Discussions
ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF SAME SEX MARRIAGE? WHY?
Posted by visualinked • 11/28/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: Personal
Im gay but im not really into it. I just believe the real value of a relationship whether you are straight or not.
Now, i want to ask you. Are you in favor of same sex marriage? Why?
User Comments
-
I don't see why sexuality should have anything to do with the ability to get married. I think that if a religious group would sanctify it, that the government shouldn't do anything to prevent this sort of union.
Why should anyone be denied the right to pursue what makes them happy in the US (so long as it doesn't involve murder, theft, etc.)?-
Very well said
-
-
It really doesn't bother me. If gay or lesbian couples want to put themselves through the torture of marriage... so be it!! Straight people shouldn't be the only people to suffer through it.. lol. I'm kidding of course.
But seriously, I'm perfectly fine with gay marriage. I don't think churches that disagree with it should be forced to marry gay and lesbian couples under some kind of equality premise, but willing churches and the state should go right ahead. We shouldn't deny any couple the opportunity to start their own family unit. -
I really think that marriage should be between ONLY different sex. -
I would like to tell the church and the priest " Look at yourselves in the mirror".
-
God makes socket and plug. Why do you want to marry socket with socket or plug with plug??-
Well, to keep this purely academic, but along those lines of reasons why would god make people who are only interested in the same sex?
And don't even try that whole, it was his choice BS. After watching my little brother struggle with his sexual identity, I can safely say, it's about as much of a choice for him, as it was your choice to be black. -
First you have to prove there is a god, that this god is the Judeo-Christian god, that anything in the Bible is actually what God wants, and that this god gives a damn who you have sex with.
Only then can your "God makes socket and plug. Why do you want to marry socket with socket or plug with plug??" post not offend my senses.
Also, men have anuses and women can use strap-ons.
-
-
I'm not against it. It's people's choice. If they are happy with a person from the same sex, then it's cool. As long as they're happy, that's what counts.-
now that complicates an already chaotic world.
-
-
No churches in any of the countries that do have same sex marriages have ever been compelled to conduct them.
What most people do not recognize is that the couple is not married after the vows are exchanged. After the couple have signed the document, and their witnesses have signed it, and the presiding party authorized by government has signed it, the couple is married and NOT before.
What we are talking about is this. Do you believe that all consulting adult citizens are entitled to access and receive the same government services and benefits pertaining to marriage, regardless of their sexual orientation, by virtue of their citizenship or not?
I recognize that an individual’s capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation.
I believe limiting the designation of marriage to a union ‘between a man and a woman’ is hypocritical in any nation where "equality" is constitutionally embedded. I believe all state officials including county marriage clerks ought to carry out their duties in a manner consistent with the the constitutional guarantees of equality.
I entirely support the right of any two consenting adults who choose to enter into a life long union being able to contract do so. It is immoral and unconstitutional for democratic nations to deprive same sex citizens of the equal right to obtain a marriage license. It is invasive when governments and religious organizations try to control such a basic human need as to love and to be loved in return and to be acknowledged as good citizens for choosing to take care of one another. In fact, I do not believe for one single moment that the government or any religious organizations have any legitimate role to play in the bedrooms and broom closets of their citizens.
For a country like America that purports to guarantee “equality” to deprive a class its citizens of the basic human right to contract in such a way as to be able to dispose their possessions appropriately upon the demise of one or the other is nothing short of outrageous hypocrisy.
I believe that same-sex partners ought to have the same rights and obligations as opposite-sex married couples have routinely experienced, such as:
* Social security, bereavement, injury and pension benefits.
* Tenancy rights.
* Possibility of adoption.
* Full recognition in life assurance policies.
* Responsibility to provide reasonable maintenance for partners and children.
* Same tax treatment as married couples, including exemptions from inheritance tax on homes.
* Visiting rights in hospitals.
* The obligation to contribute financially to their relationship and children.
* Parental responsibility for the children of their partner.
* The ability to dissolve the partnership via a divorce procedure.
* Ability to register the death of a partner and make decisions concerning burial.
The right for same sex couples to marry in California was taken away via the passage of the proposition 8 vote. What was lost were between 1000-1400 federal and state rights that eschew to married couples only. Registered partnerships or civil unions give same-sex couples the benefits and protections of civil marriage, however, the couples are not legally married, and therefore they NOT entitled to spousal rights, AKA all the rights and benefits of marriage that issue federally and from the state to other married couples.
