Should Gay Marriage and/or Civil Unions for commited Homosexual Couples be legalized in the entire United States?

Vote

Want to post a match question to the forums?

It's easy! Simply click the "open for debate" link on any match question.

Calithir

Nov 12, 2009

The word marriage is vastly more degraded by those who claim it is only valuable if it only includes heterosexual couples.  When the debate wasn't going strong, anyone on the street would say marriage at its core should be about love.  Now, the debate's going, and suddenly you've got this bunch of people screaming that marriage isn't, and shouldn't be, about love, but rather, gender.  I am offended.

tyrebiter

Nov 12, 2009

"Being a straight female I completely believe that everyone should be able to be married no matter their sexual orientation."

The law in every state allows people with a homosexual orientation to get married. Of course I am talking about a gay man marrying a gay woman.

the concept of marriage is about more than 2 sex partners living together. There is also the concept of playing the game by the rules.

To be a married couple.

1, you both must be of legal age.

2, you both must be the same species.

3, can't already be married to a 3rd person

4, no polygamy

5, you cant marry an alien to stop him from getting deported, and not live together afterwards.

6, you cant marry a dead girl, no matter how good she looks, even if you're a necrophiliac.

There are a bunch of other rules that straight people must obey or they will be considered to be living in sin. In the quote I began this with " everyone should be able to be married" is a lie. If she knew a man who found some country where they let you marry 12 year old girls and got himself a 12 year old wife, she would call the cops and report him as a child molester. Nobody would read his foreign marriage licence or listen to his excuses. They would say "You can't do that!", and they would not have to explain why he can't, because he was obviously not playing the game by the rules.

So if a woman marries another woman, what  she is doing is not unlike if she was playing soccer and she picked up the ball with her hands, threw it into the net, and said she scored a goal. If a state allows a woman to marry another woman when they don't allow a man to marry another woman ( he is married to his 1st wife ) it is just not fair to heterosexuals. The heterosexuals will put a no gay marriage reforendum on the ballot in every other state and it will win the vote every time.

Erik86

Nov 12, 2009

On the topic of the "sacredness" of marriage: I can go to Las Vegas, get drunk at a party, go to a drive through chapel and marry a woman I've known for 2 hours, then get a divorce in the morning when we both sober up and realize what we did. How is that more sacred than two men or two women who deeply love each other getting married?

JaronK

Nov 12, 2009

Sing Le believes that the government has the right to decide what sex someone marries, not the person doing the marrying.  The government chosing what side of the road we drive on is necessary, because we have to all do the same thing or we'd crash.  That's not the case with sexuality. 

So Sing, since you believe that you do not have the right to chose what sex you marry, does that mean you believe the government is within its rights to tell you you have to marry a man?  After all, the system works thanks to being uniform and overriding your individual preference.  As long as everyone has to marry their own gender, it works, because something would be useless everyone did the same thing (for no reason stated).  Sounds like a totalitarian hell to me.  Live in your own, but don't try to force others to follow your particular sexual preferences.

Those of us who believe that marriage exists to certify a romantic relationship between people and needs only for those people to be consenting, and that all people have certain inaliable rights including the right to not have sex with a gender they're not attracted to... we'll be over here in our non uniform world sleeping with and marrying people we actually are attracted to and might have a chance of loving.

tyrebiter

Nov 12, 2009

This is a good match question because it shows how liberal or conservative you or your potential match are.

 for the right of center majority single sex marriage is an oxymoron. All the reasons that the liberals tell them as to why this is good idea are seen as total bullshit.

For liberals gay marriage is something to fight for, any agreement with a conservative on any part of this issue is a retreat. e.g. a conservative says "homosexuality is forbidden by the bible", a liberal will answer " Jesus never got married, he was probably gay"

Atl_Pencil

Nov 12, 2009

the concept of marriage is about more than 2 sex partners living together.

The concept of marriage is whatever we want it to be.

There is also the concept of playing the game by the rules.

The rules are whatever we decide that they will be. Marriage is a legal construct, nothing more.

There are a bunch of other rules that straight people must obey or they will be considered to be living in sin.

Living in sin is a religious idea, and does not apply to law in any way. It is irrelevant to this conversation.

So if a woman marries another woman, what  she is doing is not unlike if she was playing soccer and she picked up the ball with her hands, threw it into the net, and said she scored a goal. If a state allows a woman to marry another woman when they don't allow a man to marry another woman ( he is married to his 1st wife ) it is just not fair to heterosexuals.

