|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:43 am
Hey...if you love that person...and your gay, bi, lez, or other wise... I Say let them get married. I see nothing worng with it. Besides...I see alot of people who might be gay or bi or lez all the time. I even talk to a few who are. Hell...I had a grilfriend who was bi. =P So I back people up on this subject alot really. I say let the marrige take place and let life happen in it's own way.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:12 pm
Christians don't have a monopoly on the word "Marriage." I think that it's still a sign of intolerance to try and call the union of two people who want to be recognized as family by a different word. Maybe not as much intolerance as those who fight the union, but it still separates people into the categories of "Us" and "Other." Think about it: how would you feel if only Jewish people were allowed to say "marriage," since Judaism was the prequel to Christianity, and all Christians needed to call their arrangements "unions" or "partnerships?" It's pretty damn degrading when you look at it from the loser's point of view.
The Bible should make no difference to anyone. "Marriage" is something that occurs in all cultures, most of which have no use for Christianity. To say that it's your word just because it's presented in your medium is a little silly, at best. Are you going to say that we need a new word for "woman" since women in the Bible were homemakers and women today often work? Of course not, so why use a different word for a marriage you don't ethically agree with? I don't agree with dumb kids getting married just out of high school just so they can have sex, but it's still a marriage.
Look, if you want to force the Christian meaning (and the dictionary was written by Christians, so keep that in mind before coming after me with that argument) of marriage onto society, first you have to make Christianity the official religion. I don't know about you, but the part of the Constitution that says "No state religion" seemed pretty clear to me.
Go gays!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:10 am
I feel marriage issues and such should be decided by state or city. Like in America. It shouldn’t be decided as a whole of what should or should not be done. Gay marriages, though wrong in some eyes, is still marriage between two lovers.
It shouldn’t be avoided just because you don’t like it or it creeps you out. Though they can’t have a baby on their own due to natural process they still can have children. Gay parents don’t make a gay child. Gay is a life choice not a curse. Women can have babies without men due to sperm donation and men can adopt a child that needs a home. I seriously doubt that orphan is going to care that their parent is gay. At least they have a loving home and family.
And what really got me laughing is that I saw someone on tv mention the whole breast feeding. To tell you the truth, not all babies are breast fed. They should be, but it doesn’t mean they will be different if they aren’t. Also men and women can lactate in certain situations, but it is more common in women even when they are not pregnant. So that issue is put aside.
Also another thing I forgot about, a man can get pregnant. There have been cases, so it isn’t like it has never happen. So for whatever reason there is, men and women who are gay should have the right to be married. I don’t hate gays. I might not like them due to me not being gay. Well I shouldn’t say not like, because I have a friend who is gay and it isn’t like he is hitting on me. I just don’t go for that lifestyle. But it is alright for the people who choose it.
Also in some research I notice the bible was changed from what it originally stated. Women were called servants or slaves I believe in the bible in the 10 commandments. So Christianity isn’t all that perfect either, but I am a Christian as well, but I choose not to believe certain things that seem wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:06 pm
Most gays would argue that it is not a choice, Shuro-kun; it's how they were born. I think when people accuse gays of "choosing" their sexuality, it makes it easier to deny them the right to marry or raise children, because they chose to do something that the Bible says is wrong (even though the Bible states that only sleeping with another man is bad, and doesn't mention anything about romantic attraction, but that's for another debate topic). Some people treat homosexuality like drug addiction: they chose to live this way, so obviously they are bad people, or people who made a terrible mistake and refuse to change. When it gets treated as the way in which somebody was made, either by nature or a divine creator, it gets harder to deny them the right to marriage.
I agree that it should be up to the state to decide what marriages are allowed; that's how our Constitution dished out state power, and it's good enough until we can get past this period of intolerance. I do believe that the ban on recognition of gay marriages procured out-of-state should be lifted; if somebody from Virginia, which does not recognize same-sex marriage, travels up to Massachussettes, which does, I think the marriage should be deemed as legal as any other in Virginia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:56 pm
There's really no reason why gay marriage is illegal anywhere at all. I mean, why on earth would you care if two people in love wanted to get married?
I figure, it ain't my life, it ain't my business. They're not hurting anyone, so s'all good.
What's with all the "it'll violate the sacred bonds of matrimony" BS anyways? There hasn't been a sacred bond since Britney Spears got married for 3 hours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:57 pm
Master Secret Asian Man Hannah Who Pwns There's really no reason why gay marriage is illegal anywhere at all. I mean, why on earth would you care if two people in love wanted to get married? I figure, it ain't my life, it ain't my business. They're not hurting anyone, so s'all good. What's with all the "it'll violate the sacred bonds of matrimony" BS anyways? There hasn't been a sacred bond since Britney Spears got married for 3 hours. 1. The sacred bonds of holy matrimony are only applicable to church faiths, and therefore, marriages that take place outside of the church can easily ignore the religious bonds imposed by the church. 2. As much of an idiot as she is, I don't think Britney Spears can destroy a thousand or so years of tradition more than the church already has. xd I dunno. Some woman in California married a rock. There's no going back. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 5:54 pm
I personally dont care in the least what youre sexual preference is. I think that if you want to marry someone you should be able to. It baffles me that we have separation of church and stste, and yet the most vocal anti-gays seem to be Christians. At the same time, who seems to be making the decisions? Christians. Aftre all, when theres a group of epople saying that we should vote for whoever best reflects what jesus would do, thats not separation of church and state.
This may seem like a digression, but it brings me back to my point. What would Jesus do? I bet he would give his blessing and send them on their way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:44 pm
Master Secret Asian Man Hannah Who Pwns There's really no reason why gay marriage is illegal anywhere at all. I mean, why on earth would you care if two people in love wanted to get married? I figure, it ain't my life, it ain't my business. They're not hurting anyone, so s'all good. What's with all the "it'll violate the sacred bonds of matrimony" BS anyways? There hasn't been a sacred bond since Britney Spears got married for 3 hours. 2. As much of an idiot as she is, I don't think Britney Spears can destroy a thousand or so years of tradition more than the church already has. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:31 am
Eizoryu I have nothing personal against the LGBT community, but I don't really like the idea of it being called "marriage." I'm going to pull that ages-old Bible reference of the definition of marriage, which is defined by the Bible and by the first definition of Webster's dictionary as, in short, the uniting of a man and a woman as husband and wife. Marriage isn't just a Christian rite, and people should not have to be forced to share your personal beliefs. What you are talking about is also a religious marriage, which homosexuals can get, it will just not be acknowledged by the government. So all they are looking for is government acknowledgment so they may have the same rights as straight married couples. Who cares about a dictionary? The law is above a simple dictionary. That is why people are going to the government instead of a book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:05 pm
i think that it should be passed. Many are saying they shouldnt just because "god made adam and eve not adam and steve" yes, and if you belive that, then you should know that the bible also says that everyone should be loved. If that means being loved my the same gender, i say so be it! and what if those gay people that want to get married are Atheist? they dont believe in god, so their chance of getting married were ruined because of another religion. thats not right. people should be able to marry and love whoever they want. They didnt make plain old marriage a debate whether it should be dont or not. y should this also be the case?
~love is love, and everyone needs love~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
