Gay Marriage

1. 59

   Lovely Nightmaresposted 11 years ago

   Honestly, I think Gay Marriage should be legalized EVERYWHERE. I truly don't see any problem as to why it isn't already legalized. People, innocent citizens, humans, should not be criticized or judged or even discriminated for something they can't control! You can't choose who you love. No matter what, you can't. You love who you love. End of story.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Paul Wingertposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Fully agree.

      replyreport
   2. 62

      nightwork4posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      nothing could be more true. that's one of the things i love about Canada, we finally saw through the religious hype and put it on the back burner.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         brimancandyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I love Canada! You don't even have to be gay to notice that Canadians are far less stressed about everything. I have been to Toronto and Montreal, and actually feel safe walking down the street by myself. Would not do that in Detroit or Chicago.  It's not a gay thing either, there is just no feeling of safety here at all, no matter who you are.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            A Driveby Quipperposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I feel safe in Florida where we can stand our ground.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               You stand your ground against?   Or for?   What exactly?

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  The rampaging hordes of gay men that are actively hunting him down to give him a makeover... and redecorate his house... and teach him to shave WITH the grain. 
                  
                  A singularly well-dressed mob they are...

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     

                     replyreport
   3. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I totally concur with this premise.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I totally agree.

      replyreport
   5. 72

      Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I dunno about "gay marriage."
      
      I mean, I didn't get "straight married"--I just got married.
      
      Gay people don't go to their gay jobs, gay park their gay cars, gay eat their gay dinner, get a gay mortgage, or go gay fishing on the weekends, do they?
      
      So, mutually consenting gay adults should be allowed to get married, just like mutually consenting everybody else.
      
      No need to call it something different.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         K9keystrokesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         +1...brilliantly said Jeff.

         replyreport
   6. 55

      whoisitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It seems Anne Heche can choose whom she loves.
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Heche#Relationships

      replyreport
      1. 59

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I know you think you have a point... I'm just not sure what it might be.

         replyreport
         1. 55

            whoisitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Well, that's too bad.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Nah... it's alright.  It would have been a silly conversation anyway.
               
               I'm sure your point was somewhere along the lines of "She chose to stop being gay".
               
               Then I would have said bisexual doesn't mean you are gay sometimes and straight sometimes... it means you are bi-sexual all the time.
               
               And then you would have failed to get it and told me I was wrong about something that you have no idea about.
               
               And I would have walked away from the conversation having less faith in humanity in general.

               replyreport
               1. 55

                  whoisitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I choose not to converse with those who are entitled to remove me from the forums. Thank you have a nice day.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Well hell... If I would have known I could do that...
                     
                     *Goes looking for whatever screen has the options to do that*

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Find them for me too, will you?  If I could remove folks from forums, I wouldn't have to work nearly so hard to converse with them intelligently.  I'm feeling lazy today.

                        replyreport
                        1. 77

                           Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           But we can flag them for personal insults

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Ah, this is true.  I so rarely feel insulted though.  When a person is just flat out unable to discuss something without resorting to name calling and insults and all that jazz, I sort of feel that the discussion has ended in my favor already. 
                              
                              I have, however, reported posts that were insulting to others.  I don't like bullies.

                              replyreport
                              1. 77

                                 Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Well said

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Thanks. 

                                    replyreport
2. 59

   michelemacwritesposted 11 years ago

   I fully agree with you. Just as any other major social change, it will take time and the passing of generations before our gay society is accepted and treated  equally and with respect.

   replyreport
3. 61

   mayacatposted 11 years ago

   Of course you're right. Love is love no matter who it involves. Luckily for us, we are well on our way to making this a reality.

   replyreport
4. 59

   atleeageroposted 11 years ago

   you refered to them as ' innocent citizens',and  'humans'...i think that is stretching the consept associated with these words far,considering there is nothing innocent about being gay,and in all hitherto it has  and is always an 'inhuman' act

   replyreport
   1. 62

      nightwork4posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      wrong. there is nothing "inhuman" about being gay. the inhuman part is thinking that it is a bad thing. if anything, you are the inhuman one and your mind is messed up thanks to your religious beliefs.

      replyreport
   2. 78

      psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      So you think gay people are corrupt non-humans. That's... unfriendly.
      
      I think the same of people who cannot correctly punctuate sentences. They should be banned from marrying.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
   3. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "considering there is nothing innocent about being gay,and in all hitherto it has  and is always an 'inhuman' act"
      
      You are very obviously a person who is steeped in tribal law that gives no consideration to love,  understanding, compassion, anything beyond your "professional" learning....... could any of this be true?
      
      You might call it presumptuous of me to say such things about you when I don't know you....you would be right, of course.
      
