Should same-sex marriage become legal?

Sep 25, 2011 Full story: MLive.com 15,315

Between 2000 and 2005, the number of same-sex couples in the United States increased by more than 20 percent, according to the Williams Institute, a think tank concerned with laws and public policy related to sexual orientation.

Full Story

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#4219 Jan 4, 2012
dick wrote:
Because (1)same sex relatioship is not allowed in any religion.(2) un-natural (3) proven cause of deadly diseases.(4) just imagine for sake of argument that all humans in the world have only same sex relationship- No children-result end of world soon.(5) Human has been created superior to animals and even animals don,t do it with same sex. There are innumerous reason against same sex and none in favour. Just let us learn from animals. Sorry I don,t mean to annoy any one, just this is what I think
1) Who cares? Religion is garbage.
2) What counts as natural?
3) No, it isn't. Sexual intercourse of any kind can spread disease. Lesbians are LESS likely to spread disease.
4) Irrelevant. Most people aren't gay and this would never happen.
5) False. There are nearly 1500 documented species that engage in homosexuality.
Robsan5

United States

#4220 Jan 4, 2012
Hey Richard, good luck being a bigot. What cult do you belong to? You are right out too!
1-we don't care about religion in this discussion,
2-Homosexuals have existed for as long as we have.been humans. That is natural.
3-You mean AIDS? Or are you talking about all the other STDs that lots of straights have?
4a-children are not a requirement to get married or stay married.
4b-If humans die off, the world won't end.
5-Animals? We are discussing humans.

Learn from animals? You mean like lions? When a new male lion takes over a pride, he kills all the cubs and has sex with all the females. So you think we should practice infantcide and polygamy?
No thanks, I think same-sex marriage is a much better option.

Robert
fedupwiththemess

Ashburn, VA

#4221 Jan 4, 2012
No it should not...its wrong. Should plural marriages become legal? No they are wrong also and nasty...you allow gay marriage, next is plural marriage right behind then the USA will be all ucked up even more.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#4222 Jan 4, 2012
fedupwiththemess wrote:
No it should not...its wrong. Should plural marriages become legal? No they are wrong also and nasty...you allow gay marriage, next is plural marriage right behind then the USA will be all ucked up even more.
Why would allowing gay marriage lead to plural marriage? And what is wrong with plural marriage?

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#4223 Jan 4, 2012
dick wrote:
Because (1)same sex relatioship is not allowed in any religion.(2) un-natural (3) proven cause of deadly diseases.(4) just imagine for sake of argument that all humans in the world have only same sex relationship- No children-result end of world soon.(5) Human has been created superior to animals and even animals don,t do it with same sex. There are innumerous reason against same sex and none in favour. Just let us learn from animals. Sorry I don,t mean to annoy any one, just this is what I think
gee... our of 5 points you've gotten none of them correct. amazing.

1) same sex relations are allowed by many religions

2) same sex pairings appear in more than 1500 other animal species,+ homo sapiens

3) deseases are caused by bacterium, and by viruses... not by sexual activity.

4) fact...(for the sake of argument) even if all humans stopped reproducing today the world wouldn't end. in fact, life for all other species would probably be a whole lot better than it is with mankind running a muck.

5) the human was not created superior to any other animal... it is a fact that, at best, he is equal to other animals, and much worse than most. the notion that mankind is better than any other animal is nothing but pure ego talking. he gave himself 'dominion' over all other creatures out of fear of them.

6)we are animals.

7) there's no such word as 'innumerous'

“laugh until your belly hurts”

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#4224 Jan 4, 2012
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would allowing gay marriage lead to plural marriage? And what is wrong with plural marriage?
ah... f 'ed up mess is just jealous because he can't find even one person to marry him.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4225 Jan 4, 2012
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
How could you never sin. That sounds self centered. Everyone has done things god doesn't agree with so how can you say you never sinned.
Sin only applies to those that beleive in your Sky Santa. I don't believe in him, therefore the concept of sin doesn't apply to me.

For someone that claims to be "very educated", your question seems a little daft.
Robsan5

United States

#4226 Jan 4, 2012
fedupwiththemess wrote:
No it should not...its wrong. Should plural marriages become legal? No they are wrong also and nasty...you allow gay marriage, next is plural marriage right behind then the USA will be all ucked up even more.
God you are funny!

