Same sex marriages. Your opinion?

[Sir Taliesin]

Live and let live. I didn't vote because while I don't have a problem with Homosexual marriage, I can't say that it is necessarily a "good" thing. The poll made it seem black and white while like everything else it has a shade of gray too.

[Chewbacca]

To contrast other religious beliefs on this issue, I believe that homosexuality is a spiritual condition as much as I believe the loving union between people is as well. This idea is not uncommon in shamanic societies. Homosexuals were actually given a nearly sacred position in some societies as it was veiwed that they were closer to the god or goddess than any straight person could be.

[ 07-31-2003, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[Timber Loftis]

I believe that marrage is a pact between 2 ppl ( hetero, gay, lesbian)in which they promise to share their lives together, for better or worse, richer or poorer, kids or no kids. Its a union between 2 ppl that want to promise themselves to each other and try and make a go of survival at life together.

On the legal side, this is quite correct. All "marriage" is, legally, is a shortcut form of creating a legal relationship and connection between two people, with sets of liabilities, privileges, and duties. In truth, you can get nearly all of the protections of marriage (about 90% I'd say) by spending about $10,000 on a good contract/estates lawyer. It takes 5 or 6 legal documents, but it can be done. The only question regarding LEGAL marriage (not spiritual) is why should some folks have to pay more and do this "contract" in long-form, while a section of society, based on gender alone, is allowed to "file short-form" (to import IRS terminology)??

[Moiraine]

Wow Timber ! I totally totally agree with your post and the way you said it. You've won my personal prize of "the post I would have wanted to make" for the day. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Cerek, I agree that a child should be raised by two people, in order to give him/her more than one viewpoint on life, I disagree that these two people should be of different genders. I believe what is the most important in raising a child is love and harmony - and since gay couples are or will going through so much more obstacles and suspiscion than hetero couples, any child given to their care is sure to get that in plenty. I do feel strongly, along with Timber, that when so many kids are in dire need of parents, it is kind of cruel to deny them love ... Besides, a loving couple, any loving couple, is composed of two people who have found a strong balance in personal characters and social backgrounds, which is the best nest a child can hope to grow into.

EDIT : Timber, I was referring to your first post, the big one big enough that I would have felt guilty to quote. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 07-31-2003, 01:58 PM: Message edited by: Moiraine ]

[Mouse]

As far as I'm concerned, marriage is the public and legal formalisation of a couple's love and committment to each other. It matters not one jot to me whether they are homo or hetero (or otherwise categorised by race, age etc.). As long as the couple understand the committment and give informed consent to marriage, I can see no substantive impediment to same sex marriages.

I also see no reason why those who hold strong religious wiews that marriage is only to be allowed to heterosexual couples for the propogation of children should be allowed to impose this on society as a whole. Just as I would not demand that a same sex couple be allowed to formalise their union in a Catholic ceremony, I cannot accept that the Catholic Church should be allowed to dictate to the secular authorities over whether same sex civil marriages should be allowed in a municipal building in accordance with civil legislation.

[harleyquinn]

Originally posted by johnny: It's not the way it's supposed to be, but who am i to judge two people who love eachother ? If two guys wanna marry eachother, or two women, by all means go right ahead. And the Vatican.... well, who cares about what they say or think ?

I found it rediculous that the Vatican is making such a strong statement about this, but didn't come out as strong about priests abusing children. Seems to me they need to get their priorities straight (when I say they, I mean the vatican, not the religions followers, like Cerek, for example).
Not saying I don't know why they did what they did, just saying they need to rethink which issue is really more important at the moment.