Some rights and benefits that differ are joint custody of children, adoption and immigration rights, next of kin, inheritance, social security, and tax benefits, accident compensation, life insurance, immigration, spouse and child support, workplace benefits, ability to sue for wrongful death, hospital visitation and health care decisions. (Take note that the the foregoing is NOT an exhaustive list.)-
Well, there are actually some christian/catholic organizations/churches that will sanctify gay/lesbian marriages. You are correct though, about the union bit.
I suppose my point was more far-reaching than that though, if they want to have a marriage, let them have a marriage. If they want to go see a judge and a court clerk, let that be allowed also. -
Geezz TT is writing an essay here. My eyes hurt >.< (no offense TT).
But indeed you brought up interesting facts there.
@OP; I don't support same sex marriage. It's terrible and plainly sucks. Besides, it's against my religion's (catholic) belief.
-
-
Same-sex marriage should be a non-issue. However, the passing of Proposition 8 shows that we can't sit on our asses being complacent while conservatards are out robbing innocent people of their rights for arbitrary reasons.
-
It demonstrated to me that the churches who we assume set their priorities on expenditures of untaxed funds for charitable works don't. In this case they set their priority on expending $75 million to eliminate marriage for same sex couples. This was despite the fact opposite sex married couples were not in any way affected by same sex marriage.
IMO it's a wake up call to all Americans that the fox (religion) is in the hen house (government/state).
Just imagine how many hungry, homeless, sick people, not to mention those victims of sexual abuse, whose lives were forever changed by pedophile priests/pastors/ministers that those $75 million tax free dollars could have helped.
What we witnessed was religious people supporting only opposite sex marriage putting their millions on the line to lay exclusive claim to the word "marriage" and the rights and benefits that issue to only to married people. IMO that kind of behavior is reminiscent of territorial tree peeing behavior witnessed in animals. -
"conservatards" ... I like that :o)
-
-
I am not gay, but I support it. I can't think of no reason why it would be wrong. Also, I think that civil unions should be afforded the same rights as married couples. I don't think that this "marriage" that is historically religious in nature should be granted any special privileges over a non-religious union. -
I am gay but im not really into it. Marriage for me is like deeper and deeper responsiblity
-
Complacency of people like you ESPECIALLY in the GLBT community only brings us down. how can you not fight for your rights? Just because you think that Marriage is too much responsibility...don't you want to have the RIGHT to someday if you change your mind?
Doesn't it bother you that a group of right wing bible thumpers with "old money" are telling you that you aren't worth the same rights as they have?
-
-
It doesn't bother me in any way, if people are happy, then that's all that matters. -
@visuallinked, please don't use all caps on your post title. Thanks. -
It does not really bother me about other people marriage but those kind of thing really reminds me a lot of the end of City of Sodom and Gamora.. until today the place where Sodom and Gamora used to stand is clearly become the evident for the people to see how God hate those things -
I don't think anyone should get any rights for marriage unless they are willing to raise children. Adopted or otherwise. I don't care about gay or straight. What is the benefit to society for giving people who are married a variety of legal rights if they give society nothing in return.
Marriage is a contract. There is a certain nicety to people who talk about being married and never having or raising children. Without children it becomes a political and legal vehicle for all kinds of things, gay marriage, childless couples, marriage for visas.
I don't really care about people saying they are married. They can be married by anyone.
It is the legal rights and obligations that go with it that matter.
Marriage has always been a contract about family.-
Society is not giving anybody anything. Marriage predates both religion and government. The church didn't even invent a marriage service until the middle ages. Also in countries that boast "equality" in their Constitution it would seem that the benefits and rights that eschew to one citizen ought to eschew to all citizens.
FWIW many gay people do raise children. In fact I know several gay couples and all of them have children. Some are young children and some are in college.
However your only those who raise children position ought to be able to marry raises the following issues:
(1) In the case of an opposite sex couple where one or both of them are sterile and they do not wish to adopt do you really believe that they should not be allowed to marry?
(2) In the case of a widow who has passed through menopause and who wants to marry another husband do you believe that they should not marry?
-
-
"do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" 8) -
Some of my blogs actually answer this question. Follow my links to see what I have to say. Warning, it ain't going to be pretty. Some people may totally disgree.
-
I actually wrote a blog about this last week that I think many of you will like. It discusses legal/secular marriage and how to deal with gay marriage.
thefreefirezone.blogspot.com -
Why not? As long as people don't hurt other beings what they do in thier home/bed is not of my concern. -
for TonyB:
Bro, sorry.i wont do it again. I was just used using all caps.
Thanks for reminding me. -
Absolutely. People are people and love is love. It makes me sick that someone can't visit their partner in a hospital if they're seriously injured or make medical decisions on behave of their partner because they can't be considered a family member.
