Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
After reading a few post I can see people just cannot escape their biases and somehow bring up other issues to try to answer the question. This comes to show that communication is not as easy as expected because as much as people deny it and even try their own personal views on an issue does affect their reasoning.
The OP asked a very clear question. He did not imply anything for or against gay marriage. He simply focus the subject on those that oppose it in how it would affect their rights. He just wants to know their replies on the point of the question.
Since I am not opposed I can't answer that question though. I am curious what right get affected by those that oppose it. I will keep reading, take care.
I'm not against it either.
But the OP doesn't seem to grasp that the entire premise of the thread is based on a straw man argument that you MUST have a right violated before you can be simply opposed to something.
As was mentioned by another....
I'm not female, but I oppose women being raped. So no right of mine has been violated, but I am still opposed to it.
President Obama has declared the federal ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. But Natalie Neusch says what no one wants to talk about: a lot of gays just find gay marriage weird.
I can identify with this article. I'm not necessarily against same-sex marriage, but it doesn't get me excited either. I get caught up in cheering for same-sex marriage sometimes because that's what the gay news headlines are screaming about, but personally, civil unions are completely fine with me.
I think repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell was a lot more important than this ongoing fight for governmental and societal recognition of same-sex marriage. It feels like we're trying to force too many Americans to accept something that bothers them fundamentally, and even among those who support it, I'm sure there's a healthy percentage who only support it because they feel like they're supposed to in order to be considered a good and decent person.
Sure it is. It weakens the institution of marriage, cheapening the vows I took with my wife.
My "type"?
I think divorce is horrible. It's not good, and it cheapens marriage as a whole. Instead of watering down the definition of marriage, we need to strengthen it. But to answer your question, divorce is less common among church-going, actively practicing Christians.
If gay marriage weakens or cheapens the institution of marriage then the institution of marriage much be terrible fragile...and perhaps not worth saving.
The preacher and his religion may preach and believe anything they want. They may discriminate anyway they desire. What they believe only applies to other members of that particular faith and should never be part of secular Law. I do not inflict my beliefs on them and will not tolerate them trying to tell me how to behave. I obey the secular Law, not the restrictions of their faith.
Sure is and many had to rewrite the Bible they wanted to read because the original translations called homosexuality an abomination to the eyes of God.
Some even parade their sin.
Can you imagine an adulterers parade, or a thief's parade?
Homosexuality was considered a deviant mental problem as well until the homosexual community spent lots of money in the medical community to change that result.
If gay marriage weakens or cheapens the institution of marriage then the institution of marriage much be terrible fragile...and perhaps not worth saving.
You can make that argument. I personally wouldn't. I think that instead of abandoning it we should do everything we can to strengthen it. Society is better off with marriage as a strong institution.
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,955 posts, read 5,544,409 times
Reputation: 8559
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
The basis of marriage is the transfer of ownership of the woman from her father to her husband. Traditional marriage is another form of bondage for women. If women can be bound in an ownership contract so can males but this is rarely, if ever, enforced. On this basis I think marriage should be banned completely and not extended to homosexuals.
Realistically as marriage, in most parts of the US, has changed in meaning I do not see way it should be limited by race, sex or religion. Allowing homosexual partners to wed does not harm them, society or me in any way shape or form.
Yet, even as YOU pointed out, there are lots of limits on our constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Absolutely.
But sanrene doesn't get to define that.
Remember what he proposed: that gays could get what they want, if only they stopped asking for it so much.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gays Who Don't Want Gay Marriage
