Tina says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20104:23 am 

I'm completely for it. Whatever makes people happy, who are we to judge? I really have a hard time understanding when people who are against it claim their reasoning is it will make their own marriage less real. That just boggles my mind.

Lisa says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20105:08 am 

I don't see how gays marrying affects people other than the people getting married at all. Their lives won't change in ANY WAY. This shouldn't be a big deal. So. Yeah, gays should definitely be able to be married. Also it DISGUSTS me that only 70% of Americans think that the LGTB community deserves the same rights. Straight up disgust.

D says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20105:15 am 

I'm pro-gay marriage. If people are that insecure in their own sexuality/marriage that you think gay people are a threat maaaaybe they should spend some time on self reflection.

Ace says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20105:16 am 

I'm completely in support of gay marriage. If it will make the religious types happy to call it something else, I say go for it, all that matters to me is equality. Besides, being that I have two adopted siblings, I know how many kids without families there are out there and we have thousands of couples who want them! It seems only right to me that rather than continue to keep these kids in the system that we give them a shot with good, happy parents. Gay marriage makes sense, who cares what they do in their spare time? We don't care if two shoe fetishists or BDSM lovers or furries get married, why should we care what anyone else does in their bedroom?

morsec0de says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20105:56 am 

"And, of course, shortly after God rained fire and brimstone down on Sodom and the remains of it have not been found…to this day."

Which highly suggests the story is completely mythological, and the city probably never existed.

Kelsey says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20106:02 am 

Also, many animal species show homosexual activities. Tell me that's not natural.

D says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20106:24 am 

With all due respect for Christians you cant use the bible as a defense against gay marriage because…not everyone believes in your book and also we are nation that was founded in part by the pursuit of religious freedom. If you feel gay marriage is wrong that is your business and your faith. Don't be gay. Don't enter into a homosexual marriage. And most importantly please don't use your faith in an argument about national laws.

Also does anyone else find it funny that in the Bible polygamy was accepted and up until recently marriage was pretty restrictive and sexist in nature? Not to mention the concept of a "love marriage" is more or less a modern concept. Back to traditional marriage indeed!

AshleyLauren says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20106:53 am 

To me, this seems similar to when interracial marriage was banned…people said that was immoral as well…people are people, and all people deserve the same rights-marriage included.

Brittany says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20106:53 am 

I think using the Bible to explain why gay marriage is "wrong" not only takes equality away from homosexuals, but also from non-Christian religions. I am a Jewish person in huge support of same-sex marriage, and feel that using any religious reasons to explain their side of this one issue only raises more. By reasoning that a rule stated in the Bible should apply to all American people, the assumption is that Christianity is the most important or "best" religion. If a non-Christian person wanted to get a same-sex marriage, even that reasoning wouldn't work. They don't follow the rules of Christianity anyway, so it's not like they would be making an exception in this case. What if laws were passed based on the rules of other religions? For example, if it became illegal to mix milk and meat in the same meal? Anyone who was not Jewish would be insulted that they would be subjected to follow a law based on someone else's religious belief.

I think the entire debate can be explained by the "separation of Church and state." There are no U.S. laws about homosexuality, therefore homosexuals should be given ALL of the rights heterosexuals have.

someguy says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20107:07 am 

"Also, many animal species show homosexual activities. Tell me that’s not natural."

Are humans animals? Do you classify yourself as an 'animal'?

Do animals get married?

I believe that the absolute best way to appease everyone is to just not call it marriage. Give them the same rights, benefits, etc. as married m/f couples, but just FREAKING CALL IT SOMETHING OTHER THAN MARRIAGE and the whole debate over it will probably just fizzle out. Call it a "Civil Union" (which some do and some are trying to do) and just leave it at that. It's simple.

Educated says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20107:32 am 

To someguy: "Are humans animal? Do you classify yourself as an 'animal'?

Haha. Yes, humans are classified as animal. We are part of the animalia kindgom. Go read a biology textbook.

Meg says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20108:26 am 

I'm very, very torn on this issue.

My first problem is, I want everyone to be happy. I have a lot of gay friends and coworkers and I hate seeing them in a situation where they feel their happiness is being compromised.

