Gay Marriage

[nadarama]

I don'
 agree with it!

[liz562]

I see nothing wrong with it as long as the couple is happy, thats all that matters.

[sigmapi1501]

I don'
 agree with it!

Maybe because you aren't gay. But what about for other gay people?

[narv]

Being gay myself, I'm completely for it, and would be even if I were heterosexual. Virtually everyone in opposition cites religion, which has no place in the law. The argument shouldn't have to go any further, but it does, and there are plenty of points to be made past that. If anyone is strictly against it and wants to delve into discussion, I'm bored.

Well, I'm against it because God says homosexuality is an abomination, and if God says something, then it is true (cf thread: http://www.fusioncash.net/forum.php?topic=44591.0).

Gotta leave because this place is closing, but just wanted to put my hand up real quick.

[falcon9]

Well, I'm against it because God says ... and if God says something, then it is true

No, the religious opinion contains at least two unsupported/invalid assumptions.  One; that the source, ('biblical', by default), contains messages from a hypothetical supernatural egregore.  There's no evidence to support such an assumption, (other than the logical-invalid circular 'hearsay' of the 'bible says that the bible is the word of g-d'). Secondly, the conclusion doesn't even follow logically from the irrational premise; that being an assumption of 'truth' from the hypothetical supernatural egregore is not supported by evidence substantiating the claim.
 

(cf thread: http://www.fusioncash.net/forum.php?topic=44591.0).

I've replied to that thread, (since you called me out by 'nym there), but others may interject before you can get back on a public wi-fi connection.

Gotta leave because this place is closing, but just wanted to put my hand up real quick.

[anthonym1000]

not in my church but in your church go for it. diffrent strokes for diffrent folks. long as no ones getting their heads chopped off 

[falcon9]

not in my church but in your church go for it. diffrent strokes for diffrent folks. long as no ones getting their heads chopped off 

Are you referring to historical xtian practices against non-xtians and alleged xtians who the "church" didn't care for?

[tinajacksonville]

I believe that Marriage is something two people share whether they are gay or straight. It is their business and no one else should judge them.

[ajami]

No one has the right to judge anyone for their choices.  Who is to say your church, my church, bible are right or wrong.  Let people live their lives the way they want.  We all will be judged some day when our day comes.  Until than do not make choices for anyone, do not judge them either.  Think this way, if having relationship or feeling the way you do is not right than why were we created to feel that way.  Who wrote the bible, it was men, not god, unless you can show me different.

[noonja]

I think when people oppose gay marriage, it is because they believe is it disturbing or because of religion.

Personally, two people of the same sex getting married has no affect on my life what-so-ever so I don't see a reason why anybody should get in between the two people in love.

Does it say anywhere in the Bible that those who are believers should change the minds of those who aren't?
Love and politics are two completely different subjects. Since marriage belongs in the religion field, why don't we create a marriage that's nonreligious? You know how there has to be a licensed priest at the ceremony? Why don't we have a marriage that doesn't require one for the nonreligious people? In the United States, aren't we free to believe and to not believe? We don't HAVE to get married at a church right?

[falcon9]

Does it say anywhere in the Bible that those who are believers should change the minds of those who aren't?

They may be several vague references to running around proselytizing and bible-thumping in the self-promoting/self-referential bible.  Ask an evangelizing fundie.

Since marriage belongs in the religion field, why don't we create a marriage that's nonreligious?

Your assumption is false, as history, (especially before the judeo-xtian religions), clearly shows.
 

You know how there has to be a licensed priest at the ceremony? Why don't we have a marriage that doesn't require one for the nonreligious people?

Again, your assumptions are false.  There are already civil unions which do not require a "priest" just as there are nonsectarian non-priesthood licensed to perform legal marriages, (for instance, wiccan, setian and satanic priesthoods are legally authorized to perform binding marriage ceremonies).

In the United States, aren't we free to believe and to not believe? We don't HAVE to get married at a church right?

Correct; and no one has to be married in a church to be legally married.

[noonja]

Thanks for the information. I grew up believing that marriage is a religious ceremony and that I needed to get married in a church with some priest binding the marriage or some sort.

Since that's not the case, there's no reason for religious people to oppose something that does not even concern with their life.. unless they believe God will bring h*** to Earth as punishment. That matter may never be resolved.

[vp44]

I guess from whats being said here that with Romneys RNC platform that most of you wont be voting for him cause he is against same sex marriage. 

[handllucas]

I do not believe it is right, but if they want to do it, let them do it.
It does not affect me and I have no right to interfere in that part of people's relationships.

[monkmano]

Hi,

I am not in opposition at all I think people should be free to marry a man or a woman. It is and has been legal in canada since 2005, and it's really a non-issue here not saying there arent prejudiced people but no debates over marriage, or the "definition" of marriage