Homosexual Marriage

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

Church and State, two great tastes that by one of the most strongly enforced laws of your country do not taste great together in any way shape or form.

Not so strongly enforced, unfortunately. I don't particularly approve of either church or state in any form, but at the same time recognizing one of the ideal functions of the state and agreeing with it I feel obligated to defend the ideal.

You can't argue politics via religion, and you can't argue religion via politics. They are seperate and distinct by deliberate purpose.

Religion is separated from politics as part of a political mandate. It's the enforcement of this political mandate that ideally prevents a certain evil, therefore in this case the political justification, given from the moral justification, is in contrast with an immoral manifestation of religion.

So yes, in this particular case I can and most certainly will argue against religion via politics, although I must recognize that it's the moral basis of the political mechanism which is the real issue.

[psychopete]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

This is a disgusting issue. It sickens me when I see two homosexual people together that truely love each other and would want to get married or something.

If people want to do things in the privacy of their home that's not my issue, when they bring it in public and want to take it furhter, is what ticks me off.

I'm 100% against gay marraige, it's disgusting. I understand when people use it as a joke or making fun of them but when it's serious I have a problem with it. A good example is in movies, it may be funny and all but that still does not mean it's right.

This is an issue where I don't care what anyone else says, I will always be against it, and strongly. I don't care about the "rights" gays say they have. I say NO, and many others out there do too.

Is there something truely wrong and evil about two people loving each other, regardless of gender?

So, you're saying we don't have rights? Read a little thing called the United States Constitution, then come back to me.

I don't exactly get why you put those links there kilroy, maybe you should explain in your words why you linked to those wikipedia sites. Also, I've heard other sides on plenty of issues, including homosexuality in general, but I have never had a different opinion on it. I would bring religion into this, party of what I base my beliefs off, but my guess would be that you woudn't care. I base a lot of my views of religion, so if your not religious then it wouldn't make any sense arguing with you, it would be a never ending arguement to the point where it would make no sense. Also, if the Constitution cares so much, then how come the majority of states voted against allowing gay marraige?

Here's some common sense: Our founding fathers were the ones who wrote the Constitution. I would bet that they did not consider homosexuality an issue, if they did then I would be they were aginst it since they were religous. I doubt homosexuality was hardly an issue 200 years ago.

Religious views being the basis for your political beliefs isn't doing much to support your arguement.

You say it's disgusting and wrong, but tell me, what is so disgusting about it to you? You need to support your statements or shut up.

[Melone Marshe]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

The greatest "wrong" I can see with homosexual marriage is the fact that the two can't have children together. But then, this is a very remotely minor issue to me, as love doesn't require having children to begin with. Actually, being married has no real link to having children anyways, so this point is moot...that is to say, I see absolutely nothing wrong with homosexual marriage.

Marriage is supposed to be about a bond between two people who truly care about each other, and wish to spend their lives together. What's it matter if the two people who share such a strong bond are guys or girls? Not to mention, in reply to one poster...a gay couple getting married isn't "throwing their gayness" in your face any more than a straight couple throwing their..."straightness" in your face.

And to you guys who keep saying "OMG IT'S GROSS"...why? Because the contents of one-another's pants aren't different? Love isn't simple like a preschooler block puzzle, but if you think it is, maybe you should just go back to preschool until you can at least figure out the block puzzle first.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

The only issue I would say that has nothing to do with religion is the fact that homosexuals can't have children. Why would anyone care about somebody else's business anyways? Men and women marry and sometimes they don't want to ever have children. Sometimes men and women can't even have children. In no regards to religion, wouldn't a homosexual be just like these people? If you are going to deny rights to homosexuals, you might as well deny rights to infertile people or people who are not willing to have children.

[Kamunt]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

I'm trying to figure out where to jump back into this "debate" here, but I'm having difficulty finding an appropriate place. Would've been so much easier to have just stayed active in the topic, but I suppose Finals take precedence over Internet morality, etc. debates, don't they? I could continue the textual flogging of das1, but that seems wholly unnecessary. Hmm...I suppose I should just sit back for awhile until I find my proper place to fall into line.

EDIT:

...to you guys who keep saying "OMG IT'S GROSS"...why? Because the contents of one-another's pants aren't different? Love isn't simple like a preschooler block puzzle, but if you think it is, maybe you should just go back to preschool until you can at least figure out the block puzzle first.

This made me physically laugh. It's funny because it's true, though, I suppose. :3

[devonin]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

The greatest "wrong" I can see with homosexual marriage is the fact that the two can't have children together.

As this is often a quoted reason against allowing gay marriage in the United States, a gay rights lobby group was proposing a law that would state that any married couple that did not produce a child within 5 years be forcibly divorced by the government.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

As this is often a quoted reason against allowing gay marriage in the United States, a gay rights lobby group was proposing a law that would state that any married couple that did not produce a child within 5 years be forcibly divorced by the government.

