The issue has ignited a cultural and political debate over what constitutes marriage and the legal rights of gay partners. “Earlier this week, Georgia announced it will appeal a judge’s ruling that struck down its voter-approved ban on gay marriage. The Georgia constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was approved by 76 percent of the state’s voters in November 2004. On Tuesday, however, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell ruled the measure violated the Georgia constitution’s single-subject rules for ballot questions.” “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman,” reads the measure, which would require approval by two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states. “Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman,” it says. 2006 The Associated Press Article Site: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12853948/ I know in California where Gay marriage is supported by the majority, this was a huge topic. This debate seems to be never ending I do not think there will be an end in sight until the government gets out of our homes and back into the office were they can decide on other things besides the union of two people based on sexual preference. Don’t get me wrong, I am not a homosexual, nor do I agree with the practices, but if we allow the government to tell us whom we are and are not allowed to marry, than what else are they going to ban? It was not long ago that birth control was banned and abortions were banned, not that I support abortions, but the government does not belong in my bedroom or my body. The martial union of two people is a union between TWO people not the state, or congress or senate, but TWO people. ***********************************************************************This debate is not on birth control or abortion. Please post a separate thread for a pro-life/pro-choice debate. This debate is should gay’s allowed to marry and is it unjust for the government to regulate these sort of issues? ***********************************************************************
Posts: 206 | Location: Houston, TX USA | Registered: 05-11-06
I think it is appaling that in todays society we still struggle to accept people that are different to the norm. Of course gays should be allowed to marry there is no real* reason not to.
*Despite being a confirmed member of the C of E I don't see because the Bible says it is worng is a good reason to say it should be illegal not everyone believes and shouldn't be bound by the bible if they aren't religious.
Even if you don't wish to allow it within your church, there is no reason whatsoever not to allow these people the same legal rights as everybody else. That includes the right to file taxes jointly, automatically confer citizenship rights upon your spouse, visit each other in hospitals during "spouse only" situations, jointly own all property, etc.
And if you say "fine, call it a civil union", then that's what you should call the legal status of ALL married people. Giving legal preference of any kind to heterosexual people is, quite simply, unfair.
-The Scandinavian coutries that have legalized gay marriage have seen a dramatic drop in the number of traditional marriages, resulting in 50% of children now being born out of wedlock. I don't think that any social scientist is going to argue with me that it is in a child's best interest to have both a mother and a father within a secure, married family.
-Legalizing and legitamizing gay marriage opens a pandora's box of perversions. If I can deviate from traditional marriage and be involved in a homosexual marriage, why can't I marry multiple partners, or my pet?
-Traditional marriage is not discriminatory. Everyone is entitled to the right to marry, homosexuals (and polygamists) simply don't meet the qualifications of the law.
-Traditional marriage is a 3,000 year old institution that was adopted and upheld by every civilzation, until recently.
-Studies of legalized gay marriage in the countries that have it have shown that the average homosexual marriage lasts for four years and each spouse has had, on average, eight other , extramarital partners. Sounds like a healthy relationship.
-No U.S. court has ever recognized, nor has any scientific study ever established, that homosexuality is rooted in nature and therefore is the same as heterosexuality. Scientists understand that homosexuality is rooted in a collection of biological, psychological and social factors. We cannot treat them as the same thing.
-In no way will changing the definition of marriage (followed by spouse, parents, love, and gender), improve society.
Posts: 18 | Location: Arizona, USA | Registered: 10-27-05
quote: -Legalizing and legitamizing gay marriage opens a pandora's box of perversions. If I can deviate from traditional marriage and be involved in a homosexual marriage, why can't I marry multiple partners, or my pet?
..because theyre unnatural, and multiple partners weakens the gene pool. Homosexuality is perfectly natural.
quote:Studies of legalized gay marriage in the countries that have it have shown that the average homosexual marriage lasts for four years and each spouse has had, on average, eight other , extramarital partners. Sounds like a healthy relationship.
Lets not mention Mr America's oh-so-christian institution, with a 50% divorce rate. Yeah, all the husbands must be homosexual.
quote:-Traditional marriage is a 3,000 year old institution that was adopted and upheld by every civilzation, until recently.
Homosexuality has been around longer than humans have been. More than they'd care to admit.
Edit: ...hang on. Polygamy and polyandry have been around in large parts of Asia for ages, and still continue today. Are you going to tell me that your society is superior to theirs, so that you may cast that down as dispicable? Not one to endorse relativism or anything, but its a big call to make, Whitey.
quote: -Traditional marriage is not discriminatory. Everyone is entitled to the right to marry, homosexuals (and polygamists) simply don't meet the qualifications of the law.
Very quotable. Thats like saying a white-supremacist organisation is not discriminatory. Everyone is entitled to join, so long as they aren't black. Or Jewish. Or stinking arabs.
...Nastiest Member on QL...
Posts: 3774 | Location: Disputed Zone | Registered: 01-10-05
No one has mentioned that the concept of gay marriage is un-democratic. In America, the homosexuals compose a small percentage of the population. Why should a minority have the right to impose it's will on the majority? (59% 0f American's are opposed to gay marriage http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=39). In a democratic society, it is ludicris that traditional marriage be redefined for a select few.
Beacon-of-Hope: I think that you have my statement wrong. No one is denied thier right to marry. It's just that marriage, defined by the majority, is only between a man and a woman.
And call me intolerant...but I would venture to say that, yes, a society that eschews polygamy, homosexual marriage, etc. is in fact morally superior.
Posts: 18 | Location: Arizona, USA | Registered: 10-27-05
Homosexuals (again, a small percentage of the population) demanding that the rest of society change thier definition of marriage is an imposition. Again, 59% of Americans are completely against Gay marriage.
