This Site's View on Same-Sex Marriage

[Bogart]

I voted for same-sex marriage. Civil unions, in reality, are unequal, because they make an illegitimate classification based on sexual orientation.

It's not unequal- if it was unequal they wouldn't get the same rights (except for adoption). The problem is, marriage means the union between a man and a woman, so it's senseless to call the union between two people of the same sex "marriage", as it's contrary to the definition. Plus, gay couples who adopt end up causing psychological damage to the child. Therefore, it's only appropriate that a new definition especially for homosexuals is made- civil unions. This is not like the civil rights movement, where blacks and whites are really the same. A heterosexual and homosexual couple are NOT the same; just like men and women are not the same.

Yeah, where's your proof? I'm not aware of any clinical proof to back this up.

[Bogart]

"Fine But one could suggest you move if you don't like it."

Well if Missouri is any example than 60-70% of America doesn't want gay marriage.

I don't see how this is necessarily relevant. I'd like to know why it's any of their business and how they would be victimized by allowing it. Any religious argument can be discounted out of hand.

[7,052,770]

I support full gay marriage

[angus]

I voted Neither because I'm straight.  Please don't make fun of me as I was born that way and I can't help it.  If I was gay, however, I think I'd want to be able to marry the man I love.  Today makes two months of heterosexual marriage for me.  And in two months I still haven't felt the sense that my marriage is somehow weakened by nontraditional marriages.  

It seems like an appropriate time to mention that my wife is expecting.  I hadn't mentioned it before because in both our families it is customary to wait until marriage before impregnating one's significant other.  But what the hell, these things happen, and we were already planning on getting married anyway, and we're both very excited, and scared, about having a baby.  It's getting harder to hide, what with the basketball-under-the-blouse look my wife has attained.  I actually raised the question to my wife about what if our child is gay.  Her answer is that of course he won't be, so it's not something we should worry about.  "I'm not a coward, I've just never been tested.  I like to think that if I was I would pass" is how that Mighty Mighty Bosstones song goes.  I hope that big test of openmindedness is a test I'm never required to take.  But if it comes down that way, I hope my wife and I both live in a society wherein our child won't be the subject of discrimination and hate.  Ours is the greatest nation in the world.  We will make it even greater when we can accept all people for what they are.

[John Dibble]

Well said angus.

[Bogart]

I voted Neither because I'm straight.  Please don't make fun of me as I was born that way and I can't help it.  If I was gay, however, I think I'd want to be able to marry the man I love.  Today makes two months of heterosexual marriage for me.  And in two months I still haven't felt the sense that my marriage is somehow weakened by nontraditional marriages.  

It seems like an appropriate time to mention that my wife is expecting.  I hadn't mentioned it before because in both our families it is customary to wait until marriage before impregnating one's significant other.  But what the hell, these things happen, and we were already planning on getting married anyway, and we're both very excited, and scared, about having a baby.  It's getting harder to hide, what with the basketball-under-the-blouse look my wife has attained.  I actually raised the question to my wife about what if our child is gay.  Her answer is that of course he won't be, so it's not something we should worry about.  "I'm not a coward, I've just never been tested.  I like to think that if I was I would pass" is how that Mighty Mighty Bosstones song goes.  I hope that big test of openmindedness is a test I'm never required to take.  But if it comes down that way, I hope my wife and I both live in a society wherein our child won't be the subject of discrimination and hate.  Ours is the greatest nation in the world.  We will make it even greater when we can accept all people for what they are.

Well said.

[Kodratos]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

[Kodratos]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I said civil unions were acceptable. As long as we give them a civil union that includes all of the benefits of marriage, then the argument will be voided. After that then the only argument they can make is that it's discriminatory to not give them marriage, and they will lose on that front every time because the American people don't buy that crap.

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I said civil unions were acceptable. As long as we give them a civil union that includes all of the benefits of marriage, then the argument will be voided. After that then the only argument they can make is that it's discriminatory to not give them marriage, and they will lose on that front every time because the American people don't buy that crap.

