The Gay Marriage Controversy

[Keeni84]

THANK YOU, Elizabeth.

Why should everyone else be denied the right to get married? Their are Christian homosexuals who have faith in marriage as a religious institution. Do not assume that homosexuals have no faith. There are Jewish homosexuals, Christian homosexuals, Catholic homosexuals, Pagan and Wiccan homosexuals...and the list goes on. Should they be denied their right to get married in the religion of their choosing?

Not everyone in the world is non-religious. People should have the right to get married under their God in their religion. Just as I should have the right to have a civil union with no religious connotations.

I believe that marriage and civil union should BOTH be allowed in society. For whomever wants to get married in religion (homosexual or not) and for whomever wants to just have a civil union with no religious connotations (homosexual or not).

[kirei_na_me]

I think I just said something about people who are religious wanting to get married and have some kind of ceremony to make it "right" for them? Even homosexual people have religion, and I don't think there's one thing wrong with that. I just want to make sure you all knew that I said that...

[kirei_na_me]

If this is Bush's argumentation I wonder what he makes of the separation of state & religion. To bring this into the constitution would go against one of its very principles.

Maybe there should be anyway a differentiation between the "sacred institution" of marriage as of the church/religion & contractual marriage as of the state.

bossel, separation of church and state doesn't really mean anything in this country. There has just recently been a long, drawn-out debate about The Ten Commandments being taken out of an Alabama courthouse.

[Elizabeth]

If this is Bush's argumentation I wonder what he makes of the separation of state & religion. To bring this into the constitution would go against one of its very principles.

Maybe there should be anyway a differentiation between the "sacred institution" of marriage as of the church/religion & contractual marriage as of the state.

Bush was simply using the term marriage in the legal sense in lieu of civil unions or domestic partnerships since as yet there's no universal agreement on where or how those should be recognized. As far as I'm aware, the governor of California has come out for full & equal legal rights between civil union (homosexual) and married (heterosexual) couples so I doubt even Bush would quarrel with that. Certainly no one can deny homosexual couples a purely religious ceremony and those have probably been going on underground for quite a long time now.

[Keeni84]

Oh, Kireina_me that wasn't in reference to you. I just wanted to point out that many if not most homosexuals don't want to be "civil unioned" they want to be "married".

[mieboy]

Well!! I totally support this gay marriage stuff...BECAUSE I'm gay....lol
Bush is beeing nazist saying these stuffs on tv. The Americans say that the USA is a country of freedom...So, Why Gay marriage its not allowed?!
Well, I have an Australian boyfriend. I hope someday the planet earth accept that there are man who likes man and woman who does like woman...It's not a disease, it's not a option or preference...It's just who we are,I'ts just our feelings...
BYE!!

[kirei_na_me]

Good for you, mieboy!

I think people are born being gay. So many people remember being attracted to the same sex--or both sexes--from very early on, like pre-K age. I don't think it's a conscious decision at that stage.

I think it also could be genetic. How many people in my family are gay? Enough to make me question if it's inherited. Besides the ones that are officially "out", there are others that are not, but pop up on the gaydar.

[Maciamo]

And why then should the majority give up any of their rights to "marriage" which already is "customizable" in the sense that religious ceremonies are not mandatory, when inclusion in the institution is precisely what gays and lesbians seem to be asking for? You could also argue I suppose on the other spectrum in the name of religious freedom that for a truly devout couple legal recognition in the form of a license, registration, etc should be irrelevant to their personal commitment which could even undermine their faith and a sacred ceremony alone ought to be passively endorsed/recognized by the state.

What I mean, is that legally marriage should disappear, but it would of course remains as a religious ceremony, or something recognised by one's religious group, but completely separate from the government. What does religion have to do with legal benefits such as tax rebates, common insurance, lower inheritance tax, possibility of adoption, etc. Religion always causes problems like now. If marriage had nothing to the state, there wouldn't be any problem betwen gays and the Bush administration. If they want to get married, that is up to their religion (and branch/sect). If the local priest/reverend doesn't want to marry a gay couple, they go somewhere else, change religion or protest against their religious leaders. What could people like Bush have the right to decide for everybody of all confessions and no-confession who has the right to get married, or align legal benefits on the institutions of marriage, when people like me would rather get the benefits without the marriage. In addition, nowadays people should be able to customise each legal part of their union to some else. Basically, instead of getting married and have the same law applying for everybody regardless of their peculiarities and situation, I'd rather make a contract that fits exactly to my relationship with the other person. You don't always want to have financial responsibility for your partner "in the package". That's why such contracts already exist ("prenuptial agreement", which sounds like a rather old-fashioned term). What I would like is keep the contract for legal matters between the couple, and let the marriage (not just the ceremony, but the whole idea of marriage) to the religious groups. So that if people feel marriage is "sacred" and an alliance before god, then they are perfectly free to do that in accordance with their religion or beliefs, and let others be free of that trouble.