My second problem is marriage, while it is a legal institution is rooted in religion. The way we see marriage, the way we deal with marriage is rooted in a christian tradition that is thousands of years old, so to deny it's religious basis is denying marriage itself. Legalizing gay marriage would bring a smorgasbord of problems to ministers, priests etc who, when inevitable asked to perform a marriage would refuse, and then be sued. I've heard people say that this wouldn't happen, that people would be reasonable and if Fr. Mike won't marry them then they'll find someone who will, but let's face it. We're in America. We really enjoy suing people.

So now we have hundreds of legal disputes and more anger and more fighting until someone inevitably gives in. If the pro-gay marriage side wins you have priests and ministers being forced to marry people against their beliefs which is wrong. Or you have people feeling persecuted because they've been refused something they feel they should have, and that anyone should give them.

So I think there should be a compromise. I am 100% in full support of civil unions. I've heard that thus far they've had a few problems but as long as they are EXACTLY as a marriage is, minus the name, I think they are great. Because honestly the "breeders" (as my wonderful gay boss calls us hetero folks) just want the sanctity of the name, because for a lot of them marriage isn't just a piece of paper, it's a sacred union and they feel like that is being taken away, whether they're wrong or right.

Christen says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20109:34 am 

Separate but equal is not equal; we've clarified that issue in the past already. I agree, marriage is a religious institution. However, getting a marriage license is NOT a religious institution. Change the name for everyone on all the paperwork in order to obtain a legal "marriage", and let that be the end of the government's say in it. Churches can continue to have all the weddings they want, and call it marriage, and let it be defined as they wish. But why have marriages for heterosexual couples and civil unions for homosexual couples when everyone could have a civil union and heterosexual couples can have a religious marriage if they wish?

I just don't see why the religious aspect of marriage needs to be any part of the government. The government is still going to recognize that marriage, be it done at a drive through in Vegas or in a church.

Jenna says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20109:55 am 

"marriage is rooted in a christian tradition that is thousands of years old…"

Marriage is an older institution than the Christian church. And regardless of how marriage is perceived, the question is whether to allow gay marriage as a legal institution, not a religious one. If gay marriage is allowed by law, then religious communities may choose to recognize or not recognize that union, and they can turn away gay couples from getting married in the church (leaving the option of being married in a court or Justice of the Peace office). That is the right of the church as a wholly separate entity from government.

The bottom line is that religious arguments can't (or rather, shouldn't) hold water in regards to legal issues because our constitution guarantees freedom of religion, so one person's religious values cannot be forced on someone else.

internet elias says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201010:18 am 

Hmmmm. Gay marriage. Yes…it will happen nationally. It’s not going anywhere now. Its time has come. And, realistically, we can’t discuss gay marriage without discussing morals. Everybody….and I do mean everybody knows that the ordination of marriage is grounded in procreation. Even many animals mate for life..and they, of course, are male and female. As for me, I’m not fighting gay marriage, adultery, stealing, murder, rape, incest, molestation of children, or any other sins….except my own. The log which remains in my own eye only cries out to God for mercy. But sin is the natural state of fallen man. And morals are rooted in natural law or the need of individuals to exist safely and productively without being violated at the hand of fallen man. As a Christian, I find NO contradiction in the Bible…which of course underlies my moral code….and the moral code of many around the world.
The following is one place which explains the reality of the ‘gay’ issue…at least for me.

Ro 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Ro 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Ro 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Ro 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Ro 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Ro 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Ro 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Ro 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Ro 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
Ro 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Ro 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Ro 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Ro 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Ro 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Those scriptures are powerful to the many who believe in God. But those are not as powerful as the following account of the gay men of the city who attempted to rape the angels of God at Sodom:

Ge 19:1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
Ge 19:2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

Ge 19:3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
Ge 19:4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

Ge 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
Ge 19:6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
Ge 19:7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
Ge 19:8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

Ge 19:9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.
Ge 19:10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.

And, of course, shortly after God rained fire and brimstone down on Sodom and the remains of it have not been found…to this day.

BUT THERE IS ANOTHER ACCOUNT WHICH BETTER PUTS THE ‘GAY’ ISSUE INTO PERSPECTIVE FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN GOD AND SCRIPTURES. No only is the gay issue an issue of ‘same sex’…..but it is an issue of ‘perversion’ of ‘evil.’ The following scripture is heart rendering. Be prepared. Hold tight to your emotions. It’s really heartbreaking. It tells of the gang rape of an Concubine belonging to a man of Israel. Rather than see the gang rape of a man…he offered the group his daughter and his concubine…thinking it was the least of the two evils. And they tortured the concubine all night until she only had strength to crawl back to the door of her masters house…where she died with her hand on the threshold of the door.