      But you are also very presumptuous when you talk such ignorant rubbish about homosexual people.  You don't have the right to pass judgment, regardless of what you have read in your big "Book."   
      
      Love, compassion, understanding are essential if you are going to live by that "Book."  Also, there is a need to look inside of yourself, judge what you find there first, and deal with it, before you cast demons upon others you do not understand.

      replyreport
   4. 62

      Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      What's an inhuman act? Being attracted to or falling in love with someone of the same gender? Or are you simply unable to get your head all the anal stuff ? Which, btw, is also practiced in hetro relationships- and is not necessarily part of a same sex relationship. Two people of the same gender attracted to one another, how utterly inhuman!

      replyreport
      1. 59

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I actually worked out something about this in another thread... I was typing as I was thinking/debating and actually had a bit of a opinional epiphany.
         
         Here is what my little mind came up with... expanded.  For society to change there has to be a shift in the moral majority to the moral minority.  That's what is happening now.  More and more people are coming to find gay relationships acceptable within their own moral code.  Those who are still opposed to it morally are finding themselves more and more in the minority.  Where they used to be able to find solice and affirmation of their "rightness" they are now seeing that the majority disagrees with them. To most that equates to effectively being told what they believe is wrong.
         
         No one likes that.  They want to go back to everyone agreeing with them.  They are forced into a situation where they either admit they are wrong or join a minority.  As these people are internally well aware of how THEY treated the minority when they were the majority they really really don't want to face that the majority now has the power to do it to them.  Now THEY are going to have to watch their mouth and be careful with THEIR actions or face being outcasts.
         
         It's a tough pill to swallow so they find ways to be spiteful and vendictive (like trolling) to at least be able to put a thorn in their perceived tormentors side.
         
         Those of us that are for Gay rights should be happy to see it... it means that they acknowledge (even unconsciously) that their ideals are falling by the wayside. If they weren't threatened then they'd just ignore us.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            So very well said! I personally wish we could get past thinking in terms of black and white as wrong and right and realize that gray is where most of us live, we are humankind...

            replyreport
   5. 79

      lanablackmoorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Now that is fascinating. All this time, I had no idea that my being in love with the same woman I've known for 11 years qualified me as inhuman. I do have to wonder what my relationship is, though, if not a human act: A marsupial act? An act of God? Your theory is very interesting, but it does leave some pressing questions!
      
      LOL No, but seriously. Why do people like this care so much about things that will never practically affect them in 100 years? I feel incredibly sorry for anyone who is of such a fragile mental and emotional state that the mere sight of a gay couple in public is enough to send them into a tizzy. We're not fundamentally different from any other couples. We want the same rights every other American taxpayer is entitled to. We want to fall in love, get married, have families, start productive careers and live happy, normal lives just like everyone else. Most of all, we want to be left alone. If you feel that any of this requires your input, I strongly suggest a hobby. Might I recommend crochet?

      replyreport
   6. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Ignorance can be excused when there is no information available to counteract it. 
      But ignorance, combined with vindictive and self-righteous beliefs, is unforgivable when there is so much information presented, particularly in Hubpages.
      "atleeagero" you are so, so ill-informed!

      replyreport
5. 59

   Dame Scribeposted 11 years ago

   I'm a Aboriginal and our beliefs are that they have 'dual' spirits in one body therefore making them special and the 'Man Upstairs' put them here to learn lessons, for our own lives. Forcing others to live by the word of a 'bible' written by men just isn't a strong enough argument when we are created to learn and think for ourselves. I think it's fantastic that isolation and ostracization of LGBT's is coming to a end and acceptance is fast approaching. It shows, we are growing/evolving, as a society. A better society and people.

   replyreport
6. 65

   Astra Nomikposted 11 years ago

   I agree with this view. People will gravitate towards the strongest and brightest most welcoming light. And whatever place grants this freedom the most readily will be the place where the most fulfilled couples and contented people live. It will be the place that other countries or societies have to aspire to or else they will wither like forgotten grape vines that get the least water or sunshine.
   
   Love is love. And it can't be stopped. It comes from within us all. And the sense of wanting to belong to the one we love is not a thing that can be governed by others autocratically.
   
