Gay Marriage

[chrissy444]

This is just an example of how the state and federal government are not separate from the catholic church.  It's disturbing how big the catholic church and federal government are, and they are slowly taking away citizens freedom.  They are corporations!  Not to mention religion and government should not be combined!  The government needs to be smaller, and let smaller private operated business take over were they have stuck their fingers in. And I believe the reason gay marriage is still illegal is that larger corporate business...like the federal government, don't want to have to pay more for their employees...i.e. when you get married your spouse is on your insurance, life insurance, 401k's, pensions, even social security.  We are turning into corporate america, and it's sad.  America is suppose to be about everyone having their own beliefs, independence, and freedom.  Everyone should have this freedom as long as they are not physical hurting another person. 

[ancmetro]

I am straight. I would not consider any other lifestyle. Do not forget honor your father and your mother...That is what marriage is all about...starting a family...a man and a woman.

[gm4cam]

I feel that you fall in love with a person not a gender and if that person happens to be of the same gender then so be it...that is just my thoughts about it....

[liljp617]

I am straight. I would not consider any other lifestyle. Do not forget honor your father and your mother...That is what marriage is all about...starting a family...a man and a woman.

Marriage is about honoring yourself, your feelings, and your partner.  Your father and mother can accept it or whine about it; it's not their life.

[ahunter300]

civil union is not marriage - marriage is a contract for children - what ever people do is their business - but what people do to children is the community's concern.

[th4moi]

I don't believe in gay marriage...most religions are against it...i honestly don't see how someone can fall in love with the same sex..you must have to FORCE yourself. Most ppl probably turn to their own sex b/c they get tired of being shot down by the opposite sex..thats the truth. sorry if anyone got offended ...just wanna say my opinion like everyone else on here.

[liljp617]

civil union is not marriage - marriage is a contract for children - what ever people do is their business - but what people do to children is the community's concern.

Marriage is a legal union provided by the state between two consenting adults.  The legal view of marriage has nothing to do with children.  It is a contract between two adults, not a contract for children.

Homosexuality and gay marriage don't have anything to do with children.  Homosexuals being legally allowed to marry and homosexuals being legally allowed to adopt children are two completely different debates.

I don't believe in gay marriage...most religions are against it...i honestly don't see how someone can fall in love with the same sex..you must have to FORCE yourself. Most ppl probably turn to their own sex b/c they get tired of being shot down by the opposite sex..thats the truth. sorry if anyone got offended ...just wanna say my opinion like everyone else on here.

Religions are against a lot of things.  Usually when they're against something, they're on the illogical, irrational, ignorant side.  Let's be blunt:  What religious organizations/individuals say doesn't mean a damn thing more than what any other organization/individual says.

There's no forcing yourself to love someone.  Go actually make contact with some homosexuals (from what I'm seeing here, you haven't before).  Ask them some questions, namely one of the silly assumption you just made.  Ask them how much they "force" themselves to love someone.  Love can't be forced.  If it is forced, it's not love.

Homosexuality is possibly genetic and is most certainly determined by one's environment.  As a male, you don't get fatigue from chasing women and then wake up one day and decide "hey, I'll be attracted to other guys!"  Sexuality does not work that way, it's clearly much more deep seated than that and is determined at a somewhat young age.  Perhaps you should do some research into the subject before giving us "the truth."

It's intellectually dishonest to say this is your opinion, then state things and follow them up with "that's the truth."  No, it's not the truth.  It is not founded on any facts what so ever, not a single study has been done on the idea that people get tired of the opposite sex and randomly switch sexuality like it's some point decision in life.  Think.  For the sake of mankind.

[Stealth3si]

the real issues are two different  things.....

first.... should two people, who want to be in a monogomous relationship, commiting the rest of their lives to each other, be allowed to have the same rights no matter what their sexual orientation.... the answer is yes

second... should the "label" be the same.... this is the one most people struggle with...

marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman to procreate....

the religious types believe it was sanctioned by God to be that way....

an alternative label was suggested (civil union) to allow the same rights that  "married couples" get... the old "separate but equal argument"

and this idea wasn't well recieved....


my suggestion is simple.... NO STATE SANCTIONED "MARRIAGES".... make all of the state recognized unions.... "civil unions"..... make that the requirement for all the benefits, that should come with the choice to spend the rest of your life with someone...

then people who want to express themselves in a religious "marriage ceremony" could still call themselves "married" as an expession of their belief system and not as a requirement for benefits...

Correct.  This would be one of the more simple, realistic solutions.

Although I disagree slightly on the definition of marriage.  The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the ages and it has a lot more to it than just a man/woman union.

Also, the civil unions weren't equal.  Not just because of the "separate but equal is inherently unequal" stuff, but because they simply didn't provide equal benefits to those under civil union.

Well, my opinion... I don't really care if someone is gay or not. I personally am NOT for it, meaning it's not my slice of pie. My son's godfather is gay. However, I don't understand why gays need a marriage instead of a civil union. Practically the same thing to the state. Marriage is strictly between man and a woman. Anyone reading this can hate me all they want, but this is still my opinion. On the flip side... some people just can't help loving someone who is the same gender. So, my opinion is obviously flawed.

Because giving someone what you deem equal treatment, but telling them they're to be separated from the rest of society and kept a minority is not equal treatment.  Separate but equal is inherently unequal (I hate repeating this so much, but it sums up the point well).

The optimal idea would be to get rid of marriage as a state institution all together and have nothing but civil unions for all couples.

