What is the argument against homosexual marriages?

[Siddhartha]

Opponents of gay marriages held a demostration in Hartford CT a couple of months ago. I did not understand their position. It sounded like bigotry to me. My question is how does the marriage of two individuals of the same sex threaten the institution?

Quoting or using the Bible to justify prejudices is not enough.

 

[konichiwa]

"devalues the institution of marriage"

(see: Married by America, Joe Millionaire, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, The Bachelor/ette)

 

[tm37]

Marriage was first a church function well before the Gov. got involved.

I am for a gay union that sets the same legal paramenters that marriage does for government funded programs and benifits. Some people are opposed to them because they feel that it would force employers to provide health insurance to gay couples.

 

[BG4533]

Personally, I have no problem with it. As long as they don't flaunt it for attention.

I have heard a lot of people say the purpose of homosexual marriages is just to get a tax break though.

I think a lot of it is just predjudice and is backed up by religous "stuff", i.e. lack of ability to procreate.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
"devalues the institution of marriage"

(see: Married by America, Joe Millionaire, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, The Bachelor/ette)

???

 

[koryo]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
"devalues the institution of marriage"

(see: Married by America, Joe Millionaire, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, The Bachelor/ette)

As someone who has been married for 11 years, I have no idea what this means. I have never heard anyone explain what it's supposed to mean.

If 2 people want to make a legal commitment to each other, we should let them. I'm not sure how that's supposed to "threaten" marriage.

You could actually make the opposing argument more convincingly. If we start giving "domestic partners" rights and benefits, like some companies have started doing, should we do that independent of sexual orientation? If you do this for all unmarried couples, doesn't that devalue marriage?

In 50 years we will look back at this argument and it will seem as stupid as Jim Crow does now.

 

[Kemosabe1447]

They're Sick

 

[konichiwa]

I'm all for gay marriages. I was suggesting that the rhetoric that they "devalue the institution of holy matrimony" is crap, considering half the things we see every day that devalue it.

Originally posted by: Kemosabe1447
They're Sick

Glad to hear your feeble opinion

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: koryo

Originally posted by: konichiwa
"devalues the institution of marriage"

(see: Married by America, Joe Millionaire, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, The Bachelor/ette)

As someone who has been married for 11 years, I have no idea what this means. I have never heard anyone explain what it's supposed to mean.

If 2 people want to make a legal commitment to each other, we should let them. I'm not sure how that's supposed to "threaten" marriage.

You could actually make the opposing argument more convincingly. If we start giving "domestic partners" rights and benefits, like some companies have started doing, should we do that independent of sexual orientation? If you do this for all unmarried couples, doesn't that devalue marriage?

In 50 years we will look back at this argument and it will seem as stupid as Jim Crow does now.

I agree it sounds like bigotry to me too.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Kemosabe1447
They're Sick

Who were you in your previous incarnation here at ATOT?

 

[Kemosabe1447]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Kemosabe1447
They're Sick

Who were you in your previous incarnation here at ATOT?

Have any ideas, guesses?

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Kemosabe1447
They're Sick

????

 

[compudog]

Originally posted by: koryo

Originally posted by: konichiwa "devalues the institution of marriage" (see: Married by America, Joe Millionaire, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, The Bachelor/ette)

As someone who has been married for 11 years, I have no idea what this means. I have never heard anyone explain what it's supposed to mean. If 2 people want to make a legal commitment to each other, we should let them. I'm not sure how that's supposed to "threaten" marriage. You could actually make the opposing argument more convincingly. If we start giving "domestic partners" rights and benefits, like some companies have started doing, should we do that independent of sexual orientation? If you do this for all unmarried couples, doesn't that devalue marriage? In 50 years we will look back at this argument and it will seem as stupid as Jim Crow does now.

Well said. If two adults want to legally commit to each other, fine. Personally, I think that homosexuality is unnatural, but that is my opinion. (BTW, I am married 13 years)

 

[Tiger]

I have heard a lot of people say the purpose of homosexual marriages is just to get a tax break though.

Not a tax break, just the same insurance benefits as married heterosexuals.
In Iowa, thanks to our decidedly pinko governor, same sex un-married couples, one of which is a state employee, are eligible for state employee benefits as if they were a married hetero couple. All done with an executive order. We (the state of Iowa) don't recognize "gay marriages". No legislation has ever been introduced. It would die a quick and painful death.
Of course heterosexual un-married couples, one of which is a state employee, aren't afforded the same benny's.

 

[koryo]

Well said. If two adults want to legally commit to each other, fine. Personally, I think that homosexuality is unnatural, but that is my opinion. (BTW, I am married 13 years)

If you look at the history of homosexuals (here, and in the world as a whole), it's pretty much impossible to argue that anyone "chooses" to be one. I personally am not comfortable around gay couples, but that's my hangup. It's time we stopped persecuting these people.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Opponents of gay marriages held a demostration in Hartford CT a couple of months ago. I did not understand their position. It sounded like bigotry to me. My question is how does the marriage of two individuals of the same sex threaten the institution?

