Gay Rights & Gay Marriage

[CJ Cregg]

[Republican_Man]

Ban gay marriage, legalize civil unions. That's what I say.
Give same-sex couples the same opportunities, but don't disrupt the traditions that have been around for so long. And let's not forget the fact that marriage has always been a religious tradition, determined by faith.

[Ziona]

I say no because the bill isn't meant to protect same sex-marriages it's meant to punish those who have a biological/chemical predisoposition that they cannot control.

I'm not for the punishment of persons who cannot change how they are.

[Republican_Man]

Punishment for them? I fail to see how this is punishment for those who can't help but be gay. As long as a bill goes through stating that civil unions are permissable, there is nothing wrong with it.
If there isn't eventually one, then it's not entirely right, but there's still ample reason to keep the traditional marriage alive.

[Ziona]

I respect your opinion RM, I really do. That's just my side of the situation. I just happen to be extremely liberal in politics, if not at times apethetic.

I just don't agree with the gay marriage ban amendment at the moment.

[IntrepidIsMe]

I hope he's doing this more for symbolic reasons than anything, because it clearly won't pass.

[harrykims#1fan]

arent gay marriages and civil partnerships th same?

i'm not against civil partnerships/ gay marriages call it what ya like i'm all for people being happy no matter who they're with

[TrekkieMage]

[webtaz99]

I say let gays marry, have joint bank accounts, raise kids, get divorce, or whatever. At least then they might SHUT UP.

[Cathexis]

OKay, speaking as a lesbian, this is what I have to say:

If I choose to have a committed relationship aka a marriage with another woman, I fail to see where the government gets off on prohibiting my right to the pursuit of happiness as outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Is that document not part of the traditions upon which this country was founded ? So are we just going to only honor SOME of those traditions, the ones that suit only OUR interests ? Or are we going to do the honorable thing and acknowledge EVERY one's right to live how they wish ? You tell me. Civil unions don't provide enough for same-sex partnerships. Period. Tradition is all very well and good for those who follow it; however, think about how many other traditions are being trampled over in the pursuit of 'progress' and 'modernization'.

Don't get me wrong, I like tradition. I have a strong Jewish background, as well as Protestant Christian....and I practice a Messianic Jewish faith, for the most part. Call me a hypocrite, but aren't we all ? We all preach what we don't practice, that's part of being human. We are all sinners and we are fallible. I don't want to get too into religion and all of that, so I'm not about to go there.
The point is, the next step after banning gay marriage would seem to be banning atheistic marriage, for how can two people 'marry' based on the traditional principles of the term when neither believe in God ?

NEXT we'll be saying that only certain TYPES of straight couples can pursue marriage under the law of the United States.

Well, I would support a civil union if it were given the same credibility as marriage; however, my own mother was married in a courthouse, not a church. So what do we say to people who choose not to marry in the traditional locale ?

Where will this end ? I tell ya, it's going to be like Nazi Germany in the next ten years if people don't start learning to live and let live.

You wanna marry, fine, but if I wanna marry....oh no, I'm not up to par with the standards of the definition of the word, therefore I'm not eligible to partake in such a 'holy' and 'sacred', and 'traditional' ceremony.

One word: Constitution.

Honestly, I could go one about this for ages, and I most likely will until someone makes a decision that meets the priorities of all who are affected by it. I happen to be one of those people, and I abhor Bush for his merciless attempt to take away my right to pursue happiness in marriage.

[borgslayer]

Ok Being a Straight Manly of a guy that I am. I say lets allow women to marry each other but lets not allow men. Seeing 2 gay men together is freighting in my opinion no offense. I don't mind however women marrying each other.

Spoken from a guy.

[Republican_Man]

Cathexis, the right to the pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. It is our founding document, so that holds weight, but I don't think that that's enough to say no to a ban on gay marriage.
There's an interesting idea about that that I think might be valid. Let the states, and the people, decide. Don't let the courts, don't amend the Constitution. Just leave it up to the people to determine the marriage laws of their respective states.

[Cathexis]

[Republican_Man]

Well, I wouldn't oppose a gay marriage amendment, in all honesty, but I'm not so sure that I would support one either. I can't say that that's the best way to go about it. I think going through the people, as 19 states have, is the better way to do it.

[webtaz99]

It seems to me that preventing "same-sex marriage" is discrimination based on sex, which is un-Constitutional. Of course, there is a distiction between the legalities of marriage and the religious aspects. The law might allow it while a given church might not.

[IntrepidIsMe]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/07/same.sex.marriage/index.html

The senate blocked it.

[WeAz]

Hallejuiah. (Thats not how you spell it..) At least one piece of good news during finals week...

And the arguement that marriage's sacred tradition is bull. If we cherish marriage, and want to protect the tradition, why do we have one of the highest divorce rates in the world? That doesn't seem like cherishing a tradition...

