|
The main argument is that gayness is something you "choose" and you can just switch it off like a light-bulb. Yes, people can find out they're bisexual or gay later in life, but they have done studies where kids actually a gender preference early on. Even if they are "converted" they never lose it, it's just buried.
|
Problem is, those who are against gays think that these biological differences are actually an illness like the Down Syndrome instead of a different view on sexuality. It's really hard to draw a line between what's different and what's a problem.
When Christobal Colon discovered America, europeans though the indians were a totally different kind of animal. Some decades ago blacks were considered a sub-race. Now, it's homosexuality, how do we know if it's the new "Down Syndrome" or the new "black"? And this is were the "we are the majority" fallace comes in. @Bartuc: Life and views on it have evolved through years far too much to consider anything "traditional". Sacrificing people as a gift for your god was well-seen a thousand years ago. Now it's abuse and a total insult to humanity. Some decades ago it was an horrible offense for a white to marry a black. Now they have the right. The only thing you could have against it are medical reasons, which support those anti-marriage with animals and inanimate things. However, they have yet to prove homosexuality is all that wrong. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The main argument for gay marriage that I've heard is so that it gives homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. There's nothing about the facts of their partnership beyond that mentioned. Quote:
*sees nothing wrong with homosexuality being more widely accepted* I mean, what're they going to do? There are already homosexual couples in the media, and it's already becoming more accepted than it is today. The mother and father ideal started to vanish when parents began to divorce one another (and sometimes remarry). Bestiality does not involve consenting relationships between two humans. Marrying your vehicle also does not involve consenting relationships between two humans. Polygamy does not involve consenting relationships between two humans. (Maybe more than two, but not two.) Marriage--of any sort, between a man and a woman, man and a man, or woman and a woman--does. |
*agrees with Wordstreamer* Also, from what I get from your post, it seems to me that it was made up of double-standards.
-It's acceptable for heterosexual marriages to have children or divorce. -It's not acceptable for gay marriages to have children [adopt/use medical help] to reproduce or divorce. -A gay who wishes to marry is comparable to an irrational animal. -A straight who wishes to marry is perfectly normal. I also believe the "mom,dad 'n kids" structure fell apart when divorce was created. Saying it's the only acceptable family structure would make "single mother 'n kid" not a family. Also, claiming that kids/family is the only thing that keeps marriages tied up means those marriages of people who don't want children illegal, for they hold no desire to reproduce. What about those women infertile /born with an illness that keeps them from having children, does that make them "unsuitable" to marry? |
For me, it should be legalized, but of course, a lot of people in my country (the Philippines, which is reputed to be the only Catholic country in Asia) would say otherwise. For me, marriage is the union between two individuals... so, if gays would want to be together for life, then why would I care what they want?? I say, go!! Religion should not be involved with the government... besides, there's always something called "civil union", right? XD
|
This topic is about letting an illegal marriage become legal. What is to stop it from moving onto things other than humans once we give leeway in the direction of one thing.
Quote:
|
Sorry; I should have specified exactly two humans. Technically polygamy is more than two, though, because there are more than three people involved--even if the women are not married together, the relationship--because they are related through the male that they are both married to, just as siblings are related to their inlaws, except I would expect that the precise details differ--is between more than one person. At least for the male involved.
|
I think gay people should be able to married, they deserve the right to be happy just like everyone else, and if marrying the person they love is what makes them happy, i wish them the best of luck because they deserve it.
|
If we give into one change and let one group of people get their marriage. It would be segregation to not allow the rest.
What if a man/woman loves two women/men equally and wants to be legally married to both. Both of them are accepting of it. What is to stand in the way of that? I mean if we can allow gay marriage and completely change the marriage speech/vow (not sure what its title is) to accommodate that change. Why not allow a man/woman have multiple ceremonies to be legally married to the women/men they truely love equally? Are you willing to accept that? Cause it seems by your arguement you are not accepting of polygamy. |
It already is segregation. And all this "if we let them marry, we'll let everyone and everything marry" was already disscussed back when a white marrying a black was in their way to become legal. I think people back then thought blacks were animals.
Polygamy isn't accepted because it could result in abuse. I find this to be more prone to be abused than marriage between two people. And seriously, churches won't neither have to change their speech since they don't accept that and it's their opinion. What we're disscussing is legal marriage, and if there must be a change with their speech, do you really waste that much saliva by replacing "her" with "your partner"? |
Quote:
If they get married it will not longer be 'your partner' but 'your spouse.' Your partner is only a term used to identify a long-term serious relationship. |
(I don't actually care about polygamy, as long as everyone involved consents to it. *shrug*) I was more mentioning that the only difference in homosexual marriage versus heterosexual marriage is the gender of the people involved. Yes, there are religious issues--but in a country that isn't supposed to embrace any religion, but keep it separate from the state matters, that should be unimportant. I was defending the fact that legalizing homosexual marriage is not going to necessarily lead to legalizing polygamist marriage. Yes, then the argument could be made that polygamists, etc. are being discriminated against--but the discrimination is already there, and that argument can already be made. It used to be illegal to marry someone of a different race (specifically African American-Caucasian marriage), and now it isn't. Did that open gates for polygamy?
|
Okay, "your spouse". Thanks for the clarification ^^'
I say it's prone to be abused because if it's accepted, it'll come with the option of divorce, meaning some people could take advantage of that. But, hell, if people really want to marry that many partners, as long as they're responsible adults, it'll come in the right time [which I don't think is now]. And, is it my fault people divorce? I believe if there's x percentage of people getting divorced, allowing gay marriage will not make that percentage any higher. It's the same people, only more marriages will be done, and there being more marriages, there WILL be more divorces. |
Allowing that opened the gate for socially accepting alot of things. Doesn't make it right. It is a corrupt system now and days. It is socially acceptable to slit your wrist for attention. Socially acceptable is not always good.
