FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


What do you think about Same Sex Marriage?





ninacax
I'm gay myself and I can't understand why straight people are against same sex marriage.
If you don't agree with it, is very simple, don't get married with anyone from your sex.
neuroticknight
There is nothing to think about it, their life their wish, it is not a crime if no one is at a loss , let people be
GuidanceReader
I am not gay. I am against 'me' being in a gay marriage, because I am not gay. I too can not understand why anyone would worry about a gay couple marrying, because to be honest, how does this really affect their lives? The only lives it does affect is the gay couple. So no, I am not against gay marriage - I just don't care. (I am, however, for equal rights)
Mr_Howl
dharmu wrote:
hello members
i think same sex marriage is not a natural marriage.... Because they can not reproduce naturally.


So should those who are barren or sterile also be denied marriage?

Here in the US, people argue that it shouldn't be allowed because it's against the Bible--but no one said they had to get married in a church, did they?

And it annoys me that even though gay marriage is legal here in MA, married same-sex couples are denied certain federal benefits. What a crock.
nickfyoung
I see it has just been approved in the UK so it is just a matter of time before it will be universally accepted. There will always be opposition from the hard core Bible believers because that is what they believe. It seems to be a product of modern times as are much of the 'revolutions' society has come through. The free love of the sixties is now accepted as the norm as is the other big revolution feminism, burn the bra type stuff. That is all part of society as are gays. It wasn't that long ago that gays were not accepted and most stayed in the 'closet' So gay marriage is going to be part of history soon too. Just be patient and it will happen. It takes a while for a 'norm' of society to change but it does eventually. The Bible believers have their beliefs too and we have to respect them for that as well.
johans
I just notice the wrong spelling of the `thing` to think of the subject.

For me, i am not in favor of it. My decision in based on my believe as a roman catholic and base on the Bible.
bufekur
ninacax wrote:
I'm gay myself and I can't understand why straight people are against same sex marriage.
If you don't agree with it, is very simple, don't get married with anyone from your sex.


I do not like when a guy hugs me, it makes he feeling...
johans
bufekur wrote:
ninacax wrote:
I'm gay myself and I can't understand why straight people are against same sex marriage.
If you don't agree with it, is very simple, don't get married with anyone from your sex.


I do not like when a guy hugs me, it makes he feeling...


Well, that depends on the situation. if you are on the game then that could be fine but if you are on the street that must have awkward feelings.
friend2012
I am not against gay marriage but also not for gay marriage.
I am not gay. Being man, I think only a female would complete me.
Bondings
I regard gay marriage as something inevitable in the course of history. It's one of those obvious things that is only a matter of time (progress of society).

We've had gay marriage in Belgium for almost 10 years now and society is not falling apart. To be honest, after the initial debate, it hasn't made any noticeable impact on society at all. There is only the "ah yes they can marry now" feeling after you hear about a same-gender married couple.
pochui
i have nothing against gay/ lesbian marriage- people should be free with their choice of life. as long as people are not doing any harm to others with their decisions, they should be allowed to make them huh? the only thing here which is a bit odd and debatable is children...should gay/lesbian pairs be allowed to adopt them or not?
Caleb
The reason behind that why they dislike is the media who show that the only purpose behind that is only sex and nothing more.So that's why people dislike that more.But i think there is nothing wrong with that.Because everyone has their own life and its depend on him how he spent that and he is also responsible for that.
cheater01
I think nothing is wrong with it. I am bisexual but even before i realized that i always wondered why people made such a big deal out of it. Everyone should have the right to marry who they want to. Why does it matter to other people what some people do behind closed doors? It really isn't anyone Else's business to say you can't marry someone that they want to be with. Love is love, it doesn't matter about your color, religion or gender.
biolu
Everyone do what he want...
biolu
Everyone do what he want...
Bluedoll
I am not gay but I respect those that are and the same rule applies for my personal interaction with people. If I am not interested, Im not interested. One feels people should be able to do as they please without being harassed.

When we think of marriage however then we might want to think more about legal and social implications than our own personal feelings. This is not to say that law passed is enough but it is a starting point. I believe that unless love is present in any marriage then it is not worthy of the title. In my country marriage is recognised including gay marriages.

