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.
Not for supporters. Want to know arguments against.
My argument is simple. I could care less what they do or not but not when its forced on states against the will of the people who vote against it, then the reason its so important to override the will of the people must be asked.
So why should gay marriage be forced upon everyone? Science tells us homosexuality is not genetic (at least there is no direct and precise evidence) so right away it cannot be equated to the real civil rights movement which dealt with proven genetic traits like race and gender or traditional marriage for the same reason.
What argument could you make to justify it?
Why should homosexuality be given state recognition of marriage over all other sexual preferences?
I think you are confused.
Legalizing gay marriage doesn't mean that you will be forced to marry someone of the same sex. It just means gay people can marry a same sex partner. It won't affect your marriage, or whom you can marry at all.
Not for supporters. Want to know arguments against.
My argument is simple. I could care less what they do or not but not when its forced on states against the will of the people who vote against it, then the reason its so important to override the will of the people must be asked.
So why should gay marriage be forced upon everyone?
Well Simon, it's not. No one is forcing you, or anyone else, to marry someone of the same sex. As so many others have said, "If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Feltser
Science tells us homosexuality is not genetic (at least there is no direct and precise evidence) so right away it cannot be equated to the real civil rights movement which dealt with proven genetic traits like race and gender or traditional marriage for the same reason.
You're wrong on that count too. There is a lot of evidence that homosexuality is genetic, but I suspect you haven't actually read scientific studies and journal articles, as I have. You just ASSUME that it isn't because that's what you want to believe. Here's an article that discusses common nucleotide polymorphisms linked to homosexuality:
I also have direct evidence from my own life. My mother was a lesbian, and I am as well. My sister was in a lesbian relationship herself as a teenager, although she is married to a man now. This is a rather common occurrence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Feltser
What argument could you make to justify it? Why should homosexuality be given state recognition of marriage over all other sexual preferences?
It's not given preference over other sexual preferences. It's now being given equal recognition. Finally. After all, heterosexual marriage has been legally recognized for thousands of years.
Not for supporters. Want to know arguments against.
My argument is simple. I could care less what they do or not but not when its forced on states against the will of the people who vote against it, then the reason its so important to override the will of the people must be asked.
So why should gay marriage be forced upon everyone? Science tells us homosexuality is not genetic (at least there is no direct and precise evidence) so right away it cannot be equated to the real civil rights movement which dealt with proven genetic traits like race and gender or traditional marriage for the same reason.
What argument could you make to justify it?
Why should homosexuality be given state recognition of marriage over all other sexual preferences?
This post prejudices the discussion by stating things that are simply not true as if they were true facts.
If gay marriage is "forced on you", then you would wake up and find yourself wed to your gay partner. No person is gay marrying YOU. Why is it even "gay marrying"? No one is straight marrying you either.
Science has never even hinted that homosexuality was not genetic and thus far it appears entirely possible that there may be certain genes related to it. The lack of concrete proof is not in anyway the same as evidence to the contrary. Do not confuse the two. If you seek knowledge, focus first on how to learn and think so that you will be capable of holding knowledge. If you can not hold logical statements together, you won't be able to comprehend a more nuanced argument.
No argument needs to be made to justify it, because it is a freedom rather than a power. It is not being imposed on you. The question is what argument can be made for the tenants of a building (or state) to declare that their neighbors (or members of their city) are unable to marry the person they choose. Would you want your neighbor to inspect your significant other to determine if they met the right criteria for marrying you? By "forcing" equality, the law is preventing some people from determining for their neighbors whom that neighbor may marry. The only time those laws are acceptable is when there is a proven case that in the absence of those laws certain individuals will be VICTIMIZED. You are not victimized when your neighbor has a "gay marriage".
So when is someone victimized? When an 11 year old child is married to an adult, you have a high likelihood of the child becoming victimized. That is why we have things like an age of consent. If the two individuals are over the age of consent, then we as a community have determined that they are capable of making choices for themselves.
Heterosexual people also have their marriages recognized by the state. Infact, gay people already have their marriages recognized in all fifty states if they are willing to marry a person of the opposite gender whom they may not love or be attracted to. It is only when they marry their significant other that some states decide to interfere.
The major purpose for marriage laws were developed centuries ago. The laws were to protect the wife and children, who were usually unable to care for themselves and to establish ownership in inherited property.
The majority don't seem to feel that same sex couples have this need.
The majority is wrong because marriage has come a long way from protecting the property rights of widows and orphans. That's why the US Constitution protects the rights of minorities from the tyranny of the majority, and that's finally being applied to same sex couples.
Not for supporters. Want to know arguments against.
My argument is simple. I could care less what they do or not but not when its forced on states against the will of the people who vote against it, then the reason its so important to override the will of the people must be asked.
So why should gay marriage be forced upon everyone? Science tells us homosexuality is not genetic (at least there is no direct and precise evidence) so right away it cannot be equated to the real civil rights movement which dealt with proven genetic traits like race and gender or traditional marriage for the same reason.
