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.
I personally have no opinion on same sex marriage/legal unions, so I apologize if I fail to sway you. I do have a few points for discussion, however. One of the major benefits to legalizing these unions is that partners will have access to legal inheritance, social security, employer health care benefits, etc. Currently, depending on the state, those benefits are being denied and a legal recognition of the partnership would enable their receipt. As Americans, it seems as though we should choose our beneficiary.
On the other side, many are afraid it is a slippery slope. If you view marriage as a religious institution (which most Americans probably do) then allowing gay marriage is morally wrong. What's next? Legalizing polygyny and polyandry? Or something worse!?!
Obviously, if you accept homosexuality as compliant with whatever moral standard you belive, then marrigage is the apparent next step.
I think homesexual "marriage" shouldn't be allowed. But as for homosexuals being allowed to commit to each other and be allowed all the same benefits as a married couple, I'm fine with that.
I'm really just tired of the extreme activist side of the homosexual community trying to redefine words and symbols to push their agenda. They already took the word "gay", and are really overdoing the rainbow symbols too.
Be creative. I'm sure there are plenty of homosexuals that are intelligent to come up with a word for a same sex union, no need to redefine a word that has always been used for a opposite sex unions.
*clapping* yay! How d@#m refreshing is it to go through 13 posts and noone got slammed/flamed/ridiculed especially on a topic as touchy as this. Though I may have just jinxed it. Good job all! Oh and yes, I support same-sex marriage as well. Jest had some great points that I agree with. I believe that acknowledging any caring loving relationship can only lead to better things. Security and acceptance are what alot of us strive for in our daily lives.
I prefer gay marriage to some half measure, like domestic partnerships.
As a heterosexual man, I take marriage very seriously. It's an extremely serious commitment that makes me very vulnerable if I undertake it with the wrong person. So, I'm not in a great big hurry to get hitched up with someone so that they can get health benefits.
A domestic partnership law that imposes few obligations on the partners, but many on employers, insurance companies, etc., is a sure disincentive to employers to locate where such laws are enforced.
I think homesexual "marriage" shouldn't be allowed. But as for homosexuals being allowed to commit to each other and be allowed all the same benefits as a married couple, I'm fine with that.
I'm really just tired of the extreme activist side of the homosexual community trying to redefine words and symbols to push their agenda. They already took the word "gay", and are really overdoing the rainbow symbols too.
Be creative. I'm sure there are plenty of homosexuals that are intelligent to come up with a word for a same sex union, no need to redefine a word that has always been used for a opposite sex unions.
I've always grown up with the definition that marriage was a committment two people make to one another. Only recently that the gay marriage debate has been brought up that opponents added the "man and wife" to the definition. So who is really trying to define it?
There is a lot of discussion about what to call a gay legal union. I think in the end, it doesn't matter. It's just spin. As has been mentioned, there are really two parts of a marriage, the legal part, and the religious part. Any legal gay union that gives the partners the same legal rights as a heterosexual couple is, legally speaking, a marriage. Whatever it is called is just semantics. Currrently, gays can enjoy the religous benefits of a union, but none of the legal benefits.
I'm waiting for an answer as to how we're hurting anyone?
Hurting someone is the the sole barometer for legality. Otherwise prostitution, some drug use, necrophilia, etc would be legalized. I think many gays focus on the "who are we hurting?" agenda in demanding equal rights. You ought to focus your vast propaganda machine (or so I've heard ) on the legal benefits of marriage, and how as American citizens you and your partner are being denied those legal rights. Of course that won't force anyone to accept the moral element of your marriage, but that isn't really your primary purpose, or a feasible one.
I thought that once people got married they stopped having sex.
So, be careful whatcha wish for!
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.