The legal implications touch on many things. For example in courts if people should split it regards financial responsibilities. There is an important issue concerning marrage that needs to be talked about and looked at into the future.




The issue of having children is a huge consideration and has been mentioned once in this discussion briefly. I will not be so bold as to take a stand in an opinion on this component because to be clear the jury is not back yet. My only comment so far is to say once more, I feel the most important aspect of children in gay marriages is not a legal debate at all but a social one. Is their love in the household?

If there is a reason for marriage to be condemned it would be this one and it falls to the same ridicule as any other marriage. There is little need of designation of being gay or straight in this kind of issue I think.
nickfyoung
That does bring up an important point. Children in a gay marriage are going to have questions when they grow up surly.. Our minister of finance was in the news last year because her and her partner just had their first baby. As they are both female and gay one of those questions for that baby when it grows up is going to be,'who is my father'. I just wonder if a gay couple such as that can give the amount of male input necessary to raise a young boy for instance who needs male input as a child.
Ankhanu
It's marriage. Done.
daisuki
I think that gay couples should of course be able to marry. Marriage as an idea and as a practice has evolved into a completely new tradition than what it began as, and it's place in today's culture requires that gay people should have the same rights to marry as a straight couple.
I am very ignorant about religion and the origins of the practice of marriage I don't deny that, but I assume that the majority of the opposition to gay marriage is on a religious basis, and if that really is the case i guess it is just as hypocritical for a non-religious straight couple to marry as it is for a gay couple to marry... does that make sense? I use that example to illustrate how stupid it is for gay people not to be able to marry.
Bluedoll
Ankhanu wrote:
It's marriage. Done.
I am afraid it is not as simple as that. I am not referring to religion or even the courts so much though both things do effect outcomes. Nor even is there any pointing going to gays though I know this is the subject.

The idea that we can pass laws (I support gay marriage, as it is the law of my land) about marriage and leave out children is short sited. How will these things affect children? What message are we sending?

Look, not far from where I live there is a woman that has four children from four different fathers. There will be new men I am only assuming that will come in and out of her home and be part of that household for a time. She is not gay but my question here is.. is this normal? I can see a definite demise of family structure and values happening in the world.

I am not judging my neighbour nor saying anything bad against her but I am saying these adult behaviors might affect the next generation. I do hope it is in a positive direction.
Ankhanu
I fundamentally disagree with you, Bluedoll. It IS as simple as that.
First off, children need not always apply to a married couple. Without children involved (and children are not a necessary aspect of marriage), then yes, any married couple format is functionally identical. Second, if children are involved, there's no reason a same-sex couple can't show equal or greater care for the child(ren) as a hetero couple. How are children in same-sex couple households affected? Usually minimally, though the bigot children at school might use it as ammunition for teasing... but hey, children will find ANYTHING to use as ammunition for teasing. There is zero evidence that children of same-sex couples are any worse off compared to children of hetero- couples. The message we're sending when we allow same-sex marriage is that homosexuals are not second-class citizens to be marginalized... this is a wholly positive message.

Is a woman with multiple children from multiple fathers normal? Yeah, it's pretty normal. It's likely not ideal, but it's far from an anomaly in today's, or any other, society. In some societies, monogamy is abnormal, and the children within them are not any worse off for it; it's not a common societal set up, but it exists.

Really, the topic of "family structure" or "values" in the marriage debate is nothing but a strawman, based on an ideal and it has little basis in reality. All of the problems with family structure and the like that are brought up as a reason to deny same-sex marriage are present, and generally common, within societies in which only "traditional" marriage is permitted. Fragmented families happen, no matter what pairings are legally permitted, and there's no evidence of greater fragmentation in more pairing-inclusive societies.

Of course, if there is evidence to the contrary, feel free to provide it. Anecdote doesn't count.

Yes, marriage is marriage. Done.
watersoul
Two people declaring an intention to care for each other for the rest of their lives, in a loving relationship, with all the legal benefits of being in a marriage together? That is of course something we should all support.
Thankfully in a few years time we'll be talking about this as a bit of historical bigotry.
The next generation will be changing things as issues of sexuality become less important to them.
My late teen son is into girls but has a couple of gay friends in his school. There is no bullying, exclusion, or feelings of superiority over sexuality in his community, they just accept people based on how they treat others.

