how does this affect you?...i mean, if they stay single, they are still gay.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
I am strictly hetero and I work with a lot of gay people. A few of them are committed to getting married and having a family. I think that is fantastic!!!

They are really cool people to work and associate with socially, in fact I am good friends with several of them, they are cetainly no threat to anyone. Hence, I have NO problem with gay marriage.

What I DO have a problem with is the narrow minded, archaic and stilted
views of religious zealots and other ignorant people who would condemn gays. Yes we have all heard about Adam and Eve, well sad to break it some of you but Adam and Steve are alive and well in YOUR town.

Honestly, do idiots really think that gay people woke up one day and said "I think I'll turn gay and let arrogant uneducated people victimise me" ? Gay people do not "turn" gay, they are born gay, through no fault of their own.

I think of them as just another gender, one of mother (or father) nature's
creations and they have just as much right to happiness with a lifetime partner as you and I.

I do not have any gay people in my family but if I did and they found someone to love as a lifelong partner I would be proud as punch and I would embrace their choice. It is not our choice...it is theirs.

As for children as part of a gay marriage, well I have seen some pretty disgusting hetero parents in my time...need I say more ?

When two people love each other deeply and can make that unselfish committment to put the other person first, then the children of that have a strong basis for a loving home and fine parents to care for them. Who says the parents have to be male and female??








[edit on 29-8-2010 by resistancia]

[edit on 29-8-2010 by resistancia]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join