Jud 19:22 Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.
Jud 19:23 And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly.

Jud 19:24 Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.
Jud 19:25 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

Jud 19:26 Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light.
Jud 19:27 And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold.

Jud 19:28 And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place.
Jud 19:29 And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.

What if you or I had been she? How very, very said.

Soooooo…I view the gay issue as an issue of evil…of perversion…of Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

But, as scripture foretells, the dispensation of man on earth will end with the prevalence of evil…by God’s purpose and permission..not by Lucifer’s whims. And…that is what we are seeing today with the gay issue, and all the other dark perversions in the world. And as the wicked before the flood…and as the wicked of Sodom….God will allow until He calls ‘enough’…then He will again destroy, with fire and brinstone, those who CHOSE the pleasures of such vileness. God did not choose their destruction…they did. God’s will is that ‘none perish but that all come to repentance.’ He doesn’t force. He invites. He explains in the following:

Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: WOW1

I know you intended your post to be on a much lighter note. But its not a light subject. It deals with the eternal souls of men and women. I love them all. And no one can reach them but God. I don’t fight against any of it. “The battle is the Lord’s.’ I pray ‘thy will be done.’ By having that desire in my heart, I know I am doing all that can be done to bring them out of such a destructive life style. I am giving them into the most loving and fair hand which exists…that of the Father.

I have a friend of many years who lives near me. He’s a former teacher..like myself..who lived the gay lifestyle until about four years ago. At the age of about fifty…he confessed it to his church …in which he and his family were one of the most affluent families in the church. Before he retired from teaching he was asked by the school board to test for HIV…to eleviate concerns of student families. He tested negative. He had kept his alternative lifestyle secret…but most secrets are not really hidden. After his ‘confession’ before his church…I visited him one day at his home. I hugged him and told him how pleased I was to hear that he had become convicted of the sinfulness of the lifestyle. He said, “I feel so cheated.” I hugged him again and said, “You were cheated. That was the whole point of the deception.’ Satan’s one aim is to kill, steal, destroy. And he is PROFICIENT at all three. There is another man, a couselor, who was in our school system for years. A very sweet and kind man who had lived with his male partner for twenty years. Only a few knew of the situation. And it never was a school issue. But I’ve always felt so deeply concerned for this man. That he, like my other friend, never knew the wholeness of a relationship blessed by God. That he never knew offspring, grandchildren, and peace. I know that God will bring those who desire it…out of the bondage and lust of gay relationships. I know too, that sin is sin. But God has always placed sin against the body in a higher bracket..since as He says..

1co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
1co 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

1co 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
1co 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
1co 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
1co 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

1co 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
1co 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

Good post. I enjoyed it. thanks. I did not intend to be so lengthy or ‘heavy.’ It just evolved. I know the intent of your post was not to deal lightly with sin…but was to have a look see at the issue of gay marriage. But the issue is such a serious one…involving all eternity,

T says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201010:20 am 

It frustrates me when people say they can just have a Civil Union. It's not the same. Marriage = Love + Commitment. They deserve to have the same title and the same rights. As someone else said, it's so much like interracial marriage and even the whole Civil Rights Movement. I'm sure in another 30 years it will be legal, but it's sad that it seems like it will take that long.

rjcloyd says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201010:47 am 

"marriage is rooted in a Christian tradition that is thousands of years old…"

The tradition was to "sell" your daughters to another family. Women were used as a vessel for procreation, and marriages were based on that. It was also the law in many places that if there were no sons in a family and the daughters were already married off, they could be borrowed back and "joined" with their own father to attempt to have sons to continue the line, while still married to the husbands assigned to them by their fathers. Non-consensual polygamy and concubines were common, and as we know men were allowed to beat their wives.

This is not a tradition that anyone wants to continue.

And taking away the name "marriage" for everyone and calling the legal institution a civil union is equitable to taking away something from everyone just because you don't want someone else to have it. What if, instead of mixing everyone together in the well established schools that already existed, we had lowered the standards of all of the schools in the US so they matched the low quality education that we were giving African-Americans and other minorities before integration? While we can make a civil union have the exact same legal impact as marriage, we would still be telling a minority group that they do not deserve to have the same things that the majority do, and we believe in that fact so strongly that we are willing to overhaul a long established legal system in order to keep them from calling their (hopefully) life-long and important union a "marriage."

