reply
- Feature
- Like
Equal rights for all people would be great. Gay marriage hurts no one. If you don't believe in it, don't do it.
reply
- Feature
- Like
I believe that this would be the best solution. Marriage is a deeply religious thing. It has always had ties to religion. So I must ask the question: Why is the government messing with religion?! Separation of church and state demands that the government has no rule over marriage. I think that government should cease to recognize all marriage, including those of heterosexual couples. Instead, it should adopt the use of civil unions only. If any person wishes to be what we now call "married", that person and his/her partner should get a civil union. Any two people would be allowed to get these, provided they met age requirements, etc. The government should take all of the benefits which it now gives to those in a marriage and transfer those benefits to civil unions. Any people currently in a marriage, would automatically be given a civil union, provided they fill out some paperwork. This would create legal equality among homo- and heterosexuals. Also, just because marriage would not be recognized by the government doesn't mean it wouldn't be recognized at all. Marriage will still be allowed in the church, where it belongs. Should two religious people wish to get married, they would be free to do so. They can have a wedding at a chapel, have a priest speak, etc. But their marriage would mean nothing to the government unless they also got a civil union. Only then could they receive the tax benefits, health insurance benefits, etc. This plan would enable equality among homosexuals and heterosexuals. It would also allow the church to "protect" its marriage. I think it is the best solution there is.
reply
- Feature
- Like
Yes, who said in the first place that a "normal" relationship was between a man and a woman?
reply
- Feature
- Like
And won't our grandkids look back at us and say, just like we do to our racist relatives, "oh I know its sad, but they came from another time. It's okay." That's not what I want for my generation to be seen as.
reply
- Feature
- Like
Definitely. I don't think we should force churches, individually, to make decisions that don't think is right, because that's just forcing them into submission, but I think that both civil unions with tax rights and marriage licenses and legal marriages should be open to absolutely anyone who wants them for whomever they find groovy enough to love. On CNN I saw a talk between Perez Hilton and this one guy supporting the abolishment of gay marriage, and the opposing fellow definitely slipped out "Well, I think they should be separate but equal, of course." Doesn't that sound like... oh what were those laws? oh yeah, JIM CROW!
reply
- Feature
- Like
Yes. Yes, yes! Most people who are against same-sex marriage defend their point of view with their religious beliefs. Most Christians argue that the Bible is firmly against homosexual relationships by quoting Levicticus 18:22 "You shall not lie with a male as a women, it is an abomination". In spite of this there are churches in the US (The Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church. United Methodist Church -you get the point-) who claim that God's message in the Bible was one of love and tolerance, which would make it possible for both men and women to have homosexual relationships. A further argument of those who are against same-sex marriage is that gay marriage is against the holy union of matrimony, claiming that it causes separation and -seeing as the Bible does not approve of this union- would be a serious fault to their believes. On the other hand, the League of Women Voters argues that Proposition 8 (which eliminated same-sex marriage from the Californian Constitution) is a "major threat to the basic Constitution rights" and seeing that the civil union of gay couples would not directly affect any Christian or any other person whose personal believes are against this there should be not even be a debate about this matter. Marriage is the union of two people in love who are committed to each other, no matter if you are black, white, Latino, young, old, straight or gay. In the same manner in Plato's "The Banquet" Aristoteles tells the story of how people used to be not only women or man but they were men/men, men/women or women/women and as a punishment of the gods they were separated, this being the reason why people would always be looking for their other half. How is it that over thousands of years ago, homosexuality was accepted as another form of the same love and gay-couples nowadays are denied a basic civil right? There is no reason why anybody should feel like a second-class citizen and be denied of such a basic right.
reply
- Feature
- Like
I'm a bisexual woman who is engaged to a wonderful man whom I love with all my heart. Now coming from both worlds I just don't understand why gays can't have the same rights as me and my future husband. It's common sense. Plus the government would get money out of it, and lord knows our country needs it.
reply
- Feature
- Like
most definitely. who the hell are we to say two people can't get married, regardless of sexual preference. it doesn't make any sense. but apparently some laws just can't stray away from that book of ideas.
reply
- Feature
- Like
So in Canada you can marry the same sex, but I guess the real question is will they ever be looked at as normal. I dont think I could ever get used to that as normal, however I am not against it and feel they should have all the rights as anyone else.
reply
- Feature
- Like
