agreed. if it WAS a question about procreation, being gay at all would have to be banned/made illegal. but seeing as how it's not the issue, and there ARE going to be homosexuals either way, why not let them get married?
What about shemales? What defines sex, is it only whether you've got something hanging between your legs or not? What about breasts as well then? Facial features? What if a shemale and a woman want to get married, is that gay or straight? What about straight couples where one member gets a sex change and they remained married? Would they be required to divorce, since they are now of similar sex? In a world of such advanced methods and scienes, there are no more lines, or patches of varying gray. I only like my wang on women, so where does that put me for marriage?
you, sir, have perplexed me beyong my wits. i now sit here in the darkness awaiting in fear of my terrible demise. i fear that my brain shall soon implode, and as reaction, the pressure in my head will cause my brain to explode (due to the pressure being increased from the implosion), thus, causing my entire body to spontaneously combust. i am terrified. and for that, i applaud you, kind sir.
actually, some of the founders did believe in a god/God, but not the God of Christianity like many people often argue...
Um, quite a few of the founding fathers were Christian, but they won't teach that in public schools because of political correctness bull****. After reading a lot more and thinking about it quite a bit, Gay unions are fine, just don't call it marrage. And don't give them any tax breaks, I don't want to have to pay for it
really? i don't even go to a public school. i go to a private CHRISTIAN school, which is why i found it quite strange that my BIBLE teacher told me this info, which led to me investigating it.
whats love got to do with it? sorry had to.... Anywho.. I just can't see it as being right. I mean I accept that yes they can love someone as much or more then someone of the different sex. I just think, That even if a man or a women aren't able to reproduce the parts are or were originally there. I still think that this is an important part in Marriage. I guess I am having trouble wrapping my head around the fact that people can love someone of the same sex as much as a straight person can love someone of a different sex. Also maybe cause I have religon in my roots even though im agnostic now I just don't agree. However, Freedom is freedom, and in order for our country to work we need our freedoms and that means even a gay couples pursuit of happiness must be allowed by the government. So yeah. I see both sides and Im still on the fence just still leaning on the no side. Yet I want to agree because hey the more gay guys get married means there are less guys going for girls. Maybe they can make it one sided eh? (meant as a joke don't take it anyother way. cause there is no other way to take it)
if reproduction is important in marriage, what about couples where one is sterile or infertile and the other can reproduce? > 6,000,000,000 people on earth, the last thing we need is more babies. thats why i will adopt. you see, the ability to reproduce isn't important, love is. would you marry someone that could reproduce or someone you love?
Your comment shows a misunderstanding that many people have (I know you were joking, and I'm not saying that you share the misconception) about gay marriage. Most of the gay/lesbian couples that want to get married are pursuing it because it's legal recognition of something that they already know: that they're in a stable loving relationship. Gay guys who are trying to get married aren't going to be competing for girls anyway, because they're already happy with their partner. Getting married isn't going to change that, it'll just make it "official" in the eyes of the law. Of course, the other reason for gay or lesbian marriage is that it's a public celebration of two people's love and commitment to each other, and for *that* reason if none other, gay marriage should be allowed IMHO Cheers Buzzy
i had a discussion in class about gay marriage a couple weeks back and it kinda made me think. first off, i went to a private christian school (i just finished and graduated ) so all the teachers are (or at least claim to be) christians. so my teacher tried to argue that the only reason gays want to get married is to get tax breaks, etc. so then that made me think and i asked him why he didn't just get married within the church, and not worry about the legal marriage junk. he didn't have a response: he said he was different, but couldn't explain why. just curious - what does everyone think of this? (both people for and against gay marriages)
The government's whole agenda is to regulate whatever it can instead of helping. I think there are more pertinent issues that need attention such as fighting cancer, helping the homeless and charities, economic recovery, and other important factors. The gay marriage issue should be left alone. This is another tactic to steer attention away from the war in Iraq.
So does this mean you support the status quo on gay marriage then? "...tactic to steer attention away from the war in Iraq" is pertinent for two reasons: Firstly, according to Bush the war has been over for about a year now - I believe "an end to major hostilities" were his words, although that's not proving terribly accurate right now. Secondly, allegedly one of the reasons the war was started was to divert attention away from the problems with the US domestic economy. Having to divert attention away from a diversion that's gone horribly wrong is never a good look.
i think that gay couples should immediately be granted the option of a registered civil union, provided they can prove history of a stable household (bills, rent payment, joint account etc). In fact this should be available to anyone in this situation. An often overlooked group of people are elderly widows/widowers who live together as friends for mutual support. They effectively live as a married couple, want to be able to visit each other in hospital etc. Nevertheless they still consider themselves married to their dead partners and therefore do not want to remarry, and hence would benefit from a civil union. The other side of marriage (and not for everyone) is the state of being married before god. And that's a matter between you, your priest and god, not the goverment.
Regarding this stuff on Gay/Lesbians not procreating (sp?) A lot of long term same sex couples tend to look towards surrugousy (sp?) or adoption or something of the same....