The only solution is to give EVERY man and woman equal rights. And everyone has the right to enter into a legal, consensual relationship with another person (and I believe that if more than two people wish to enter into a legal, consensual relationship with one another, then that's no problem either). The only requirement we should all have for each other is we don't force our own beliefs on another person or group of people, which is what the majority of the US is doing to a vast amount of people.

becca says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201010:55 am 

"Everybody….and I do mean everybody knows that the ordination of marriage is grounded in procreation"

because it's totally illegal for women who have gone through menopause to get married.. women who have lost their ability to bear children due to diseases such as cancer, too. and let's not forget men with low sperm counts! no marriage for them!

this whole marriage in order to procreate thing just isn't the standard anymore. isn't the american ideal for marriage love, partnership, and happiness?

i'm all for lgbt marriages. there's enough hate and anger in this world. why wouldn't you want people to be happy, and to be able to celebrate their happiness?

David says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201011:00 am 

This is a courtesy message to inform you that we have created a link to this article.

Our website, AllPoliticalOpinions.com, strives to be a valuable resource for learning about – and expressing your opinions on – all the issues of the day. We invite all political writers to visit us, and perhaps set up a profile, and post more links to articles such as this.

Marcus says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201011:16 am 

In my view, there is no legitimate argument against gay marriage. Two consenting adults have the right to do whatever they want with their lives as long as it does not hurt anyone. Gay marriage in no way hurts other people, in fact, it literally has zero affect on anyone else besides the people in the relationship. You can't control people's lives just because you disagree with their lifestyle.

Blaire says:
Fri, 29th Jan 201012:03 pm 

First let me preface this by saying that I went to a very conservative catholic high school, and I myself would be considered "conservative" politically, but guess what? I am very pro-gay marriage, as was everyone except 2 girls out of 200 at a conservative catholic school. I think it will become legal soon. It's very much a generational issue. Our generation rarely has a problem with it, and I agree, aside from the religious arguments, there really is no argument AGAINST gay marriage, only for it

Hopefully it will be legal soon!

Casey says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20101:04 pm 

Considering same sex couples are not the same as heterosexual couples that's grounds enough to call it something else. Its not the same thing so why should it be called the same thing? I'm all for same sex couples being granted every last right as hetero couples, but call it what it is, not what something else is. That saves eveyone the headache.

Jodie says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20101:19 pm 

America was built on separation of Church and state. Canada's prime minister Trudeau once said that 'The state has no business in the bedrooms of our nation.'

But what really grinds my gears is that while heterosexual love is exploited on ridiculous 'dating' and 'love' shows where people 'pick' their flavour men/women of the day, get married for greencards and visas, get married for all sorts of stupid, thoughtless reasons, it is still considered more valid in the eyes of the state than two gay couples who truly love each other.

There was once a time interracial marriages were outlawed. And internet elias, get your bible-thumping bullhorn out of our faces. Your argument is completely invalid towards the liberal muslim/jewish/buddhist/hindu gay communities (yes, they exist! gasp!) who don't follow your faith. So shove it.

Lisa says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20101:21 pm 

If marriage is considered such a "religious" thing, then how come my aethiest brother and friends can get "married?" Why is my muslim friend married to an agnostic? Why is my Hindu friend "married?" How come many "marrriages" occur outside of the church, in other cultures, etc?

The fact is is that saying that marriage is stated in the bible as one way or another is an archaic definition. It is universal now.

criolle johnny says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20103:48 pm 

rjcloyd I'm really tired of hearing about "selling" a bride in old Christian traditions.

Walking a bride down the nave (not the aisle) is a transfer of RESPONSIBILITY, not PROPERTY! A father was liable for the feeding, clothing and protection of his children. For his female children that was true until that female child was MARRIED.

The father walked his daughter to the alter to symbolize the transfer of that RESPONSIBILITY to her HUSBAND.

That's why brides always wanted the entire town as witnesses. It showed that she had a new protector/provider. She wanted everyone to know who it was. So did her father … he was relieved. That's why he provided a dowry when she married.

In some, not all third world cultures it WAS the tradition to sell a bride. That's an issue too complicated to discuss in this forum.

Bright Blessings

criolle johnny

Fufu says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20104:26 pm 

The Notre Dame comic strip fiasco was blown way out of proportion. The comic strip shows two TOOLS making homophobic remarks. TOOLS. See the significance?

