Are you for or against same sex marriage?
- Thread starter McRocket
- Start date
I thought things might be a much more liberal on this site judging by the poll results so far, interesting to me, but it is a big issue these days.
i vote yes on same sex marriage, purely because what people do behind closed doors is there sole business and if you work and / or pay taxes or insurance, you should get benefits regardless of your sexual preference. i could care less what the church says, the government is what counts.
Just my :2 cents:
i vote yes on same sex marriage, purely because what people do behind closed doors is there sole business and if you work and / or pay taxes or insurance, you should get benefits regardless of your sexual preference. i could care less what the church says, the government is what counts.
Just my :2 cents:
against
Adam + Eve....not Adam + Steve
Adam + Eve....not Adam + Steve
even though nobody has posted in this thread for a while, i will.
im for it. im not familiar with other countries laws and standards, so anything i say pertains to the USA.
why shouldn't 2 people that love eachother be able to have a marriage license? that is, after all, all that they want. they don't necessarily want to be married in a church, therefore any argument about religion is moot. its just bringinf in a completely different point, completely utside the argument. and what does the church have to do with the government in a country that practices freedom of religion? there's no reason they shouldn't be able to enjoy whatever privledges a married couple enjoyes in the eyes of the law. besides, if homosexuality isn't *******, why should their obtaining a marriage license be *******?
its also my opinion that homo's being able to marry would help to cement the idea of marriage being forever and something that should be valued and cherished. the divorce rate here is ridiculous for straight people that rush into things, but there are tons of people that have been together for years that are dying to be married. id bet they won't be getting divorced within a year because they see something they'd like more. people treat marriage like a disposable camera. its sick.
its my opinion that these "immoral, disgusting sinners, bound to burn in hell for eternity" can help america become a more "wholesome" place to live. somewhere people practice what they preach and aren't close minded, stubborn mules.
oh well, we'll see how things play out.
im for it. im not familiar with other countries laws and standards, so anything i say pertains to the USA.
why shouldn't 2 people that love eachother be able to have a marriage license? that is, after all, all that they want. they don't necessarily want to be married in a church, therefore any argument about religion is moot. its just bringinf in a completely different point, completely utside the argument. and what does the church have to do with the government in a country that practices freedom of religion? there's no reason they shouldn't be able to enjoy whatever privledges a married couple enjoyes in the eyes of the law. besides, if homosexuality isn't *******, why should their obtaining a marriage license be *******?
its also my opinion that homo's being able to marry would help to cement the idea of marriage being forever and something that should be valued and cherished. the divorce rate here is ridiculous for straight people that rush into things, but there are tons of people that have been together for years that are dying to be married. id bet they won't be getting divorced within a year because they see something they'd like more. people treat marriage like a disposable camera. its sick.
its my opinion that these "immoral, disgusting sinners, bound to burn in hell for eternity" can help america become a more "wholesome" place to live. somewhere people practice what they preach and aren't close minded, stubborn mules.
oh well, we'll see how things play out.
I don't see why it's anybodies buisness if same sex couples get married. And for the people using GOD/Jesus against it is hypocritical. How can "Christians say that God forgives and loves all but just because you don't like it, God doesn't either. It's great that more are for but the number for the ones against is way too close. I'm totally with you nothingandless.
tartanterrier
Is somewhere outhere.
If 2 poofs want to get married then why not?? At least it's 2 less we have to watch out for 
Just as entitled as anyone else I guess! I know three women at work who have recently been blessed/married.
I'm for the government encouraging 2 adults per household ...
I could give a rats ass about the religious right-wing views or the (and they do exist) special interest gay attitude (some who think you have to be gay if you are the same sex in a household).
The government should be encouraging 2 adults per household. You should be able to share benefits, that includes insurance pre-tax, among other things. Take sex out of the equation. The government doesn't tell me how "special" my relationship with my wife is, so I don't care what you call it.
And I want the marriage penalty eliminated, period.
I could give a rats ass about the religious right-wing views or the (and they do exist) special interest gay attitude (some who think you have to be gay if you are the same sex in a household).
