Welcome to Gaia! ::

Kage>> Well, let's put aside religion and morality and look at the governmental stand-point behind the debate. How does a same-sex union benefit the country and what makes it worthy of government financial support? (since, as you pointed out, traditional marriage receives benefits from the government) Look past the individual level and look at it in a communcal sense.

Traditional marriage, generally, results in babies, which in turn results in new citizens, which in turn results in citizens who will eventually go into the work place, which in turn results in citizens who will eventually pay taxes, thus benefiting the government as a tax payer and as a worker for the community of the government.

By natural means, a same-sex union cannot result in new citizens.

Then take into account the amount of same-sex unions there are in the country. Though there are certainly more than there have been in the past, the amount of traditionally married couples is massively higher than that of same-sex unions. They are in a very well defined minority, and in this particular government, majority rules. Why take measures to give benefits to a group that is in a small minority? In a lot of ways, and in many people's minds, it is simply a waste of money.

As harsh as it sounds, this is how it is.

Well, it's not that great xd I just tried to make it sensible.

I could throw in the whole religion debate, but for some reason it just doesn't want to be heard by most who are for same-sex marriage.

Mierda, I have to go. Business meeting. sweatdrop
I wonder if the gay marraige debate will still be going strong by the time I get back.

Sorry to break it to you, but the Bible (or I should say Judeo-Christian beliefs, which are derived from the Bible) is of massive influence in the setting up of the US. Go back and read your history and you will see that the forefathers set up the government based on their religious teachings. So to say the bible has no place in government, or, more clearly, the US government, is denying what history says.

And to clarify, Jewish belief is derived from the Old Testament, which very clearly states that homosexuality is a no-no. Buddhism does not say either way, but it has leaned towards the side of opposition for almost its entire existence. The ideas of yin and yang clearly show that homosexuality is a disturbance in the balance of nature. It goes on to say that the incorporation of too much yin or yang leads to consequences, the consequences that very often take place in a homosexual relationship. (sexual disease, lowered level sex drive, depression, etc.) The Qu'ran speaks very bluntly that homosexuality is an abomination. So as far as religious views towards homosexuality is concerned, they have been one, relatively, in their view for a very long time. (only very recently have they changed)

Now I will agree with you that it is a choice left up to the individual to decide, but at the same time, we live in a country that recognizes the right of free speech. So those who oppose homosexuality have as much right as anyone to express their views, as much as homosexuals have their right to express their views. The debate, however, is in the government recognition of same-sex union as marriage, with all that entails, and since this government was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs, the incorporation of Scriptual teachings into the debate is creditable.

I think I'm sick.

Don't really feel like getting into the gay marriage discussion, but I'll simply say that people need to have better reasons to believe what they believe. Bullshit reasoning makes me sad. sad


But anyway... hi, guys! surprised

Which part?