   I would love to have the same rights as someone in a hetero marriage.

   replyreport
7. 77

   bn9900posted 11 years ago

   If being gay is right the why has it taken since the beginning of time to get to this point, why didn't you come out sooner?  Thats right, because it is wrong and sick...that is my opinion and thus am sick of the gay pride stuff...that is just plain wrong, keep it in the bedroom.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "If being gay is right the why has it taken since the beginning of time to get to this point, why didn't you come out sooner?"
      I guess you think all black people should still be slaves since it took them so long to get rights. Oh and women should be unable to own land or vote. After all it took us sooo many years to get those abilities. I hope you've never had anal sex!

      replyreport
      1. 59

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You do realize he was baiting right?  He'll see profile views jump because of it.

         replyreport
         1. 92

            peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I know but sometimes I can't keep my mouth shut when idiots speak.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               They know that... that's why they speak in the first place.

               replyreport
8. 65

   Astra Nomikposted 11 years ago

   Why does the very idea of someone being gay cause so much loathing and lack of compassion? How can anyone govern or legislate the mere involvement of one person romantically with another? How does anyone legislate that right and that freedom that straight people enjoy so much. How can marriage be good for some and not for the rest of society? How is it that one group gets chosen over another? Is this right? Is this fair and just? Is this the "American" way? I think the American system of fairness will prove just in the end and make it legal finally ... and therefore proper, as it should be.
   
   I find it incredible in the year 2013 to see some small numbers of people still being afraid of a little word like "gay".

   replyreport
   1. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      This should be a total nonissue.    There are more pressing issues such as unemployment, the state of our children's education and general survival, and the upcoming fiscal cliff which will inadvertently affect all of us.

      replyreport
9. 0

   advicewithspiceposted 11 years ago

   Regardless to what anyone says.  It is wrong.  God did not make Eve for Eve or Adam for Adam.  If you don't like what i'm saying, then don't read it. I, as individual have no say in what other people do, UNLESS they are breaking a law, hurting a child, etc.  It is none of my business who wants to marry who, HOWEVER, it is wrong. Game.Set.Match. End of story.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "It is wrong"  ....  in your opinion.   Not an absolute, because where you have two people in love with each other, When two people are in a loving relationship, there is no victim involved, except when caused by those who presume to sit in judgment of them.... no god does that, only fellow human beings like yourself.  So you make the victim(s).  Get it? You are the guilty one, by making victims of prejudice. 
      
      In you country, there are crimes of violence perpetrated upon innocent parties, creating victims, most cruelly.   Go and attend to those.  Fight violence and cruelty.  Feed the hungry.  Help to heal the sick.  Stand up for the oppressed.  Apply all the love you can give to your fellow humans, especially the women who are down-trodden for the convenience of men.  Look after the soil, the other living things which are subject to our human ignorance and abuse.
      
      All of these things will take up so much of your time, that you don't have the energy, or the inclination, to worry about what others are doing in their private lives.   Also, remember that the "god" you speak of is only your personal understanding of things, it is not a proven entity.   Many people do not accept the existence of such a "god" so you cannot expect us to agree with your understanding. 
      
      (Or maybe you personally have something in your own life which is secret and you are feeling guilty about, so you take it out on others who are vulnerable, just to hide your own guilt.  Is this the case? If so, deal with it before pointing your finger at others.)

      replyreport
   2. 78

      psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Except that you are allowing it to be against the law for them to marry. So you are forcing them to make it your business. 
      
      Kind of a Catch-22 unless you support legalization first.

      replyreport
10. 0

    advicewithspiceposted 11 years ago

    comprehension escapes you.  Anyone who believes in the Bible comprehends what I mean, other than that you are lost.  Moreover, God will judge them. There is no escaping that.  That is what is wring with the world today.  People think they can do what they wish and ignore GOD's word.  God's word is the final say, as all will soon see. game set match.

    replyreport
    1. 72

       Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       "That is what is wring with the world today.  People think they can do what they wish and ignore GOD's word."
       
       This is usually code for "I can't bear the thought of someone somewhere being happy doing things I find icky, so I'm going to pretend that GOD shares my prejudice. Maybe it'll scare people into not doing icky stuff where I can't see it or even know about it, and it'll certainly make me feel superior."

       replyreport
       1. 0

          advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Ignorance is in your post.  If you are ignorant to GOD"s word, that is your problem.  Besides, where is the prejudice you see in my post.  Your ignorance clouds your judgement. game . set. match.

          replyreport
          1. 72

             Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             "Ignorance is in your post. If you are ignorant to GOD"s word, that is your problem."
             Nope. Sorry. I'm fairly well-versed (heh, see what I did there?) in the Bible.
             
             "Like it or not Jeff, that is what's real."
             It may be real, I guess. There's no proof one way or another. Then again, it may be just you using God as an excuse for co-opting the power of government to bully gay people.
             
             I can't know for sure what God wants, and neither can you. I can, however, live my own life according to my best understanding of what He wants me to do. It would be unconscionable, though, for me to force others to live their lives according to what I think God wants.
             
             Tell me, do you wear blended fabrics? (difficult not to in the modern age...)
             Do you eat shrimp, crab, prawns, or lobster?
             Had a cheeseburger lately?
             Had contact with a menstruating woman? (Are you sure? Did you check!?)
             Ever eat ham, bacon, pork, etc?
             