Personally, I think ALL government recognized marriage should be civil unions, since in reality that is what they really are. I can see no logical reason to have a seperate term for same-sex relationships.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

[Kodratos]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I said civil unions were acceptable. As long as we give them a civil union that includes all of the benefits of marriage, then the argument will be voided. After that then the only argument they can make is that it's discriminatory to not give them marriage, and they will lose on that front every time because the American people don't buy that crap.

Personally, I think ALL government recognized marriage should be civil unions, since in reality that is what they really are. I can see no logical reason to have a seperate term for same-sex relationships.

I agree with that. I think "marriage" should be left up to religious groups. Unfortunately legal marriage is too embeded into the American psyche.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I said civil unions were acceptable. As long as we give them a civil union that includes all of the benefits of marriage, then the argument will be voided. After that then the only argument they can make is that it's discriminatory to not give them marriage, and they will lose on that front every time because the American people don't buy that crap.

Personally, I think ALL government recognized marriage should be civil unions, since in reality that is what they really are. I can see no logical reason to have a seperate term for same-sex relationships.

I agree with that. I think "marriage" should be left up to religious groups. Unfortunately legal marriage is too embeded into the American psyche.

I don't like that Idea... Because not only will gay people be able to get married, 2 men and a women could or a man and his dog.

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I said civil unions were acceptable. As long as we give them a civil union that includes all of the benefits of marriage, then the argument will be voided. After that then the only argument they can make is that it's discriminatory to not give them marriage, and they will lose on that front every time because the American people don't buy that crap.

Personally, I think ALL government recognized marriage should be civil unions, since in reality that is what they really are. I can see no logical reason to have a seperate term for same-sex relationships.

I agree with that. I think "marriage" should be left up to religious groups. Unfortunately legal marriage is too embeded into the American psyche.

I don't like that Idea... Because not only will gay people be able to get married, 2 men and a women could or a man and his dog.

A. Why do you care? It doesn't affect you if a man wants relations with his dog. As for marriages with more than two people, once again it doesn't affect me or you, but I don't think it would ever happen because the tax code for it would be so complicated.

B. A dog is not a citizen, does not and can not pay taxes. A dog is in reality a piece of property that society has given some 'rights'(in the form of animal cruelty laws). As I said, government marriage in reality is a civil union, which is a civil contract - non-humans are not able to enter into contracts.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

To me? Well, while I don't care if anyone else follows how I think a marriage should be(how mine will be one day I hope), here goes:

It is the ultimate bond of trust, sacrifice, and commitment between two people, and it should be considered sacred. Trust because they share their lives and safety, sacrifice because when you live with someone, are dedicated to them, you love them and you want to make them happy and thusly put their happiness first sometimes(generally, you should give as much as you receive), and commitment should be obvious. It also involves acceptance, you have to accept and love the person you marry for who he/she is, not try to make them something they are not. I don't think I can explain it better than that with text.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

To me? Well, while I don't care if anyone else follows how I think a marriage should be(how mine will be one day I hope), here goes:

It is the ultimate bond of trust, sacrifice, and commitment between two people, and it should be considered sacred. Trust because they share their lives and safety, sacrifice because when you live with someone, are dedicated to them, you love them and you want to make them happy and thusly put their happiness first sometimes(generally, you should give as much as you receive), and commitment should be obvious. It also involves acceptance, you have to accept and love the person you marry for who he/she is, not try to make them something they are not. I don't think I can explain it better than that with text.

Thats a good way to say it, but what if someone felt that way about her mother or his father. Should they get married?

[ijohn57s]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

To me? Well, while I don't care if anyone else follows how I think a marriage should be(how mine will be one day I hope), here goes:

It is the ultimate bond of trust, sacrifice, and commitment between two people, and it should be considered sacred. Trust because they share their lives and safety, sacrifice because when you live with someone, are dedicated to them, you love them and you want to make them happy and thusly put their happiness first sometimes(generally, you should give as much as you receive), and commitment should be obvious. It also involves acceptance, you have to accept and love the person you marry for who he/she is, not try to make them something they are not. I don't think I can explain it better than that with text.

Thats a good way to say it, but what if someone felt that way about her mother or his father. Should they get married?

I'll add a question to that. What if a 40-year-old man decides he feels that way about a 5-year-old girl? Should they get married?

