Prop 8/Gay Marriage Question
|
eh, i voted against the version in my state, but it passed. to be honest though, i don't care. I'm not trying to get gay married. i don't even feel bad. it's like legalizing drugs. yes, i want to legalize it, but i'm not gonna take them, so since they're illegal now, i don't care. Most of the country is culturally and Socially Center Right, but, most is obviously Left wing on economics and foreign policy (judging by the election). They have their reasons, some go by the original creation of marriage (Romans created it to encourage reproduction and child care in order to strengthen their society). the religious made it a thing about LOVE between a man and a woman. it never existed as something for gay couples. the thing is, all of a sudden gays want in on it, and they have no true basis except "civil rights". the problem is that the government is granting benefits to straight couples and not gays. what they should do is end marriage and make it all civil unions. marriage, since it's now a religious thing about love, should be left to the churches. basically, we need to make a new system because we have sexual Animosity in this country. The gays are getting militant, and the government needs to create a compromise NOW. Side: End Marriage and Start Civil Unions
On the issue of gay marriage & church. I feel that churches should have the choice just as they do for other situations. I myself, had premarital sex. I married a man who is not Catholic. I did not marry in the church, I married in the mountains beside the American River. These things all mean that most churches (including the one I grew up attending) won't recognize my marriage "in the eyes of God." If California is going to pick on the gays, then they should also pick on those of us who had sex before marriage, children out of wedlock, have been married before, etc. etc. Don't use the label "In the eyes of God" unless you plan on including everyone that won't be recognized "I the eyes of God." Besides, as a girl who grew up Catholic, and loving God & the Bible, I have to say a lot of it is crap, and should be taken with a VERY large grain of salt. On the legal level, our country was based freedom to live their own lives and be free from religious persecution. That's why separation of church & state is so vital. Laws SHOULD only be based on real factors that affect the greater good and general welfare of the people. Gay marriage has NO impact on anybody, except the gays getting married. It's as silly as voting to ban wearing white after labor day. Who cares? Why? And how does it affect you? Side: No Question let them have it
The religious right denounces committed gay couples as not being not "real." If you hold this view, please define what makes your commitment to your life partner a "real" marriage (other than a certificate and a ceremony). Furthermore, what are your views on this situation: You become gravely ill and your life partner immediately files for divorce. That person already has another in his life, and takes that person as the new spouse, leaving you abandoned at a critical moment. What are your thoughts as to the legitimacy of that person's new life partner? Is it a legitimate marriage in your view, in the eyes of your religion? What are your feelings toward that person who abandons the other in the time of their most desperate need? Is this, in your view, fulfilling God's wishes, and so has your full support as a legal and binding marriage? Do you support a ban on marriages like this, and should a person like this be ostracized? Side: No Question let them have it
1
point
I believe, like the Pyg, that the government should abolish the word "marriage" from all legal documents and replace it with the words, "civil union" and give same sex partners the same rights as heterosexuals. I'm trying to teach my daughters to be self sufficient so that if they ever find themselves in a situation where their partner leaves them, they can carry on. Side: No Question let them have it
1
point
Semantics...whether the term is marriage or civil union it's all the same. Even if you say "I Do" in front of a Justice of the Peace, you're still considered married. It's kind of backward really. If you say I Do" in a church you are "Married" in the eyes of God. If you cannot be married and simply have a Civil Ceremony performed by a J.P. you could arguably be labeled "Civilized" in the eyes of the people. Side: Semantics of the worst kind
2
points
The Canadians have it right. Marriage is religious, civil unions is what everyone has until they do a ceremony in a church. Plus, the tax laws aren't affected. I think what a lot of people are missing in this debate is how this also affects the straight population. We in the gay community know what it can be like getting in to see a loved one in the hospital. Too many unmarried straight couples face the exact same problem because they don't have that stupid license. It would make more sense to have a federal law on it, modify the tax code, and put a law in place where you could designate anyone to be allowed hospital visitation without the hospital having any right to veto that wish. There's much wrong with the laws as they stand right now for everyone. We just aren't a society that functions the same way it did in the 1950's and it's time to change the laws so they reflect how we all live NOW. Side: Prop 8 won
1
point
1
point
in america i fear that calling it something other than marriage will just lead to complex legal battles over whether states can treat the 2 things differently etc. so i am in favor of just repealing DOMA - so that a marriage in one state is respected by other states - just like other marriages and contracts- even if it is a gay marriage Side: No Question let them have it
1
point
1
point
|