Quote:
Quote:
|
I say it's not now because it isn't well-seen by society now. Everything has to go through a process of evolution. Blacks didn't get the right to marry whites in one night. Same with gay marriage, which is being more accepted every day. Polygamist marriages will come, at the time it is enough accepted. One step at a time. A huge leap could create a mass riot.
I didn't attempt to segregate, but if we allowed polygamist marriages in the times of a society that doesn't even accept all 2-people marriages, what will stop the formation of a new KKK? I agree socially acceptable is not always good, but that's why science is always looking to support or disaprove, in order to keep "socially acceptable" in a path where no one [or at least not that many] gets hurt. However, I don't think it's socially-acceptable to self-harm. Why would kids hide their wrists from their parents? Because deep inside they know it's wrong. Your stats are based on what you've seen, but you fail to mention that a lot of marriages keep going even after the husband cheated because women either have no job to support herself and her children or because they're too religious to leave their husband. I say this out of what I've seen too. |
My husband and I recently separated and will quite probably be getting divorced. If I were ever to marry again, I would want my spouse to be another woman. So apparently I am for gay marriage. There is no justifiable reason for gay marriage to not be allowed.
People argue that it is an offense against god/religion, which is irrelevant given that from a legal aspect, religion and god have no place in making laws. People argue that we shouldn't be allowed to use the word marriage but rather should have civil unions instead, but we've already seen what happens when we try to apply the "separate but equal" concept. Even more ridiculous, people argue that gay marriage opens the door for marrying children, animals, inanimate objects, etc... which is absolutely ridiculous. An adult couple (gay or straight) can legally do something which none of those others can do and that is consent. I can consent legally to marry, but a child, dog or chair can't. Meh- this subject gets me pretty upset because it will have an effect on my life and the lives of many of my dear friends. We don't deserve to be discriminated because of sexual orientation. |
I think gays should be allowed to marry because that is just messed up and I think it is unconstitutional for them to not allow it. It is a right of the people as said by amendment for the US is that rights are retained by the people. And I think marriage is one of them.
|
Indifference is inaction.
I am not really affected in the matter but I feel that people should not make so much of an issue over it. Let them marry. If they chose to dedicate their life to that person, let them take custody of the property, the tax benefits, the privileges that we have; Not needing to mention the emotional connection involved in giving your life to another. It doesn't pose as a threat to anyone, it just serves as a debate to turn to when a political distraction is needed.
If the traditional marriage between man and woman is in danger, it is not because of gays or lesbians living their life openly, it is because the couples who are straight are in need of marriage counseling. (if it is so fragile that their way of life is being stopped because of other people.) Enforce marriage and you have a better chance of people staying in monogamous relationships, less disease going around, more families sticking together, less single parents struggling with raising a child while the other denies responsibility. There is no danger in allowing people to show commitment. The only danger is there are people out there that are not willing to accept walks of life that are not following in their footsteps. End the double life, live the life you chose. The more we learn to accept one another the more we can actually focus on improving the quality of life in our countries. Let us speak of global warming, health care, better family planning, creating jobs, getting out of economic crisis, stop pushing all the focus on whether it's Adam and Eve or Adam and Steve. I thank the friends I had met in college to open my eyes to their dilemma; A minor opinion to me; A problematic reality to them; If it were not for them I would probably be indifferent or ignorant to the situation. Indifference is inaction, inaction is a negligent action in itself. |
I strongly believe that PEOPLE should be allowed to marry other people regardless of gender. If they're happy it shouldn't matter.
People really shouldn't think that it's okay for men and women to get married then look at two men or two women who are just normal human beings and say it's wrong for them to have equal rights. It's a shame that in the year 2009 people still can't understand that homosexuals aren't evil. But I guess like racism homophobia and discrimination will never go away :< |
I think that anyone has the right to marry who ever they want, as long as they are happy.
so am i for or against gay marriage? i'm not for it or against it, as long as people are happy, it doesnt' matter if its a guy with a guy or a girl with a girl, as long as they are happy together... like really, who am i...to interfer with someone's happiness, just because society doesn't agree with it. v.v |
why CANT they marry? they are ppl too!
if that would make them happy then why not! X3 |
I agree with gay marriage, myself being homosexual. Although we can be together for as long as we want, having something to SHOW we're together, and want to share our lives with each other is what we want.
Heterosexuals can marry each other. Why? Why just them? To me, its not fair. We didn't DO anything have this kind of punishment on us. We don't care what the public wants to see. We don't care what they want. Its not about them. Its about us. We have to go to a different country, or a different state than what we live in, just to get married. And I don't think that is right at all. Don't we have our rights, too, or is it just because we rather be someone with someone of the same sex denies us that? Its not something we have a choice on. Its not like we woke up one day and said "Hey! I think I want to be gay." *Eye roll* I thank anyone who does think we should marry as well. You're opinion really matters to us. 8D |
Hmm... my answer is the same as this: Does everyone have the right to happiness?
Yes... though yeah it's "strange" because I'm not really used to it... but happiness is happiness... |
Yes! Deffanately! Why deny someone happyness?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:45 AM. |