gay marriage

Interesting. The arguments for and against this are so far almost entirely secular.

Religion is very important to me, it governs almost all aspects of my life. Marriage to me is not a legal union, it is a spiritual and religious union which is simply expressed legally for the convenience of our secular government (/society).

That said, my personal opinion is akin to chemistry_geek's : if they want a legal union which affords them the legal privileges and responsibilities of any other marriage, why not let them have it !
 
There seems to me little point in actually debating the religious aspects - they are quite cut & dried, with almost no room for any debate.

For most faiths, a key characteristic is that certain ideas are regarded as beyond the reach of further research or insight; God (tradition holds) handed down the official line long ago, and it is scandalous, if not outright heresy, to suggest that these issues could ever be reopened. Arguably, this characteristic is what has caused the Roman Catholic Church to fragment into other sects over the centuries; when some group disagreed with The Church, their only recourse was to break away into a different church. A good thing? A bad one? Who is to say? I'm not religious myself, but I do think that before a person commits himself to a faith, he should be familiar - and comfortable - with all its beliefs and traditions.

Gay relationships are condemned by most (though not all) Christian sects, and certainly by Islam, and I believe Judaism too. Does anyone know of a religion that explicitly condones gay relationships? How about one that doesn't commit one way or the other?
 
most all neo-pagan religions condone and welcome gays. i don't think this is like some official policy, but more the result of the open and loving attitudes of most who are drawn to the Crafts in this day and age.

frankly, what worries me about gay marriages is that if they are legitimized, then current domestic partner laws and benefits will no longer be applicable and many non married hetero couples (like me and mine) would lose them as well. most of these policies of 'spousal equivilants' might get thrown out the door and no longer be available to anyone who doesn't choose to get married legally. but selfish reasons aside, i can't come up with any reason gays shouldn't matter. in fact, i doubt that anyone can come up with anything but selfish reasons why they should or shouldn't. so it comes down to 'live and let live' in my opinion.
 
Amen to that... doh! er... agreed!

Or to put it another way, the theme of this thread: people trying to get their own subjective views across in the guise of objective ones, and since there's no such thing as an objective view, we might as well all retire and enter a world of solipsism right ;) :rolleyes: )...
 
as it stands right now, i say give them a civil union. the only reason for the different name would be to let people have "marraige". i'm still up in arms about the adoption thing. i'd like to see some actual studies i guess.
 
i'm still up in arms about the adoption thing
Click to expand...

I suspect that anyone would agree that, in an ideal world, we'd like to see every orphan adopted by a healthy, happy, affluent, loving couple - and (I'll admit) preferably a straight couple - but from my perspective, this is **ONLY** because of the potential stigma the kid might have to endure by having gay parents, not because I think gays are actually bad parents.

However, in many cases, this is not the choice adoptees face. There are, in fact, LOTS of kids up for adoption all the time -- just not a lot of healthy, full-term, newborn white kids. THEY are adopted almost instantly, within days.

Others, failing to meet one or more of those criteria, languish for years, wards of the state, moving from one foster home to another and reaping little benefit from it. If a kid is a minority, more than a year old, or has any health problems - such as may result from being the child of a drug addict - their prospects are dim indeed.

As for gay parents adopting: yes, I think technically only one of the couple becomes the legal parent. However, adoption agencies are extremely nosy, and learn everything they can about each person before permitting an adoption. Rest assured, when a gay couple adopts, the adoption agency is well aware of the situation.
 
I'd also like to see some studies, as I said earlier. I don't believe a child raised by a Gay couple would suffer in any way, other than other children making fun of them. This already happens to kids of mixed race, fat, geeks, etc. Nothing new. It certainly won't make them gay.

In the US, the divorce rate for first time marriages is over 50%. Somehow, I think the Gay divorce rate would be lower. Men get along better with other men then they do with women, not sure about women, in all my years, they're still a mystery :)

In any case, Religion doesn't belong in this discussion, at least not in the US. There is separation of Church and State here. So it's strictly the laws of the Government. These do need to be changed and made the same in all states for all people. Gays can't be discriminated against, whether you like it or not. Sooner or later, Gay marriage will be happening in all states in the US.

I'm indifferent on Gay marriage. I don't care if they marry or not, but they should have the same rights as I do, as anyone in this country has.

Gays adopting children here in the US has been going on for a long time, but only one partner actually legally adopts.
 
i'm definately not convinced that gay marraiges would have a lower divorce rate. in fact i'd say initially they are prone to be higher because people will get married out of spite/novelty/etc. just look at rosie o'donnel

and for separation of church & state, yeah thats the rule, but it doesn't seem to be the concern in this case. if you look through the bulk of the posts against gay marraige there is a strong religious background to the feeling.

we need some psych people in this forums to supply us with some reports!
 