I've spoken about this often with my son, and he can't quite believe the attitudes which still exist in the older generations. He even tells me that his friends find it ridiculous that some 'grown ups' actually still think people are 'turned gay'. The funniest (and most thought provoking) line he ever gave me was "Blonde girls are my favourite dad, you could put a wig on the best looking lad at school and I still wouldn't fancy him, but I'd defend his right to wear that wig".

Roll on the day when the next generation are in positions of power I say, religiously inspired notions of 'the norm' will hopefully be banished to the history books.
Josso
Firstly there is 0 issue with marriage, as pointed out above there's probably more than one issue with same sex adoption. In the past it happened as well, people forget, but back the less tolerent times you would just be raised by "two aunts" or whatever.

Ankhanu wrote:
Second, if children are involved, there's no reason a same-sex couple can't show equal or greater care for the child(ren) as a hetero couple. How are children in same-sex couple households affected? Usually minimally, though the bigot children at school might use it as ammunition for teasing... but hey, children will find ANYTHING to use as ammunition for teasing. There is zero evidence that children of same-sex couples are any worse off compared to children of hetero- couples. The message we're sending when we allow same-sex marriage is that homosexuals are not second-class citizens to be marginalized... this is a wholly positive message.


I'd be more inclined to ignore the tedious common opinions like "they won't be cared for properly" or "they will be bullied". A child will always find a female and male to bond with as parents, at a stage in their life where they rely on it for their development - that's just nature - sorry folks it's easy to be like "hell yeah! future! let everyone have what they want" but sometimes we take a step back and it takes us a while to realise. Of course a child can have two female role models, or two male role models, or more, but a child WILL find role models of both genders, even if they can't find them in the home. At certain key phases of the childs life I think it's probably damaging to the development of the child if there's a possibility of lack of exposure to one gender or another. Not a very popular opinion but please don't mistake it for discrimination.
Ankhanu
If children find male and female role models in or out of the immediate family, doesn't that make the point somewhat irrelevant? This is especially the case since even in paired hetero- family dynamics those role models aren't always in the immediate family? If we assume that children need a good male and female role models, and the modelling can't come from either or both sexes (which IS an assumption, and is, I think, based upon largely irrelevant concepts of gender roles), there is the fact that the role model will be found in any case. There seems to be some assumption that parents are good role models... and it's an assumption that all too often is simply pants. I think authority dynamics are likely more important in role modelling and child welfare than are the sexes of those who are in the parental roles.
nickfyoung
Whichever way you argue for children we can't deny that their role is changing. Children are amazingly resilient and will find ways to survive any change in society or their family situation. However, time will tell what long term effects these changes will bring.
There is no doubt that society is evolving into a new era as same sex couple become the norm and more and more common. Children from these couples will adjust and cope and play a major role in the new evolved society structure. Good or bad is yet to be seen.
Nick2008
I see marriage as being regulated by two main bodies: the government and the church. A lot of people seem to mix them together and in order to keep a secular government, we must keep "church and State" separate, as many of America's founders would have argued.

In the eyes of the government, marriage should be seen as the official relationship between two loving individuals. It should not matter what religion, gender, race, etc. the person is. Any two individuals who are in a legitimate relationship should be treated as equals in the eyes of the State.

The Church, on the other hand, is a private entity. They can strictly define marriage as the covenant between man and woman. If churches do not want to recognize homosexual partners, then that is in their rights to do so. We have no job in telling them what to do and how they should structure their beliefs.

Unfortunately, many people have blended the two ideas together and have adopted the approach of one or the other. Either you support the idea of a secular state or moral, religious values. I believe we can find a medium where both sides can be happy, and we have seen this in state and national governments that have come up with the idea of a "civil union." These arrangements basically define "marriage" as something overseen by the Church but the gay relationship itself is officially recognized by the government and they are treated the same as heterosexual marriages under the law.
Ankhanu
Nick2008 wrote:
I see marriage as being regulated by two main bodies: the government and the church. A lot of people seem to mix them together and in order to keep a secular government, we must keep "church and State" separate...

Quite so. To be clear, my arguments have almost entirely been based in the secular/legal side of the equation, not the religious side (as I don't consider the former an important factor, just a speedbump in the process).