[Hachiko]

Well!! I totally support this gay marriage stuff...BECAUSE I'm gay....lol
Bush is beeing nazist saying these stuffs on tv. The Americans say that the USA is a country of freedom...So, Why Gay marriage its not allowed?!
Well, I have an Australian boyfriend. I hope someday the planet earth accept that there are man who likes man and woman who does like woman...It's not a disease, it's not a option or preference...It's just who we are,I'ts just our feelings...
BYE!!

This from one who has come out in earnest, without hesitation or remorse. Applause.
*applause*

[Elizabeth]

What I mean, is that legally marriage should disappear, but it would of course remains as a religious ceremony, or something recognised by one's religious group, but completely separate from the government.

The legal status of marriage may not be as flexible as you describe but it is in effect a totally seperate entity from the religious in the US at least which the language may or may not reflect depending on your context and perspective. I don't necessarily assume marriage implies a church wedding or contract between two people and their god and it certainly isn't the religious or ceremonial aspect of marriage per se that is the crux of the issue with gays and lesbians and Bush.

[mdchachi]

Some of you are confusing the legal definition of marriage with that of religious marriage. Gays have been getting married in religious ceremonies for years. Whether or not a religious organization allows gays to marry is an issue for that organization alone.

The issue that is at hand is the legal definition of marriage. Legally, marriage is basically an affirmative action program for married people. Married people are given certain rights and benefits that other people are not. These rights and benefits are mainly to do with practical matters such as inheritance, child custody or health care.

I think the debate needs to take a step back and determine what the State is attempting to accomplish with this "affirmative action" program. Once the issues and goals are clear, then the solutions will also appear. For example, why limit "marriage" or "civil unions" to gay & heterosexual couples? Why couldn't a brother and sister enter into a committed "civil union"? Why couldn't a man or a woman form a "civil union" with multiple partners (ie polygamy)? These ideas might make sense. Or they may not. But it really needs to be looked at in logical manner without bringing issues of religion into the discussion as they are not relevant.

[mieboy]

personally. I dont mind if the govern creat some law that allows gay people marry. I even dont care even more if the catholic church its against the gays union too...I just wanna spend my lifetime with someone that I love and trust...A piece of paper or a ceremony wouldnt make any difference.

[Rachel]

Personally I think this whole thing is staggering!
I�ve been keeping an eye on this from my side of the pond, and I have to ask ?
Why the HELL did you elect this guy as leader of your country ? I mean� WHY ?
I just don�t get it !
Didn�t you have enough warning about the Bush family when you elected George. The man who said :

"No, I don�t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots.�

Then you elect another one in and acts surprised when he declares gay marriages are wrong and cause confusion ! (What confusion by the way�.That gay couples are capable of being a committed loving respectable couple, instead of being evil loose godless perverts.)

This man is a modern day Hitler ! And I'm sorry if that offends anyone but, lets look at the facts.

1. Like Hitler Bushy is funded more than any other industry, by the oil industry. Did you know that Hitlers war machine was funded by the export and sale of petroleum. Germany owned the patents on most of the petroleum products of the time and controlled most of the trade of those products.

2. Like Hitler Bushy has given his country a focus for it to hate, an minority for it to persecute and a religion to revile. A source of all woes for his country�s problems, keeping peoples focus away from the damage being done within by there own government.

3. Like Hitler Bushy is inspiring and encouraging his own countrymen to spy on each other for the sake of �National Security�. This whole thing with Ashcroft and �The Ministry of Homeland Security��. It�s the Gestapo all over again. And if you think that�s harsh let�s look at�

4. Like Hitler Bushy has given his Intelligence arm the right to hold anyone they want, for any length of time, with out any legal rights, for any reason they damn well like.
Have any of you read the �Patriots Act��..Oh my god! Scary or what ?

5. Instead of �German Aryans� you now have �American Patriots�. Tell me are you a good little Patriot ?

6. Like Hitler Bushy is now imposing extreme travel restrictions and permits on people coming into and leaving the country. In order to protect the country from agitators, terrorists and extremists who pose a threat to the fatherland.

7. Like Hitler Bushy is holding �Undesirable None Combatants� in a prison camp. If they�ve done something wrong then give them a trial and a sentence. For **** sake treat them as humans or let them go.

The ONLY real difference is bush�s PR is slicker and better developed than Hitler�s was.

