Same sex marriages, good or bad

[justyxxxx]

So let me ask you this, ttlpkg, do you support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage?

 

[chesty]

No good man, yuk!

 

[gotmilk]

i think there are more important issues that are being obscured by all this sensationalism, like legalizing drugs

George Soros is using his billions of dollars to work on that....and we all know Bush has to be smoking dope now..

 

[superqt4u2nv]

I didn't say it was only to procreate. I said that was the primary reason, and it is. People in Utah choose to practice polygamy, does that make it right? Men choose to sleep with boys, does that make it right? You choose to ignore what nature obviously intended to be, and you are wrong.

Come on you know it is not the same as polygamy. Your take a moral stand on this not a political tell why this bad with political reasoning only.

 

[bodytemple75]

I am straight. I also have a couple of friends that are gay, and are great guys. I believe that gays should be able to have the same rights and privlidges of being married, but it being called a "civil union" or whatever. I DO NOT believe that their bond should offically be referred to as a "traditional Marriage." This to protect both groups. The terms should remain seperate but both mean, unions lawfully. This giving to give both gays and straight couples "identity" and preserve whatever each group wants to have as their "ideal" partner in life "cerimony" called. Everything will be all fair, and everyone will have their "ways" about doings things protected then. It seems though, the CHURCH AND STATE bullshit will never be seperated really, and that is just bullshit. Whether or not there is a God or not,..... I do not care nor believe. But that is me. Although, I consider myself a good person, please forgive me to whomever does in fact believe if I have offeneded. I apoligize, but those were just my views. Not to offend, but am sure many others feel the same. Many people are good people, and do believe in God/religion, and we have to respect that. They should be able to believe in what they wish. One thing is certain though....He does not live on Planet Earth, and should have "ABSOLUTELY NO" say in what we do as a whole people. To dictate the lives through religion, and any type of law set down with having a "base" of religion being it's backing should not be allowed. This is only fair to all and right, no matter what the topic is,....gay marriage, color/minority issues, creed, or whatever. this should most definately not be allowed. If we started to base laws with first, consulting religious experts/ or icons, I do not believe that to be a wise, intelligent, responsible, or in some cases,...alltogether "sane" thing to do when given the responsibility of governing this country.



As far as adoption goes. I do believe (most, not always) that a man and a woman would be most "preferred" parents in most cases for, as the "ideal" parents for a child. Why?... because keeping in mind the overall "mental health" of the child as it develops, adjusting to the family environment, what it recognizes as a "family unit" and identity issues. Gay partnerships are not commonplace, and who knows how or if, this can effect a child. We do live in the real world, and it is not always a nice place....It can be cruel, and I do see this as being a big issue for the children of gay couples having to deal with as it grows up socially/mentally.

Without sounding contradicting,...I do believe that gays are 100% capable of being parents to adopted children, and should be allowed to have children if they want, but under only "close, case- to case basis, state approval meets, and absolutely mental, criminal, and financial acceptiance and compliance laws/standards". I do believe it should be slightly "harder" for them, Because of the "unusual" circumstances. All this to make a sure fit, and weed out others who would not make good parents. Of course this also should/ hopefully already does to comply somewhat to straight parents, but as I said before "should apply slightly more to gay couples," now because of the "new" and untested circumstances of such a new parenting proposal. All this I believe to be fair. For how long or how a law is carried out of any procedure is decieded in the courts of course...

 

[bluepeter]

cnn.com has a poll going to see if readers support a constitutional ban. They've had almost 400 000 votes so far (supposedly) and 58% voted no. Good news for ABB proponents!

 

[atlantabiolab]

Come on you know it is not the same as polygamy.

Why is it different? Merely the number of participants?

Your take a moral stand on this not a political tell why this bad with political reasoning only.

Tell us why the special interest groups are OVERWHELMINGLY against the idea of "unions", which provide the same protections as marriage? Why do they insist on the use of an obviously taken concept?

P.S. I am not supporting ttpkg's love for Bush's idea of Constitutional Amendment, which is a denigration of its purpose.

 

[Longhorn85]

ttlpkg, do you just object to the term "gay marriage" or are you against any kind of union between same sex couples?

Also, the argument about men sleeping with boys doesn't apply. Can you not tell the difference between a man having forcible sex with a child, and two consenting adults having relations? Big difference there, bor.

I am against any state recognition and tax-payer support of same-sex couples. Sex with a child, homosexual sex, they are both deviant sexual behaviour.

 

[Longhorn85]

Come on you know it is not the same as polygamy. Your take a moral stand on this not a political tell why this bad with political reasoning only.

SuperQ is this your way of debating? By trying to set parameters for my argument everytime I make a counter-point?

Homesexuality is wrong. Gay marriage is wrong. Our society will suffer if we allow marriage and the family to disintegrate, and destroying the definition of marriage will do that.

Can I be any more clear?

Now, let me ask you a question. You harped on the fact that marriage is not designed to procreate. Is a woman designed to have children? Of course all women don't, but they are cleary designed to do so. They have breasts to provide milk. They have wider hips than men to facilitate birth. They ovulate. You can't ignore nature.

Marriage is similarly designed for procreation.

 

[justyxxxx]

I am against any state recognition and tax-payer support of same-sex couples. Sex with a child, homosexual sex, they are both deviant sexual behaviour.

You're black right ttlpkg? Wasn't sex with black men by white people once considered deviant sexual behavior? I believe that many times it resorted in the black man being set on fire . . .
And isn't it true that black people weren't good enough to sit in front of the bus or eat with the whites?

Oh my, and now look at you, preaching the same BS as the whities once did . . .

In no way am I saying that gay people have been treated as badly as black people, however, denial of rights for ANYONE, no matter how they've been treated in the past is wrong. You can preach your conservative bullshit all day, but as far as I'm concerned, you're no better than the people that owned your relatives.