What argument could you make to justify it?
Why should homosexuality be given state recognition of marriage over all other sexual preferences?
What do you mean it's forced on the people who vote against it? Do you not know how a vote works? It's not a unanimous decision. It's majority rule. That means that some people won't be happy with the outcome, but that's how it works. There were people who opposed abolishing slavery, but we didn't say 'but will they be upset?'
And gay marriage is not forced on everyone. I'm a heterosexual man and no one is requiring me to marry a man. No one's even requiring that I support it.
Rights are not connected to genetics. If you are a human, you have rights. Plain and simple. A government that tries to think up exceptions is a government that does not deserve it's power. But let's get right to the point: religion. Protected in the first amendment and is not genetic at all. Religion is undeniably a choice yet is a protected class. So even if homosexuality is a choice (which I see no reason to believe that it is), they still have the right to fight for marriage rights.
So why should it be given state recognition? Because marriage offers clear benefits, such as inheritance laws to protect the deceased spouse's partner. Gay relationships may want or need that financial security, and since America is secular (and marriage is also secular, and not connected to religion), so long as every other standard as met, arguing that the gender of the spouse is irrelevant is completely reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo
Small government
The government shouldn't tell churches who they can and can't marry.
Leave it up to churches to make that decision.
They do. Marriages in modern times are preformed by the state, not the church. While many have ceremonies in churches (which I agree, a church should and does have the right to deny homosexuals this privilege), they are legally married by a judge, not a priest/preacher.
If you want to argue that the term marriage should be off limits to the state, and they should only recognize civil unions for all couples, you may have a point. But as of now, you're operating on the incorrect assumption that marriages are only preformed by religious groups.
The major purpose for marriage laws were developed centuries ago. The laws were to protect the wife and children, who were usually unable to care for themselves and to establish ownership in inherited property.
The courts are empowered to decide if the states rational basis claim overrides the right of the individual to marry. In the case of consenting adults of the same gender, courts have been consistently ruling that the states have no such rational basis in preventing such marriages.
A couple further notes:
*Since opposite sex couples who are incapable of bearing children for whatever reason are never denied marriage on that basis, it is very clear that procreative ability is not a test for whether one may marry.
*Since opposite couples do have children (regardless of how those children come to be the wards of those parents), if the goal is to protect children then does it not follow that the children of opposite sex couples deserve the protection that the marriage of their parent(s) provides? (hint - the answer is a resounding yes)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Padgett2
]The majority don't seem to feel that same sex couples have this need.
PS - Don't interpret my posting of the cites above that I have any use for the notion that basic rights should be contingent upon popularity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo
Small government
The government shouldn't tell churches who they can and can't marry.
Leave it up to churches to make that decision.
The government doesn't.
No churches are forced to marry any couples they do not want to marry. Churches routinely refuse to conduct interfaith marriages, for example. No church is forced to perform interracial marriages - though most are smart enough to know that a refusal to do so brings significant PR damage so they do so regardless of whether they approve.
Same-sex marriage has been legal in Massachusetts for 11 years now. Show me a single instance of a church being forced to conduct a marriage. Well? It hasn't happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Vega
Many many people believe the Bible and try to live by its teachings. The Bible is clear, homosexuality is a sin.
I couldn't care any less what you think your ancient book says, any more than I care what the Quran says or L. Ron Hubbard had to say.
Location: God's Gift to Mankind for flying anything
5,921 posts, read 13,848,998 times
Reputation: 5229
Suppose the word marriage in these cases is replaced by the word *Partnership*
Anyone think the *problem* will go away ?
Sadly, there are plenty of *normal marriages*,
where the amount of a true partnership, within that marriage,
is a lower amount than the marriage amount.
If the amount was truly equal, there would be no divorces ?
Not for supporters. Want to know arguments against.
My argument is simple. I could care less what they do or not but not when its forced on states against the will of the people who vote against it, then the reason its so important to override the will of the people must be asked.
So why should gay marriage be forced upon everyone? Science tells us homosexuality is not genetic (at least there is no direct and precise evidence) so right away it cannot be equated to the real civil rights movement which dealt with proven genetic traits like race and gender or traditional marriage for the same reason.
What argument could you make to justify it?
Why should homosexuality be given state recognition of marriage over all other sexual preferences?
Civil rights and liberties are not supposed to be put up for vote by the people. That's how minorities get the shaft.
We don't need scientific evidence to prove or disprove that homosexuality is something you're born with or natural or whatever. Even if it was a choice, it's still the person's own sexual preference.
If gay marriage is passed, it's not enforced upon everyone. If you're straight, marry another straight person. Geez.
Many many people believe the Bible and try to live by its teachings. The Bible is clear, homosexuality is a sin.
I really don't care what a mythical books states. Politics and laws should not be based on mythology.Unless you want to live in a theocracy and we know what those looks like:Saudi Arabia, Iran, need I go on?
Your mythological beliefs should not dictate to the rest of the people in society.
Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
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.