Quoting or using the Bible to justify prejudices is not enough.

Why is not the Bible not enough to justify it? Just because you don't believe the Bible doesn't mean its not true, OR that it is just a good of source for an opinion as anyone's own head. We are talking about opinions here right? Saying that you can't use the Bible to justify your argument sounds like your saying, that YOU can't defend your arguments against the Bible, therefore you trying to eliminate it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Opponents of gay marriages held a demostration in Hartford CT a couple of months ago. I did not understand their position. It sounded like bigotry to me. My question is how does the marriage of two individuals of the same sex threaten the institution?

Quoting or using the Bible to justify prejudices is not enough.

Why is not the Bible not enough to justify it? Just because you don't believe the Bible doesn't mean its not true, OR that it is just a good of source for an opinion as anyone's own head. We are talking about opinions here right? Saying that you can't use the Bible to justify your argument sounds like your saying, that YOU can't defend your arguments against the Bible, therefore you trying to eliminate it.

Because it's irrelevent to those who aren't Christians or Fund a Mental Case whackjobs like you

 

[Michael]

I am pro recognizing homosexual marriages (one of my sister-in-laws is a lesbian and lives with her wife and they have a daughter).

However, I recognize that the above is my opinion. There are many people that I respect that do not want homosexual marriages to be recognized (mainly for religious reasons, and I respect their point of view).

My view on this has always been nthe same - this is a nationwide issue and should be taken up by the Federal government. The views of both sides need to be respected and voting/democracy allowed to take its course. I am glad that action was taken to stop the stealth implementation of this (states have agreements to recognize marriages in other states and there was a danger of one state making it legal which would force all states to recognize it).

I'm sure that some people will be surprised that I support the legal recognition of these marriages since my views are pretty much to the "right" on most issues, but this is an area where I think that discrimination should end. However, I also recognize that others may have different opinions than me and they also should be respected.

The track record of votes on this is pretty spotty - it has passed in some states and failed inothers. Most polls I have seen show the American public to be generally opposed to legally recognizing these marriages.

Michael

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Opponents of gay marriages held a demostration in Hartford CT a couple of months ago. I did not understand their position. It sounded like bigotry to me. My question is how does the marriage of two individuals of the same sex threaten the institution?

Quoting or using the Bible to justify prejudices is not enough.

Why is not the Bible not enough to justify it? Just because you don't believe the Bible doesn't mean its not true, OR that it is just a good of source for an opinion as anyone's own head. We are talking about opinions here right? Saying that you can't use the Bible to justify your argument sounds like your saying, that YOU can't defend your arguments against the Bible, therefore you trying to eliminate it.

Too much hypocrisy for me to take it seriously. People are too selected in what parts of the bible they follow. They use the bible to justify repressing and persecuting people they do not like but at the same time they may not obey the Ten Commandments by not observing the sabbath or they may take their God's name in vain. They may eat pork or shell fish.

 

[Grasshopper27]

I'm for homosexual unions. I don't want them called marriages, but legal unions is just fine with me.

Thumper's sister is a lesbian and she has been living with her g/f for several years now. If they could, I think they would get "married".

: ) Hopper

 

[stormbv]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Opponents of gay marriages held a demostration in Hartford CT a couple of months ago. I did not understand their position. It sounded like bigotry to me. My question is how does the marriage of two individuals of the same sex threaten the institution?

Quoting or using the Bible to justify prejudices is not enough.

Why is not the Bible not enough to justify it? Just because you don't believe the Bible doesn't mean its not true, OR that it is just a good of source for an opinion as anyone's own head. We are talking about opinions here right? Saying that you can't use the Bible to justify your argument sounds like your saying, that YOU can't defend your arguments against the Bible, therefore you trying to eliminate it.

Because it's irrelevent to those who aren't Christians or Fund a Mental Case whackjobs like you

But...But...it's the truth!!! It's the word of God!

 

[nater]

Why do I believe married heterosexual couples should get a tax break? Because I think for a child to have a good upbringing they should have a MOTHER and a FATHER. Not two fathers, not two mothers, not just a mom or just a dad, but BOTH. A homosexual couple would not provide that.

 

[stormbv]

Originally posted by: nater
Why do I believe married heterosexual couples should get a tax break? Because I think for a child to have a good upbringing they should have a MOTHER and a FATHER. Not two fathers, not two mothers, not just a mom or just a dad, but BOTH. A homosexual couple would not provide that.

Hell, there's a lot of heterosexual couples that don't provide that.

 

[Pliablemoose]

What is the argument against homosexual marriages?

Just the mental images of gay men in the act.

However, I think lipstick lesbian marriages should be encouraged, as long as they have an exhibitionist fetish

Seriously though, WTH, if 2 people of the same sex want to add to the nightmare of family court scenes, I'm all for it, I think Gay Divorce Court is a great idea for a reality TV show

 

[Tom]

You can't make an omelette without eggs.