-
As far as I understand it the christian community seems to think they have a monopoly on the concept of marriage and that their values should reflect that. There's a lot of arguments against that statement but gay people should be allowed to get at least the same benefits as married people. Call it a registered partnership or whatever but don't deny it just because you don't like what they are doing. I don't like the current US administration but I can't go around ignoring them, now can I?-
It's VERY important to understand that it's only the far right wing conservative Christian churches & cults that take that take this position against same sex marriages.
This is a list of the churches that supported Prop 8. The list was on Craig's list but has since been removed. It was also on the support Prop 8 website. It too has been removed.
Read the full list at this site mojoey.blogspot.com/2008/11/list-of-churches-supporting-prop-8.html
It's also important to understand that in America it's each individual state that has the legal authority to create marriages and not the federal government.
Lastly, it's important to understand that the case before the courts is focused only on the difference between "amendment" and "revision". Proposition 8 was an amendment. They may decide that the correct procedure ought to have been "revision" (requires much higher % of votes) than "amendment" (requires bare majority).
TYLER v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Case: S168066, Supreme Court of California
Date (YYYY-MM-DD): 2008-11-19
Event Description: Order to show cause issued
Notes:
The motion for judicial notice filed in S168047 by petitioners on November 5, 2008, is GRANTED.
The requests for a stay of Proposition 8 filed by petitioners in S168047 and in S168066 are DENIED. Respondent Secretary of State Bowen's request to be dismissed as a respondent in S168066 is GRANTED. (Kevelin v.
Jordan (1964) 62 Cal.2d 82.)
The motions to intervene in S168047, S168066, and S168078, filed on November 17, 2008, by Proposition 8 Official Proponents et al. are GRANTED.
The motions to intervene in S168047, S168066, and S168078, filed on November 10, 2008, by Campaign for California Families, are DENIED.
The State of California, the Attorney General, the State Registrar of Vital Statistics, and the Deputy Director of Health Information and Strategic Planning of the California Department of Public Health are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE before this court, when the above entitled matters are called on calendar, why the relief sought by petitioners should not be granted.
The issues to be briefed and argued in these matters are as follows:
(1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution? (See Cal. Const., art. XVIII, sections 1-4.)
(2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution?
(3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?
The return is to be filed by respondents, and a brief may be filed by intervenors, in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Friday, December 19, 2008. A reply may be filed by petitioners in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Monday, January 5, 2009.
Any application to file an amicus curiae brief, accompanied by the proposed brief, may be filed in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Thursday, January 15, 2009. Any reply to an amicus curiae brief may be filed in the San Francisco Office of the Supreme Court on or before Wednesday, January 21, 2009.
Moreno, J. joins this order except that he would grant the requests to stay the operation of Proposition 8 pending this court's resolution of these matters.
Kennard, J. would deny these petitions without prejudice to the filing in this court of an appropriate action to determine Proposition 8's effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before Proposition 8's adoption.
Votes: George, C.J., Baxter, Werdegar, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.
-
-
If we are doing labels: I'm bi. Do I care about gay marriage? No.
I really don't care if people want to 'give' me rights, recognise me, or let me into their church. I'm at a point in my life where I have given myself my own approval, and that's all that matters.
I know others might disagree, and I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings. I'm just speaking from my own perspective. Being who I am has made me into a really tough person when I need to be and I'm actually grateful for that. I suppose I'm getting set in my ways. -
We are to Love others uncoditionally, however, God does not condone (spelling) man and man or woman and woman. He does approved of husband and wife and I stand by the Word of God being truth.
It will be Gods judgement of their choices and not mine.-
My God, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, disagrees. I guess this means we get to have a Holy war.
-
Well, I think the matter at hand is not everyone believes in your or a god. And since marriage by state is a legal matter, God should have no bearing on it at all. If marriage where decided by the church only then I could see your point. But people want to get married for legal reasons, property rights, medical rights and so on...church has nothing to do with THAT kind of marriage.
-
-
In favor of, very much so. People should be free to do as they believe as long as they dont try to push their beliefs onto anybody else -
I don't believe we males have any right to interfere with whatever it is that women desire. If women want to have a lesbian relationship with another women, I am in full support of it. As for those homosexuals, however, I strongly oppose their hanging out in those public restrooms. If homosexual marriages will get them out of those rest rooms, I'm all for it. Else, i'm opposed.
-
NIMBY?
-
-
I believe that is everyone's right to marry and live with anyone they choose. The argument that marriage should be between a man and a woman because it was Gods intent is BULL because this country is supposed to be seperate from those beliefs.
The argument that marriage should be between a man and a woman because the purpose of marriage is to create families...
If that's the way it should be, then no one past childbearing years, people who are unable to have children, people who choose to remain childless...they shouldn't be allowed to marry either.