As a Notre Dame student, I have been around a lot of controversy lately concerning the rights of the GLBT community. Honestly, gay marriage is not a religious issue. It's an issue of basic human freedoms. Are we all equal or are we not? The separation of church and state hasn't expired, as far as I know. Christians (and especially Catholics) can have opinions on homosexuality, as well as other sins, like premarital sex and getting drunk, but religious sentiments should not have the bearing they do on legislation. We are all equal in the eyes of the law.

D says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20105:22 pm 

criolle johnny marriage (not just Christian marriage) has a deep history of oppression and paternalism toward woman. It is not exclusive to Christians and long before they came along cultures were using marriage as a means of "transferring property" and "establishing ties". (Notice I didn't say anything about love)Some cultures placed religious emphasis on marriage while others did not however there is a common tie in most of them-including Christianity-and that is male dominance and supremacy over his spouse. Obviously this has changed over time but that doesn't mean we can pretend it didn't exist. Doing so does a disfavor to your own faith as well as the intelligence of those you are arguing with.

And the whole point being made is: Truly traditional grass roots biblical $h^t marriage is sexist, outdated, and condones polygamy. So we should either legalize gay marriage or reinstate polygamy dowries and every religions crazy "traditional" marriage rules.

Christine says:
Fri, 29th Jan 20107:09 pm 

I'm 100% pro marriage equality for everyone. I've got plenty of reasons that I'm sure have been brought up at some point, so I won't rehash them. However, I have two more person reasons. The first reason is pretty selfish — I'm a lesbian and hope to be married and have a family one day. The second reason is also a tiny bit selfish for my friends: two of my closest male friends have been in a relationship for nearly 40 years. If that isn't love, I don't know what is. I hate knowing that if anything happens to one of them, the other loses all rights — no hospital visitation, no access to health records, no inheritance, nothing. Even if civil unions contained all the rights of marriage, I wouldn't be happy; don't give us a separate water fountain and pretend it's the same thing. Marriage = love = these two men I know.

D. says:
Sat, 30th Jan 201012:59 am 

I think the suggestion that gay marriage should be "the same thing, just call it something else" is nothing short of ridiculous. If you want to claim a word for religious reasons, then maybe legal heterosexual marriages should also have a different name since religion should have nothing to do with the law.

Matthew says:
Sat, 30th Jan 20106:19 am 

Marriage is not a religious institution. It is a legal one. And the 14th Ammendment protects equal rights for all citizens. Therefore gay marriage should be guaranteed under the laws of this country. We're one of the last Western societies NOT to legalize gay marriage. Time to catch up with the rest of the world.

kirsten says:
Sat, 30th Jan 20108:02 am 

I think this is way more than just a gay marriage issue. If a heterosexual couple gets married then god forbid one of them is deathly ill, the healthy one can stand by them in the hospital till the end. They can even make deciecions for them if the person becomes incompacitated. Now if this couple were homosexual… even if they were together for 50 years, they are not allowed in because they are not "family". Does this seem wrong to anyone else? The same situation goes on for hundreds of issues. It does not seem right. Love knows no bounds. I feel that the only huge hurdle for gay marriage is a religious one, and religion does not belong anywhere in our laws. To me this is all just one more way to supress a group of people that the church deems as sinners and it is wrong.

Liz says:
Sun, 31st Jan 20107:36 pm 

I find it odd that in the verses listed above no one found in frightening that it was viewed ok for a father to allow his daughter/concubine to be tortured. Wouldn't the most selfless act be to take the crowd on themselves? Even in that situation the daughter was considered less than.

Liz says:
Sun, 31st Jan 20107:39 pm 

I find it odd that in the verses listed above no one found in frightening that it was viewed ok for a father to allow his daughter/concubine to be tortured. Wouldn't the most selfless act be to take the crowd on themselves? Even in that situation the daughter was considered less than.

On another note I believe their are same sex couples out their who would seek marriage for religious purposes as well. Perhaps that is another reason this argument for same rights but different titles just isn't acceptable.

Casey says:
Mon, 1st Feb 20107:50 am 

Yes Liz, there are same sex couples out there who want religious marriages as well, which is what makes the decision to legalize or not that much more difficult, because as someone above said, if gay marriage is made legal there are going to be people who want to get married in a church that will refuse to marry a gay couple, and that will lead to people trying to sue the church/ minister, which will inevitably lead to the government limiting the rights of the church, which will not only be a breach of separation of church and state, but it will piss of the very people who are trying to prevent this in the first place and also bring about a lot of questions about a lot of laws.

