Gay Marriage

[julius11]

I put yes.  But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all.  I feel that we can't ignore what exist.  And being gay is real.  My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families.  The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance.  So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.

[ooblink182oo]

No, i find gay marriage very displeasing.

[skyosora]

Let them be married. They deserve the same benefits as straight couples.

[danalynn919]

The only problem I have with gay marriage is the use of the term "marriage."  I was brought up in a religious home where a marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman, so said God.  I fully support "civil unions" for gay couples, so that they can have the same rights and benefits as married couples as far as the law and insurance companies are concerned.  I believe that it is descriminatory to deny gay persons insurance benefits or anything else based on their sexual preference. 

[liljp617]

The only problem I have with gay marriage is the use of the term "marriage."  I was brought up in a religious home where a marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman, so said God.  I fully support "civil unions" for gay couples, so that they can have the same rights and benefits as married couples as far as the law and insurance companies are concerned.  I believe that it is descriminatory to deny gay persons insurance benefits or anything else based on their sexual preference.  

That's good and all, except marriage is a legal union in this country by rule of the government.  If you want to get married in the eyes of God in your church, be my guest.  That doesn't mean other people want to...and nor do they have to considering you can get married by a court official without any religious involvement.

What about people who don't believe in your God (there are many other religions in this country as well as non-religious people)?  Should they not be able to get married?  Should they also be under a different category such as a civil union?  Why?  Marriage has been around much longer than Christianity (2000+ years or so longer), why does Christianity get a monopoly on the word marriage?  Just because?

In regards to them having civil unions, it seems like you want them to be treated equal, yet you support an idea that blatantly treats them differently.  It is inherently discrimination.  We, once again, go back to the "separate but equal is inherently unequal."

[vlsm23]

To me marriage is just a legal ceremony of two people.  When I got married, we had an online ordained minister conduct our ceremony.  There was deliberately no mention of god in our ceremony because I am agnostic and my husband is atheist.  We were married outside with no church involved whatsoever.  If I didnt want the experience of a big wedding and enjoying the day with my family and friends, I would have just gone to the courthouse.  Nobody gave us crap because we are the "traditional" couple.  If religion did not get in our way, why does it have to keep gay marriage from occurring. 

[meegaan]

Yes!
It's just the plain and simple with me!

[Stealth3si]

I didn't say they were.

I know.

I just want to be sure we're in agreement.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time because I'm not interested in which has a better track record.

My point is simply that, unless we live in the Utopia, I don't see a wonderful track record from either.

Though, I would be very interested if you could give us concrete elaborate historical examples of how the state has had a more logical, rational, and typically understandable stance on and approach toward most moral issues from the past and how the church don't have that wonderful of a track record at all in determining or carrying out what is or is not moral.

I don't see the purpose in bringing up a counterpoint...

I don't agree it's a 'counterpoint.'

Would it be fair for me to say "I don't care if you would like an example of how the state has more rational approaches to moral issues?"  No, it wouldn't.

The question I believe you should be asking rather is 'do we have to seek approval from each other?'

Governments over the ages do not have flawless records

Don't they ever.

I want to be sure we're talking about both gay and straight people.

Who do you think I meant when I said "the power of the people?"

The voting citizens of this country.

In this case, we need to look over your previous post:

The "power of the people" has little to no place in determining civil rights.  The "people" are overwhelmingly ignorant, prejudice, egotistical, gullible, stuck on ridiculous old ideas, and so on. I guess the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1850s/1860s (and prior).  Maybe then we wouldn't have to deal equally with those pesky, vastly inferior people from Africa (not stating this as fact, stating as sarcasm to prove the point).  Maybe the "power of the people" should have been more listened to in the 1920s so women would just keep quiet and do their cooking and cleaning (again, sarcasm).

I fail to see how the power of the people diminishes anyway.  Again, no church can be forced to marry any couple...they can turn down any couple they wish right now, why would it change?  The government cannot and shouldn't determine who the church gives the traditional ceremonial marriage.  The fact remains, however, that it is plainly immoral and illegal for the state to discriminate against a minority and deny them a civil marriage.  It is also immoral (and hypocritical) for the church to do so, but again, their level of hypocrisy on the vast majority of issues is overwhelming, so I don't expect much different and they can do their own thing.