This fight for equality isn't about anything but right-wing bible thumpers, trying to prove that me, and people like me... aren't worth the same rights as they have. -
Yeah, I think that I should be able to marry someone that I am in love with, regardless of gender. If I pay the same taxes and live in the same world, and am a law-abiding human being, I should be able to have the same rights as everyone else. Anything less is discriminatory.
aviewofthec.com -
We all have rights,and we WILL be held accountable for our choices. The world has functioned under Gods laws since He Created you. And it will end with Him coming soon to get his bride. We will all get our chance to explain our choices. your freedom to choose was givin to you, just as the air you now breath. But Gods law numbers your days to be here, and at its end your judgement. consider wisely, for you alone will determine your destiny. He loves you enough to give you the choice. -
Some people questions other peoples choices and behavior. But let us all remember as long as these people doesnt hurt u and the community, as long as these people respect each other and as long as theirs love between them and the people around them then we have no right to question their identity.
These people wants to be happy. Are we going to set aside happiness from them? Whats our right,anyways?
visit: adelodextermacaldo.blogspot.com -
i dont understand why the god is dragged into this issue, what has god to do with being gay or lesbian.
Naturally being gay is kind of against nature, it doesnt make sense, the purpose of sex is reproduction. but considering personal choice and that gay and lesbian form less than a percent of general population it shouldnt matter, sometime even animals show same sex sexual behaviour so its fine.-
Oh, funny how so many animals - who do not posses the human ability to "choose" a lifestyle - engage in homosexual sex.
Last count was over a thousand species of animals and insects.
If you're using nature to determine what's natural, than homosexuality is more natural than heterosexual monogamous relationships.
-
-
If I felt that being gay were a behavior, I wouldn't take issue with your statement, but I do believe it was meant with the best intentions. If you go down the reproductive route, then what about people that are sterile, are they not in compliance with God? It's just a really slippery slope. The mouth is made for eating, but it's used for other things, on and on and on.
-
I don't get it... is your answer, "Not my business" like everyone elses?
-
-
To each there own but there could be some comical scenarios
You may kiss the bride. Which one is the bride?
This could be a funny thread in itself-
Party A, you may kiss Party B.
-
that was a great response, i missed it back then
-
-
Jesus Christ are we still on this???? I say to anyone who opposes this issue-
Get a life!
What do you care if some hairy bloke wants to marry his hairy bloke wife??
It sure don't keep me awake at nights.-
ROFL
-
woot!
It's astonishing how many nosy and manipulative people there are in the world. They seem to a sick need to exercise have power and control over others - get a life indeed! -
triple :o)!
-
-
No! -
What does anyones opinion matter its down to who ever is involved that matters -
I'm in favor of freedom. And people should have the right to make that decision for themselves. Since I'm straight and not homosexual, I don't have the right to state my opinion on if I think it right or if I agree. It's not my business.
-
Well, Let me start by saying something!, im not someone to beat around the bush! if i have something to say, i will say it! i will get straight to the point and say..i forgot what i was going to say!:D -
I can't come up with a reason why gay people shouldn't be able to marry one another. It just doesn't make any sense to me. I blog about this all the time on my kidsofqueers.blogspot.com/ blog. I really think this is a civil rights issue and not a gay issue. No one should be denied the right to marry whomever they please. -
I think that same sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples. It's as simple as that...if marriage is a civil union the church need not be involved at all. -
i disagree with same sex marriage, it's just a form of escapism of people who can't deal marriage with the other sex. It's either they're phobic or they learned it.
-
How does your claim have any correlation with reality?
[it's just a form of escapism of people who can't deal marriage with the other sex.]
Or, maybe, just going out on a limb here, it's not an issue with the other sex so much as an attraction to their own sex. Take my friend, Victor. He gets along just fine with women. His best friend is a lesbian. However, he is not attracted to women sexually or emotionally.
In what way could this possibly stem from an inability to deal with a marriage to a woman? -
there is a difference between being friends with a woman than being married to one. marriage in heterosexual relationships complicates a lot of things along with kids, financial and emotional issues.
-
However, that person's homosexuality has nothing to do with marriage or issues with women. Victor's only 20 years old. Your claim is empty.
-
Papuj
Are you serious?
Have you ever met a homosexual?
-
-
Reading some of the messages above it seems it differs all over the place....
Here in The Netherlands it is legal, same sex marriage has the same right as heterosexual couples, churches even do marriages here. Obviously there are still some who fight it but there always will be. Can please some of the people some of the time, not all the people all the time.
I am all for it, if it makes people happy, go for it, you only live once
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
