Gay Marriage Debate - Valdosta, GA

[Gabby]

People should have the right to love whoever they want. No matter if it's man and man, man and woman, or woman and woman. The fact that people oppose it so much is the abomination, not homosexuals. The people who say that being gay is an abomination are the true abominations.

[Headful Of Ghosts]

Gabby wrote:

People should have the right to love whoever they want. No matter if it's man and man, man and woman, or woman and woman. The fact that people oppose it so much is the abomination, not homosexuals. The people who say that being gay is an abomination are the true abominations.

Funny, no one said you cannot love whoever you want, homosexuality is not "outlawed" in this country, only the marriage of homosexuals.
By allowing the marriage of homosexuals, society as a whole will be stating that there is nothing immoral about homosexuality.

Who defines what is moral and immoral, right or wrong?
Many who promote homosexuality as moral feel as though the Government or even society should not define what is moral or not, if that be the case are you willing to carry it all the way to its end? If morality is defined by the individual then you may not like where that takes you or those around you.

[jennyjams]

@Bonnie, you're also not suppose to get divorced or have sex before marriage according to the bible... But people do.

[Macguru]

Headful Of Ghosts wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny, no one said you cannot love whoever you want, homosexuality is not "outlawed" in this country, only the marriage of homosexuals.
By allowing the marriage of homosexuals, society as a whole will be stating that there is nothing immoral about homosexuality.
Who defines what is moral and immoral, right or wrong?
Many who promote homosexuality as moral feel as though the Government or even society should not define what is moral or not, if that be the case are you willing to carry it all the way to its end? If morality is defined by the individual then you may not like where that takes you or those around you.

The “slippery slope” argument is illogical on its face, and is not acceptable in polite and intellectual discussions.

[Headful Of Ghosts]

Macguru wrote:

<quoted text>
The “slippery slope” argument is illogical on its face, and is not acceptable in polite and intellectual discussions.

You just can't handle the truth, hurts, but let it sink in, you'll see the error of your line of thought.

[Jasper]

Oppose, freaks wanting everyone to accept their freaky lifestyle as normal.
No matter what you do or say it will always be wrong.

[megan mcdonald]

Love is love

[Isaidit]

Who says its not right?!?! YOU say it's not right, And WHO the hell are you?? This is just more proof that we seriously need to give more to our educational programs because the ignorance and honestly the trash that we have in Valdosta is just getting a bit ridiculous. EDUCATE YOURSELVES.

[wlb]

its an abomination!

[wlb]

is it gaybe or gabby?

[J]

Equal Rights!

[Proud in the South]

Every Tax paying citizen should have the SAME rights,, EQUALITY FOR ALL

[Anna]

I believe that any couple who chooses to build a life together and satisfies the legal parameters (beyond gender) of marriage should be allowed civil unions and all the rights that pertain to those unions. However, that is all purely based on federal and state rights. I do NOT believe that any religious organization should be forced to recognize these pairings as spiritual unions or be penalized for not recognizing them so long as their doing so isn't depriving them of some sort of right guaranteed under government. In other words, if two men want to have a ceremony and get a certificate, then they should be allowed to benefit from inheritance laws and insurance, etc... But religious organizations shouldn't be forced to marry them nor should they be restricted from voicing their opinion that such unions are not considered righteous in their eyes.

Thing is that a lot of people like to quote the Bible to explain why gays should be married, but marriage is not just a spiritual joining. And if their version of things is correct then any damning or limitations should be placed on these couples by their deities. But marriage in this country (and in pretty much all others) also carries legal rights. It's these that I feel should be allowed as we can't go around saying separation of church and state EXCEPT for this one thing... Are there any LEGAL reasons that a same sex couple cannot marry and enjoys those benefits that other couples who in a monogamous relationship with shared finances enjoy?

[Iconoclast486]

Anyone who describes homosexuality as perverse or unnatural is clearly ignorant of the facts. I would suggest putting down your bible and picking up a science book.