Should gay's be allowed to wed?

[-Davo]

If you're going to ban the marriage of the same sex, you might as well ban marriage between white and black. Yellow and red. Jew and Christian. Australian and American. Japanese and Chinese. Infact, the law should just state "you must wed, and only wed, an australian born, and legal citizen only".

[DGB454]

Legislating morality is never a good way to go.

[-Davo]

Don't spam this thread, this is a serious topic

I'll start a new question:

Do you think they should be allowed to marry? Give your answer yes/no/I don't know, and give a reason WHY, nothing stupid, plain and simple.

I think they should be.

We've obviously learned nothing from Hitler's mistakes in WW2. He baned german public marrying anyone who's not german, our government are going down the same path.

[my3rdskyline]

I think they should be.

I feel like this: I'm not gay, I have gay friends, I'm not affraid of gays. I am however much more easily freaked out if someone gay get's in my "space". I'd be very dissapointed if my son was gay, but not to the point of disowning him. But I would definitly be dissapointed. I respect that other people may have different views as me so I think they should be able to do the same things I can. I guess I just believe more in how I think it "should be" speaking from a reproductive standpoint. I understand that many people may not believe in God and may have a different sexual prefference than me so I feel they should be allowed to make the same spiritually an legally binding commitment to their partners. ya know what I mean?

this strikes me as almost asking if you think being gay is wrong in the first place. this is just a much more extreme version of that question to me. So to answer, I don't think it's wrong to be gay. I'm just saying it's definitly not for me. and the only reason I want my son(s) to not be gay is so that my bloodline will continue. And these are all very natural feelings for any man to have.

Althought I do have to ask this(although I am not sure of my answer):
do you think that being gay means that there is something wrong with your instictual desires as a human? Naturally obviously humans are not supposed to be gay (correct me if I'm wrong here) because if they were we would not procreate. So... do you think that being gay is a mentality that a person has allowed to overcome their instincts or is it a different instinct?

please don't shoot me for my points of view, they are just my points of view. I'd like to hear what others think. I just wanted to ask because the question isn't really about gay marriage, it's about... what do hetero/homo/bisexual people think causes sexual preferences that are not of your own?

I do not mean to belittle gay people in any way AT ALL but I have to ask what you think about this? to some degree I feel that homosexuality MIGHT relate to events in a persons past which have caused psychological... changes.
There is a gay person in my family and I asked her some very blunt and honest questions. she recently "came out of the closet" a few years ago. before this she was heterosexual. Her past has some history of physical and sexual abuse that I was aware of so I asked her honestly if she felt that her sexual preference has in any way been altered because of these events. She said that she did not believe so and that she had always felt "something strange". respect that answer but from an unbiased point of view you can not deny that those events are in this persons past and many many times there is an issue like this or some event somewhere that has caused this person to feel like that.

I do not think that very many people are "born" gay or people that want to get a sex change or anything like this that deviates from the "norm" I feel that they are chemical "imbalances" in a person to some (large or small) degree. Not to say that I don't respect these people or there "decisions" I just dont feel that anyone is naturally born gay or even transexual without there being some chemical diference than that of a "normal" person. sorry for the earfull... again, I'd like to hear what other people think!

[2strokebloke]

I don't see what sense it makes for same sex couples to get married (in fact there's very little going for heterosexual couples to get "married" - but I'm not going to get off topic on that here) however, I can't see what harm it does to anyone, and therefore have no reason to be opposed to it.
I think people who are opposed to are looking for something to piss them off, otherwise there's no really good reasons for going against it.
As for what makes people gay, I see it totally as choice. But I don't see it as unnatural, at least not any less natural than wearing socks or driving a car, or using condoms.

[lazysmurff]

there is no reason for them to not be allowed to wed.

those seeking to legislate morality and prevent gays from marrying (i'd say republicans, but thats not entirely true, not to mention Kerry doesnt support gay marriage either) will claim that it disgracious the good idea of marriage. i'll remind them that heterosexuals are doing a pretty damn good job of it themselves

[YogsVR4]

The original logic used in this thread was a very steep slippery slope that nobody could make a stand on.

[2strokebloke]

Here we go with the slippery slope argument again... Yogs, you're begining to sound like a broken record.
Got any opinions to share while you're here though?

[taranaki]

If anyone finds joy in being recognised as permanently partnered to someone else,I say let them follow their hearts. Only a mean-spirited and pedantic bore would argue that marriage in the 21st century is the same as it was in the 19th.

[tenguzero]

Why the hell shouldn't they be allowed to wed, if they want. I see it this way (and this is along the lines of what Howard Stern said one morning.) Anti-gay marriage supporters have been crying foul, and whining about "The sanctity of marriage" this, and "Marriage is a holy union betweeen a man and a woman" that. And yet, these are the same people who file for a divorce (for every two marriages in the U.S., there's one divorce,) come home at night, kick off their shoes, and turn on "Who wants to marry -enter stupid subject here-" And yet, these hypocrites think they have the right to preach about the "sanctity" of the union? That's pure and simple BS. If you couldn't keep your own damn marriage together, what the hell gives you the right to go and protest someone else's choice for marriage, just because it's different from what you think? "Gays? MARRY? Why, that's proposterous! They're spitting in the face of a holy union! Hey, what time is Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire on?"

The times are changing. Deal with it. That being said, I don't agree with the agenda that a certain amount of gays are taking up in their cause for equal marriage rights -- that of shoving it in the public's face. It's only fair that the general populace be given a decent amount of time to digest such an issue. Forcing it down people's throats will only make them frustrated and angry. And that benefits NO ONE.

-On a side note, I am aware of that supposed "first official gay divorce" that took place up in Canada several months back. I can only assume the vast amount of gays who want marriage rights don't support acts like this when they are meant purely as precedent.

[jon@af]

Simplest answer and explanation possible: Yes. Gay couples should not be discriminated upon because of their sexual preference.

[YogsVR4]

For Bloke - the original post said "ban marriage between white and black. Yellow and red. Jew and Christian. Australian and American. Japanese and Chinese." Thats logic exends to "4 year olds, a dozen wives, your pet goat" A bullet list of similar things is hardly a convincing arguement (either for or against).


If its a matter of the ceremony, anyone can do that now. There is no law that prevents marriage ceremonies, take vows and have a fantastic reception party. The issue is over legal rights that the marriage lisence provides. Its a legal contract. So the real question is, do the people who want to get married want that piece of paper, the same legal rights over property (which can be done outside of a marriage lisence) or to have the party.

My guess is that most people think ceremony and not the legalities.

I have an issue with adoption (as an adoptee) but beyond that, I'm on the fence.

[lazysmurff]

actually, i think everyone is focusing on the actually rights of property, taxes, medical things, etc.

i really dont think its the governments right to ban someone who loves someones else access to their emergency room bed simply because of sexual orientation.

[YogsVR4]

The issue is the courts. They're making the determination instead of the legislature. Regardless of wether you support gay marriages or not, the courts shouldn't be writing the laws. Had they not done it, there wouldn't be the push to write the laws as one man one woman right now.

[my3rdskyline]

Originally Posted by taranaki

If anyone finds joy in being recognised as permanently partnered to someone else,I say let them follow their hearts. Only a mean-spirited and pedantic bore would argue that marriage in the 21st century is the same as it was in the 19th.

I'm with you on that.