What everyone needs to realize is that as people we're all so different that it is literally impossible to please everyone, every new law that is passed limits someones freedoms while granting more to someone else. This situation isn't all just black and white, if legalized it will bring a whole slew of other issues with it.

Tamara says:
Mon, 1st Feb 20103:48 pm 

Casey, it's not like that: it is not the same to be deprived of the right to do something and to be "unhappy" because someone else has a right. The government shouldn't pay the same sort of attention to the first and the second. It's like, for example: there are some people that are just not pleased colour people have the same rights white people do. So, we should consider these people's suffering in the same way we consider colour people's suffering, and make a law that pleases them all (the colour ones and the racist ones). What you are saying is as ridiculous as this sounds. Being homophobic is as bad as being racist, and no law should care about homophobic or racist people's thoughts; so in this case, yeah, it is sort of black and white.

Casey says:
Mon, 1st Feb 20107:00 pm 

No Tamara, I think you missed my point. I'm not talking about homophobic people being "unhappy" about gays having the right to marry. Go back and re read the first half of my comment. That's what I was refering to in refrence to the limiting some peoples freedoms to grant more to others. Not that it will make homophobic people upset.

Danielle says:
Tue, 2nd Feb 20107:17 am 

Casey, I think I understand what you are trying to say regarding homosexuals wanting to get married within religious institutions, however this is not reason enough to deny them to right to marry at the state level

kristen says:
Fri, 5th Feb 201012:06 pm 

i have a split opinion on gay marriage. on the one hand, i believe marriage is a religious thing, and i believe being gay is a sin. but at the same time, i believe that that is just my personal view, and that as humans everyone should have the same rights reguardless of their beliefs, or lifestyle, and i believe that should include the right to have a state/nation recognized union. i think there should be a way for everyone to be on equal ground.

Aik0 says:
Fri, 5th Feb 20106:33 pm 

"Considering same sex couples are not the same as heterosexual couples that’s grounds enough to call it something else."

Excuse me, but they are doing the same thing for the same reason, they love each other and want to spend their lives with each other.

Also *cough* separation of church and state *cough* founding point for the united states *cough*

Kyrstin says:
Sat, 6th Feb 20105:05 pm 

calling it something else is not going to help. watch the season nine episode of south park called "follow that egg".

Heather says:
Sun, 7th Feb 201012:02 am 

I really don't care either way whether gay marriage is legalized or not. Quite frankly, there are other political and social issues that I'd rather spend my time fighting for. I'm straight so when I get married, there shouldn't be a problem, so it's really not an issue for me.

I don't really have any gay friends so it doesn't affect me personally.

I'm definitely not a homophone and I dislike it when people act that way, but it's just not something I take a strong stance on one way or the other.

Heather says:
Sun, 7th Feb 201012:04 am 

btw, when I say I don't have any gay friends, it's just that my friends happen to be straight.

I'm not against being friends with homosexuals at ALL. It's just that right now my circle of friends are all, well, straight :p

Heather says:
Sun, 7th Feb 201012:05 am 

homophobe*

kaaaahhddn says:
Mon, 8th Feb 201010:17 pm 

gay marriage owns

not dealin with a couple's dumbass kids livin next door owns

couples with more disposable income in a city owns

it all owns

christina erickson says:
Wed, 10th Feb 20109:18 pm 

Can you please understand the marriage wars are far from over. But the new information proves that the mocked smooth hill is indeed a very smooth dating sites reality. Since the homosexual community has enlisted the gay church as it lackeys to sanctify what God has called abominable.
http://onlinegaydating.blogspot.com/2010/02/do-no…

logic says:
Wed, 17th Feb 20108:36 pm 

Gay couples have more money than straight couples, yet they don't qualify for the same tax breaks and benefits that straight couples have. They are denied the spending money to keep our economy going.

You don't hate our economy…do you??

epupps2644 says:
Thu, 25th Feb 20109:51 am 

so we want to get religioius..eh?

according to god calling by aj russel

God is love.

God would never disown his children.

accoriding to the bible:

God first commandment was to love.

now on a political level…

conservatism eats the soul away.

we were all born to have adventure in our lives. without conservatism life would be more beautiful.

there should be gay marriage. everyone deserves the right to marry who they love.