[John Dibble]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

To me? Well, while I don't care if anyone else follows how I think a marriage should be(how mine will be one day I hope), here goes:

It is the ultimate bond of trust, sacrifice, and commitment between two people, and it should be considered sacred. Trust because they share their lives and safety, sacrifice because when you live with someone, are dedicated to them, you love them and you want to make them happy and thusly put their happiness first sometimes(generally, you should give as much as you receive), and commitment should be obvious. It also involves acceptance, you have to accept and love the person you marry for who he/she is, not try to make them something they are not. I don't think I can explain it better than that with text.

Thats a good way to say it, but what if someone felt that way about her mother or his father. Should they get married?

Well, first off, the parent would have to return that sentiment. Second, I don't think so, for a multitude of reasons. I don't think it would be possible to stop them from having a relationship of that nature, but government would likely not allow it. Inbreeding would be an issue, as it is detrimental(yes, I know this goes back to children being the purpose of marriage, but this isn't the only reason I don't think it should be allowed), and a multitude of wierd tax reasons could also be an issue. Let's also not forget that someone who falls in love with their parent is not likely psychologically stable, so it could be construed that they do not have the mental capacity to give consent for such a relationship.

[nclib]

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

A 65-year-old woman without problems couldn't have kids--should she not be allowed to marry?

[John Dibble]

On the 5-year old girl - this once again goes to consent. First off, the man is obviously a pedophile - so he has a psychological instability, calling his consent into question. Second, the little girl is obviously too young to understand the implications of marriage, or even sex, and does not have the mental capacity to consent to either.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I'm not in "favor" of any of these options. we will either have marriage or civil unions, unions are better. The only reason gays want to be married is to force society as a whole to accept thier actions, making them feel better about themselves.

So, the various benefits bestowed by marriage, like being able to go into the hospital emergency room in the event of such an emergency, has no bearing on the issue whatsoever?

I can't go see my best friend in the hospital emergency room, and me and him are like brothers... But you don't see me trying to change the law so it will fit how I like it.

That's not the point. He said the idea is that gays ONLY want to marry to feel better and force society to accept them, I say that that is not the case. Some homosexuals may want SSM for that reason, but many want the same benefits that is given to straight marriages recognized by law.

Oh ok, but like I said, they don't need to get married. Because it is wrong.. And I can prove it... Can two guy makes kids? No.

Now you might say so if the women can have kids she can't get married... No that is not the case, she could if she did not have problems. But two guy and two girls can't make kids..

Once again the argument that marriage is for the purpose of having children - please stop defining the purpose and meaning of marriage for the rest of us. In many areas(not all though) homosexual couples can adopt(and in reality, only one has actual custody, so in the event of a breakup there is no visitation rights, though I find myself wondering if you would care about it in this kind of case) and those children normally end up fine. And yes, a lesbian couple can produce a child, though a little outside help is required, usually in the form of a sperm bank.

You get my point. What is marriage to you?

To me? Well, while I don't care if anyone else follows how I think a marriage should be(how mine will be one day I hope), here goes:

It is the ultimate bond of trust, sacrifice, and commitment between two people, and it should be considered sacred. Trust because they share their lives and safety, sacrifice because when you live with someone, are dedicated to them, you love them and you want to make them happy and thusly put their happiness first sometimes(generally, you should give as much as you receive), and commitment should be obvious. It also involves acceptance, you have to accept and love the person you marry for who he/she is, not try to make them something they are not. I don't think I can explain it better than that with text.

Thats a good way to say it, but what if someone felt that way about her mother or his father. Should they get married?

Well, first off, the parent would have to return that sentiment. Second, I don't think so, for a multitude of reasons. I don't think it would be possible to stop them from having a relationship of that nature, but government would likely not allow it. Inbreeding would be an issue, as it is detrimental(yes, I know this goes back to children being the purpose of marriage, but this isn't the only reason I don't think it should be allowed), and a multitude of wierd tax reasons could also be an issue. Let's also not forget that someone who falls in love with their parent is not likely psychologically stable, so it could be construed that they do not have the mental capacity to give consent for such a relationship.

But you said, if they love each other they can get married. I'm just messing with you. But you see, If we let Gay people get married. Then people like that would wont it too. And before you know it there will be no marriage.