The government should be encouraging 2 adults per household. You should be able to share benefits, that includes insurance pre-tax, among other things. Take sex out of the equation. The government doesn't tell me how "special" my relationship with my wife is, so I don't care what you call it.
And I want the marriage penalty eliminated, period.
That's true.A same sex relationship can't be called a marriage because the meaning of that word is closely and legally defined as being that between a man and a woman.In the UK we have to call them "civil partnerships" which are now legal.
The big problem is that the main point of marriage was to provide a structure for the ******** to grow up in , cared for by both parents.There are plenty of childless marriages of course but the first consideration was really a protection for the young.
If a any two people decide to stay together for life then it should be possible for their possessions to be transferred without taxation on the first death.This is possible for husband and wife or for a formalised same sex couple.But for some reason it is not possible for brothers and sisters to enjoy this. So ******** (who may have been widowed earlier) who choose to live together for the company and to share expenses have no protection and this is wrong.
I have no issues with it. I don't know if they are so hell bent on it being recognized for financial/tax reasons or just to be recognized as a "married couple". Whatever the reason... to the best of my knowledge it doesn't effect anything that happens in my life so let them be happy. Who am I to decide.
It seems like the biggest contention with not making it legal is for religious reasons when you boil it down the the basic beliefs of the people who oppose it. And that's a good enough reason to make it legal.
There are a lot worse things for politicians to squabble about in this country, I don't think issues like this have any bearing on national security or our fiscal debt so who cares.
It seems like the biggest contention with not making it legal is for religious reasons when you boil it down the the basic beliefs of the people who oppose it. And that's a good enough reason to make it legal.
There are a lot worse things for politicians to squabble about in this country, I don't think issues like this have any bearing on national security or our fiscal debt so who cares.
No adoption?
With some many unwanted ********, having two loving parents works very well compared to not merely just 1, but none!
Even Bill O'Reilly is for two parents of the same sex, because even he says it's better than one.
Because ... ???
With some many unwanted ********, having two loving parents works very well compared to not merely just 1, but none!
Even Bill O'Reilly is for two parents of the same sex, because even he says it's better than one.
Encouraging love, caring is a good thing ...
Take sex out of the equation, encouraging love, caring is a good thing among adults.
I don't care if someone has a sexual relationship or not, they should be defined by the state as the same in an union of equal value and name.
People argue that allowing such marginalizes the marriages of man and woman.
As a man who has been married over a decade, there is no document, government definition or other statement that defines my marriage.
My marriage is defined by how I love my wife and no one is going to tell me differently.
That's the same deal for everyone else on the planet, they will define their own values and considerations.
I can't believe the percentage on this board is full of such closed minded people who don't realize the obviousness of this truth.
Take sex out of the equation, encouraging love, caring is a good thing among adults.
I don't care if someone has a sexual relationship or not, they should be defined by the state as the same in an union of equal value and name.
People argue that allowing such marginalizes the marriages of man and woman.
As a man who has been married over a decade, there is no document, government definition or other statement that defines my marriage.
My marriage is defined by how I love my wife and no one is going to tell me differently.
That's the same deal for everyone else on the planet, they will define their own values and considerations.
I can't believe the percentage on this board is full of such closed minded people who don't realize the obviousness of this truth.
I don't think they should be allowed to adopt ******** because their lifestyle is not natural or healthy.
Let me make this clear: I have nothing against gay people, no problem at all, don't give a **** what they do. But you can't tell me they're normal or natural or any other such bullshit because they're not. They're wrong, plain and simple. They're not natural, they're fucked up, and as a result, in my opinion shouldn't be raising ********.
Let me make this clear: I have nothing against gay people, no problem at all, don't give a **** what they do. But you can't tell me they're normal or natural or any other such bullshit because they're not. They're wrong, plain and simple. They're not natural, they're fucked up, and as a result, in my opinion shouldn't be raising ********.
Exactly how is a lesbian lifestyle unhealthy? :dunno:
angelfire1972
Banned
why not?
Similar threads