Where's the paranoia?
P.S. Your analogies are comparing apples and oranges.
Posts: 18 | Location: Arizona, USA | Registered: 10-27-05
quote:Originally posted by paladin101: Homosexuals (again, a small percentage of the population) demanding that the rest of society change thier definition of marriage is an imposition. Again, 59% of Americans are completely against Gay marriage.
Where's the paranoia?
P.S. Your analogies are comparing apples and oranges.
For one, it shouldn't offend anyone to make the definition of marriage applicable to all human beings. To say that homosexuals demanding rights imposes on the rights of others is not only ignorant but also does exhibit some paranoia. What are you worried about? Does it hurt you to see two men or two women getting married? The point Ladon is making is that homosexuals are not harming anyone by demanding equality, just as civil rights activists in 1960's America were not.
Incidentally, Apples and Oranges are both fruit. The both contain necessary vitamins and nutrients. They also both grow on trees. Homosexuals and Heterosexuals are both human. They also both need love and a firm confirmation thereof. Deal with it.
"Once you can accept the universe as being something expanding into an infinite nothing which is something, wearing stripes with plaid is easy." - Albert Einstein
Posts: 141 | Location: 3rd rock from the Sun | Registered: 11-25-02
quote: -Traditional marriage is a 3,000 year old institution that was adopted and upheld by every civilzation, until recently.
So was slavery...
quote: -Studies of legalized gay marriage in the countries that have it have shown that the average homosexual marriage lasts for four years and each spouse has had, on average, eight other , extramarital partners. Sounds like a healthy relationship.
Straight marriage isnt doing so well either...
quote:Scientists understand that homosexuality is rooted in a collection of biological, psychological and social factors. We cannot treat them as the same thing.
And heterosexuality isnt?
quote: -In no way will changing the definition of marriage (followed by spouse, parents, love, and gender), improve society.
In no way will it degrade society either
"Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same, to conquer was his big goal, So he built his great empire and slaughtered his own kind, Then he died a confused man, killed himself with his own mind.": "Were Only Gonna Die For Our Arrogance"-Bad Religion
This entire argument is ridiculous: 1)You are assuming that the drop in the number of traditional marriages was caused by the legalization of gay marriage. 2) I have a sneaking suspicion that by "out of wedlock" you mean not born to two heterosexual parents. And should single parents be forbidden to raise children, too? 3) Because pets can sign a marriage license. This chain reaction is entirely implausible and irrelevant. 4)You depend on the authority of ancient civilization, US courts, and the vague "scientists" to support your stand, instead of arguing for it yourself. 5)These "studies" sound suspicious; also, the quality of gay relationships has absolutely nothing to do with whether they should be allowed to get married. Movie stars can marry each other, right? 6)Many people strongly believe these concepts should be redefined. You state that as fact, but it's impossible to determine objectively.
-Traditional marriage is a 3,000 year old institution that was adopted and upheld by every civilzation, until recently. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So was slavery...
Hey, that doesn't make marriage and slavery equal. Aren't you arguing to extend the institution of marriage to homosexuals? And if you're trying to prove that heterosexual marriage and slavery are equally bad/wrong/whatever, where's the rest of your commentary?
Me ke aloha, Elikapeka.
"Perfect love is rare indeed - for to be a lover will require that you continually have the subtlety of the very wise, the flexibility of the child, the sensitivity of the artist, the understanding of the philosopher, the acceptance of the saint, the tolerance of the scholar and the fortitude of the certain."
--Leo Buscaglia
[This message was edited by elikapeka on 02-04-07 at 12:42 PM.]
Posts: 472 | Location: Houston, Texas, U.S. | Registered: 03-08-03
All I'm trying to prove is that just because something has been around for a long time doesn't mean that makes it a good thing. I'm not equating heterosexual marriage to slavery at all.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin
Yes without a doubt gay marriage should be banned. I am outraged that this is even up for debate or vote. Futhermore I can't believe that their is a gay bishop that is awful. This is a big problem in the whole world escpecially the United States. I would disown my own child if he or she was gay. Being gay is a disease it has become an epidemic very sick.
You aren't a very good troll. Go visit the dregs of the internet and learn how to do it properly.
"No longer empty and frantic like a cat tied to a stick, that's driven into frozen winter shit (the ability to laugh at weakness), calm, fitter, healthier and more productive, a pig in a cage on antibiotics."
So you are saying if your child got sick from a disease you would disown them...Glad you aren't one of my parents... I am not gay but I believe True Love is hard to find especially in this world today. I say if you can find it Hold on to it..Tight...and don't let it go.... I personally would not want to live on a island with all straight people if they are like you - prejudice....If more people would worry about themselves and how they treat others this would be a much better world.... I hope for your future or present childrens sake you get some enlightment in your life. Stop judging people - that is not your job....
My answer to the question is No - Marriage should not be banned.. but that would also mean that if they wanted out then they should have to pay for a divorce...Good with the Bad
quote:Originally posted by poptab: Yes without a doubt gay marriage should be banned. I am outraged that this is even up for debate or vote. Futhermore I can't believe that their is a gay bishop that is awful. This is a big problem in the whole world escpecially the United States. I would disown my own child if he or she was gay. Being gay is a disease it has become an epidemic very sick.
Posts: 2 | Location: Suffolk, VA USA | Registered: 01-19-09
Yes, they should be allowed to marry. How are we to determine what is right or wrong? I make no judgement on them. Let them be happy. I would not like someone telling me who I can or can't marry.
![[ACLU Execution Watch Counter]](https://www.aclu.org/graphics/dpcounter.gif)