             'Cos all of that stuff is just as forbidden as abomination unto the Lord as a man lying with a man is.
             
             If you're not also willing to ban shrimp and bacon (and especially bacon-wrapped shrimp!) along with people of the same sex getting married, then your whole "'cos GOD said so" argument collapses.
             
             Game. Set. Match.

             replyreport
             1. 0

                advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                FYI.  I do not eat pork, cannot stand shrimp-they are hideous. I urge you to educate yourself.

                replyreport
                1. 72

                   Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                   How about blended fabrics? Do you wear those? How about pepperoni pizza? How about cheeseburgers? Do you shave or cut your hair?
                   
                   If the answer to any of the above questions is yes, you have no business telling two men they can't get married.
                   
                   I urge you to educate yourself.

                   replyreport
                   1. 0

                      advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                      Again, I urge you to educate yourself, and moreover, read my post correctly.  Where in my post did I say that?  Exactly!  You're obviously angry, and not thinking well, which is typical.  I said what I said.  GOD has the final say. point blank. Game.Set.Match.  Comprende?

                      replyreport
                      1. 72

                         Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                         "Where in my post did I say that?"
                         You didn't; you avoided the question entirely, kind of like a politician who gets asked something he really doesn't want to answer.
                         
                         "GOD has the final say."
                         And you don't speak for God, thank goodness.
                         
                         I'm not angry, not a bit. You're just in the wrong. You're welcome to believe whatever nonsense you want about what God wants--that's what freedom of religion means.
                         
                         But you're not welcome to use what you believe as an excuse to force others to live the way you want them to live. (That's also what freedom of religion means.)
                         
                         Comprende?

                         replyreport
                         1. 67

                            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                            where the heck is my "like" button?

                            replyreport
                         2. 0

                            advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                            Grow up, and learn the meaning of Game.set. match. lol.  what am I saying, as my fiend says, I don't talk to fools. I don't speak the language of idiot, I see you are well versed.

                            replyreport
                            1. 67

                               JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                               Didn't Jesus say that anyone who calls someone a fool is in danger of hell?  Got your sunscreen on?
                               
                               Game.  Set.  Match.  You do get that YOU'RE three only one that thinks those three words are actually cool, right?

                               replyreport
                               1. 0

                                  advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                  Are you a teenager?

                                  replyreport
                                  1. 59

                                     A Driveby Quipperposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                     Not a teenager. "Game.  Set.  Match." is old school.

                                     replyreport
                               2. 0

                                  advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                  You couldn't possible have a life. You're ridiculous.  You obviously don't even read the Bible, so watch what you say.  Anyone who adds to it, or takes away from it will have plagues added to them.  You really need to grow up, I know teenagers that have better discussions.  You obviously have low comprhension.

                                  replyreport
                                  1. 67

                                     JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                     I actually have a degree in theology, read Greek, Latin and Hebrew and have been studying the Bible for over 15 years as an adult.  Thanks.  Matthew 5:22

                                     replyreport
                                  2. 59

                                     MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                     So many conservative Christians are going to be cursed with plagues then...
                                     
                                     http://conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project
                                     
                                     The site boasts over 450 million views by Conservative Christians...
                                     
                                     I'm waiting to see boils and locusts... Should be fun to watch.

                                     replyreport
                                     1. 59

                                        Disappearingheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                        I looked at the link and oh my.....it's a bit of a worry isn't it? American right wing politics interpreted from the bible...it's horrible. The use of "liberal" as some kind of swear word!!! It appears that the opposite of liberal is someone who wants to control what others do and think.

                                        report
                            2. 72

                               Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                               Grow up, and learn the meaning of Game.set. match. lol.
                               This is amusing: someone who ends his sentences with "lol" is telling someone else to "grow up." Hilarious.
                               
                               Also, I know the meaning of Game. Set. Match. used in this context. It basically means an intellectually lazy person is declaring victory without having achieved it.
                               
                               what am I saying, as my fiend says, I don't talk to fools.
                               Perhaps not, but apparently I do. Oh, well. It's not the first time.

                               replyreport
       2. 0

          advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Like it or not Jeff, that is what's real.  Suck it up and move on.

          replyreport
    2. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thank you, but I have seen what a "belief in the bible" does to people, and am thankful that I have moved beyond that childish make-believe.
       I have no need for a superstitious god; no need for a judgmental god, because that task is taken over by humans - who use every excuse in the world for trying to drag people into that guilt-trip.  All because of a fictitious belief that there is a life in another dimension after we die.
       Believe on, my friend.  When your "time" comes, you will have missed the opportunity for doing more good in the life you have been blessed with.  There is nothing for you beyond that point, so concentrate on Now.

       replyreport
       1. 72

          Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Also, if he really believes in all the rules of the Bible, he's probably just as condemned as everyone else--if he eats bacon, shrimp, cheeseburgers, pepperoni pizzas, or owls (no kidding--there's a commandment against eating owls!), wears blended fabrics, shaves his beard, works on the Sabbath (which may or may not be Saturday, not Sunday), has a tattoo, etc, etc, etc, he's on the highway to Hell.
          