Religion just fucks it up for everyone. starts wars… the whole nine yards.

100% for Gay marriage

~26 Epupps 44~

JEWS RULE says:
Wed, 31st Mar 20108:21 am 

gay is selfish & uncaring and although sometimes it seems right. its just not. gays are still seen as freaks and play clowns.

1. Marriage is an ancient tradition and has always been a union between a man and a woman. The life giving union of a man and a woman has been the very foundation of society and that it has been in existence since before the formation of nation-states.

2. If we loosen up the concept of marriage to include people of the same sex, that will open up for further changes. People will want to marry members of the immediate family, animals and minors.

3. Heterosexual and homosexual relations are fundamentally different. The union between a man and a woman is a fertile one, while homosexual relationships can’t without help lead to children. This is no small difference; the future of the entire human race depends on it.

4. Marriage is the best thing for the children. Children need parents who have a long term commitment to caring for them. It is the parents who have given the child life and the institution of marriage is designed to strengthen the long term relationship between the man and the woman in favor of their children.

5. The institution of marriage protects fidelity. Traditionally marriage is heterosexual and monogamous but according to Andrew Sullivan another view on relationships is common within the gay community. According to him, homosexual men “have a need for additional sexual contacts in a relationship between two men.” This would by extension weaken the longevity of marriage, leading to more divorces.

6. Marriage is between a man and a woman and that is an expression of the fact that men and women need each other. Separately they are incomplete but when a man and a woman marry they form a complete unit.

7. The institute of marriage is important to society and changing it to let men marry men and women marry women will lessen its importance, which would prove harmful to society.

8. It is not homophobic to be against gender-neutral marriage laws. In Sweden we already have a form of civil union into which homosexuals can enter and get basically the same legal rights as you would get in a marriage.

1. Segregation is bad.

This one is obvious to me. In racial segregation it was said that blacks and whites should have the same facilities, at different places. This only served to further the idea that blacks and whites are fundamentally different, which leads to racism.

When we today say that homosexual and heterosexual unions should be separate things with separate names, we are really saying that homosexuals and heterosexuals are different and should be treated differently. That way lies homophobia and bigotry and I frankly feel that the world has had enough of that.

brandi says:
Wed, 31st Mar 20109:33 am 

^ you are a moron

brandi says:
Wed, 31st Mar 201012:34 pm 

And guess what there are shitty straight parents too. Just because they're straight doesn't make them better. I should know. I have two of them.

AC says:
Fri, 1st Oct 20105:33 pm 

Marriage is 1 of 2 things. It's either a religious practice in which a couple invites god into their relationship, or it's a legal union in which couples agree to share assets and responsibility.

Traditionally marriage was not about love. It was about forming an alliance to secure the families assets and social standing, as well as to insure your family line did not die out.

While God considers homosexuality a sin, yes it is in the bible, I've read it myself, he also FORGIVES our sins (uh, Jesus didn't die for nuthin'!) I'M not saying it's right or wrong, what someone chooses to do in the privacy of their own home is fine by me, as long as it's not harming anyone else. But I don't think the big man upstairs would really approve of a religious gay marriage, which defeats the point of one entirely.

And on the second, same sex couples can't procreate, and for good reason. A child needs a male and female parent to be able to develop properly, as the male and female have different instincts, parenting skills, and offer vastly different components to a child's development. For example, females are often the more protective parent, limiting what the child can do and keeping it safe. The male is the one that usually allows the child to take risks, encounter new things, learn about their environment, and make mistakes.

While this shouldn't hinder homosexuals from getting a legal marriage, it should be consider in issues of adoption by homosexual couples. Furthermore, the, "but they love each other!" argument should be dropped, because given that there's still debate over whether love truly exists, the extremely high divorce rate, and the fact that it was never really about love anyway, that argument is based on emotion, not fact, and doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

Bora says:
Mon, 23rd Apr 201211:20 pm 

Each write a letter elipaxning about the way you feel about things.Marriage is never easy it’s a matter of talking and compromising.Sometimes when your young though, it’s difficult to discuss things without it turning into a heated arguement because your both shouting at each other.By writing it down and you both sitting quietly on your own reading what the other person has to say about the situation, you will find that what is written sinks in and you will think about it more carefully than if these things were said face to face. You can also be totally honest without embarrassment.It works, believe me do try it.