For/Against Homosexual Marriages (state, homosexuals, religion, benefits)

[FlaGrrrl]

On a side note.. I would love to get in on the 'White Privilege' debate but since it is soo many pages in.. I chose to start another topic. Also, don't want to be redundant and start a similar post, ya know? But feel free if u so choose.. anyways... lol.




My question to you is..

Are you for or against homosexual marriages? Why or why not?

[sanrene]

Against. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Let them call it something else, like civil unions.

The only reason they want the "marriage" title is to give them the appearance of normalcy and acceptance.

[FlaGrrrl]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Against. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Let them call it something else, like civil unions.

The only reason they want the "marriage" title is to give them the appearance of normalcy and acceptance.

So you don't think homosexuality is normal?

[sanrene]

Let me think on that. No. Not one bit.

[nitokenshi]

I'm against all marriage for both heterosexuals and homosexuals. Marriage is religious and ceremonial. We are suppose to separate church from state yet we give benefits to "married" couples. It should be domestic partnership for everyone in a relationship that want the benefits. Call it a marriage and have the ceremony if your religion dictates.

[FlaGrrrl]

Originally Posted by nitokenshi

I'm against all marriage for both heterosexuals and homosexuals. Marriage is religious and ceremonial. We are suppose to separate church from state yet we give benefits to "married" couples. It should be domestic partnership for everyone in a relationship that want the benefits. Call it a marriage and have the ceremony if your religion dictates.

So would you say that you would have to be in a romantic relationship to have a domestic partnership?

[Lakewooder]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Against. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Let them call it something else, like civil unions.

The only reason they want the "marriage" title is to give them the appearance of normalcy and acceptance.

Well, that was quite mean. I would guess that you have never been in love.

[nitokenshi]

Originally Posted by FlaGrrrl

So would you say that you would have to be in a romantic relationship to have a domestic partnership?

Aren't the people usually getting married in a romantic relationship

[FlaGrrrl]

Originally Posted by nitokenshi

Aren't the people usually getting married in a romantic relationship

Sure... but if marriage is a religious construction then why not recognize a platonic partnership?

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by nitokenshi

I'm against all marriage for both heterosexuals and homosexuals. Marriage is religious and ceremonial. We are suppose to separate church from state yet we give benefits to "married" couples. It should be domestic partnership for everyone in a relationship that want the benefits. Call it a marriage and have the ceremony if your religion dictates.

But we also have freedom of religion. So, why shouldn't religious peoples be allowed to have religious ceremonies such as "marriage"?