          But of course, none of those commandments are even important--the only one we need to focus on is the one that says OMG, Noe Butsecks!!!1!!eleven!!
          
          It's easier to follow the commandments that tell you not to do the stuff you don't want to do anyway. The commandments against doing stuff you want to do but that hurts nobody else? Those ones you can rationalize away.

          replyreport
       2. 0

          advicewithspiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Gee, I wonder you got here, jonnycomelately.  Believe what you believe, how can anyone be so idiotic, yes, I said it.  I hope that means you don't celebrate Christmas, since there is no GOD.  I can see now how far off the world really is, just as the Bible stated.

          replyreport
    3. 61

       tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       God will judge ALL...this is true:)

       replyreport
11. 55

    ftclickposted 11 years ago

    I've lived in big cities & have no problems with gays as I deal with them in work and recreational related activities. I do have a problem with redefining the term marriage. Marriage was meant to be between a man and a woman. The woman is supposed to hold her virginity until marriage in 100s of cultures worldwide and then bear a child. While it is true those cultures and America have gay populations (most likely just 5 to 10%) this ancestral tradition becomes completely wiped out when it is a man and a man or woman and a woman. I can say that probably 90% of you who are in their late 30s and up did not even question why gays can't marry from your teens to mid-20s. It all of a sudden just became fashionable to join the bandwagon at the turn of the century b/c gay media has important positions and is now inventing ways to get straights on the train.
    
    The gay adoption and advanced reproductive technologies is allowing single moms, single men and gay couples to raise children as well. I am against that too.  It cannot be called a "marriage" as traditionally for the past 2000 years. It will always be different since it is a man and a man or woman/woman and be treated as such. A Caucasian man and Asian woman is a marriage, just like a African man and Caucasian woman, or Latino man and African woman. It has to be called different , and obviously is "Gay Marriage".  The term seems to be the problem. If  gays want typical marital tax benefits so be it but it cannot ever be termed the same as 90% of society's long-standing tradition. No, it is not discrimination. Because it is unique on its face. Hetero is different from Homo. Straight is different from gay. Maybe the term unionized should be revisited. Our society works & engages with gays everyday. Sorry, we work and make friendships with "people" each day. Love is love, true. Let people live in harmony. We should be able to agree on this and move on if done right so no segments of society are offended.

    replyreport
    1. 92

       peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       "The gay adoption and advanced reproductive technologies is allowing single moms, single men and gay couples to raise children as well. I am against that too."
       Wow so you support children not getting adopted. Quite sad.

       replyreport
    2. 72

       Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       "I can say that probably 90% of you who are in their late 30s and up did not even question why gays can't marry from your teens to mid-20s."
       
       Well, since most of us are straight, it never occurred to us. And since, back then, very very few gay folks (who are a small minority anyway) were asserting their right to equal treatment under the law, nobody ever suggested it to most of us.
       
       "It all of a sudden just became fashionable"
       'Fashionable' has nothing to do with it.
       Treating all people equally under the law has everything to do with it. There is no compelling reason for the government to prevent two informed, competent, consenting adults from joining their lives together in marriage. Nobody is harmed when this happens, not even people who think two dudes doing it is 'icky'.

       replyreport
       1. 55

          ftclickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Peeples,   you have your opinion. If I don't agree with you it is "sad" ? OK, your opinion but notice I don't have to belittle you for having one. I don't think gay supporters would say this when pushing an agenda.
          
          Jeff,
          C'mon it is a trend. There could've been a trend the opposite way but people accept gays for their stereotypes as being funny, artistic and gentrification of neighborhoods.
          
          You are correct. nobody is harmed. But it is not marriage as defined or accepted from 1000s of years ago. How are they not treated equally? You always move to consenting adults or people. You leave out same gender on purpose. 
          America does not discriminate based on race, gender or sexual orientation. So that is the inequality hot button area. OK. The problem is the constitution will never override the bible states and I am not religious. Neither will it fly in all countries.  So, gays are in a battle and the war will not be won. Unless of course, some states or regions actually do secede from the union which some prophets said will happen. I know we have gay senators so it looks like the uphill push is paying off and will get there.
          
          I believe that, "I now pronounce you man and man" is not a traditional marriage. Call it something else.  I could live with, "I now pronounce you spouse and spouse".? IDK.
          