Uh. Devonin. The only reason people get married is to have children. Jeez. This elementary knowledge here. Everyone knows there's no such thing as love.

[Chrissi]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

I aggre that only 1 gender should be able to be married. Its gross other wise.

Which gender, male or female?

Also, gg. You're from Canada. You must be disgusted with your country, what with the homosexuals and their gay marriage running all over the place.

[psychopete]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

I aggre that only 1 gender should be able to be married. Its gross other wise. Just think about it!

I will also ALWAYS be against it! FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really, what is there to think about?

And I'll say to you what I said to the other one: elaborate, dammit.

[Coca Cola]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

Same Sex Mating Is Against The Machine

I Oppose

[x6tence]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

my opinion on homosexual marriage: NO

[devonin]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

Support your opinion with reasons and evidence as per the rules of the forum.

[ToshX]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

Support your opinion with reasons and evidence as per the rules of the forum.

The thing is, there is no real reason outside of religion and not being able to make kids. I think the law should NEVER do anything based on religion, and I also think that, until we have a PROBLEM or the population is actually DECREASING rather than rapidly increasing, I also think this argument also will not work.

So what will to support this argument? Absolutely nothing.

The majority of the public is not always right.

Remember when black people were slaves, and in general treated like garbage in general back then when they really didn't deserve ANYTHING(as in they didn't deserve to be treated that poorly) they were getting at all? Know how it just continued on because the majority thought it was okay? I'd think instances like those would have made people notice that the majority is not always in favor.

And hey, what if someone's still racist towards black people? Well, there are MANY other instances in history where stuff like this has happened in which a person could agree to. I think it is impossible for someone to agree that ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING should be as it was thousands of years ago. That being said, why not make the change now, even if the majority will disagree, for the help of a better world in the long run?

Oh, and devonin, I'm not saying this to you, I'm saying this to everyone. More towards the people who disagree with homosexual marriage, though.

EDIT: I worded something poorly in my 4th "paragraph"(2nd if you don't count the two sentences between). Sorry about the confusion that could've caused. I fixed it now though.

[devonin]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

Oh, and devonin, I'm not saying this to you, I'm saying this to everyone. More towards the people who disagree with homosexual marriage, though.

I didn't think you were saying it to me, since I didn't actually state an opinion just now, I asked someone else to provide their reasons and evidence.

Though to address what you said: How do you know whether x6tence has reasons or evidence yet, since they haven't actually stated some?

I appreciate that you have obviously come up against a lot of people who are against gay marriage on religious grounds, but here's the thing: They aren't wrong.

They believe in a religion that says it is wrong, so they believe it is wrong. That is their right as a free thinking human: to believe whatever they want.

It only becomes problematic when they assume that their conviction (even in an absence of evidence) is enough to convince someone of the correctness of their position, or when religious groups are allowed to more directly influence the government than non-religious groups.

Democracy is the tyrrany of the majority, and anyone wanting to live in a democracy is constrained by the fact that there will be times where they feel their minority view is correct, and the majority view is incorrect, but you live in a democracy, you live with it, or you leave.

If you made a change that the majority disapproved of, you wouldn't be in a democracy anymore, even if the change is one that you feel is encouraging freedom.

[ToshX]

Re: Homosexual Marriage

I'm sorry, I'm noticing a lot of typos and stuff in my post that really turn my post in the opposite direction. It was worded pretty poorly. Reread it and it'll send off a different message.

I appreciate that you have obviously come up against a lot of people who are against gay marriage on religious grounds, but here's the thing: They aren't wrong.

They believe in a religion that says it is wrong, so they believe it is wrong. That is their right as a free thinking human: to believe whatever they want.

I'd like to say I agree with you here, but I'd rather do things by known facts. I hate to say it, but no religion is a known fact. Even atheism is not a fact, nor is it any closer than anyone else's opinions on it for all we know. What I'm saying is until we PROVE a religion to be real, one in which says homosexual marriage is wrong, I think there should be no problem with it.

I just really don't like to think things should be based off of assumptions of what COULD be there. I just don't think it's a valid argument.

Democracy is the tyrrany of the majority, and anyone wanting to live in a democracy is constrained by the fact that there will be times where they feel their minority view is correct, and the majority view is incorrect, but you live in a democracy, you live with it, or you leave.

I'm sorry, I missed this part when I posted. But yeah, I agree if there is OTHER EVIDENCE against it besides religion(well, which is "valid" evidence), then it becomes more of a reasonable opinion.

If you made a change that the majority disapproved of, you wouldn't be in a democracy anymore, even if the change is one that you feel is encouraging freedom.

Then maybe we should not be a democracy if it is limiting the amount of freedom we have. But that's an entirely different argument.