I voted NO! - Page 2

[SarahGuinn]

gardenmommy, I disagree with you so vehemently it's almost tangible.

HOWEVER. You have taken the best choice of phrasing and I hope that everyone else here sees it.

We most often have problems in the spirituality forum because of people making blanket statements that they are putting out there as fact. You are stating "I believe..." and not "This is the way it is."

I can appreciate that.

Even if I think you're wrong! Ha!

Regardless of whether or not it actually is right.

Here's where I find the biggest fault. I don't believe that the government, in this instance, truly knows what's right and what's wrong.

By the way, the government legislates morality every day: it is against the law to murder, steal, defame another's name, to molest/abuse one's children or spouse, to own another person (slavery), and to commit perjury (lie). It is absurd to say that government cannot legislate morality; if it cannot, than it has no business making or enforcing laws against the aforementioned behaviors because they are inherently moral issues.

All of the moral issue that you've stated are crimes in which there are victims, whether it's the state or a private citizen.

There is no crime commited when two people love each other and wish to have that love recognized by the state.

Just my opinion.

[merpk]

Now, don't jump on me, ladies, but I don't see what love has to do with it at all.

Seems to me that the only purpose of civil marriage is for the good to society that comes from people living stable, settled-down lives. To promote this stability and settled-down-ness, the government has seen fit to make marriage a civil, or should I say legal, act; in other words, as opposed to a spiritual or religious act, with religious intent.

In other words, if you're following a Bible-based religion, it's hard to justify sanctifying a relationship which the Bible says is not sanctifiable.

But that's not what the issue is.

There's separation of church&state, right? So the government must not be attempting to legislate away church/religious marriages of gay people, but must be considering legislating away civil marriage. Which is a whole 'nother ball game.

So why is it only some people should be civilly settled-down in legal fashion, and not others? And why should only some people get whatever legal or tax benefits accrue (in theory, anyway) to those who live civilly settled-down?

What's religion got to do with it?
Or love?
We're talking legal rights here, and equality under the law. The civil law.

IMHO.









P.S. - I don't eat shellfish.

[Amazlilith]

Nursing Mother....

You are right...you can have your beliefs and your opinions, BUT it is NOT right for them to infringe on my family and the protection of my family. Like I have once heard you state, "Please don't push YOUR agenda on me".

[Amazlilith]

Originally posted by Nursing Mother
This is marriage pure and simple the ways its been for thousands of years....man, woman produce children, makes family. I'm trying to look more at the biological POV and what makes sense in nature for the pro-creation of the species.

Then by your understanding, people who don't want children or can't have children shouldn't be married either.

What makes me sad it that you would approve more of a marriage between two people that married after knowing each other a minute, the a gay couple who have been in a committed relationship for 10, 20, or 30 years...

[Sunnydrop]

Nursing Mother~ Do you eat shell fish I don't always agree with you NM, but i have so much respect for you after all these years. no way would I flame you for your thoughts.
I just try and understand them kwim? I agree with you too, no one has the right to tell you you are wrong or force my opinion on you. I would never do that. Which is why it sucks that the goverment is forcing theirs on the Gay public. kwim? Why is it so bad to let everyone marry who they love?
the word believe is so strong, I read the bible I did not see Jesus say anything about gay people. I don't BELIEVE he did...

and garden, so are you saying you follow the bible word for word in your daily living? or simply dislike shell fish?

Blessings, Sunny

[Greaseball]

As far as nature is concerned, it would be best for us all to become homosexuals until overpopulation was no longer an issue.

[JessicaS]

I don't like shellfish. I think it is yuck. But not all of the Levitican laws are applicable to Christians, we were exempt from many of them in the New Testament.

I think homosexual marriages should be legal. I really feel that with all the problems this world has today people wishing to enter a commitment of love and fidelity should have encouragement and understanding. I am not trying to be PC or anything I just don't have a problem with it.

I would far rather get angry and tear my hair out about other issues than a loving relationship between two people. Not to mention that it will really hack off Fred Phelps, that alone makes me all for it.

