PDA

View Full Version : Gay Marriage



SicN Twisted
11-08-2004, 12:20 AM
Although it shouldn't, for some reason this pertains to politics.

Yay or nay?

lousyskater
11-08-2004, 12:26 AM
i'm completely for gay marriage. i'm also appalled that 11 states approved bans on gay marriage.
________
Depakote side effects (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/depakote/)

Moose
11-08-2004, 12:40 AM
yay.

the people that oppose gay marriage have never given me a good reason why in my opinion...i see why not, i say yay.

wheelchairman
11-08-2004, 05:46 AM
It was certainly a smack in the face, when a progressive state like the People's Democracy of Oregon, voted against gay marriage.

I'm for equal rights for gays.

Nepthys
11-08-2004, 08:13 AM
I don't see any reason why two people who love each other should not be able to get married if they want to

MindlessSelfIndulgent
11-08-2004, 09:01 AM
I want to marry a homosexual maan.

Nina
11-08-2004, 09:03 AM
it is honestly absolutely not understandable to me how
anybody can not fucking get over gays and that many of
them want to marry as well. i call it ignorance, shuddup.

Mota Boy
11-08-2004, 09:08 AM
I think this issue will be a moot point in a few decades, given then progressive liberalization of social issues in American/world politics. Even in heavily Republican states that overwhelmingly passed the ban one can see that the younger you were, the less likely you were to support banning gay marriage. Eventually we'll grow up as a society and realize that homosexuals are humans too.

Vera
11-08-2004, 09:25 AM
Yay.

Boylove & girlove. *supports*

samr
11-08-2004, 09:51 AM
Gays have civil unions. they dont lose money now.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. IT should be sacred like that. Even if Divorces are high, well thats the man and woman's fault.

wheelchairman
11-08-2004, 09:54 AM
Actually, originally marriage is only meant to be between white man and white woman. So I mean, we've already shamed the tradition marriage now haven't we?

RXP
11-08-2004, 10:11 AM
Yep.

Marriage is unnatural? discuss.

Heat
11-08-2004, 10:18 AM
im for gay marriage... why not? i thinkt it there isnt anything bad about gays

Vera
11-08-2004, 10:40 AM
Marriage is unnatural? discuss.
Who the shit cares whether it is or isn't? Some people will want to make the commitment anyway, some don't.

Izie
11-08-2004, 10:51 AM
/jesus/
You could have used one of those fancy polls in this topic.
anyway, yay ofcourse.

(and it's already legal here anyway)

/jesus/

lousyskater
11-08-2004, 02:17 PM
Gays have civil unions. they dont lose money now.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. IT should be sacred like that. Even if Divorces are high, well thats the man and woman's fault.
religiously it's between a man and a woman. and explain to me how marriage is sacred? do you know how high the divorce rate in the US? 50%. if marriage is so sacred, why do these people completely disregard it? religioous organizations can call gay marriage what ever the hell they want, but in the eyes of the government, it should be considered marriage.
________
WEB SHOWS (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

RXP
11-08-2004, 02:44 PM
Who the shit cares whether it is or isn't? .

I do.

'legal' marriage is a fucking joke. I'd go on a rant about it but I really can't be arsed. If you're gonna get married you can do it non legally so I don't give a shit about gays.

Unnatural Disaster
11-08-2004, 02:44 PM
It seems nowadays that Gays are the only group of people that it's okay to be racist against......

killboypwrheadjx
11-08-2004, 03:05 PM
do u know how rediculous this is all gonna look in a hundred years? its gonna look like segregation and rosa parks and all that bullshit

Tired_Of_You
11-08-2004, 03:13 PM
Yay

Why not? If two people love each other, in my opinion they should have the right to get married if they want to. I know someone who is against gay marriage and he never gave me only 1 good reason to be against that.

nieh
11-08-2004, 06:32 PM
the only reasons anyone has ever given me against gay marriage have been tradition and religion, and neither of those have business in politics and civil rights. Also, gays DON'T have civil union in a lot of states, and even in some of the ones they do, they're not equal to the benefits of a real marriage. In my opinion, gay marriage in a legal sense (i.e. see a judge or someone and get a marriage license) should be allowed. Marriage in a church is a different battle for a different time. There will be liberal churches someday, but the way I see it is, if your Catholic enough to want to get married at a Catholic church (and you don't want to convert and go to a different one) then you should realize that according to Catholicism, it is wrong to be gay (the Good News Bible says "No man shall have sex with another man. God hates that"). Trying to get gays married at a Catholic church is like going to Mecca and praying to Allah while wearing a yarmulka and a star of david around your neck. That's not to say I agree, just that...religion is stupid, and it shouldn't matter if a church is willing to marry you when you can still tell people "we're married" based on a wedding in a courtroom or outside or whatever. Hell, people get married in Vegas all the time without churches. It's still under the eyes of God, just not the stupid, short-sighted, racist God that religions talk about.