Huh? You're saying that allowing a woman to marry another woman is wrong because a man can only marry one woman instead of two? That doesn't make any sense at all.

sing_le

Nov 12, 2009

JaronK,when it comes to what side of the road we have to drive on,the government has a choice...either way would work if we stuck to it.As to which form of sexual relationship is the normative one entitled to the protections we call "marriage",nobody has a choice...our species has two sexes,therefore opposite-sex relationships must be guaranteed a privileged position.If two people in a romantic relationship are not of opposite sexes,the public interest requires that it not be "certified" (as anything other than a bad idea).

Tyrebiter...I'm a largely liberal lifelong Democrat.Don't assume I'm "conservative" because I don't "have a mind so open my brains fall out".

MerAngel2112

Nov 12, 2009

I will never undertsand why anyone would want to be a conservitive? doesnt all that hate and judgement eat away at your soul? I dont beleive they are the majority at all.

Sing_le - so if say all the men were wiped off the planet [the more I read what you say the better this idea sounds] then you would be ok with woman marrying women - since there would be only one sex clearly it must exist for itself - blah blah ect. You have to agree with with statement following your previous 'logic'.

"So if a woman marries another woman, what  she is doing is not unlike if she was playing soccer and she picked up the ball with her hands, threw it into the net, and said she scored a goal. If a state allows a woman to marry another woman when they don't allow a man to marry another woman ( he is married to his 1st wife ) it is just not fair to heterosexuals." - huh??? it isnt anything like that example?

 "The heterosexuals will put a no gay marriage reforendum on the ballot in every other state and it will win the vote every time." - no it won't! not in MA anyway. its sad about ME but we won't let that happen anywhere else - TV got them all confused  - but manipulating people with TV ads doesnt mean all heterosexuals agree with that. Look at all the straight folks on here in favorite of equal marriage! its mosntly straight people saying this. For FIVE YEARS it has been legal in MA and I live here - trust me - the 'institute of marriage' is falling apart or not falling apart the same as it ever way. It's made no differnce to the marriages of straight people in my state.

no_name_avail

Nov 12, 2009

"Except that the child's needs already have been taken into account, and so far kids with gay parents are doing just fine. If you want to have them not be able to adopt kids, prove that it's harmful. No one else has been able to do it."

Until the other kids at school find out that the kids daddies are homosexuals, and then beat the shit out of said kid everyday for the rest of his childhood and teenage years...

no_name_avail

Nov 12, 2009

Erik86

Yesterday – 10:16pm

On the topic of the "sacredness" of marriage: I can go to Las Vegas, get drunk at a party, go to a drive through chapel and marry a woman I've known for 2 hours, then get a divorce in the morning when we both sober up and realize what we did. How is that more sacred than two men or two women who deeply love each other getting married?

 

Well a marriage is supposed to be fuckin sacared. obviously, in that type of situation... thats just sad...

what is even more sad is that you feel the need to argue that a marriage should be sacared...

That is a person that you are supposed to have children with (if agreed to...) It shouldn't be anything less.

Anyways... Enough with this bullshit. Homosexuality is apparently a learned behavior. It can't be genetic... It would have breed itself out of the population thousands of years ago if it were. Therefore people aren't born gay, but they learn to be gay. So if a gay person wants to marry, then they can learn to stop being gay. End.

no_name_avail

Nov 12, 2009

Furthermore.

Gay couples should not be allowed to have children, until proven for a fact that that type of environment isnt harmful to a child.

Common sense tells me that if two men are having sex with each other, kissing and hugging each other, infront of a 5 year old every day, and the kid has no mother...

Well use your brains...

no_name_avail

Nov 12, 2009

Furthermore.

Gay couples should not be allowed to have children, until proven for a fact that that type of environment isnt harmful to a child.

Common sense tells me that if two men are having sex with each other, kissing and hugging each other, infront of a 5 year old every day, and the kid has no mother...

Well use your brains...

Atl_Pencil

Nov 12, 2009

Until the other kids at school find out that the kids daddies are homosexuals, and then beat the shit out of said kid everyday for the rest of his childhood and teenage years...

Has that been happening? Not that I'm aware of. But if it does happen, then it's the fault of the schools for not protecting the children. There are always going to be kids that get made fun of for things they can't help. Are you suggesting that we base our laws on the whims of children?

Well a marriage is supposed to be fuckin sacared. obviously, in that type of situation... thats just sad...

Again, a marriage is whatever society wants it to be. If two people don't want to take is seriously, then they don't have to.

Homosexuality is apparently a learned behavior. It can't be genetic... It would have breed itself out of the population thousands of years ago if it were. Therefore people aren't born gay, but they learn to be gay. So if a gay person wants to marry, then they can learn to stop being gay. End.

Even if it was learned, which it's not, what would it matter? If I were to choose that I would go against my nature and marry and have sex with a man, what difference does that make to you? It wouldn't change a damn thing in your life.

no_name_avail

Nov 12, 2009

"Even if it was learned, which it's not, what would it matter? If I were to choose that I would go against my nature and marry and have sex with a man, what difference does that make to you? It wouldn't change a damn thing in your life"

Nature v.s. Nurture:

It clearly isn't nature. It would have breed itself out of the gene pool...