[Puck]

Sad that we have to put the definition of marriage into our Constitution. There is no such thing as a marriage between two people of the same sex, so there is nothing to ban really. I guess if they want it, let there be a right to some of the tax benefits that married people have to same-sex couples, but that also worries me in that then you might have same-sex couples begin adopting children in higher numbers.

It seems the attack on the family never ennnnnnds. Hopefully this 'gay marriage' ban will pass and at least stunt this movement.

I also have to add that the divorce rate in this country is disgustingly high, and it is sad that Americans have fallen into such a pitiful state of being in general. Notice I said the attack on the family never ends? Divorce rates are part of the 'beginning' before the issue of same-sex marriage ever arose.

[Cathexis]

Good point with the divorce rates. So much for marriage being 'sacred' and so important !

Chew on this:

Divorce Rate
Welcome to divorcerate.org, the resource for providing information on the divorce rate in America and around the world.
What is the current divorce rate in America?
It is frequently reported that the divorce rate in America is 50%. This data is not accurately correct, however, it is reasonably close to actual. The Americans for Divorce Reform estimates that "Probably, 40 or possibly even 50 percent of marriages will end in divorce if current trends continue.", which is actually a projection.

"50% of all marriages in the America end in divorce."
The above statement about the divorce rate in America hides all the details about distribution, however.

Age at marriage for those who divorce in America Age Women Men
Under 20 years old 27.6% 11.7%
20 to 24 years old 36.6% 38.8%
25 to 29 years old 16.4% 22.3%
30 to 34 years old 8.5% 11.6%
35 to 39 years old 5.1% 6.5%


The divorce rate in America for first marriage, vs second or third marriage
50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.�

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:
The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%


The divorce rate in America for childless couples and couples with children
According to discovery channel, couples with children have a slightly lower rate of divorce than childless couples.

Sociologists believe that childlessness is also a common cause of divorce. The absence of children leads to loneliness and weariness and even in the United States, at least 66 per cent of all divorced couples are childless.

Source

So tell me, if marriage is suuuuuuuuch a tradition between a man and woman....explain these statistics away. Of course, these numbers are a projection and are only credible if the current trend continues...but come ON !

I'm not even sure how much I even like the term 'marriage' in and of itself; however, here's a nice cushy little definition.

Marriage (n):

The state of being married; wedlock.
A common-law marriage.
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
A wedding.
A close union: �the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics� (Lloyd Rose).

Times are changing, lifestyles are changing. And just because two lesbians or two gay men may want to consider themselves the same as two heterosexuals under the law, we're going to discriminate against them ? Sooner or later, we're going to have a second Holocaust because some numnuts is going to get the idea to just...get rid of all these "homosexual offenders", not just take away their rights....

And then people like Eva Brown, a Holocaust survivor, their message of love, peace, acceptance and forgiveness will have been in vain.

I refuse to let any man stand in the way of my happiness with another woman, especially if I feel committed and joined to my partner in a nuptial sense under equality that the law is supposed to protect and guarantee to me.

Words and language change, the word gay itself doesn't even mean the same thing it did twenty years ago. Why should the word marriage be an exception ? And don't anybody try to say that it's different with marriage because we (the LGBT community) are attacking and/or attempting to break away from a basic, fundamental belief system. What do you think Martin Luther did ?

[Puck]

[Founder]

[Leo Wyatt]

Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is natural. It is sad that some people don't know the real meaning of marriage. No, I am not gay bashing ....


Being gay is not normal but I don't hate gay people nor so I stop being friends with them if they are gay. It is just not natural. But, that's all I am gonna say for awhile. No need to say anything else as for now anyway.

[webtaz99]

Even though I believe in the "traditional" monogamous man-woman marriage, it is by no means "natural". Much less than 1% of species in the world are monogamous, and none of the higher primates are. Even humans are biologically adapted to having multiple partners.

[Hitchhiker]

You know, this really, really confuses me. Why would President Bush do this?

From a historical legacy point of view, it doesn't make any sense. Even if he succeeds in banning gay marriage, it would only be temporary. History has shown that countries' political policies become more open to social change as the years go by. Which means that if President Bush is the president who bans gay marriage, then years or decades down the line when gay marriage is allowed again, how will people regard him? I think they would view that decision as a very bad move.

So it doesn't make sense from a PR point of view. Yes, yes, I know, what if President Bush doesn't care about PR? Well, aside from the fact that all politicians care about PR, it still would not be that effective. Even if he succeeds in banning gay marriage, eventually I'm confident that the ban would be lifted in the future. So he would have spent his political power and clout on something that is an entirely transitory play on people's whims.

The only reason that appeals to me at all is that it's some sort of creative political gambit whereby, once he bans gay marriage, this renews his supporters and ensures that the next Republican presidential candidate in 2008 has a firm backing. But that would just be giving him way too much credit.

[WeAz]

And saying that Gays can have civil unions, but not marry is kind of demeaning. its like saying: You can't do what every one else does, but you can do this, which we say is just as good"