NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm doing a project and i need a variety of people's views on same-sex marriages...it culd become a good debate too...

I'll start with my views: I think that people should be allowed to choose their own path in life because love is one of those things that people can't control... its one of those things where people don't decide who they love... you can't force people to ignore their feelings...

You see, im an atheist so i dont believe in the stuff about God wanting boys to be with girls and vice versa... but to touch on that point if i was a God-believing person then why would God create a way for homo-sexuals to become intimate if it was "wrong"? why would God let people become emotionally invested in the same sex if it was "wrong"?

I am a power hungry gun loving right-winger and I say NO!! to gay marriage :)

People should be free to do whatever they want as long as they don't harm anyone.

Those who think different are fascists.

marriage shouldn't be an issue of government. it's a private thing..

there is the point that maybe Gay marriages shuld be outlawed for this reason:

Two guys are living together, both are straight, but they live together as friends... They are only 18 so they get living away from home benefits... they decide that it would be more money if they marry each other (even though they are straight) and claim the beneifts of a couple...

But the thing with that argument is that what stops a guy and girl doing that... it is discriminatory if that is the only argument the Government can come up with... people should have equal rights to scam the Government...

As long as the state is going to give out special benefits to married heterosexual couples, then they need to offer those same benefits to same sex couples. Personally, I'd rather the government stopped calling any of it marriage and made every union a civil union, and left marriage to a strictly religious definition.

Thats a good point... there should be a difference between a religious union of people and government recognised union...

Two consenting adults should be able to enter into a secular marriage.

I don't care. It doesn't impact my life at all.

i'm very pro gay marridge, i look upon marridge as like a vow of love between two (or more, mwahahaha! you crazy Polygamists!) persons. gender should have nothing to do with it. i personaly view marridge as a very deep and emotional thing, but i'm also not particly religious. I think marridge should have nothing to do with goverment, but i think it should be supported by goverment, for both same and differnt sex marridges, just to be fair. i'm sorry if you find my ramblings confusing, but i do my best.

People should be free to do whatever they want as long as they don't harm anyone.

Those who think different are fascists.

thats a very anti-fascist fascist statement mein fuhrer
;)

Look, honestly, as long as two people are inlove, why should it matter?
Marriage is about love, respect and commitment. If two can show a relationship these qualities, then who are we to stand in their way? If we were not menat to fall inlove with people of the same sex, GOD wouldn't let it happen, isn't that right?

Look, honestly, as long as two people are inlove, why should it matter?
Marriage is about love, respect and commitment. If two can show a relationship these qualities, then who are we to stand in their way? If we were not meant to fall inlove with people of the same sex, GOD wouldn't let it happen, isn't that right?

i'm sorry if you find my ramblings confusing, but i do my best.
Excuses excuses, your post makes sense and is not at all confusing, please try harder next time, this board has a reputation of inane pig headed pro-illogic rant type posts to maintain, and you frankly dont appear to be helping.....


Cholodo you are not much better with your premise that people who are not interfering with others should equally not be interferred with, in fact everyone in this thread except Right-Wing America needs to sort themselves out....I sure hope rationality isnt catchy, come to think of it is there not some law prohibiting the undue spread of sanity in the build up to a US Presidential election....?

Where's the "fuck it, they can get married, and if you don't like it, tough shit" option?

marriage shouldn't be an issue of government. it's a private thing..

And that's the least insane thing that most people would say on the matter of marriage. Frankly, New Genoa makes sense. Not that it would ever fly, but it's the easiest solution.

thats a very anti-fascist fascist statement mein fuhrer
;)
Ah yes, I'm intolerant cause I don't tolerate intolerance. Naff off.

Where's the "fuck it, they can get married, and if you don't like it, tough shit" option?

Sorry Goed, i shoulda put that one there... :D

There's some good points here and they'll help wit my project... thanx but keep them coming... people that are anti-same-sex marriages dont be afraid to let ur voices get heard...

Why should the government encourage homosexual relationships? Why should they encourage heterosexual ones? Why are they involved in marriage at all? The government should step out entirely, and leave marriage as a religious institution with no bearing on civil matters.

Why should the government encourage homosexual relationships? Why should they encourage heterosexual ones? Why are they involved in marriage at all? The government should step out entirely, and leave marriage as a religious institution with no bearing on civil matters.
Whether or not the government should be involved in marraige, is not relevent to religion. Marraige is a social institution not a religious institution.

Whether or not the government should be involved in marraige, is not relevent to religion. Marraige is a social institution not a religious institution.
Marriage is. State-sanctioned unions are something else entirely. Someone could marry their dog if they found the right church, the government would not sanction that.

Marriage is. State-sanctioned unions are something else entirely. Someone could marry their dog if they found the right church, the government would not sanction that.
If marraige is a religious institution, substantiate this fact.

If marraige is a religious institution, substantiate this fact.
Where do 99% of all marriages occur? In a house of worship, sanctioned by a minister of whatever faith the couple agrees on. What gives the government the right to give privileges to married people? Why should my tax dollars subsidize some married person's house?

Where do 99% of all marriages occur? In a house of worship, sanctioned by a minister of whatever faith the couple agrees on. What gives the government the right to give privileges to married people? Why should my tax dollars subsidize some married person's house?
With regards to where marraiges occur firstly I dont for moment believe that 99% of marraiges occur in a house of worship sanctioned by a minister of whatever faith, and even if I did, what exactly do you think this would prove?

The rights of government to privledge married people is a seperate discussion entirely to that which I raised with you. You have stated that marraige should somehow be controlled by 'religious' groups to the exclusion of any they care to exclude, and I have challenged you to provide a sound argument to substantiate that premise. Whether or not X % of marraiges occur in X type structures in front of X type persons does not substantiate any of the premises you have asserted, neither does the government's entitlement (or lack there of) to privledge married people at your cost.

As an avowed Libertarian, I think the government should butt out of marriage.... let it be between the parties involved...

On a side note to the wacko "right-wing"ers out there, who are christian, you're all polygamists, if you are married, since you are married to your spouse AND the government...

It boils down to this. Either:

A) Marriage is a religious rite. Therefore, due to the First Amendment that prevents the government from making laws regarding an establishment of religion, if a church decides to marry gay couples, there is nothing the government can do about it.

or

B) Marriage is a social and legal contract. In this case, not allowing homosexual couples to engage in these contracts is discrimination.

It boils down to this. Either:

A) Marriage is a religious rite. Therefore, due to the First Amendment that prevents the government from making laws regarding an establishment of religion, if a church decides to marry gay couples, there is nothing the government can do about it.

or

B) Marriage is a social and legal contract. In this case, not allowing homosexual couples to engage in these contracts is discrimination.

Yep, that about boils it down.

And regardless whether two men get married or not, it in no way effects my relationship with my wife.

Thanks everybody for helping with my project...