Gay Marriage Debate - Brunswick, ME

Discuss the national Gay Marriage debate in Brunswick, ME.

Do you support gay marriage?

Brunswick opposes
Oppose
 
40
Support
 
30

Vote now in Brunswick:

Diana Long

Brunswick, ME

#1 Aug 6, 2010
justice equality constitution
NoHighPlaces

Willingboro, NJ

#2 Aug 16, 2010
My legitimate reasons for opposing Gay marriage..

1.It would weaken the definition and respect for the institution of marriage. The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn't be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman. It makes biological sense since only a man and woman can pro-create.

2.It would further weaken the traditional family values essential to our society. The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, a great depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of "family" would only make the situation worse.

3.It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage (e.g. having multiple wives or marrying an object could be next). Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn't hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn't he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn't matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy, one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn't been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95+ percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.

4.The gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged, as a lot of research shows it leads to a much lower life expectancy, psychological disorders, and other problems. Studies show that homosexuals, for a variety of reasons, have life expectancies of approximately 20 years less than the general population. Just like a lifestyle of smoking, drinking, etc., unhealthy lifestyles should be discouraged.

Since: May 09

Fults

#4 Sep 7, 2010
A big black book of scary fables has nothing to do with the legal rights of two people making a commitment to each other. Marriage is a civil contract between a couple and THE STATE. Any religious ceremony or significance is purely OPTIONAL. It is "by the power vested in me by THE STATE of ______" that clergy is even ALLOWED to perform a marriage.
Madison

Brunswick, ME

#5 Jan 17, 2012
NoHighPlaces wrote:
1.It would weaken the definition and respect for the institution of marriage. The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn't be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman.
2.It would further weaken the traditional family values essential to our society. The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, a great depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of "family" would only make the situation worse.
3.It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage ( having multiple wives or marrying an object could be next). Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn't hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn't he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn't matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy, one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn't been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95+ percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.
4.The gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged, as a lot of research shows it leads to a much lower life expectancy, psychological disorders, and other problems. Studies show that homosexuals, for a variety of reasons, have life expectancies of approximately 20 years less than the general population. Just like a lifestyle of smoking, drinking, etc., unhealthy lifestyles should be discouraged.
I don't have enough space here to discuss all of what you've written, but I'll just point out a few things.
"The gay lifestyle"? No. Sexual preference has no bearing on your lifestyle. Straight people can live unhealthy lives, and gay people can live unhealthy lives. They can also live perfectly healthy lives. Oh, and the reason that there are more "Psychological disorders" found in gays is because of bigoted people like you who oppose our very existence.
So our lifestyle should be discouraged. What you don't seem to grasp is that people have NO CHOICE in their sexual orientation. It doesn't matter if you tell a gay person that they should "stop being gay" or what have you. They will still be gay. It's not a choice, like smoking and drinking.
It's absurd that you're worried about a "New kind of family" being introduced. So, this is America, and every single mother or divorced family is dysfunctional, and preventing our country from thriving? No, I think not. I'm pretty sure it's our democracy and constitution and economy.
Also, you're wrong about gay rights advocates wanting legality to marry objects. No. They just want people to be able to marry the ones they love. Pets, blow up dolls, etc, can't sign a marriage license.
Cassidy

Freeport, ME

#6 Jan 17, 2012
You want to tell me who to love? Hold on let me just take away your rights to marry the person you love.
Eva Neczypor

Brunswick, ME

#7 Jan 17, 2012
Marriage is marriage, mate. If two people want to vow before their family and friends and whatever god or whatever then there shouldn't be restraints on that FFS.
Jessica

Brunswick, ME

#8 Jan 17, 2012
Love is love
Danielle Morency

Freeport, ME

#9 Jan 18, 2012
The first line of defense that anti-gay supporters use to defend their outdated ideal of marriage is that gay marriage isn’t a real marriage because homosexuals can’t produce children and they don’t make good adoptive parents. They think this because children need male and female role models. This statement may be made to target gay marriage, but it also sheds light on marriage after menopause and single parenting. The case they are making is that if the couple can’t make babies, it isn’t a real marriage, and it shouldn’t be legally recognized. This is preposterous because this means if you are a woman in your late 50’s, and you have run out of eggs, you are no longer allowed to get married. Apparently marriage has an unspoken expiration date. The other point they make in the statement is that a homosexual couple is unfit to raise children. The reason they give for this is that the child needs male and female role models. This absurd idea enforces that it is also unfit to be a single parent. However, there are a considerable amount of successful children raised by single parents and homosexual couples. An example would be none other than Zach Wahls. He was raised by a lesbian couple, and he is an exceptional addition to society. He scored in the 99th percentile on the ACT’s, he’s an eagle scout, and he owns and operates his own small business. In reality, homosexual families are the same as heterosexual families. Wahls put it best when he said “The sense of family comes from the commitment we make to each other. To work through the hard times, so we can enjoy the good ones. It comes from the love that binds us. That’s what makes a family.” Wahls ended his speech with “The sexual orientation of my parents has had zero effect on the content of my character.” What do the anti-gay’s know about how homosexuals raise their children? Why listen to those with no experience with the topic when Wahls himself says, with out a doubt, that he was raised by gays, and he turned out exceptionally. However many cases show that gay couples are fantastic parents, the anti-gays are under the impression it is better to be an orphan than have two mothers! Rather than focus on the issue of marriage, or even the debate on parenting , the anti-gay community have made themselves out to be the victim.
Meghan