Robert
Join Free

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4227 Jan 4, 2012
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
What ever your bored.
Even more so today.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
And I'm posting about someone else's post. So keep it moving nobody cares.
It's a public forum. And you don't speak for everyone, just yourself. You have absolutely no basis to claim "nobody cares", you can only claim "You don't care".
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not trying to push my views on others.
Your number of posts would indicate othewise.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
If I don't believe in same sex marriage that's me but don't assume what religion i'am even if it sounds christian.
I love it when you fundies try and pretend your anti-gay bias isn't rooted in your christianity. Are you not a christian? Do you deny Jesus Christ as lord and savior? Please clarify for us, since it seems to be such an issue with you. I mean, I'm not aware of any other religion that promotes one singular god who is here in spirit, heaven and hell, the devil, and who is represented by ministers.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/TN9P1VU1E...
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
People who don't believe in god doesn't bother me I would treat them with respect also.
It's not respectful in anyway to continue forcing your god into a conversation where he has no place and where he wasn't being discussed. That is not respectful in any way. But like most christian fundies, you think nothing of doing that and believing the rest of us should accomodate your need to do so.

No hon, that's NOT respectful in any way.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not me so I can't get angry if you don't believe.
My and other's beliefs on your god aren't the issue. And whether that, for some reason, angers you or not, is irrelevant. The simple fact is, this thread isn't about your god. Period. And this has been pointed out several times, yet you continue to post about him and what you think his intentions are. That's NOT respectful.
fedupwiththemess

Ashburn, VA

#4229 Jan 4, 2012
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would allowing gay marriage lead to plural marriage? And what is wrong with plural marriage?
Plural marriage is wrong. Very wrong. Just another way for a man to be involved with more than one woman and make it legal. When they allow a woman to be married to more than one man is when plural marriage should become legal. Plural marriage is for sexual purposes only. It for men.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4230 Jan 4, 2012
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobodies talking to you.
This is a public forum. If you don't want to expect to be responded to, then don't post. Simple as that. Nobody was talking to you when you first arrived, but you seem to have injected yourself into the conversation anyhow!
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
My reasons for stating that is I don't want you all thinking since I don't believe what you believe that I'm going to try and change your minds.
Hon, normal people don't change their minds based upon the "beliefs" of others. They change their minds when they evaluate data, research and experience. You've presented none of those.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is why I say I'm not trying to push my views.
Not pushing your views would be stating once that you don't agree that gay people should be able to marry. Stating it over and over and over and using your god as justification of your beliefs is most certainly, pushing your views. What seems to upset you is that you can't just state your "beliefs" and not be challenged on them. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. If you want to enter a public forum and present your "beliefs", then you need to be expecting your beliefs to be challenged and for you to be able to support them. So far, you haven't supported your beliefs in anyway other than to bring up your religion.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not one of those who walk around with a bible talking you should join me in.
No, you're one of those stating that you don't think gay people should have the same rights and privileges as straight people because of what you interpret your bible to state. And you think that gay people should then just say, "oh, gee, ok".
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know me so stop trying to argue things you feel I'm contradicting.
And you don't know me either, yet you are publically ranting on that I, and others like me, shouldn't be allowed to marry, because of what you interpret your bible to state. I find your bible to be completely irrelevent so no, I won't stop trying to argue. Sorry you don't like that.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
I know what this thread is about I posted my opinion and now people are going bananas oh we'll..
No hon. You are very wrong about this. You stated your "opinion" and want it to go unchallenged. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. No one is going "bananas", and no one is "angry" because you haven't presented anything worth our consideration. This country isn't a theocracy, so your bible is trumped EVERY TIME by our system of government. If you want to bleat on that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, then you need to present a better reason then your bible.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4231 Jan 4, 2012
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
ok so your just arguing for your people I get that I been got that. It's not you business what I'm posting to others move on and skip reading my post go argue with another person who doesn't believe.
For some one "very educated", your use of the English language is very poor.

Oh, and this is a public forum. I'll respond when I want.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4232 Jan 4, 2012
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hold on your going way off on this. Yes I love my sister but I still believe in man and woman marriage ok that doesn't mean I don't respect her relationship.
1) Gays being married don't negate man/woman marriage.
2) You stated previously you would treat her "THE SAME". Not recognizing her relationship as "THE SAME" is disrespectful, whether you want to believe it or not.
Red-n-30 wrote:
<quoted text>
That just mean I my self wouldn't marry the same sex that doesn't mean I don't love her and her partner. Her views are different now and I respect that. She respects mine as well. We don't speak about it. Were very close sisters so nothing will keep me from being there for her.
No one is asking you to marry the same gender. But you have stated you are against gay people being able to marry. That is NOT recognizing your sister or her relationship as "THE SAME". You treat her and her relationship differently solely through your "beliefs" about them. Heck, the very fact that you think you are entitled to some sort of an opinion about her marriage shows you don't think of her THE SAME.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4233 Jan 4, 2012
fedupwiththemess wrote:
Should plural marriage become legal....??? HELL NO. If gay marriage passes then plural marriage will be next.
Yeah, bigots said the EXACT same thing when they were fighting against inter-racial couples being married. They couldn't make the connection, and neither can you.