          Jeff, is man and man ever the same as man and woman? Answer that 100 times and see what you come up with? man and man can never be equal to man and woman. simple. EOD.
          Plus, since America loves to categorize everything gay marriage will always be separate just like the census separates your origin. This has broadened  in just the past few years.
          All I said is it has to be classified differently as "gay marriage" or union but not just "marriage". I never said to not allow them to marry. For me to not treat people equally would be hypocritical since I am a minority, a growing one but still a minority.

          replyreport
          1. 92

             peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             "If I don't agree with you it is "sad" ? OK, your opinion but notice I don't have to belittle you for having one."
             There are over 500,000 children sitting in the foster care system in the US alone. I don't think anyone can really say that denying them a warm, safe, loving home isn't sad.
             Personally I was one of those children that never got adopted and I would have taken a gay set of parents any day over the straight ones I was born with. It's not just MY opinion. It's millions of grown foster children who went without parents opinion!

             replyreport
             1. 55

                ftclickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Very good point. Now, I really agree with you . I was shortsighted and was defensive. Good thing we can share some experiences and facts. I now wish I could remove what I wrote earlier. If there are good parents who can offer a good loving environment then it should be OK no matter gay, single or straight. I will just write less. At least I don't tweet on impulse

                replyreport
          2. 72

             Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             C'mon it is a trend.
             Well, sure: it's part of an ongoing trend to extend equal rights under the law to more and more of our citizens. I hope it continues. But it has nothing to do with fashion.
             
             You are correct. nobody is harmed.
             So why should it be prohibited, then?
             
             But it is not marriage as defined or accepted from 1000s of years ago.
             No, it isn't. If it were marriage as defined or accepted from 1000s of years ago, it'd be a case of a man marrying a woman by paying her father ten sheep and a cow. Her consent wouldn't be required, and she might be the fellow's second or third wife. So no, it's not the same kind of marriage from biblical times, but then, neither is mine.
             
             How are they not treated equally?
             They're not allowed to get married. Duh.
             
             You always move to consenting adults or people. You leave out same gender on purpose.
             That's right, because two adults have the same rights as any other two adults. We don't forbid two men from going into business together, nor do we forbid a man and a woman from going into business together. Why should we forbid two men from marrying one another? There's no compelling reason to prohibit this.
             
             America does not discriminate based on race, gender or sexual orientation. So that is the inequality hot button area.
             Well, it shouldn't, but it does.
             
             The problem is the constitution will never override the bible states
             Yes, it can and has--there's no teacher-led worship/prayer in public schools, exactly because the constitution overrode the practice of school prayer.
             
             and I am not religious.
             So?
             
             Neither will it fly in all countries.
             Again, so what?
             
             So, gays are in a battle and the war will not be won.
             Yes it will, sooner or later.
             
             I believe that, "I now pronounce you man and man" is not a traditional marriage. Call it something else.
             And when was anyone ever asking you to personally approve their marriage? It's none of your business (or mine) when two other adults decide they want to get hitched. The difference is you seem to want to stop some, but not all, strangers from getting married, and I don't want to stop anybody.
             
             Jeff, is man and man ever the same as man and woman?
             Of course a gay couple isn't exactly the same as a straight couple. It's also true that no straight couple is exactly the same as any other straight couple.
             Is that some reason to treat some people as second-class citizens?
             
             All I said is it has to be classified differently as "gay marriage" or union but not just "marriage". I never said to not allow them to marry.
             Wait, what? They can get married, but only as long as they promise not to call themselves a married couple? That makes exactly no sense at all.

             replyreport
             1. 55

                ftclickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Jeff, is man and man ever the same as man and woman?
                Of course a gay couple isn't exactly the same as a straight couple. It's also true that no straight couple is exactly the same as any other straight couple.
                No, no semantics does not work here. Straight married couples have more in common and sameness than a gay couple. Gay couples share many commonalities which is why it should have a different term
                
                Is that some reason to treat some people as second-class citizens?
                Not second class, How? Nobody is enslaved or working for pennies like prisoners.  You gotta get over that wild exaggeration. Unless you are illegally here. 
                Gays are the same gender marrying or unionizing, same genders can never be the same as opposite genders marrying. Therefore, they deserve to have a separate "but equal" term or do you want to redefine biology, now?  gotcha Jeff.
                I like the 10 sheep and a cow remark.
                