Your personal choice is your own choice. I could careless what you do with your life.

Heres the thing...

How many people have had friends or known people to use the word "gay" to make fun of stuff...

I bet everyone here has...

Do we really want marriages to become gay...

I'd rather preserve the meaning of a marriage as it is. Its is something sacared, and to be honored.

It has nothing to do with equal rights. Like I said some type of "union" is fine.

creating a cultural situation where marriages will become known as gay, giving the most often used meaning of the word gay (as a means to rip on something,) is not fine.

JaronK

Nov 12, 2009

No Name: You claim homosexuality is nurture.  You also claim homosexuals can learn to be straight.  Therefor, at some point in your life you must have chosen heterosexaulity, right?  After all, homosexuality is something that you learn how to do.  Now, me, I'm straight.  The idea of sleeping with a man never even came up in my head.  I like women, end of story, and it's pretty much always been that way.  But for you, evidently you just learned to like one over the other.  This means you're bisexual.  But not all of us are.  Some people don't have a choice.  So consider that carefully... not everyone is like you.  I've known plenty of people who were quite clearly gay and never had a choice, and plenty that were quite straight and never had a choice.  Just because you're not straight or gay doesn't mean everyone else is just like you.

Meanwhile, evidence suggests that homosexuality is indeed a nature thing.  The third biological male son of any given female has a much higher chance of being gay, suggesting that it is a non genetic but still passed on from the mother trait (like fingerprints, which are not based on genetics but are developed in the womb).  Furthermore, there are distinct advantages to bisexuality (less chance of fighting with others of the same gender for mates when mates of the opposite gender are unavailable, for example, and greater utility in forming alliances in a tribal situation).

Oh, and it has been shown in many studies that children of gay families actually do better or equally to children of straight families.  So, that problem is solved... here's some data for you http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/281279.html .

Meanwhile, you claim that a good argument against gay marriage is that children of gay parents might get beaten by bigotted children.  Is that also why blacks shouldn't marry?  After all, the same sort of bigotted children who might beat up a child of gay parents might beat up black children too.  And hey, people use "gay" as an insult, so do you feel that the existance of racial slurs against blacks, jews, hispanics, and others should also mean those can't marry either?

no_name_avail

Nov 13, 2009

JaronK:

Your an idiot.

Im not even going to bother to read the rest of what ever the hell you wrote...

Its common sense logic. Especially since you seem to believe so deeply in Evolutionary Theory...

Isn't it obvious that homosexuality is a learned behavior?

I can't be genetic. If it were genetic it would breed itself out of the gene pool...

Your going to need a hell of alot of evidence to support that its genetic...

Anyways... with it most likely being nurture (as one can see just as the sky is blue...) then it would be extremely harmful to children to allow a homosexual couple raise them...

Umm I'm pretty sure I was born straight, and have always been straight, and have no interest in anything other then heterosexuality. Your reasoning is flawed.

Ethinic differences are not the same as sexual preference. Your comparing apples and oranges...

no_name_avail

Nov 13, 2009

Heres the bottom line:

I for one do not want to see marriages become "gay" marriages.

Atl_Pencil

Nov 13, 2009

I for one do not want to see marriages become "gay" marriages.

Apparently gay marriages don't make straight marriages gay. Who knew?

JaronK

Nov 13, 2009

no_name, you're assuming that gay people don't have babies.  However, the drive to create children is the same between homo and heterosexuals.  Homosexuals just don't do it accidentally as much.  Remember, in ancient greece it was thought that only a man could truly love a man... but you still got married and had kids, you just were expected to love other men more.  Sex for babies with the women, sex with men for pleasure and fullfillment.  Also, any society that preasures people to act straight will result in gay men and lesbians having plenty of babies.

Now, you say you're sure you were born straight.  However, if that's true than you'd know that someone "born straight" can't be gay... and thus you'd have to be born differently to be gay.  That should be obvious.  Only bisexuals and learn to be straight or gay, other people simply are one or the other and can't change.  If you're truly straight, you can understand how impossible it would be for you to "learn" to be gay, and thus how impossible it would be to "learn" to be straight if you were born gay.  So which is it?  Are you born into a sexuality, or do you have to learn one?  You've now claimed both in the same thread.

sing_le

Nov 13, 2009

"Being gay" in this context is a combination of homosexual orientation and the delusion that homosexual activity is justifiable.The issue goes away if people can just learn to ditch the latter (which these days seems to be held by a larger number of heterosexuals than homosexuals).

Post a comment