There is absolutely no correlation between the two. If you disagree, then present us with the specific steps of how one will lead to the other. Oh, and by the way, there is no such thing as "gay marriage", there is only marriage. So for your statement to have any truth whatsoever, it would mean that "marriage" leads to "plural marriage".

good luck hon supporting you lie!

“Because you are... A puppet.”

Since: Sep 08

Long Island

#4234 Jan 4, 2012
dick wrote:
Because (1)same sex relatioship is not allowed in any religion.(2) un-natural (3) proven cause of deadly diseases.(4) just imagine for sake of argument that all humans in the world have only same sex relationship- No children-result end of world soon.(5) Human has been created superior to animals and even animals don,t do it with same sex. There are innumerous reason against same sex and none in favour. Just let us learn from animals. Sorry I don,t mean to annoy any one, just this is what I think
Well Dick, it seems as though you have received the appropriate verbal smack down already. I will not add to it except to say that you really should do your research before posting.:P

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#4235 Jan 4, 2012
fedupwiththemess wrote:
<quoted text>Plural marriage is wrong. Very wrong. Just another way for a man to be involved with more than one woman and make it legal. When they allow a woman to be married to more than one man is when plural marriage should become legal. Plural marriage is for sexual purposes only. It for men.
If plural marriage was legalized, it would have to go both ways.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#4236 Jan 4, 2012
alternative wrote:
<quoted text>
Multiple marriages were what the OT spoke of so polygamy was apart of any description of early marriage. So, what is the problem?
Just a nomencalture clarification ...

Check out

polygamy
polyandry
plural marriage
group marriage

My last comment should have applied to "group marriage"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_marriage
Aida Lott

Perrineville, NJ

#4237 Jan 4, 2012
fedupwiththemess wrote:
No it should not...its wrong. Should plural marriages become legal? No they are wrong also and nasty...you allow gay marriage, next is plural marriage right behind then the USA will be all ucked up even more.
Yes..... we know that you think sex is nasty, you poor little frigid prig.

Your "slippery slope" argument is a logical fallacy. Do you know what that means? It means you have NO evidence to make that statement... it is merely fear-mongering.... and that seems to work on stupid people.
Robsan5

United States

#4238 Jan 4, 2012
It sure worked on FedUp!

Robert

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#4240 Jan 4, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>Even more so today.

Red-n-30 wrote, "<quoted text>
And I'm posting about someone else's post. So keep it moving nobody cares. "

It's a public forum. And you don't speak for everyone, just yourself. You have absolutely no basis to claim "nobody cares", you can only claim "You don't care".

Red-n-30 wrote, "<quoted text>
I'm not trying to push my views on others."

Your number of posts would indicate othewise.

Red-n-30 wrote, "<quoted text>
If I don't believe in same sex marriage that's me but don't assume what religion i'am even if it sounds christian. "

I love it when you fundies try and pretend your anti-gay bias isn't rooted in your christianity. Are you not a christian? Do you deny Jesus Christ as lord and savior? Please clarify for us, since it seems to be such an issue with you. I mean, I'm not aware of any other religion that promotes one singular god who is here in spirit, heaven and hell, the devil, and who is represented by ministers.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/TN9P1VU1E...

Red-n-30 wrote, "<quoted text>
People who don't believe in god doesn't bother me I would treat them with respect also."

It's not respectful in anyway to continue forcing your god into a conversation where he has no place and where he wasn't being discussed. That is not respectful in any way. But like most christian fundies, you think nothing of doing that and believing the rest of us should accomodate your need to do so.

No hon, that's NOT respectful in any way.

Red-n-30 wrote, "<quoted text>
It's not me so I can't get angry if you don't believe. "

My and other's beliefs on your god aren't the issue. And whether that, for some reason, angers you or not, is irrelevant. The simple fact is, this thread isn't about your god. Period. And this has been pointed out several times, yet you continue to post about him and what you think his intentions are. That's NOT respectful.
I said keep it moving which means comment on someone else's post skip mine. KEEP IT MOVIN!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 8 min Frankie Rizzo 15,380
CP exclusive: Wynne says some sex education pro... 17 min dethmetalchick 68
Lesley Gore: Teenage hit singer became gay righ... 23 min Gerald 6
State's same-sex marriage dispute now a clash o... 23 min jim ed earl 2
NYC mayor to march in LGBT pre-St. Patrick's pa... 29 min Gerald 1
Hey, What Happened to the NE Jade Threads? 33 min Buford 1
Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 37 min Chris Toal 29,758
Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 49 min Not Yet Equal 1,088
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 1 hr Not Yet Equal 57,815
Transgender Bruce Jenner will be lesbian after ... 1 hr cpeter1313 107
Biggest Gay Lies (May '14) 20 hr Delbert 3,213
More from around the web