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
maze

Gaza, Palestinian Territory

#16969 Jan 14, 2015
How much is it It's five dollars English song for Children Let's chant Listen and Repeat .
http://youtu.be/UdBcinVYN4E
http://youtu.be/UdBcinVYN4E

Since: Dec 14

Location hidden

#16970 Jan 14, 2015
Since so many people don't want same sex marriage to be legal, i don't see why people don't create a new form of marriage that DOES allow same sex marriage.
It would take a while but then people wouldn't really have reason to object to it.

Since: Dec 14

Location hidden

#16971 Jan 14, 2015
Flashopia wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen, my atheist friend. Read this carefully. I see that you have a hatred against religious and kind people. Do you really think that we are wrong? Do you really think that we are crazy for following religion? Listen, I'm god and religion doesn't exist, we have NOTHING to loose. I personally enjoy having faith in my lord. If God and religion do exist, you will suffer eternally in he'll, my friend.
In other words (in case you are laughing or didn't understand)
If I'm wrong, I have absolutely NOTHING to loose.
If YOU'RE wrong, you will Suffer forever in hell.
You understand my point?
Another thing: if you reply to this post, in an unpleasant manner, i will inject a small '' surprise'' into your modem/router.
You think I'm joking. No. I'm dead serious. Try me. Go ahead. Reply with something rude. I doubt you will be able to access your Internet afterwards.
About gay marriage. I think a person should have their freedom. But, they shouldn't be allowed to adopt kids, for the child's sake. Same sex marriage makes the child lack a mother or a father. Its essential for a child to have two genders in the household for proper development. Google it.
Hi, another Athiest here, i don't hate religion but i do dislike religious people that are like you. Some of what you say is fair enough but i am afraid that you DO have something to lose, if you put too much faith into your religion you could end up DEPENDING on it, this can badly effect your mental state, though most religious people do not go to that extent and so they are fine. Also, the fact that you are threatening someone simply because they don't believe the same thing as you is disgusting, that is why so many people get murdered, especially by extremists, you are similar to those murderers, and i hope for everyone's sake that you realize this and stop before you go way too far.(also hacking like that is illegal) And one other thing, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, you have no right to tell someone that they cannot speak, i am not taking away your freedom of speech i am simply warning you about it so stop trying to take away this important right from others.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#16972 Jan 14, 2015
ClaireGirl wrote:
Since so many people don't want same sex marriage to be legal, i don't see why people don't create a new form of marriage that DOES allow same sex marriage.
It would take a while but then people wouldn't really have reason to object to it.
So, do you think that back in the 1950's and 1960's when so many people objected to interracial marriage, they should have created a new form of marriage for interracial couples?

Since: Dec 14

Location hidden

#16973 Jan 14, 2015
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
So, do you think that back in the 1950's and 1960's when so many people objected to interracial marriage, they should have created a new form of marriage for interracial couples?
Maybe not back then, back then it was a lot more violent a protest against it and it may have made people even lose their lives back then but it is different now. There is not as high a percentage of people who are against it and there would be more done to prevent anyone getting hurt.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#16974 Jan 14, 2015
ClaireGirl wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe not back then, back then it was a lot more violent a protest against it and it may have made people even lose their lives back then but it is different now. There is not as high a percentage of people who are against it and there would be more done to prevent anyone getting hurt.
Then, by that logic, there is also no need to create a new definition of marriage to a different group of people who are getting married.

We learned during the 50's and 60's that "separate but equal" does not work - and is anything but equal.

Marriage is Marriage. Fortunately, in the US at least, this battle is almost over. 35 of the 50 states allow gay marriage and it should be all 50 in the near future.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16975 Jan 14, 2015
Charlie Feather wrote:
<quoted text>
What is the "compelling state interest" in two people who want to live together?
Helping families.
aprilcakez1

Switzerland

#16977 Jan 14, 2015
looking for a guy to make me c ummm...hit me up on skype ID: April.Sutton145
Join Free
Brody

Marion, AR

#16978 Jan 14, 2015
Die Hard Arkie wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed.
Ya, me two.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16979 Jan 22, 2015
Charlie Feather wrote:
<quoted text>
The question that must be answered first is: What is the government's interest in the relationships of opposite-sex couples?
If there is no legitimate governmental interest in the relationships of opposite-sex couples, then there is none either in the relationships of same-sex couples.
If there is none, then it is time for the government to disengage itself from marriage altogether and provide no legal status for either opposite-sex couples or same-sex couples.
Fundamental civil rights do not need to provide any benefit to the government. It is the task of the government to protect civil rights, not to deny them. Marriage is a fundamental right of all persons in the US.

