Gay Marriage - are you for or against it and why?

[Napoléon]

give them "civil unions". I think those would work great for America, allowing gays to share the same legal rights, but at the same time, satisfying the people that are against gay marriage.

Why should we satisfy people who have totally barbaric and backward views? Fuck them.

[kılıç_mehmet]

give them "civil unions". I think those would work great for America, allowing gays to share the same legal rights, but at the same time, satisfying the people that are against gay marriage.

Why should we satisfy people who have totally barbaric and backward views? Fuck them.

And I think that they view gays as disgusting, and not fit to join society as normal people.

Maybe not all of them have such harsh views, but they definately do not approve of the notion of gays marrying. Neither do I. So what are you going to do?
Do you really see yourself as so superior, as to walk over the voices of others? Finding a middle ground could benefit you, and the opposition aswell.

[Napoléon]

All opinions are NOT equal. You may have an equal right to express your retarded ass view but I ain't gonna respect it when it's downright discrimination against people who simply love different people to you.

I may not see myself as in any way superior to you as a person, but let me tell ya, I think my views on gay marraige ARE FAR superior.

[kılıç_mehmet]

All opinions are NOT equal. You may have an equal right to express your retarded ass view but I ain't gonna respect it when it's downright discrimination against people who simply love different people to you.

I may not see myself as in any way superior to you as a person, but let me tell ya, I think my views on gay marraige ARE FAR superior.

Well, if you try to fit a round object into a square orifice, how can you blame the orifice for it? Gays simply do not fit into the notion of marriage.
Marriage is not simply something that you choose to go through simply because you love eachother and all.. It's an institution, the basis of the traditional family concept.

I think my views on gay marraige ARE FAR superior.

They are different. I don't think they are superior at all.

[Napoléon]

Well, if you try to fit a round object into a square orifice, how can you blame the orifice for it? Gays simply do not fit into the notion of marriage.
Marriage is not simply something that you choose to go through simply because you love eachother and all.. It's an institution, the basis of the traditional family concept.

That is true, but we have changed 'traditions' before to make them less discriminatory and backward. Why is marriage different?
Are you saying same sex couples cannot have a fully functional family?

I think my views on gay marraige ARE FAR superior.

They are different. I don't think they are superior at all.

That's YOUR opinion again silly!

[kılıç_mehmet]

Well, if you try to fit a round object into a square orifice, how can you blame the orifice for it? Gays simply do not fit into the notion of marriage.
Marriage is not simply something that you choose to go through simply because you love eachother and all.. It's an institution, the basis of the traditional family concept.

That is true, but we have changed 'traditions' before to make them less discriminatory and backward. Why is marriage different?
Are you saying same sex couples cannot have a fully functional family?

I think my views on gay marraige ARE FAR superior.

They are different. I don't think they are superior at all.

That's YOUR opinion again silly!

Well, traditions for marriage are unique and different, throughout the world.
However, there is this one thing that never, ever changed. Marriage was always between a man, and a woman. Even in countries where homosexuality had historical social acceptance like ancient Greece, Rome and medieval Japan(and even there, it wasn't between two, fully grown up males), marriages between two males were considered unthinkable.

Are you saying same sex couples cannot have a fully functional family?

No, they cannot. It will always be against the fabrics of human society.
The "core" family constitutes, in my eyes, a man, a woman and children.
I don't think that the notion of a family should be stretched as wide as it can be. Once the family collapses, society will soon follow.

[5thHorseman]

So mehmet, are you saying things shouldnt change,

I personally disagree, tradition and sentimentality are daft in my eyes, and people should be able to do pretty much what they want.

[reverendjeremiah]

Why should we satisfy people who have totally barbaric and backward views? Fuck them.

Here Here.. why should we even acknowledge the existence of their bronze age mythology as anything more than bronze age mythology?

This is the here and now, and these are peoples lives at stake.

[kılıç_mehmet]

So mehmet, are you saying things shouldnt change,

I personally disagree, tradition and sentimentality are daft in my eyes, and people should be able to do pretty much what they want.

Well, maybe you all should move to a different country where you can live without any sorts of cultural and traditional attachments, laws or any sense moral obligations to society.

Here Here.. why should we even acknowledge the existence of their bronze age mythology as anything more than bronze age mythology?

This is the here and now, and these are peoples lives at stake.

Well, you argue on the basis that opposition to gay marriage should always have a religious basis. I have a secular one.

[reverendjeremiah]

And I think that they view gays as disgusting, and not fit to join society as normal people.

Maybe not all of them have such harsh views, but they definately do not approve of the notion of gays marrying. Neither do I. So what are you going to do?
Do you really see yourself as so superior, as to walk over the voices of others? Finding a middle ground could benefit you, and the opposition aswell.

Thats fine..just as long as other people and gays can limit your freedoms as well when it comes to marriage. you know, being all for fairness and all, it would be completely unfair for you to force yourself on a group, and then suggest that they do not have the same power.

Perhaps we could start with denying hospital visitation rights for religious and heterosexual married couples for the first 5 years of ther marriage, seeing as most marriages in America end in divorce in less than 5 years.

By passing that 5 year mark, it would be proof that their marriage is legitimate and not just some fad or faked marriage which is so popular with American heterosexuals these days.

I have passed the 5 year mark with my hetero marriage, so therefore my marriage is a true and legitimate marriage.

What do you think?