SicN Twisted
11-08-2004, 07:55 PM
I do think that marriage doesn't imply any sort of commitment. The religious, "sacred" definition and proving to God you're in love and worthy to bang. In reality, marriage is only a transparent commitment. Couples can be just as committed without getting married.

The Cheshire Cat
11-08-2004, 08:31 PM
My stance on gay marriage is that if the Catholic church wants to disallow same-sex marriages in the religious sense, that's their perogative, it's their religion and their ceremony, so it's okay if gays aren't allowed to have christian/catholic marriages.

However, since the government grants special rights to married couples, they should still allow same-sex marriages in the legal sense. What ever happened to the seperation of church and state? Once the government started doing marriage in courtrooms, they should have realized that they might have to differ from religious marriages at some point.

punk_flamingo
11-09-2004, 03:20 AM
im for gay marriage...i know the majority of them dont give a fuck, but it would be nice if they had the option to marry or not

Bryan875
11-09-2004, 04:28 PM
i am personally against it because i belive marrige beween a man and a woman is sacred....but i dont think that by getting married they should get perks for it....the perks are the only thing that makes gays want to get married in the first place so taking away the perks would pretty much end it in general.

SicN Twisted
11-09-2004, 07:26 PM
All marriage is in the perks. In less you're a religious nutjob who believes marriage prove the sancitity of your love to Christ, marriage is NOT sacred. It's just insurance.

ThrashedThrasher
11-09-2004, 07:46 PM
I'm totally for it, I personally don't see why it shouldn't be legal, they're just two people that love eachother that happen to be of the same sex. And hell it's not like they're bothering you or hurting you in any way now are they?

Izie
11-10-2004, 12:58 AM
Yay for gay marriage. Because gay people are people just like anyone else, and they should have the rights like everyone else. Now the fact that's generlly not the case... I don't like it.

And as far as marriage in general goes, the marriage in council is basically a piece of paper, a contract. Not much to do with love if you ask me, just with the legal/social regulations. Now, I think they do actually have a "samenwoningcontract" here in Belgium, which would be similar to marriage in the legal/social terms, it just wouldn't be called marriage.

Thus, marriage as an institution is being ruined. Actually, it's already been ruined.

Marrying in a church is a different matter, but that has been ruined too, even more than the normal marriage, so... The contract about living together may be the best solution.

lousyskater
11-10-2004, 01:38 AM
i am personally against it because i belive marrige beween a man and a woman is sacred....

once again, marriage is NOT SACRED IN THIS DAY AND AGE! with a 50% divorce rate, how could it be sacred? i noticed that people don't seem to have concern about divorce and other marrital problems, but the moment two dudes or two chicks want to get married people get defensive about it because they think it's disgusting and sick! does that make any sense? NO! should we be concerned that to people of the same gender wanting to get married? NO! we should be focusing more on marrital problems, not gay marriage.
________
Vaporite The Solo Review (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/)

Special Delivery BR.
11-10-2004, 12:54 PM
Yeaa... .Equals rights for gays..... Im completely for the gay marriage.. and yea, why cant ppl who love each other to marry:?????..
Its normal, and, whatever, what they 9gays) do dont prejudice us....... they have their own lives, and us, our lives....
.
If a " normal" couple can marry, they can..
If " normal" couple can ... i dunnno the word in english to say that.. creat a kid who isnt from them... (add, i dunno) ... gays can it tooo...

etc etc.... we all r humans.., that kind of ppl (gays) arent different of us........ we all deserve equals rights ;)

(sorry about my fuckin bad english lol)

Lithuanian Offspring
11-10-2004, 12:59 PM
Yeah, I don't think the government should care whether the gays are married or not. I mean whats the point in banning them from marriage. I'd understand if the gays tried to get married in a church then that would be funny. Anyway, there is no way in stopping love.

dirty_magic
11-10-2004, 02:42 PM
if thats the way people want go go in life then fair play to them

the_GoDdEsS
11-10-2004, 03:10 PM
Yay for sure.

