Should same-sex marriage become legal?

Should same-sex marriage become legal?

There are 15309 comments on the MLive.com story from Sep 25, 2011, titled Should same-sex marriage become legal?. In it, MLive.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at MLive.com.

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

Muri, Switzerland

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

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#16984 Feb 8, 2015
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 Feb 8, 2015
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 Feb 8, 2015
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 Feb 8, 2015
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 Feb 8, 2015
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 Feb 9, 2015
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 Feb 9, 2015
Yes...,needs no further discussion

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#16993 Feb 9, 2015
James P wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, even though you don't explain why "it just isn't."

Ask yourself this - you want to expand the rights bestowed on Civil Unions until they match the rights of marriage, but you don't want to allow same sex couples to be "married."

Why?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16994 Feb 9, 2015
James P wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
I can show the holes in your argument without attacking you for proposing it.

What is the purpose for a separate institution, if not to label one as worth less?

In the "civil union" "compromise", only the legal rights of gay people are compromised. They forfeit equality, while the straight majority lose nothing, and would also lose no legal rights by granting full marriage equality.

The Supreme Court ruled on the matter of "separate but equal" in the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education. The court recognized that "separate but equal" opportunities created a feeling of inferiority for the minorities being segregated, and that this feeling of segregation could cause permanent emotional injury.

The Ca. Supreme Court found "While retention of the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples is not needed to preserve the rights and benefits of opposite-sex couples, the exclusion of same sex couples from the designation of marriage works a real and appreciable harm upon same-sex couples and their children.(p.117) Additionally, the court found "the statutory provisions that continue to limit access to this designation exclusively to opposite sex couples likely will be viewed as an official statement that the family relationship of same sex couples is not of comparable stature or equal dignity to the family relationship of opposite-sex couples." (p.118 In re Marriage Cases)

Additionally, Dr. Chris Beyrer, the founder and director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights, said denying same sex couples the right to marry harms community health:``We know for certain that lesbian and gay individuals suffer harm to their physical and psychological health, and to their relationships and quality of life, as result of the shame, isolation and stigma accrued from their social and legal disenfranchisement."

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16995 Feb 9, 2015
Courts have also found other arrangements do not fulfill all of the rights of marriage, yet perpetrated prejudice as well as discrimination: "it is instructive to recall in this regard that the traditional, well-established legal rules and practices of our not-so-distant past (1) barred interracial marriage,(2) upheld the routine exclusion of women from many occupations and official duties, and (3) considered the relegation of racial minorities to separate and assertedly equivalent public facilities and institutions as constitutionally equal treatment." ""If we have learned anything from the significant evolution in the prevailing societal views and official policies toward members of minority races and toward women over the past half-century, it is that even the most familiar and generally accepted of social practices and traditions often mask unfairness and inequality that frequently is not recognized or appreciated by those not directly harmed by those practices or traditions."

"Conventional understanding of marriage must yield to a more contemporary appreciation of the rights entitled to constitutional protection. Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice." "To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others."
(Ca. Sup. Ct. In re marriages)
truth to power

Springboro, OH

#16997 Feb 10, 2015
SS marriages would get a lot more respect if many in the GLBT population didn't view relationships as disposable and / or interchangeable.

What's a recipe for disaster? Most any adult who's brought up in a SS household.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16998 Feb 10, 2015
truth to power wrote:
SS marriages would get a lot more respect if many in the GLBT population didn't view relationships as disposable and / or interchangeable.
What's a recipe for disaster? Most any adult who's brought up in a SS household.
50% of all marriages fail. Why should LGBT people be any better than heterosexuals?
truth to power

Springboro, OH

#16999 Feb 11, 2015
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
50% of all marriages fail. Why should LGBT people be any better than heterosexuals?
What's the difference between LGBT relationships and straight? Generally The folks in the latter group do not step up to the plate with the count already being 0 balls 2 strikes.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#17000 Feb 11, 2015
truth to power wrote:
SS marriages would get a lot more respect if many in the GLBT population didn't view relationships as disposable and / or interchangeable.
What's a recipe for disaster? Most any adult who's brought up in a SS household.
You rely on prejudice rather than the facts:

"Dr Eggebeen (witness against marriage equality) also conceded that "gay and lesbian couples can , and do, make excellent parents" "that they are capable of raising a healthy child", and "that children of same sex couples would be helped if their families had access to or were able to receive benefits of marriage".

Dr. Charlotte Patterson: there was "no data or research which establishes that gay fathers and lesbian mothers are less capable of being good parents than non-gay people.

Dr. David Brodzinsky: The issue is not the structural variable, biological versus nonbiological, one parent versus two parent. The issue is really the process variables, how children are cared for, is the child provided warmth, is the child provided consistency of care, is the child provided a stimulated environment, is the e child given support.... and when you take a look at structural variables, there's not all that much support that structural variable in and of themselves are all that important.

Dr. Shwartz: "the primary quality of parenting is not the parenting structure, or biology, but is the nurturing relationship between parent and child."
(Ha. Sup. Ct.)

The only difference is that children of same sex couples are always wanted, while that is not true of opposite sex parents. CPS records show many straight parents beat and abuse their children in a variety of ways. Having both biological parents in the home is no guarantee of survival, let alone success.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#17001 Feb 11, 2015
truth to power wrote:
<quoted text>
What's the difference between LGBT relationships and straight? Generally The folks in the latter group do not step up to the plate with the count already being 0 balls 2 strikes.
Very true. What's more, same sex couples have children by design rather than accident.

Since: Dec 14

Location hidden

#17002 Feb 11, 2015
Yes it should be and Obama is the best president we have had hes done eveything right 100% fact
truth to power

Springboro, OH

#17003 Feb 11, 2015
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Very true. What's more, same sex couples have children by design rather than accident.
All adoptions are the result of "accidents" by hetero couples?
Gee, thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of that.

Adopting children. That's one thing.
Helping children to grow into adults that possess good values and a strong moral compass. That's another thing altogether. That's a job for a man and a woman, and it's called "MARRAIGE".

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#17004 Feb 11, 2015
truth to power wrote:
<quoted text>
All adoptions are the result of "accidents" by hetero couples?
Gee, thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of that.
Adopting children. That's one thing.
Helping children to grow into adults that possess good values and a strong moral compass. That's another thing altogether. That's a job for a man and a woman, and it's called "MARRAIGE".
LOL...oh man.

Sometimes you backward thinkers make it too easy...

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
Corn Shuckers Weekend Update 5 min Jade 1
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 19 min RiccardoFire 14,066
News $20m same-sex marriage survey underspend should... 36 min Rick Perry s Closet 2
News Southwestern Connecticut companies lauded for L... 41 min Rick Perry s Closet 12
News Anti-gay married Republican quits after he is c... 47 min Rick Perry s Closet 57
News Rikki Beadle-Blair MBE is the recipient of the ... 10 hr Trump Plotza 1
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 15 hr June VanDerMark 57,913
Roy Moore.....Just Another Hypocrite 20 hr Frankie Rizzo 29
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 22 hr look out below 26,365
More from around the web