Just so no one misunderstands me, I'm not supporting the Vatican's decision. I have several gay friends, I believe homosexuals should have the same rights as everyone else. To do different goes in the face of all the hard work the Reverand King did to get equal rights for all. Before you argue to me that it's not the same, think about it hard, that if any of these restrictions were placed on a racial group instead of on the gays, would you still be ok with it? If you feel homosexuality is a sin based on your religious beliefs, while I don't agree with you, you are certainly entitled to that belief, but is it right that because someones lifestyle doesn't agree with your beliefs they should be treated as a less than equal member of society? If so, then where do you draw the line? My family's Jewish, which means they don't believe Jesus was the Mesiah (sp?), should they be treated different in our society? (that's a retorical question, I assume you'd all say no they shouldn't)
I know I'm not going to change anyone's opinions with my argument necessarily, and that's ok, you're entitled to your feelings, just trying to give you all something to think about that you may not have before. I also agree, if a religion does not support same sex marriage, I see no reason why they should have to marry that couple. However, there are plenty of people who get married by a justice of the peace, sometimes because they are not religious and sometimes because both parties are from different religions. While those marriages may not be recognized by the church, they are certainly recognized by the law and society.
Hope no one was offended by this post because (besides the Vatican) I was not trying to attack any one on this board at all.

[ 07-31-2003, 02:01 PM: Message edited by: harleyquinn ]

[Sir Kenyth]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I think certain religions want to push their idea of a family group on everybody else. Go figure. Homosexuals can adopt children or use surrogates and deserve the same rights of civil union as everybody else. I challenge you to prove homosexuals chose that way of life, you can't. It is an opinion that has no merit as fact.

Simple. You choose whether to have an intimate committed physical relationship with someone of your choice. IT IS YOUR CHOICE! Or are you saying you don't have the freedom to choose whom your significant other is?

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Sir Kenyth: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: I think certain religions want to push their idea of a family group on everybody else. Go figure. Homosexuals can adopt children or use surrogates and deserve the same rights of civil union as everybody else. I challenge you to prove homosexuals chose that way of life, you can't. It is an opinion that has no merit as fact.

Simple. You choose whether to have an intimate committed physical relationship with someone of your choice. IT IS YOUR CHOICE! Or are you saying you don't have the freedom to choose whom your significant other is? [/QUOTE]That's twisting the issue, obviously if your are gay, your going to choose a same-sex lifepartner.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by True_Moose: And Cerek, I have to disagree with some of your points about gay parenting. I think that a child will have a much more rounded, complete upbringing with two gay, loving partners, than a single parent, or in the care of the foster home system.

I agree with you, True Moose - but I didn't say anything about single parent or foster parent homes. I would agree (for the most part) that 2 loving parents (whether the same gender or not) would be preferable to a single parent home, because the child is definitely being limited in the perspective they recieve in their upbringing. Also, there is usually a residual undercurrent of hostility between the two parents and the children see this very clearly. It isn't the case in ALL situations, but I would say most situations have at least some residual anger, jealousy, or frustration left over from the marriage.

As for foster homes, that is definitely a grey area. Some foster parents are wonderful, loving people...others are abusive (in many ways) towards the child and make a bad situation far worse.

[Bardan the Slayer]

Originally posted by Sir Kenyth: Marriage is primarily to promote a cohesive family unit. Husband, wife and children in a family. To be in a homosexual relashonship, you must know that propigation is impossible. This makes marriage a somewhat moot point. I don't think homosexuals should be persecuted. They should be able to have the same relashonship as any two consenting adults can. That does not mean they should be able to twist the rest of society and it's customs to meet their needs.

Do I take it you think m,arriage is a moot point for infertile men and women? Should they be allowed to marry too? Why the focus on reproduction?

*sigh* There ws I thinking mutual love, trust and respect were more important than the ability to produce babies, which can be done in or out of marriage.

EDIT : Hehe, moiraine beat em to it a while ago, I see.

Oh, yeah - I also happen to believe that homosexuality is a state, not a choice. Don't give me that bull about people *choosing* to be homosexual. If society deemed that you could only marry a man, and that if you 'chose' to love a woman, then that was your fault, your choice, and you couldn't marry her, would you be happy with that? Would you be happy knowing that you could never be your true self, and that you had to live a lie and a miserable existance denying who you were just so you could achieve the requisite level of social acceptane to be given equal rights to your peers?

You seem to advocate that a gay man either stay single his whole life, never getting to marry the guy he loves, or that he should live a sham and *choose* a woman to marry/sleep with/try to love. This is just ludicrous. You stand as much chance of getting this to work as you would getting a straight man to have relationships with other men because society deemed he should. It doesn't work, and shouldn't work.

[ 07-31-2003, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: Bardan the Slayer ]