|
Well, that's why we have debates, isn't it? It's every man, woman, or koala for themselves.
|
@silent.assassin: Not always. Christians are not all 'for themselves' and they fight for the same cause.
|
I...I...I'm sorry but your entire first post just made me cry.
To start off with, the only people you will get to side with you are religious freaks talking about how "God created this for this reason". I'm Christian (for lack of a better word), dont get me wrong, but this is just going too far. If you want to be taken seriously in any debate you should stay as far from religion as you can. It will honestly only hurt you in the long run. Also, research is a good thing. Children of homosexual parents are no more inclined to become gay as children of homosexually tolerant parents. Hell I have gay/bi friends that said they only started out turning that way because there parents said it was bad. Its a rebel thing. The only thing a child adopted by a homosexual pair will have is a loving family they may not have otherwise gotten. I've seen that homosexual couples are more likely to adopt "problem children" aka, crack babies, children with emotional problems, ect then straight couples are. Yes, it comes from a sense of needing to prove themselves but it still works out for the child in the long run. There will ALWAYS be straight people to continue the species. One of my best friend is bi and guess what, shes pregnant right now. She also plans on having at least one more child. Refusing a couple there happiness based on sex is not right. Its just not fair. If a man and a woman who hate eachother and are only getting married for a monetary reason are aloud to marry, why cant 2 men or 2 women who genuinely love one another marry? |
Re: Debate: Gay Marriage
Define "marriage"... If you mean in the states, by a preacher, then probably they say between a man and woman...however...marriage ceremonies DO occur outside the US you know? And in many societies marriage is simply a ceremony which celebrates a union between two people who care about one another and are committed to one another.
Gay people do not necessarily raise gay children. Like others noted before, the children are more tolerant. Not more likely to BE gay themselves. And even if they were, what would be so very wrong with that? Do you know how many homeless kids need adoption? Gay people adopting children might actually be a good thing, since then the children would have homes vs. being somewhat shoved together in an orphanage like some cattle. -.o' Trust me...underpopulation is not a problem that Humanity will be facing anytime soon. Have you seen the 5 billion + people walking around earth today? XD Or at least, a few of em? Do you notice the pollution and the mess we've made of the oceans? Yeah...we don't need more people, honestly. We just need the current people to be more responsible and loving and caring. Less hating, less bickering about stupid stuff, and more cooperating to try to work for a common good. Religion has no place in any debate except a strictly religious one. If you forget that rule, you have a really strong chance of losing that argument. I don't see how "allowing marriage is a death wish"...there will always be straight people and there will always be gay people and there will always be bisexuals too. Even if they're in hiding. The question is not "do we allow gays"--they are in existence. Period. The question is, "How much longer are we gonna be stupid and harass people for something that doesn't matter, just because we can, cause it makes us feel good?" -_-' Instead of allowing people to be themselves and be happy and productive and helpful, we're harassing them, killing em sometimes, and that really doesn't help the situation. |
The Catholic view on gay marraiges never ceases to annoy me. "Adam" and "Eve" were created back when the bible was written to promote heterosexual couples. Why? Because way back whenever, children did not have as much chance of living past the age of 5 and there were not as many people on the earth. Hetero marraige was *needed* for children.
There *were* gay people then, they just did not advertise the fact because it could lead to their deaths, and shockingly does to this day. Why? Because people now are thinking with closed minds. Being gay is not bad, not something to be feared and certainly isn't going to stop. What's the difference with a gay marraige? They're the same sex, and you say different words. Thats it. So what gives a government the right to think they can stop gay marraiges? It's ridiculous. Openmindedness, people! |
I don't know if I've replied to this before or not, so I will to be sure.
