Why is SSM such a big deal?

[Free Bird]

Don't misconstrue me, I'm totally for it. I just don't get why it is such a hot button issue, and why its proponents are still so passionate even if it is basically a settled issue.

[publicunofficial]

lol this'll be fun

[Free Bird]

lol this'll be fun

Oh yes

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Hard to imagine why a change in marriage law wouldn't be a big deal.

[Lief 🗽]

Eh, to some degree it is a symbolic issue. Obviously marriage is an important institution in our society, etc. but it large part it's just a policy that is representative of "acceptance of gay people."

[The Free North]

Its importance is overstated on Atlas relative to the american populace at large.

[publicunofficial]

Actual answer: If you live in an urban area, or are under the age of 30, you probably have someone close to you who is openly gay. The idea that they still cannot get married in certain areas, and that there is one major party that would probably consider rolling back some of the rights they've recently gained if they ever had the opportunity, can be a major rallying point.

There are many young people I know that have no interest in politics, except when it comes to gay marriage.

[BaconBacon96]

Bigotry. That's why.

[bedstuy]

1.  Marriage is a civil right granted by the government.

2.  Everyone should have the same civil rights under the law, regardless of their sexual orientation.

3.  Same-sex marriage hasn't been recognized in every state, so it is not settled. 

4.  Same-sex marriage has come to symbolize the greater struggle for acceptance and legal equality for LGBT people.  It raises the basic question of whether it's OK to treat people differently because of the sexual orientation and whether being gay is wrong/a choice.  So, the fight for SSM has advanced acceptance and equality for gay people across the board. 

5.  The US still has tons of homophobia and mistreatment of gay people so we have a lot of work to do in general to make acceptance of homosexuality a social norm.  We've come a lot way in the past 10 years, but there are still anti-gay hate crimes, conversion therapy and bullying of gay kids going on.  We can't accept second-class citizen status on any issue or be complacent even when we've had some political success in recent years.  As if it's OK to be homophobic or legally discriminated against in some states.  It's never OK and we shouldn't have to take it any longer.

[RINO Tom]

Eh, to some degree it is a symbolic issue. Obviously marriage is an important institution in our society, etc. but it large part it's just a policy that is representative of "acceptance of gay people."

Pretty much this.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Actual answer: If you live in an urban area, or are under the age of 30, you probably have someone close to you who is openly gay. The idea that they still cannot get married in certain areas, and that there is one major party that would probably consider rolling back some of the rights they've recently gained if they ever had the opportunity, can be a major rallying point.

There are many young people I know that have no interest in politics, except when it comes to gay marriage.

Very well said.

It's a big deal because it is unconstitutional for consenting adults and taxpaying citizens in a minority to be denied equal rights under the law all in the name of "muh Bible says gays are gross and will go to hell." I laugh at some of the asinine slippery slope arguments on the "traditional marriage" side like that it opens the door to polygamy and pedophiles marrying children and people marrying their cats and dogs and plants. When you just want to be treated as equals and not as second-class citizens and you have to confront this bigotry on a daily basis, it is a very big deal.

[Free Bird]

The idea that marriage is granted by the government doesn't really sit well with me though. It should be a religious sanctum

[afleitch]

The idea that marriage is granted by the government doesn't really sit well with me though. It should be a religious sanctum

So non religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married, or religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married if no church wants to marry them?

[Free Bird]

The idea that marriage is granted by the government doesn't really sit well with me though. It should be a religious sanctum

So non religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married, or religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married if no church wants to marry them?

Atheists wouldn't want a Christian marriage, anyway

[pbrower2a]

It is settled culturally -- but not politically. There are people who still oppose it because they fear the harsh Judgment of an Angry God through floods, fires, earthquakes, plagues, etc., just as there were people offended by the possibility of interracial marriage.

[CountryClassSF]

Because there are entrenched interests that not only want to impose SSM on America via the courts, but also want to make sure it is put in our face at all times.  There are many who want to do this to make Christians feel uncomfortable.

It is fairly clear that the two judges who routinely perform same-sex "marriages" will not be recusing themselves from the federal case.  It's also clear how the court will rule.

Yet, for some reason, we have to be forced to continue hearing about this, to continue seeing this, and restricting the rights of those who disagree. That's how you know it's not about equality, but more about a radical agenda that is designed to oppress expressions of faith

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Most people who I've met who care deeply about this issue are Conservative opponents, liberal supporters, and my mom who opposes it strongly but I can't really describe her political views.  Most moderates, whether they support SSM or not, aren't determining their vote on that issue.  Conservatives I've met who support it don't care very much about it.  I've met a few liberal opponents of SSM and they still ended up voting for Obama in 2012 except for one.

