Gay Marriage

What's everyone's opinion on it? Personally, I don't have a program with gays, but I don't agree with gay marriage, since it tends to taint the idea of true marriage. But as far as gays go, the only ones that really disgust me are those damn metrosexuals.

 

So, what's the "idea of true marriage", and how does gay marriage taint it?

Personally I don't care. It's up to the individual religious factions to decide for themselves and as I'm not a member of any of them it doesn't seem to be any of my business. I do however support gay civil unions, as that's a government thingy.

 

Idea of true marriage being between a guy and a girl as it has been for centuries.

Maybe 'taint' wasn't the correct word; maybe 'degrade' would be better.

After homosexual marriages are made legal, people will start marrying their pets (I heard a radio broadcast in which some lady called in, claiming she wanted to marry her female dog).

 

lol, bill o'reily made that same stupid argument with the pet marriages.

the way i see it, marriage is between two consenting (human) adults.

actually, it doesn't matter what you call it i suppose. you could call it a 'civil companionship' and avoid the religious conotations. as long as gay partners are allowed to visit eachother in the hospital and get all the tax breaks married couples get, it's fine by me.

also, i'm talking in terms of america, just to remain clear. it's become a big controversy here lately.

 

Someone has to get sad, the Christian people if gays get into their church, and gay people if so they can't get married. They have to compromise, and since the gays are less conservative (they already went against the old Christianity) they could call the marriage someting else.

 

I don't see how marriage necessitates a heterosexual couple to be "true". It's a bit like saying you're not a true Jew unless you practice animal sacrifice: Things change, and not always for the worse. Perhaps you could explain to us why you think gay marriage would "degrade true marriage".

Tell me you're not serious. Tell me you're joking and that you really understand the difference between homosexuality and fucking your toaster.

 

I have to agree with Canis on this one. The only purpose I see for marriage is legal issues, and I don't see why gays shouldn't be able to have it. if people are too bitchy about it call it a civil usnion as Rickiy suggest. (God, it's a me-too fest.) I do however, disagree with gay adoption. I think there's a good chance that the child will be brought up gay. I really don't think that should happen.

On a side note, why not legalise human-animal marriages? Pets could enjoy medicare benefits...Everyone wins.

 

I don't think the evidence supports that. Such a view suggests that homosexuality is a learned behavior rather than a genetic/hormonal/whatever one. Anyway, reminds me of that case where the mother of a lesbian sued for custody of her granddaughter on grounds that the lesbian would raise the kid to be gay. Then everyone realized, who was it that raised the lesbian? The uptight straight chick, that's who.

You know, that could really reduce my vet bills. Good thinking. I'll support it only if we can have human-pet polygamy. :thumbup:

 

While I'm definitely not pro-Church (I'm not a religious person), I think that any religion has the right to preserve itself, if you know what I mean: the Catholic Church, if they went by the scriptures, would NEVER let in gays...you can't begin to take apart people's beliefs, and CHANGE a religion, because of someone else's civil rights.

 

The basic premise of seperation of church and state is that the state and the church are not the same thing. (No shit, right?) Basically all marriages, even those old fashioned guy and girl ones, are civil unions. They're just recognized by a religious establishment. So why not grant the gays civil unions, and then let their prospective churchs decide whether or not they want to accept them?

 

I have no problems with religions not blessing a gay marriage, given that it's up to a religion to decide whether or not it support that. Civil unions I am in favour of though.

You are so, so wrong. I happen to know a fair few lesbians, and their children, and none of them show any signs of growing up to be gay. None of them are man-hating dykes as far as I'm aware, and when you get down to it, the only real difference between gays and straights is who they choose to bonk in bed. If a parent (gay or straight) is teaching their kids that, they shouldn't be parenting in the first place.

 

i agree with Jar here. i had a couple friends brought up by dual mommies... both friends married men. as for the marriage itself, no church should be forced to accept the state's views on marriage, but by the same token, the government should not be swayed by any one church's beliefs. i may think homosexuality is wrong, but it doesn't stop me from having gay friends, and i don't think they should have any less rights then i do. they're private life is really none of my business, and the constitution does say we are all entitled to the pursuit of happiness... even if i find your particular brand of happiness to be kind of kinky.

 

I'm a Christian, pure'n'true... well, actually, I'm probably going to become a Latter Day Saint, but that's besides the point... I personally don't have anything against gay marriage. I won't ever marry a man, but I think that just because I've got no interest in it means that evevryone else should be banned from it. If they want to do it, fine by me. Oh, and if someone wants to marry thier pet then it is absolutely fine by me, because that sure as hell isn't someone I want going out and reproducing with another human.

 

Marriage is an artificial social structure. Monogomy isn't, but marraige - with all its attendant ceremonies and laws - is. Since it's something mankind have created and control, I reckon restricting its applicability for gays can't really be justified without people admitting they disapprove of homosexuality in general.

Of course, that's a very secular view on it, but then you all know I have weird views on religion.

 

I love you Fatman.

 

Of course gay's should be allowed to marry, they deserve to be just as miserable as everyone else...
but in all serious why is it necessary for anyone to seek the approval/aceptence for their choice in lifestyle. One of the church's leading principals (with respect to my VERY limited knowledge of religion of any sort), is... compassion whereever possible. Not to understand one's lifestyle is one thing, but, not to recognise the love between two individual's, what ever their sexual orientation, smack's of hand in the sand crying "I can't see you!".

 

Hoho, you know there was a gay pride march the other day in London, and I thought to myself "What the hell are they still marching for, who gives a toss if you're gay or not." After a moment's thought I realised they probably still have a fair number of equality issues they want addressed (such as marriage) but the fact I thought it made me realise that gays have come a long way in the last couple of decades.

A little mean part of me also thought "What the hell have they got to be proud about, it's not like humping someone's bum is an achievement." I know, I know, I shouldn't be so nasty, but the truth is the same bendy genes that make people gay seem to make a large number of them camp, irritating attention seekers and unforuntely I got the genes that make me want to slap drama queens. I can't help the way I'm made, so don't persecute me for being a mean old git.

 

We won't. I personally like drama... it's like a free tv show during school. I mean, what's better than watching a couple girls get into a cat-fight over some needle-dicked brainless jock?

 

How do you make these transitions...? From gay pride drama queens to cat-fights over brainless jocks?

Ach well, I'll go with it. One of the things in school I thought was the best was that 2 months after Fuse started playing "Stacey's Mom" all the stupid jocks started singing it in the halls. Took a long time for my ears to stop ringing after that

 

Screw original opinions. I'm going to follow Sheriff around and quote, it's easier, and exactly what I was 1going to say anyw1ay .