A human being can be a man or a woman. Regardless, they have inalienable rights. Natural rights. It is a natural law that no matter what, these rights belong to every human being, and the only justification one might have for denying anyone these rights is in the case of convicted criminals, and even that's not absolute. So, assuming crime doesn't exist, because it's an unnecessary complication, all human beings have, among others, the right to love and marry whoever they choose. If a man meets a woman, and they fall in love, why should anyone else ever stand in their way? Sometimes of course it's a bit more complicated, like a man meets three women and falls in love with each, or a woman cant choose between her suitors, or whatever, but as long as they all figure out who's in love with who peaceably, it's all good right? Well sometime a man can fall in love with a man, and a woman can fall in love with a woman. It's a fact. From a legal standpoint, there is no difference between a homosexual and a heterosexual. There is no difference between a follower of god and a sinner. And there is no difference between the unpopular (without infringing on anyones rights) and the ethical. In the eyes of the law, you can't discriminate against homosexuals, you can't show favor toward god or his designs, and you can't outlaw a practice because it's unpopular So now what grounds does anyone have for denying homosexuals the right to marry? You could say that it's up to the popular majority to decide who can do what, but does the popular majority decide if homosexuals can drink? Or if women can own property? If immigrants can marry? If interracial couples can marry? No, these rights are taken for granted. Why not gay marriage? Because it offends some? It offends some that we execute criminals. It offends some that we don't allow euthanasia. There is no sound ethical grounds for the banning of gay marriage. The only reason it happens is because those in power choose to let it, which is due I think in large part to homophobia. Now let's break this word down, shall we? Homo as in an abbreviation for homosexuality, phobia, a suffix meaning "irrational fear". An irrational fear, a fear without any rational cause, of homosexuality. Fear of being it, fear of accepting it, fear of being called it. It's idiocy and people are being denied their rights over it. Muslims are not denied their right to worship as they please because it offends the christian majority, but homosexuals are denied their right to marry because it offends the heterosexual majority. It's a contradiction and it makes me sick. |
I really am for gay marriage, sorry. I don't think the things you said in your debate about Adam and Eve can apply. Religion can't be part of it, and marriage is really just the official binding of two people that love eachother. Nothing in your debate is really legitimate, sorry. ^^;
|
I honestly think people should be able to marry whoever they want. People are always all "god doesnt want you to marry the same gender!" well thats what I dont get, because God accepts everyone for who they are. So I just get so annoyed when people use religion to back up the fact that people shouldnt have the freedom to marry who they want. I mean seriously, I dont think someone should be forced to marry a certain gender just because it's "the right thing to do" it doesnt make sense to me. People should just aceept others for who they are.(Does that make sense? lol I hope so)
|
There is one thing I wish people would realize:
There is no place for religion when it comes to passing laws, so it is wrong (and unconstitutional) to ban gay marriage... Anyway, I look at it this way: You can not help who you fall in love with. We are all people, born equally, so why can't we all marry and be happy? It would be very unlikely, if not impossible, that gays would take over the world, which is what it sounds like you were saying. It is not like you can turn gay or something. |
Quote:
Short summery: There was a law back then stating that young men were required to ware a hat at all times in public. If they were caught without a hat on, they were punished. Sometimes with a beating. Sometimes with death. Depended on who caught them. At night, older men would sit in the shadows (sometimes degenerate men, sometimes men of good standing even) and when a young man would walk by, they would steal the young mans hat. Then they would say they could only have it back if they would have sex with them. Note: "Young" is relative in this situation. Young could mean 5-25. It was typically played with boys between 16-18, tough, if I remember correctly. And men 30+. OBVIOUSLY this isn't the best story about gay men BUT it DOES prove that Homosexuality did, in fact, exist at this time. These men would do this because being Gay was a crime. ALSO, go look up Sparta. There was a saying among Spartans. "Women were for having children, men were for having sex" Spartans did not have romantic relationships with women. Dont let 300 fool you. Hell, even that movie was technically depicting Sparta's fiercest group of warriors. 150 Gay couples. The movie just skewed it so they could add the sex. So even as far back as Sparta, there were still Gay men. In the ruins of a city on an island just off the cost of Athens, murals depicting women kissing and having sex have been unearthed. Hell, where were the women of Sparta suppose to find romance? Obviously not with there men and outsiders were not aloud into the country. So if Gay people have been on this earth for this long, what makes you think there going to take over any time soon if they havn't already? |
Quote:
This came from the witch trials when the gay men of the village where gathered up and lit on fire before the burning of the witch, hence forth why we call them fags/faggots. The triangle comes from WWII. The gay men were given a pink triangle to show that they were gay, and lesbians had a black one to wear, which also those who were anti-social wore also. Both were rounded up and killed with the Nazi's. The word lesbian comes from the female greek poet "Spaho" who resided on the island of Lesbo's. Her poetry spoke of love between 2 women, and reportably the women here were some of the best in bed and preferred being with women. There is also a great amount of Greek artwork showing men having sex with men. It's from stone work too vase's to mosiac's. It was generally thought that women were only to be married for breeding, but love could only be felt through 2 men. There's more, but I'm sleepy and forgetting things. |
We had a debate at school last Friday about the same topic. We were separated in two groups, who are for and against this rule. And you know. The ones who were for won.
My point of view is that if two people love each other and tend to live together for a long time why not to get married? It would be easier for them to separate their belongings in the end. Plus only a married couple may adopt kids ( I think that it's totally normal for homosexual couple to have them, if they want to. at least it would be better for kid to live in a family). |
Gay marriage is a debate that results as another reason this country is fucked up. So many people are against it, it drives me crazy. It's just as stupid as people putting others down because they are fat, or they are mentally challenged. If two people of the same sex want to get married they should! It's cruel to be against somebody because of who they choose to marry.
|
WOW It's really funny to me that people still think that other peoples lives, especially there privet lives are any of our concerns.