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965):“We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.”
OpinionsOfTheYou ngCount

Bethlehem, PA

#16980 Jan 23, 2015
First off, the government needs to pull it's head out of it's ass and separate church and state so that any religious reasons behind keeping this from becoming legal disappear. Now I know, being fresh out of high school makes my opinion less legitimate in the eyes of more experienced people(let alone possibly completely idiotic), but it's ( what seems to me) a very simple solution. Maybe once the republicans stop using religion to try to govern maybe they'll realize that the unity of this dying nation is worth allowing this simple little law to pass.
ApparentlyInferi or

Bethlehem, PA

#16981 Jan 23, 2015
ya heba wrote:
<quoted text>
what makes perfect sense is a husband and his wife in its untainted original form. the perverted kind of "husbands", "wives" makes perfect sense to you because homosexuals are deviants. everything you touch becomes tainted thus becomes inferior, it will never be like the original. i mean look at your "marriage" inferior, "parenthood" inferior. get use to being inferior.
You speak of inferiority. I would just like to remind you that insulting thousands of people the way you did will most likely get you barred from your "heaven". What happened to "love thy neighbor"? What happened to "god created us all equally"? Or doest that matter to evangelists like you? If god created us equally, then why did he make some of us "inferior"?
I'd also like to point out that a study has pointed out a link between close-minded people, republicans, and low IQ ratings.... So, my over zealous friend, who's inferior exactly?
kinkyFemale15

Switzerland

#16982 Jan 23, 2015
any guys into y0ung female? add my skype id: purtygrl-lexie7381

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#16984 Sunday Feb 8
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Sweetie, the government has an interest in all legal contracts, which is their interest in recognizing contracts of marriage. Just a reminder to the willfully disinforming, the notion of a compelling state interest, applies only to what must be proved in order to deny the individual their right to marry the legal partner of their choice. Pardon the expression, but try and keep that straight.
So, you can't honestly answer the question.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16985 Sunday Feb 8
Charlie Feather wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you can't honestly answer the question.
He answered your question.
Civil rights do not need to provide any compelling interest to the government or the majority. Liberty and equal protections of the law are the equal right of all persons.

The government is required to protect the liberty and equal protections of the law for all persons. If the government is to restrict those rights, they must have a compelling interest for doing so. The excuses offered have failed rational examination in over 60 courts so far. Your excuse fails because equal rights do not need to provide any interest to the government.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#16987 Sunday Feb 8
Charlie Feather wrote:
So, you can't honestly answer the question.
So, you thought this was a logical rebuttal,. Sweetie, it's not my fault you didn't like my answer and can't think of a better answer than this. The state's only interest in an individual's relationships is that they be otherwise legally consensual and if you don't want to invite interference, done with a reasonable expectation of privacy. The state's two interests in marriage are, that they be otherwise legally consensual and that their legal contract is conscionable, that's it. The state has no interest in legal marriages being breeder and/or breeder resembling only relationships.
James P

San Antonio, TX

#16989 Sunday Feb 8
The One Called Rab Gix wrote:
If you don't like Gay marriage, don't get one. Simple.
Technically speaking...nobody is stopping anyone from getting married. Who you can marry is the same for everyone. If you want a same sex union that is fine too, but it isn't a marriage. No problem with that.

Kind of like a GED is not the same as a High School Diploma, but equates to the same thing.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16990 Sunday Feb 8
James P wrote:
<quoted text>
Technically speaking...nobody is stopping anyone from getting married. Who you can marry is the same for everyone. If you want a same sex union that is fine too, but it isn't a marriage. No problem with that.
Kind of like a GED is not the same as a High School Diploma, but equates to the same thing.
Yet, the legal marriages of same sex couples still aren't legally recognized in a few states.

But in most states, same sex marriages are a marriage, like all others under the law.
James P

San Antonio, TX

#16991 Monday Feb 9
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, the legal marriages of same sex couples still aren't legally recognized in a few states.
But in most states, same sex marriages are a marriage, like all others under the law.
Nor should they be recognized, to me it is semantics, but people refuse to find a happy middle ground. Extreme religious individuals do not want to allow any kind of union and those completely opposed to religion would love to see gay marriages in the church.
For me...allow civil unions, extend rights, but do not call it marriage.
Why do we have to always have to have all or nothing, when at the same time we pound the compromise drum?
To me, it isn't marriage, not for religious or moral reasons, it just isn't. Just like a person with a GED can't say they are a graduate of their high-school just because they earned their GED after the fact. Provides the same legal equivalent, but not in fact a high school diploma.
But alas, I won't find anyone on either side of this argument that won't attack me...
Said my piece...enjoy your debate.
Tazz

United States

#16992 Monday Feb 9
Yes...,needs no further discussion

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
Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 1 hr EdmondWA 29,748
Investigator recommends dropping sex assault ch... 1 hr Porter Bowman 23
Transgender Bruce Jenner will be lesbian after ... 1 hr see the li 101
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr River Tam 15,458
SC College Examined for 'Biblical' Stance on Ho... 2 hr Rainbow Kid 11
Jade gettn her Freak on 3 hr Rainbow Claus 4
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 3 hr cpeter1313 3,917
Why I'll be voting 'No' to same-sex marriage, e... 3 hr NoahLovesU 1,056
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 4 hr NoahLovesU 57,806
Biggest Gay Lies (May '14) 9 hr Delbert 3,214
More from around the web