[kama'aina mama]

Originally posted by abimommy
Not to mention that it will really hack off Fred Phelps, that alone makes me all for it.

Best thing I've read today!!!!!!

[burritomama]

Arnold adds his two cents

I just wanted to share what our gubernatorial candidate Arnold S. had to say on this subject during a recent radio interview: "I believe that gay marriage should be between a man and a woman."

[JessicaS]

[veggiewolf]

Originally posted by TiredX2
Furthermore, even if I did believe homosexuality/trans-sexuality was wrong, I would not try to outlaw it. God gave humans FREE WILL/choice and it is not up to me to remove the choices that God has given. That is between God & that person, and if anothers choices do not effect me I should have nothing to say about them.

Just a clarification - there is no choice to be homosexual. There's a choice not to act on it which, IMO, means that you're not fully living the life given to you by <insert-creator/deity/idea-of-your-choice>.

I voted No.

[Marlena]

I voted YES....I believe marriage is a sanctified union between a man and a women as nature would have it. Ya know the parts all fit, pro-creation...and all. I BELIEVE that is what is meant to be.

The parts fit? So do the parts involved in queer sex of just about any variety - it just depends on how creative one is. As for being pro-creation, I take it this means that those people who are sterile or who don't intend to have children (or more children) should not be married and should not have sex, regardless of whom they happen to be attracted?

Gardenmommy, I appreciate your thoughtful responses, even though, as you may guess, we're on opposite sides of the debate. Still, I'd like to know how marriage "completes" a man and a woman (presumably - I'd guess? - in a way that marriage between two women or two men would not)?

Also, someone did bring up the issue of intersex individuals. It's been estimated that intersex conditions affect up to 1 out of every 2,000 people (see, e.g., Melanie Blackless et al., How Sexually Dimorphic Are We?, 12 AM. J. HUM. BIO. 151-66 (2000); see also Intersex Society of North America at http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency.html .) Should these people, who - depending on their condition - may not fit the notions, genetically and/or physically, of what's "male" or "female," also not be allowed to marry?

[2tired2clean]

I was going to just read and not reply but what the heck! I have to reply on the shellfish thing. That is OT law, laws the jewish people had to follow to be "clean" enough to get into heaven. When Jesus died for us He fulfilled the law, we are no longer bound by that law, but can still learn by it. There are scriptures in the NT that talk about homosexuality being wrong also. If I could get the poll to work I would vote yes also. I believe marriage is a commitment between two people. that being a man and a woman, I don't believe same sex relationships to be natural, leaving God out of this for a second I dont believe mother nature intended it to be natural either, otherwise it would benefit her in some way, it doesn't. I believe Marriage was created for men and women to have families, does this mean that people who can't or don't want to have children shouldn't get married? No. B/c "the two are joined together to be one flesh" they are now a family whether they have children or not. This is just my beliefs, no one else has to share them.

[merpk]

Hugely T

... by 2tired2clean
... That is OT law, laws the jewish people had to follow to be "clean" enough to get into heaven ...

Uh ... not even close.

[2tired2clean]

Hugely



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... by 2tired2clean
... That is OT law, laws the jewish people had to follow to be "clean" enough to get into heaven ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






Uh ... not even close.



why is that off topic? Shellfish was mentioned irt the topic and I responded, and why is that not even close? According to my Bible (the Holy Bible) based on my beliefs and what I read that is exactly it.

[Marlena]

Oh yes, you tell me(better yet don't)....one can become quite creative I'm sure but it is without harm and risk? Possible for some maybe, but for many....well lets just say I've read the health concerns certain "kinds of sex" can cause a person. Gay men suffer from many health risks not known to others. It that really natural?

This is a family board, so the first bit will not receive further comment. Re the second, jeez, I can't think of ANY STD that afflict only gays rather than straights. I CAN think of a handful that tend to be found in higher rates in one population versus another (cervical cancer in women who have unprotected sex with men, and anal cancer in men who have unprotected sex with men, for example). The AIDS phenomenon affects people of all persuasions, with straight people predominating in many areas of the world.