And on that note yes, I do believe that homosexual people have the right to marry. This is not a new thing there has been homosexual people through out time, it's just more prevalent now because there are more people now. Marriages are made for so many reasons, convenience, financial, children. Why not love, albeit between two men, or two women? |
I believe that homosexuals should have the right to be joined in marriage. They are humans as well, and deserve to be treated with the same rules as anyone else.
You don't choose to be homosexual, you are born this way. Your thread is specifically targeted towards your speech. If I were to side against - which I don't personally believe is right - I would agree with you as to the inability to make children of their own. **However, this can be easily countered by adoption, in which the child benefits from having parents instead of being orphaned, and potentially, a healthy member of society can be 'made.' Your argument would fall apart with religion. The scope of society today is leaning towards the right to practice one's own religion - your argument is for the Christian viewpoint. What of the atheists, the agnostics, the religions that openly accept and even embrace the right to love another person of the same gender? |
All I have to say is this: they're not hurting anyone, right? What is allowing gay people to get married going to do to you, or anyone else, for that matter? Also, I really don't think that God would HATE gay people. It used to be believed that the Bible condoned slavery. Do you agree with that?
|
Re: Debate: Gay Marriage
Quote:
That's not even an argument. If only a man and a woman are allowed to marry, then how CAN anyone say a man and a man or a woman and a woman? Quote:
Quote:
And being gay isn't contagious. The majority of gay couples with children have STRAIGHT children. The only difference is that these children aren't narrow-minded and prejudiced. Quote:
I'm sorry, but all of your arguments fail, both science and common sense. You don't know enough about the subject to decently debate it. If you're not against gay marriage, and you're just doing this for a class, I feel your pain. I'm a lesbian and was forced into debating against gay marriage, myself. It's better to take a gay person's stance, honestly. Look up the statistics on gay marriage in Massachusetts. HINT: Gay marriage is legal there, but how many gays actually marry? If you ARE against it, I'd like to tell you to mind your own business. You have NO RIGHT to dictate whether other people have the choice of being happy or not. Why should you care who I marry? You don't know me. I've been a faithful lover to one woman all my life. And we'll be together whether YOU say we can marry or not, and I'll still call her my wife. You have no right to tell me who to love or how. |
yep, I second that.
Gay marriage is just like any normal marriage, only it's same-sex. As long as the couple loves each other truly, what is there to be gross about? Heck one day if gay was normal and straight was ew, what then? Really, gay marriage is just unable to bear children kind of marriage. I don't see that it's bad or anything. So please don't sell me that "men are meant for women" crap, because men rape women, and heck much more. Some twisted ones molest them...and I kind of don't want to go there... :/ So really... politics and gay...I don't see how that goes along so well. |
What about homosexual Christians?
The two aren't mutually exclusive (which I guess is half the problem, outside civil partnerships, which were legalised in the UK a couple of years ago, which I've said already, but I've more thoughts to add to the mixing pot.) There are churches over here where priests are happy and prepared to wed homosexual couples, in the eyes of God, which if you're a Christian I imagine is a pretty big thing! Sure, the numbers aren't large - but some churches are catching up with the times. ~__~ It's, hopefully, more a case of waiting for the rest to get over themselves and move into the 21st century. |
Gay marriage... I see this every debate thread sites I go to. I think that it all depends on your view. I mean, if you're in the relationship yourself, obviously you would support it. If you're someone that is straight.. like VERY straight, you might just feel it offending and against the nature. If you're like me, that is you don't really care, then that isn't a problem.
I don't have an opinion of gay marriages. If they want to marry a partner with the same gender as they are, that means they are in love, no matter what. They're willing to take on the critism of society already. We shouldn't be attacking them like that at all. I'm not going to go in about soulmates and such, but sometimes, I do think that some gay/lesbian love might be more deeper and meaningful than a normal relationship. They obviously faced more hardship, they will care for each other more. Althought same gender relationship are not naturally make to be that way, but there are things they can do to get around that. They just simple can't bear children. I don't agree with the first quote that Fin Raziel have. If you're christian that might be the phrase it said. But that's just the natural way things are. And marriage should be distinguish by the love that both sides have to each other. If two men truly love each other, I don't see why they can't get marriage. |
I don't think it ought to be legalized. Marriage is between a man and a woman for the purpose of unity and/or raising a family. I don't hate gay people or anything... I just see marriage between a man and a woman, the way it was for my parents, grandparents, etc.
|
Wow, I'm shocked that you actually asserted that children of gay couples will turn out gay themselves.