                All I said is it has to be classified differently as "gay marriage" or union but not just "marriage". I never said to not allow them to marry.
                Wait, what? They can get married, but only as long as they promise not to call themselves a married couple? That makes exactly no sense at all.
                No, it makes good sense because it is same gender. I am pretty sure a hetero man invented marriage why can't a gay man invent another accepted term? He has "equal rights" to invent and create terms. He is not second class. Why reinvent something that works great for now because "you" or  gay groups believe the definition should be expanded to suit ones need to feel accepted?

                replyreport
                1. 72

                   Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                   Straight married couples have more in common and sameness than a gay couple.
                   Wait...a man and a woman "have more in common and sameness" than a man and a man?
                   You're going to have to tell us how you reached that conclusion, 'cos I thought it was the differences between men and women that made their marriages okay and the sameness between men and men that made their marriages somehow lesser?
                   
                   Not second class, How? Nobody is enslaved or working for pennies like prisoners.
                   They don't have the same rights as heterosexual couples: they can't get married, while a hetero couple can.
                   
                   Therefore, they deserve to have a separate "but equal" term
                   "Separate but equal is inherently unequal." --Brown v Board of Education.
                   
                   do you want to redefine biology, now?  gotcha Jeff.
                   Nobody wants to redefine biology. Sociology, perhaps. Gotcha!
                   
                   Why reinvent something that works great for now because "you" or  gay groups believe the definition should be expanded to suit ones need to feel accepted?
                   That's just the thing: nobody's reinventing anything. Gay folks just want to use the same thing that straight couples have been using for years. It works; everyone knows what it means to be "married." They just want to use it, too.
                   
                   It's not like there's a limited quantity of "marriage" to go around. We straight folks don't have to hoard it for fear it'll get all used up, or that our marriages will somehow be made lesser because we'll have to give away some of our "marriage stuff" so other people can be married, too.
                   
                   There's nothing anyone can do about whether people "accept" gay marriage or not, but that's not the point. The point is that it doesn't bloody matter whether anyone "accepts" them or not. They deserve the same rights under the law as you or I do, and those rights include getting married to an informed consenting adult spouse.
                   
                   We limit the right to heterosexual couples because of cultural inertia (or "tradition") and no other reason. Alas, when it comes down to it, by itself, "tradition" is a pretty crappy reason to deny equal rights to any segment of the population.

                   replyreport
                   1. 0

                      jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                      There are many cases where a child will be much better off, cared for better, taught better how to prepare for a responsible and productive adult life, with a same-gender couple as parents, than with their biological mother and father as parents.   
                      
                      Also, I have known married husband and wife, with a male child, where the mother divorced to live with her lesbian partner, the husband got in with a gay community to learn more about gay people, although he personally was fully heterosexual.   Everyone remained good friends, the child grew up healthily in mind, body and spirit, and guess what!   The son was not gay..... does that surprise you???
                      
                      The biggest obstacle for homosexual people in this world are the ignorant and prejudiced fellow humans.   "God" does not get a look-in!   Oh, except when "He" is used as a scapegoat for the sake of argument.

                      replyreport
12. 55

    ftclickposted 11 years ago

    Straight married couples have more in common and sameness than a gay couple.
    Wait...a man and a woman "have more in common and sameness" than a man and a man?
    You're going to have to tell us how you reached that conclusion, 'cos I thought it was the differences between men and women that made their marriages okay and the sameness between men and men that made their marriages somehow lesser?
    I think it was wrongly interpreted. Hetero couples have more in common with hetero couples than a gay couple. Marriage is not some pristine treasure. I know.
    
    Not second class, How? Nobody is enslaved or working for pennies like prisoners.
    They don't have the same rights as heterosexual couples: they can't get married, while a hetero couple can. Laws made back then probably did not have a large gay population.  The world has grown quite large with different people. Let them marry or union.
    
    Therefore, they deserve to have a separate "but equal" term
    "Separate but equal is inherently unequal." --Brown v Board of Education.
    man and man marriage is not same as man and woman marriage because of …..uuhhhhh 2 DIFFERENT genders!  It’s not hard to understand.
    Brown v Brown - We are not talking about shared learning environments or facilities.
    It’s apples and oranges my friend or muffins and cupcakes,  take your pick.  It is different. Gays deserve some type of marriage, or whatever moniker, but the certificate should be labeled differently since it is same gender.  Can we agree that race and sexual orientation are unequal?
    
    
    Why reinvent something that works great for now because "you" or  gay groups believe the definition should be expanded to suit ones need to feel accepted?
    Tradition is a good argument. I’d give you a +1 also.  I think the constitution needs many changes as well. 

    replyreport
13. 77

    brimancandyposted 11 years ago

    The main reason politicians won't legalize gay marriage is because they are worried they will lose those big religious political groups who donate huge amounts of money to their campaigns. They really don't care if gay people get married, they just don't want to upset their base, and keep that money train rolling in. If you look at the states that have legalized Gay marriage, most are small population states, that don't have a huge amount of religious nuts supporting them.
    