I could carry on for a while, but I think you get the idea by now. Your country has become the very thing that ours crippled it�s self to stop! And no one seems to really give a damn, which makes me mad damn it !

(Big Breath)

Ok rant over�sorry. I think I need some chocolate.

Good for you �Mieboy�. Never be afraid to be true to your self, no matter what. I hope you find that love and trust your looking for with your current boyfriend honey.

Huggy Love, Rachel.

[kirei_na_me]

Thank you, from one Rachel to another! I happened to like your rant very much! Just wish everyone could see and understand what's going on.

[Rachel]

Thank you, from one Rachel to another! I happened to like your rant very much! Just wish everyone could see and understand what's going on.

Thank you for the compliment Kirei.

It�s really not that hard. The lesson is already there in black and white, the problem is people just have to wake up and SEE !
If you compare Hitler�s rise to power and the things he did in Germany before he invaded poland, to what�s happening in America today. The closeness is frightening.
People have to WAKE UP, to pay attention to what�s happening and learn from the lessons of WWII.
Before it�s to late.

[Maciamo]

Some of you are confusing the legal definition of marriage with that of religious marriage. Gays have been getting married in religious ceremonies for years. Whether or not a religious organization allows gays to marry is an issue for that organization alone.

I didn't know that. So why are religious leaders or extremist so agitated about now in the States ? Civil marriage shouldn't be a problem for them, as it is not connected to religion (oh, damn it, I forgot that the US does not separate church and state : )

For example, why limit "marriage" or "civil unions" to gay & heterosexual couples? Why couldn't a brother and sister enter into a committed "civil union"? Why couldn't a man or a woman form a "civil union" with multiple partners (ie polygamy)?

Excellent point ! The future of our society lies in such reasoning. Marriage is an anticated institution. People should be able to live (that doesn't mean have sex or children - still another debate) with whoever they want and enjoy the same legal protection as "regular couples". I mean, some people can be sterile, castrated (still lots of them in India) or just don't like sex or don't want to have children. Wht couldn't they live with a friend or family member and share the benefits social and medical care, like a gay civil union ?

But very religious or conservative people will never understand such logic of their lifetime.

--

BTW, great post Rachel, I completely agree !

[jeisan]

... Why the HELL did you elect this guy as leader of your country ? I mean� WHY ?
I just don�t get it !

we didnt, bush lost the popular vote by 500,000. but because of the stupid system thats in place he got the presidency. anyway nice rant.

[mdchachi]

> This man is a modern day Hitler ! And I'm sorry if that offends anyone but, lets look at the facts.

> The ONLY real difference is bush�s PR is slicker and better developed than Hitler�s was.

I realize you are just ranting but the comparison is not apt in my opinion and I wouldn't worry about things getting out of control. Bush doesn't have the cult of personality that Hitler had. He doesn't have the support (remember only about 24% of people of voting age voted for him in the first place). On top of that he's not likely to gain much more support. Unlike Hitler he hasn't solved the nations problems. (Under Hitler the Germany's unemployment rates went down as production soared.) Unlike Hitler he doesn't have a grand appealing vision. (Afterall, Hitler foresaw the European Union -- unification of Europe -- he just happened to believe it would be best if Europe was unified as a single Germany.) Unlike Hitler he doesn't have enough support to change the nation's Constitution or subvert the courts. And I personally believe he doesn't have the ambition.

Even if Bush gets reelected, it won't be the end of the world. Certainly nothing even close to Hitler's regime.

[Winter]

I'm sure the hitler comparison was just a metaphor to symbolize Bush's apparent strive for tyranny, and oppression.

Guys, please, dont worry too much. Everything will change when I gain power. People think I'm joking when I say that; I'm really not.

[howabe]

Gays should be culled.
Set replies for any comments:
a) No offence.
b) I don't care.

NB, those two aren't the obvious contradictions they appear to be.

[Kuro_Tsubasa69]

Gays should be culled.
Set replies for any comments:
a) No offence.
b) I don't care.

NB, those two aren't the obvious contradictions they appear to be.

!PERDON! I don't care if you care or not, but exactly what do you mean by that? (This goes to Toliet Roll too!) Please tell me, I wish to know what makes bigots tick.

[kirei_na_me]

You know what my husband said when asked if gays should be allowed to marry? He said it would be good in that maybe the 'defect' would eventually cease to exist.

[Frank D. White]

bound to kill a love, no matter how strong!

Frank

[Frank D. White]

all the more women left for me !!

Frank

[kirei_na_me]

Yeah, we know Frank. You're licking your eyebrows...we know...