I think this cannot be proven, and if you look into the lives of children raised by gay couples, you'll see that is proven false. Anyways, I'm personally against gay marriage because homosexuality goes against my religious beliefs(Islam). But, I'd say that any secular nation should feel free to legalize it. I'd go against any Muslim country that'd even dare to legalize it, but for countries like America, I'm neutral to the issue. |
I completely agree with gay marriage. Because someone says that people should do this and be that why should one always listen? Not everyone is ALWAYS right. Love is Love. Love comes in all shapes sizes ages races and genders and marriage is a symbol to Love. If you take away anyone's symbol to love then you give away a lot more things. There are WAY to many children up in adoption centers from straight couples who just couldn't handle it and having a gay couple take care of that child makes things a little easier on child to know they at least have parents.
Because Majority people say things are supposed to be a certain way, do you really listen? or do you do something you know is right for the sake of TWO PEOPLE who love each other? |
I object to the whole idea of marriage.
Gay folks want to get married, but what is the point of marriage anyway? Why can't you just live together with the one you love? And you can't say that tis a sin to do that, because so is being gay, according to the Bible. My opinion on gay marriage is that if straight people can get married, so should gays. However, I think marriage all together should be outlawed. (I also believe that most people who say they're homosexual really aren't.) It's hypocritical to "gather in holy matrimony" in a church if you don't believe in God. I know I stressed marriage before sex. It's weird to not believe in sex and not believe in marriage at the same time. I'll explain. I think two people shouldn't have sex until they make a COMMITMENT to stay together forever--living together, being lovers, etc. If this commitment means marriage, then fine. But tis perfectly possible for a couple to make a commitment without marriage. And I think that is better. You would save a lot of money. A wedding is a big waste of money. You have to set up a place to have it, buy decorations, rings, cake, bride's wedding gown, groom's tuxedo, go on the honeymoon. . . . You can still be together with your lover without having a big expensive ceremony. If you must marry, eloping is a better idea. If you insist on a formal ceremony, at least don't get dressed up. The couple should look their normal selves, with no make-up or fancy clothes. Why? Because the person is marrying you for you--the normal you, not the you who is on stage to look so attractive they don't even recognize you. If your partner really wants you, they'll take you as you are, your ugly plain self with no superficial bells and whistles. Forever in blue jeans, babe. If you're having second thoughts about marriage, those thoughts should not be put to rest by good looks. Face it, one day your looks will be gone. If your partner is only with you because of your good looks, then how will they be able to stand you when you're old and wrinkled? The vow is "Til death do us part." That's a lie as long as there is the option of divorce. Don't make promises you can't keep! The divorce rate in this country is 50%. So many people waste their money on marriages that don't even last. I see no point in making a "commitment" if you're just going to break it. Disgusting. If you're going to get married, STAY MARRIED! And if you think you can't be with someone permanently like that, DON'T GET MARRIED!! Just think, if you don't get married, you wouldn't have wasted all that money on the ceremony if you later decide to separate with your partner. So in a nutshell: Being committed and living together > Eloping > Marriage. I admit, tis hard to tell if the other person is seriously committed to you if you just live together. I suggest asking your partner to get married, and if they are committed to you, they will agree to it. After you know they are committed, you don't have to get married. You can just live together and trust in them. And another thing! What's up with diamonds always being in the wedding ring? Diamonds are expensive and hard to break, but they certainly aren't any rarer or prettier than other stones. If diamonds were so rare, they would have run out by now with every married person in the country wearing a diamond wedding ring. And a plain clear stone is boring looking in my opinion. I say break tradition and get a ring for your spouse that is their birth stone or favorite color! Break tradition even more, and don't buy a ring at all!! I'll tell you my opinion on funerals too, since funerals are a lot like weddings. They both mark a beginning and an end. Why is there the rule of wearing white to weddings and wearing black to funerals? Who made black the color of death anyway? White is the real color of death, hence the snow that falls in Winter, the season of death. Funerals are another big hypocrisy. For all the Christian people out there, you should all be happy when your loved one dies because they're going to Heaven, which is supposedly better than Earth. (That is, if the dead person was a good person worthy of Heaven.) For everyone else, you're still being hypocritical by mourning, because the dead person probably wouldn't want you to be sad, and yet you are anyway. One more thing: People who talk about the dead person at a funeral only say good things about the person, which adds to the sadness of the event. Why do this? What about the bad things the dead person did? Bring up all the bad things they did, and everyone will be happy that the person is dead! |
It depends. There's civil marriage before a judge and religious marriage in a church. I believe gays should be able to enter into a civil union, for legal purposes. But no one has a right to demand a church to go against its tenets.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:05 AM. |