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.
Throughout our nations history marriage has been between a man and a woman, but over time society has become more tolerant and accepting of same-sex marriage which is currently legal in 6 states. Do you consider this progress or a step back away from our traditional values and for what reason?
Throughout our nations history marriage has been between a man and a woman, but over time society has become more tolerant and accepting of same-sex marriage which is currently legal in 6 states. Do you consider this progress or a step back away from our traditional values and for what reason?
I consider it progress. I used to be against it but now I see it as a civil rights issue and think it's sad that we can't just legalize it and allow everyone to have the same rights and freedoms.
I see it as progress. It is definitely a civil rights issue and, hey, what's wrong with being in a committed relationship, legally.
I can certainly understand why religious folks would be against it which is why I would never advocate forcing a religious entity to perform a marriage ceremony. But I do not believe that same-sex couples should be denied a civil/state marriage. Working on a religious marriage is something they need to deal with on a personal level.
I am a strong supporter of marriage equality. It is progress in my opinion.
There are churches which perform same-sex marriages at this time, therefore a church wedding is not out of the question. But I agree that churches which are against it should not be forced to perform the ceremonies.
it baffles me to no end that some folks actually think that same sex marriage will some how cause the downfall of civilization as we know it. I don't get that logic.. i just don't!
It does not matter what I think. But the federal gvt has no constitutional role to define marriage,legalize gay marriage, or abolish. This is a state issue and I support the states that have accepted gay marriage and those that have not. Of course gays have the right to due process { the proper phrase eludes me} to present a case to the SC. That is where the whole issue is heading and will be and decided.
Yes and no to the OP's question. Even though I personally think that homosexuality is one of the things that breaks tradition for me, I do not see the state in telling us who to marry. This is a very touchy debate and I hope you recognize the strong opinions espoused by members who read and post on the forums.
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.