Nor do I agree that not wanting marriage, (a religious rite) conveyed on homosexuals is wrong.

But unfortunately the "secular institution of marriage as a religious rite" is an area of comingling of church and state. In its current state... partially.

I would divide the two if I could, into domestic partnerships and marriages, with marriage being a purely religious rite with no legal significance, and domestic partnerships being the licensing aspect of the legal ceremony. The difference being a clearer line of separation between church and state, where separation of church and state here would be a good thing. The church (and other religions) have non-legal significance in marriage, so separating the two would be ideal. Marriage would then be solely a religious rite. Its a fairly simple solution.

[Stealth3si]

then they say that they were made that way, please,

Sexual attraction to the same sex isn't a choice. It is a natural tendency they are born with like any other natural urge.

Whether they act on those urges is a different matter.

[Stealth3si]

God did create 1 man and 1 woman and told them to go out and multiply!

I come from a extremely strong Christian familing and I am a Christian.  I do not believe in gay marriage.  This (oo) and this (--) just don't fit.  It doesn't work that way....I do not believe that they should be able to marry.  Marriage comes from the bible and it is stated that it is to be between a man and a woman.

It looks like you're saying homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't procreate. That is your standard. Following that same standard, sterile people (who can't procreate) shouldn't be allowed to marry. Women who have gone through menopause (or had a historectomy) shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't procreate.

The way I see it, women and men are differnet for a reason.  They fullfill the differences that women and men have and complete the circle to carry on life.

.... Unless the female has gone through menopause. So if a couple in their mid-60's get's married, is this sinful?

Can a couple of a man or woman who cannot have children marry? Or old couples where the woman has gone thru menopause?

Homosexuality ends that. It doesn't work....

Their ability to create life is not the central point to the morality of it. Otherwise, gay men who can create human life by synthesizing their DNA into a unique human being in a vat or a chamber or what have you (as may be done in the future) would make homosexuality perfectly acceptable. My intuition is that it would still be impermissible and immoral.

I think the procreation issue alone is a weak and unconvincing argument, frankly. Unless you want to argue that infertile couples can not marry.

[Stealth3si]

I am open to a lot of things in this world, because I feel if it is not harmful to me or if it does not affect me personally, I have nothing negative or positive to say about it.  If a gay couple wants to get married, by all means, let them try marriage.  I honestly think by just allowing gay marriage, we can improve the economy - really, just think about the expense some gay couples would go through if they could get married legally anywhere.

Excellent point you made here! The population definitely decreases and...

This wouldn't be a valid argument for gay marriage if gay men who can make babies would increase the population.

...children in orphanages would get a home as well, which benefits the economy in many ways.

You could have a case if much statistical data has been shown decisively that it's good for society in practice, in the same or different way as traditional marriage.

[Stealth3si]

I believe gay people have the right to be in love if they so choose. But Marriage is a religous thing and I dont know any religion that teaches or preaches in gay marriages. So maybe there needs to be gay "union" laws or something but marriage...I dont agree

And what about liars, thieves, cheaters, prostitutes and drunkards? The bible talks about these people in the same breath as homosexuality.

Should they be excluded from marriage too?

[Stealth3si]

Please do some reading on the history of marriage as well before stating factually that marriage has any origin at all in the Bible.

Scripture clearly teaches marriage.

i honestly believe that God made man for a woman and a woman for a man. there should not be anything other than that. now without a biblical perspective, you cant say much either, because all you can say is that is changes the definition of marrige as we have thought about it for thousands of years...i dont think it is right.

The definition of marriage has changed even in the last few decades.

In American or Christian terms?

The subject of this country's foundation is not one of opinion.

And so is this: the people who founded this country upon virtuous principles were not bible-believing Christians at all but were deists who believed in the Enlightenment ideals and values of life, liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness (or property.)

[Stealth3si]

Also small g in God refers to a false god, G should be always capitalized.

Firefly, I didn't end up with a red face after reading your post. However, it should be noted that certain faiths/religions require that god be lowercased or even written as G-d. Typing it out in full with capitalization makes whatever you've written it on to be sacred. As a sign of respect to those people, that is why you'll see me write it as such.

If some of you would read your Bible more you would know that this sort of relationship is an abomination against God.

For the record, my readings of Sodom and Gomorrah are that the city was burned down because of rape, gluttony, and inhospitality.

This doesn't change biblical exegesis on the abomination of homosexuality.

"Genesis 18:20-21, NIV"

Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

People consenting to homosexual "relations" would not cry out to the lord against their partner. Somebody who has been raped (as the townsmen were attempting to do with the angels in Lot's home) would cry to the lord.

"Luke 10:10-12, NIV"

But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 'Even the dust of your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near.' I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.

Which, this reads to me that if a town is not hospitable towards you, they will suffer worse than Sodom.

I would disagree that the main nature of the sin they committed was simply in-hospitality. The main sin is general disobedience as in full rebellion being judged, not just one certain sin (i.e. rape and gluttony.)

This means that in the New Testament, when the apostles brought news that the town's overall rebellion (like Sodom's overall) would be forgiven, and if they rejected it --- then that would be judged much more harsher than the rebellion by itself.

[acurtsinger2]

I have worked with a lot of gay and lesbians throughout the years.  A couple of them I could actually claim as a friend.   They were wonderful , good people who just wanted to be happy and enjoy respect like the rest of us.  Gay Marriage is a choice, the same as abortion, smoking, and drinking.