I agree that marriage has been ruined. It's just a formal thing. Although I've been raised in surroundings where marriage is the ideal state. And I don't know if I ever want to get married. I can as well live with the person. But, digression.

What I want to know is where in the Bible there is a reference to love between man+man and woman+woman as being wrong. Sure, marriage is defined as the bound of man and woman. BUT were the other possibilities ever excluded? Who excluded them? The narrow-minded church? Do you think God would be against homosexuality if he exists/existed. I truly don't believe so. Love your next. Is all. You're free to love and marry anyone.

nieh
11-10-2004, 03:34 PM
What I want to know is where in the Bible there is a reference to love between man+man and woman+woman as being wrong. Sure, marriage is defined as the bound of man and woman. BUT were the other possibilities ever excluded? Who excluded them? The narrow-minded church? Do you think God would be against homosexuality if he exists/existed. I truly don't believe so. Love your next. Is all. You're free to love and marry anyone.

The book of Leviticus (sp?). I forget the passage but I can tell you that in the Good News Bible (the one that's re-worded a little for middle school aged folks) says "No man shall have sex with another man. God hates that" In the same area it also says that you should not have sex with your uncle, your aunt, your sister, etc. but man + man is the only one it says "God hates that" next to it. It also FAILS to mention that women can't have sex with other women (though people argue that in cases like that it's implied because 'paper was expensive back then' but if that were the case then in all the translations and amendments to it, you'd think someone would think to have added it by now). It never mentions the love itself as being wrong, just the sex. Also the rules according to the bible are that you can't have sex unless you've been married. So that automatically rules out gay sex because they're not allowed to get married. Hooray for the founders of Christianity! Justifying prejudice from beyond the grave.

the_GoDdEsS
11-10-2004, 03:54 PM
The book of Leviticus (sp?). I forget the passage but I can tell you that in the Good News Bible (the one that's re-worded a little for middle school aged folks) says "No man shall have sex with another man. God hates that" In the same area it also says that you should not have sex with your uncle, your aunt, your sister, etc. but man + man is the only one it says "God hates that" next to it. It also FAILS to mention that women can't have sex with other women (though people argue that in cases like that it's implied because 'paper was expensive back then' but if that were the case then in all the translations and amendments to it, you'd think someone would think to have added it by now). It never mentions the love itself as being wrong, just the sex. Also the rules according to the bible are that you can't have sex unless you've been married. So that automatically rules out gay sex because they're not allowed to get married. Hooray for the founders of Christianity! Justifying prejudice from beyond the grave.

Thank you. The Bible's all too human, that's what is bad about it. And I wouldn't trust the information after all those translations. I do know how translations can change the meanings. Still, thanks for clearing that up.

malumboman
11-16-2004, 08:30 PM
the gay marraige ban is a huge step forward for the USA. theres no way it should be legal for gays to have any rights at all. we already made the mistake of granting unnecessary rights to women!

Vera
11-17-2004, 10:06 AM
Sarcasm?

*raises an eyebrow*

acgc2002
11-17-2004, 10:18 AM
Although I am not a lesbian, I am for the gay marriage because I root for everybody to find their happiness, either alone, with someone from the other sex or with someone with the same sex.
I know many "normal" couples that are unhappy together, as well as I know many gay couples that are really happy together.
For instance, I like guys... but what if i liked girls???? I should not be allowed to be happy or to marry or to build my life because I like someone that has my sex???
I just think anyone should be respected, either being gay or not, ´cause this is just a matter of taste.
Just be happy. :rolleyes:

CommonRider
11-17-2004, 11:41 AM
i feel indifferent if gay marriage is banned or not, but im strongly for full benfited civil unions at least. But i really dont see a fall of society if gay people are allowed to marry, its ridiculus to say it has to be banned because "it is defined between a man and a woman." Is there any better arguments than that?

malumboman
11-17-2004, 01:46 PM
god made adam and eve not adam and steve

Not Ozymandias
11-20-2004, 09:48 PM
Marriage is a useless, obselete ritual. If gays want in, it's their funeral.