Brunswick, ME

#10 Jan 18, 2012
Everyone should have the right to marry the person they love.
melissa

Topsham, ME

#11 Jan 19, 2012
i support gay marriage because i'm not a moron
juan

Westbrook, ME

#12 Jan 19, 2012
i like gays.
Gale

Brunswick, ME

#13 Apr 21, 2012
It is not right, if we were intened to marry same sex or be with same sex it would be like that for everyone. I think if the world was not so screwed up maybe everyone would be mormal.
Correction Please

Berlin, Germany

#14 Apr 28, 2012
Jessica wrote:
Love is love
What on Earth is that supposed to mean ???

LOL
Correction Please

Berlin, Germany

#15 Apr 28, 2012
Danielle Morency wrote:
The first line of defense that anti-gay supporters use to defend their outdated ideal of marriage is that gay marriage isn’t a real marriage because homosexuals can’t produce children and they don’t make good adoptive parents. They think this because children need male and female role models. This statement may be made to target gay marriage, but it also sheds light on marriage after menopause and single parenting. The case they are making is that if the couple can’t make babies, it isn’t a real marriage, and it shouldn’t be legally recognized. This is preposterous because this means if you are a woman in your late 50’s, and you have run out of eggs, you are no longer allowed to get married. Apparently marriage has an unspoken expiration date. The other point they make in the statement is that a homosexual couple is unfit to raise children. The reason they give for this is that the child needs male and female role models. This absurd idea enforces that it is also unfit to be a single parent. However, there are a considerable amount of successful children raised by single parents and homosexual couples. An example would be none other than Zach Wahls. He was raised by a lesbian couple, and he is an exceptional addition to society. He scored in the 99th percentile on the ACT’s, he’s an eagle scout, and he owns and operates his own small business. In reality, homosexual families are the same as heterosexual families. Wahls put it best when he said “The sense of family comes from the commitment we make to each other. To work through the hard times, so we can enjoy the good ones. It comes from the love that binds us. That’s what makes a family.” Wahls ended his speech with “The sexual orientation of my parents has had zero effect on the content of my character.” What do the anti-gay’s know about how homosexuals raise their children? Why listen to those with no experience with the topic when Wahls himself says, with out a doubt, that he was raised by gays, and he turned out exceptionally. However many cases show that gay couples are fantastic parents, the anti-gays are under the impression it is better to be an orphan than have two mothers! Rather than focus on the issue of marriage, or even the debate on parenting , the anti-gay community have made themselves out to be the victim.
Ridiculous homobabble.
Doug

Gorham, ME

#16 Jul 29, 2012
it ruins homes and marraiges
John

Naperville, IL

#17 Sep 4, 2012
I think it is telling that the person with the longest and most offensive post is from NJ. I love Brunswick and am considering moving there but I live in NC and I am not participating in the poll. However, I suspect other haters do not have the same scruples. Let states decide for themselves.
no big O

Bolingbrook, IL

#18 Sep 4, 2012
John wrote:
I think it is telling that the person with the longest and most offensive post is from NJ. I love Brunswick and am considering moving there but I live in NC and I am not participating in the poll. However, I suspect other haters do not have the same scruples. Let states decide for themselves.
When have states been able to have a say in civil rights?.... This is a simple issue. Why should two U.S. citizens together for 2 years who happen to be a ssc, have less rights and legal coverage than a couple married 5 minutes?

It is not a states rights issue any more than interracial marriage is
jeffrey miller

Bronx, NY

#19 Oct 2, 2012
equal protection under the lae

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.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ayer Police Chief Rizzo leaving for Maine (Jan '08) Dec 21 INVESTIGATE CHIEF... 5
Bath writer takes readers back in time to 'When... (Nov '07) Nov '14 frank conner 7
Bolero power yacht (Aug '10) Nov '14 MichelleW 131
More Maine parents rejecting vaccines Oct '14 Vaccines Cause Au... 6
beatles for sale: the tribute - to perform at t... Oct '14 New England Music... 1
Bolero in Boston Harbor Sep '14 nessbar 1
Unions: FairPoint not playing fair in labor talks Sep '14 NineXlives 1
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]