If you look at the news and read the news articles in the US, you'll see a majority of the Gay couples getting married, have been together for years, and a lot have adopted kids they are raising.

and for separation of church & state, yeah thats the rule, but it doesn't seem to be the concern in this case

Doesn't matter if it's the concern in this case, with posters of this thread. I know a lot of people object because of their religious beliefs, but that is not relevant to this issue, regardless of what anyone has to say, including Church leaders. It's going to come to one thing here in the US, the Civil Rights of a person.

Church leaders, of all people, should keep quite on this issue. They've been covering up Gays in the Ministry for years, child molestation, etc. An, it's not just the Catholic religion.
 
If you look at the news and read the news articles in the US, you'll see a majority of the Gay couples getting married, have been together for years, and a lot have adopted kids they are raising.
Click to expand...

i'm not doubting their time together nor the fact that many want to get married for all the "right" reasons. what i'm saying is that they are going to be no different than straight people with regard to divorce PLUS you have people like rosie who are going to get married for shitty reasons and be MORE prone to divorce.

and i know some have adopted kids. no has said they haven't.
 
I think Gay people will have a lower divorce rate than straight people. Just my opinion. Rosie got married because she wanted to and loves her partner. They've been together for a long time and have 4 kids. She got very upset at what Bush said, and made a big point of it, which she could because she's a personality.
In the world we live in today, Gay marriage should be the least of our concerns.
 
The seperation of Church and State is, and has long been, an important priniciple in the USA, and it is one that I consider absolutely vital. However, it is not part of the constitution, and as far as I know, no federal law exists which mandates it.

The phrase comes from a famous letter by Thomas Jefferson, who opines that "a wall of seperation exists between the church and the state." Jefferson's opinions carry a lot of weight even to this day -- but it still isn't a law.

It needs to be. I think there is clear evidence that there are many politicians and judges in the US today who would like to really like to start passing laws - or at least, interpreting laws - based solely on their religious beliefs. As a NON-member of these folks' faith, this scares the crap outta me. You want to worry about a slippery slope, HERE'S one to worry about - how far is it from here to the Taliban?
 
brianleahy said:
The seperation of Church and State is, and has long been, an important priniciple in the USA, and it is one that I consider absolutely vital. However, it is not part of the constitution, and as far as I know, no federal law exists which mandates it.
Click to expand...

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/studygd0.htm


brianleahy said:
It needs to be. I think there is clear evidence that there are many politicians and judges in the US today who would like to really like to start passing laws - or at least, interpreting laws - based solely on their religious beliefs. As a NON-member of these folks' faith, this scares the crap outta me. You want to worry about a slippery slope, HERE'S one to worry about - how far is it from here to the Taliban?
Click to expand...

Not far if the current course of actions keep up. That's a scary thing, indeed.
 
I said in once and i'll say it again. If homosexuals want to be married, so be it. However, the ultra liberals (which most homosexuals are) are going to regret it the day that gay divorce settlements , child custody, and all the fun comes their way. They can have their cake and eat it. Just don't expect anything more special than the run of the mill marriage. I am tired of people trying to get "special rights" in the United States. The last time I looked we were all suppose to have EQUAL rights. No more, no less!!!
 
Satcomer said:
The last time I looked we were all suppose to have EQUAL rights. No more, no less!!!
Click to expand...

I quite agree, it's not like marriage is some kind of ticket to paradise. Equal rights, and equal pain as well.
 
bobw said:
it just seems right to me that you need to be married to raise kids the "right" way

This statement is a joke and a put down to all single parents doing a great job. I was a single parent from the time my kids were 1 and 6. They both turned out great. College grads, never in trouble, making more money than I ever did. Turned out to be very nice people.
Click to expand...

Here here ! My mother died when I was young and my dad managed, somehow, to raise my sister and I all alone, until recently (but at my age parenting is more like friendly advice).

Gay relationships are condemned by most (though not all) Christian sects, and certainly by Islam, and I believe Judaism too. Does anyone know of a religion that explicitly condones gay relationships? How about one that doesn't commit one way or the other?
Click to expand...
You might be interested to read « The Trouble with Islam » by Irshad Manji (who is homosexual).
 
look people, if you read the post i simply said that you face an uphill battle raising kids without 2 parents. the point was that if you are going to adopt, it seems silly to start out with that challenge. christ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top