Most people I know don't mind voting for a candidate with a different opinion on gay marriage.  But that's just my observation.  Economic and foreign policy issues seem to be more relevant to whom my friends/family/acquaintances cast their ballots for.

[Gass3268]

Because there are entrenched interests that not only want to impose SSM on America via the courts, but also want to make sure it is put in our face at all times.  There are many who want to do this to make Christians feel uncomfortable.

It is fairly clear that the two judges who routinely perform same-sex "marriages" will not be recusing themselves from the federal case.  It's also clear how the court will rule.

Yet, for some reason, we have to be forced to continue hearing about this, to continue seeing this, and restricting the rights of those who disagree. That's how you know it's not about equality, but more about a radical agenda that is designed to oppress expressions of faith

Good for them, they shouldn't. Thomas didn't recuse himself from the Obamacare case even though his wife was a member of a tea party group actively working against it.

[TNF]

Because having access to marriage means having access to things like hospital visitation rights, inheritance rights, custodial rights over children, etc. It's not 'just marriage', it's a whole panoply of rights that we have established via the marriage contract. Beyond that, it's a fundamental argument of legal equality the same way that arguments over whether or not interracial marriage should be permitted. If you don't support equal marriage rights for LGBT people, you might as well stop pretending you support legal equality for all.

[bedstuy]

The idea that marriage is granted by the government doesn't really sit well with me though. It should be a religious sanctum

So non religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married, or religious people shouldn't be allowed to get married if no church wants to marry them?

Atheists wouldn't want a Christian marriage, anyway

The government doesn't recognize Christian marriage or Jewish marriage or Hindu marriage.  There's just marriage.

And, that makes no sense whatsoever.  What religious definition do we use for marriage?  Christian?  Well, some Christian churches recognize same-sex marriage.  And, what about if I want to start my own church where I declare everyone is married to everyone else.  Does that mean the government needs to give everyone on earth a green card because they're all part of the same family.  Not to mention, religious doctrine can't be the law.   That makes no sense. 

[pbrower2a]

Because there are entrenched interests that not only want to impose SSM on America via the courts, but also want to make sure it is put in our face at all times.  There are many who want to do this to make Christians feel uncomfortable.

In our faces? It's basically for a wedding ring. People rarely show a ring 'in our faces', whether a wedding ring or a class ring. The only person who ever did that in my presence resembled what I understood to be a prostitute. Homosexuality is not going away. For real in-your-face stuff, just think of the Westboro Baptist Church cult that the late Fred Phelps started -- you know them -- the ones who has those hateful placards, who protest the funerals of military veterans... now that is in your face!

I can't speak for God, but it really seams that he did make Adam and Steve as well as Adam and Eve -- and he made 'Adam and Steve' gay!

Nobody will ever be forced into a same-sex marriage.   There's nothing Christian about homophobia.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The best way to close the discussion is for the US Supreme Court to decide same-sex marriage as it did Loving v. Virginia. If you want to avoid dealing with homosexuality, then get the Hell out of urban California and go to some backward place.  

[CountryClassSF]

Such tolerance

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Don't misconstrue me, I'm totally for it. I just don't get why it is such a hot button issue, and why its proponents are still so passionate even if it is basically a settled issue.

It's a war against people's way of life, even though the things that two private citizens do in their private lives have absolutely no impact on said complete stranger who is opposed to gay marriage

[Torie]

Because being so cruel to a group of people as to an matter that is one of the most important aspect of our lives, marriage, for reasons that have no reasonable public policy basis as shown by the data, and thus seem based on bigotry or  priori religious beliefs that do not have a independent secular public policy rationale based on the data, is shocking to the conscience. I am just saying what others have said in a different way.

[CountryClassSF]

It does when the stranger is forced to hear about the gay agenda and see it every day everywhere. It is when one faces social/business implications for expressing support for trad'l marriage.

One can have a loving gay relationship in private without radically redefining marriage or speaking about sexuality to the complete strangers you mentioned. I cannot fathom why one's homosexuality or heterosexuality too for that matter, has to define an entire person

Same-sex marriage will soon be imposed by the Supreme Court. Why is there now a need to punish those who may take a different view?