    Politicians walk a tight-rope circus act every time they come up for re-election. And, if you look at what they are pushing, it is never the economy, or something smart. It's if I am elected I am going to support the hot button issues, and ignore the rest, so the people who support those issues will vote for me. Which is why you will see people like Romney telling one group he supports their cause, and turn around and tell the opposition that he supports them too. Which comes back and bites them in the ass. This last election was full of that.
    
    The only thing they care about is green cash, and black oil.

    replyreport
    1. 92

       peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Exactly the same reasons marijuana/hemp is still illegal in most places.

       replyreport
14. 59

    A Driveby Quipperposted 11 years ago

    There is nothing new about rampant homosexuality. Study ancient history.

    replyreport
    1. 76

       jlparkposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Smiles - there is even some in the Bible - something about a man (Jesus? Mayhaps?) loving another more than his brother. Judges I think, I;ll have to look.

       replyreport
15. 0

    Deepes Mindposted 11 years ago

    **DISCLAIMER** Some of the views presented here are not representative of all Christians..
    
    Personally, I have no opinion one way or the other as to whether or not homosexuals should marry. That isn't my business. But seeing as how this country was supposedly founded on freedom and equality for ALL, I don't see why that shouldn't include homosexuals.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thank you Sir, nobly put.

       replyreport
16. 76

    jlparkposted 11 years ago

    I'd like to know just how my marriage will actually affect any of you who are against it?
    
    Does it stop you from marrying? No.  Will it end your marriage? Unless your spouse is a well-closeted homosexual and married because it was the DONE thing back in the day - No, it won't end your marriage.  Will it taint your family? No.  Will it take away any of your rights? No. Does it enforce what you should teach your children? No.  Does it stop you from having children? No. Will it cost you anything? No, unless you are invited to the wedding, then a gift may be nice!.
    
    My being married to my spouse of 7 years changes NOTHING in your marriage, family, or life.  NOR will it ever. I will never have a say in who, when or how you marry, raise your children, live your life.
    
    Why then, should you have a say is all of that, for me, solely because I am gay?

    replyreport
    1. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Well said.   The perfect world that I envisage would include homosexual couples ( m. and f. of course) helping to nuture the children who have been born to heterosexual couples who don't want them.
       
       Since our world is becoming over-populated with the human species, the homosexual couple will become an important factor in reducing the birth rate and reducing the huge demand on the earth's resources.
       
       I had a couple of friends, 2 men, up to about 20 years ago, who had been very happily together for about 47 years.   They were a beautiful partnership, very supportive of each other, each playing a role in the local community and church.   
       
       Being Gay has a lot to offer the welfare of our world!

       replyreport
    2. 95

       wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Best answer I've heard is that it destroys the sanctity of marriage.  I don't know what that means, but it sounds pretty and that seems to be what counts.
       
       Does it mean that the Godliness of a hetereo marriage is now destroyed even though the gay couple did not have a God approved marriage?  Neither did I - there was no priest to bless us, but I don't know that I ruined anyone's sanctity.
       
       Some think the gay marriage should be named something else to prevent this terrible occurrence of destroying sanctity, but seems to me that if a mere word definition can ruin God's work He must not be much of a god.

       replyreport
17. 70

    Jennifer Lynchposted 11 years ago

    The problem is the church nothing the matter with being gay!

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Which church?
       
       The Catholic Church?
       
       The Episcopal Church - who openly ordains homosexual priests and bishops as well as women - and allows gay marriage?
       
       The Unitarian Church - who is pretty much open to any and everyone?
       
       The Evangelical Christian Church?
       
       Which church do you refer to in this post?
       
       The problem isn't THE or any CHURCH.  The problem is the people within it who think they have the right to dictate the morals to others.

       replyreport
       1. 72

          Jeff Berndtposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          +1

          replyreport
18. 94

    habeeposted 11 years ago

    I don't understand why so many people are against gay marriage. Who does it hurt? If your answer is that it hurts the gay couple because they'll be punished by God, then leave the matter up to God. It's not up to us to judge. You can't help who you fall in love with. Imagine not being able to marry someone you want to spend the rest of your life with.

    replyreport
    1. 55

       whoisitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You don't have to be married to spend the rest of your life together.

       replyreport
19. 70

    Jennifer Lynchposted 11 years ago

    Apologies, of course I realise that the problems lies with some individuals connected to certain churches.  However, in this Country we have such a thing as human rights.  I feel that gay people are being unfairly discriminated against and that they should have the same rights to marriage.  I was unaware of this issue until recently but it was brought to my attention by someone very close to me and my eyes have been well and truly opened, particularly about the march in Paris against gay marriage.  To be honest, I was gob smacked!

    replyreport