If we're talking about both gay and straight people as the voting citizens of this country, then who from them were you referring to in your "power of the people" commentary?

[piratelord]

i believe everyone is entitled to the life they want for themselves. just because a person is attracted to the same sex, doesn't mean they should be treated as an outcast and told they can never have the same things a "normal" person can. who am i to tell someone else that they're love for another person isn't "natural", therefore they aren't allowed to express it? i think the entire argument is completely archaic and outdated. there are so many bigger issues in this world.

Exactly!

And may I add, if they want to be tied down and miserable like the rest of us, that's their choice! lol

Just kidding. But seriously, it's not like straight people take marriage seriously. Look at how high the divorce rate, infidelity, etc., is. I think the people that are against it are just scared that gay people will make them look bad by taking it more seriously than they do (which they seem to do in a lot of things...).

[piegirl]

I believe that gays should be treated equally.  I am not gay but my brother is.  America is supposed to be the place where people have freedom to practice the religion that they choose.  Freedom of speech so on and so on.  Therfore it only seems fair that in America people who are gay should be allowed the same rights as those that are not.

[sailfish123]

I believe that gays should be treated equally.  I am not gay but my brother is.  America is supposed to be the place where people have freedom to practice the religion that they choose.  Freedom of speech so on and so on.  Therfore it only seems fair that in America people who are gay should be allowed the same rights as those that are not.

believe everyone should make there own decision

[unojuno]

My brother-in-law is gay, and he is the nicest person I know!  I personally believe that there's something fundamentally missing in a person who is attracted to the same sex--but I'm no psycho-analyst.  If that's the way they wish to live their lives, then so be it!  It's not up to me (a higher authority, maybe), to judge how a person lives his or her life.

[soccerplaya727]

I put yes.  But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all.  I feel that we can't ignore what exist.  And being gay is real.  My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families.  The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance.  So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.

how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say

[liljp617]

I put yes.  But to put it out there first, I am not gay- at all.  I feel that we can't ignore what exist.  And being gay is real.  My best friend is gay. And he is really really gay. No way in heck is a law going to scare him straight. Having said that, we need to think about all the gay people out there who are starting families.  The kids need health insurance, the parents need life insurance.  So we need to except the marriage so they get the most needed benefits that straight people have.

how can gay people have kids....think about it
u probably mean adopting kids right? and btw, i put no. i can't explain it. some gay ppl are alrite, but others are just...wow...thats all im going to say

Being gay doesn't mean your reproductive organs don't work.  Gay people throughout history have reproduced.  Obviously you're referring to an actual gay couple reproducing with each other...but clearly in today's age that isn't necessary to have kids.  There are more ways to have kids besides "traditional" reproduction and/or adoption.

As for the rest of the post, I don't understand what it has to do with your opinion of gay marriage.  Some gay people are quote, "wow," so they shouldn't be able to get married?  I don't follow the thought process.  A number heterosexuals are "wow," but surely you don't support banning heterosexual marriages...

Doesn't make sense.

[gena33612]

As long as the Bible has a stranglehold on people's minds, there will never be an understanding reached about anything in this country. 

"God says no, so I say no."  Way to think for yourselves.  Way to cast a stone on a gigantic portion of the HUMAN RACE because your book tells you to.  Way to maintain the Golden Rule.  Way to be a narrow-minded, judgemental, hateful jerk.

People are...
...black & white & brown & yellow & red.
...tall & short & fat & skinny.
...rich & poor & democrats & republicans.
...gay & straight & bisexual.

We are also scared, confused, hopeful, trying to keep a job, hoping to buy a house, wishing for a new car, worried about that 15 extra pounds, wondering where we left our glasses when we took them off.  And on and on and on...

What makes someone different?  Why does that make them bad, or less than you?  Where do you draw the line?  How far is "too much"?

We are HUMANS.  All of us.  And all of us are the same.  Thus, we all are entitiled to EVERYTHING that the rest of of the world is.