Is all that natural? Well, manifestly, yes.

Re "what is best for children and society," I've not seen a single reputable study that shows that children are harmed by living in families headed by two or more people of the same sex versus those of differring sexes. And I suspect society will be "harmed" only to the degree that it was through the integration of previously racially segregated neighborhoods - namely, not at all.

Re 2tired2clean:

I believe Marriage was created for men and women to have families, does this mean that people who can't or don't want to have children shouldn't get married? No. B/c "the two are joined together to be one flesh" they are now a family whether they have children or not. This is just my beliefs, no one else has to share them.

The views you voice are profoundly inconsistent and cannot be logically connected. As such, it would probably be preferable if you simply state that your views are based on rank prejudice, as there appears to be no other basis for them.

[TiredX2]

why is that off topic? Shellfish was mentioned irt the topic and I responded, and why is that not even close? According to my Bible (the Holy Bible) based on my beliefs and what I read that is exactly it.

I assume what the pp was referring to was that the "rules" in the OT (Hebrew Testament) did *not* have to do with being clean enough to enter heaven. At least not that I know of. So, the discussion of Biblical beliefs is not off topic, just that particular response.


Uhhhh.... If all it takes is for two fleshes to become one, we have a lot of marraiges going on

Once again, why should a supposedly free society restrict any adult behavior that does not infringe upon the rights of others?

On a personal note, with the recent gay marraiges in Canada, the last time I was in Oregon visiting family the "Oregonian" (Portlands daily paper) had several gay couples pictured in their wedding section. My family (of origin!) was horrified and disgusted. My mom kept saying the male couple was so *ugly.*

Me: "No uglier than half the guys in there."
Mom: "I don't know."
Me: "Well they've been together 17 years, thats a lot longer than most couples will stay togehter."
Mom: "If you live together that long before you're married you'll probably break up right away anyway."

WTF. Like they didn't want to get married.

Not allowing homosexuals to marry is, IMO, economic discrimination of the worst sort. If a man and a woman want to be financially responsible for each other, make medical deicsions for each other in an emergency, be responsible for each others children, share insurance and benifits through work ... all they need is a few bucks and a wedding license. For gay couples to have the same they need a lawyer, tons of differnet forms, etc... and in a crisis (like an emergency room) they may still be overlooked for a "relative" who doesn't know what the individual would want, or maybe even stopped talking to them years ago. NOT right, not fair, NOT American.

Kay

[TiredX2]

And further more...

A healthy family situation is not, IMO, based upon a father and a mother. Yes, that is what we have, and I think it is great. BUT, I think that many kids would be a heck of a lot better off with two caring, loving, emotionally stable same-sex parents then what they get stuck with!

[candiland]

Actually, I saw on either TLC or The Discovery Health Channel a study on the biology of gay people and people who had sex change operations. After some of these men died, a scientist did studies on their brains to see if there *was* a difference. They showed the part of the brain that produced testosterone and estrogen. The mens' brains were almost identical to a female's brain.
I get really upset when someone tells me that their God knows more than my God. I certainly don't tell people not to be Jewish or Christian or Atheist.... I respect other people's beliefs. Tolerance = Love in the absolute truest sense of the word. For a law to make homosexual marriage illegal because someone else's God doesn't agree with my God upsets me greatly. Separation of church and state does not exist here, even though many would fight to the death trying to convince me it does. People do not have the right to persecute and punish others because they do not agree with them. Simple as that

[isleta]

Well, I do not believe in marriage-really!LOL! I do not think it works IMO. However, I can see both sides of the issue. It is hard growing up in a society which deems this union wrong and then-wham! Change your mind or go with the flow. I mean culture and family environment shape our preceptions. However, if you feel this is wrong, it is up to your God to judge and punish. If I remember this is the way it works, right? My dad prays for the people who have been led astray from God's path, and I think he includes me depending on the issue-ha!


I feel that if two people love each other and share their life together and are denied rights such as visitation to critically ill partners or are not considered "family", this is wrong. However, I do not know if marriage is the answer. RE: my first comment