Nick2008 wrote:
In the eyes of the government, marriage should be seen as the official relationship between two loving individuals. It should not matter what religion, gender, race, etc. the person is. Any two individuals who are in a legitimate relationship should be treated as equals in the eyes of the State.

Technically, love doesn't even need to apply. There are many historically relevant reasons/precedents for marriage that don't involve the couple to be in love.
Technicality aside, this is pretty much what I'm arguing for. In the eyes of government, all individuals should have equal rights and standings (caveat - convicted felons are a slight exception, as some of their civil rights are temporarily stripped based on their actions...). Government disallowing one form of bonding while allowing another, based solely on the sex of the individuals in question is discrimination, and nothing more.

Nick2008 wrote:
The Church, on the other hand, is a private entity. They can strictly define marriage as the covenant between man and woman. If churches do not want to recognize homosexual partners, then that is in their rights to do so. We have no job in telling them what to do and how they should structure their beliefs.

I'm inclined to agree. We shouldn't really force religious institutions to provide weddings that go against their teachings... in time they'll likely be seen for the discriminatory clap-trap that they are and fewer people will want to be associated with them anyway Wink

Nick2008 wrote:
Unfortunately, many people have blended the two ideas together and have adopted the approach of one or the other. Either you support the idea of a secular state or moral, religious values. I believe we can find a medium where both sides can be happy, and we have seen this in state and national governments that have come up with the idea of a "civil union." These arrangements basically define "marriage" as something overseen by the Church but the gay relationship itself is officially recognized by the government and they are treated the same as heterosexual marriages under the law.

Partially overseen by the church... many marriages occur without church involvement.
Churches discriminate... it's part of what makes them what they are (this includes pretty much any religion, not just the more commonly encountered Christians... not Christian bashing, religion bashing Wink ). Churches can't be forced to accept the validity of other religious points of view, and they shouldn't really be forced to perform ceremonies when their values conflict neither. That said, there should be a civil recourse for those people who wish the bond of marriage.
TheGremlyn
nickfyoung wrote:
That does bring up an important point. Children in a gay marriage are going to have questions when they grow up surly.. Our minister of finance was in the news last year because her and her partner just had their first baby. As they are both female and gay one of those questions for that baby when it grows up is going to be,'who is my father'. I just wonder if a gay couple such as that can give the amount of male input necessary to raise a young boy for instance who needs male input as a child.


This just caught my eye and it had me thinking of adopted children and children of single parents. Children in adoption cases would wonder who their real parents are, whether they are told at some point they were adopted or if they figure it out on their own. Then there are the children raised by one parent. A girl raised only by the mother or by the father, a boy raised only by the mother or the father. If a girl is only with the dad, where does she get that female input? If a boy is raised solely by the mother, where does he get the male input?

Raising children is not done solely by the mother or the father. In the case of my nephew, everyone from the grandparents to the aunts and uncles and the close friends have taken the time to help raise him. Raising children takes a community, and if gay marriage is the norm in society then they just accept it.

Gay marriage is only complicated if you complicate it.
nickfyoung
TheGremlyn wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:
That does bring up an important point. Children in a gay marriage are going to have questions when they grow up surly.. Our minister of finance was in the news last year because her and her partner just had their first baby. As they are both female and gay one of those questions for that baby when it grows up is going to be,'who is my father'. I just wonder if a gay couple such as that can give the amount of male input necessary to raise a young boy for instance who needs male input as a child.


This just caught my eye and it had me thinking of adopted children and children of single parents. Children in adoption cases would wonder who their real parents are, whether they are told at some point they were adopted or if they figure it out on their own. Then there are the children raised by one parent. A girl raised only by the mother or by the father, a boy raised only by the mother or the father. If a girl is only with the dad, where does she get that female input? If a boy is raised solely by the mother, where does he get the male input?

Raising children is not done solely by the mother or the father. In the case of my nephew, everyone from the grandparents to the aunts and uncles and the close friends have taken the time to help raise him. Raising children takes a community, and if gay marriage is the norm in society then they just accept it.

Gay marriage is only complicated if you complicate it.





Yes, it will inevitably be a normal part of society and the kids will adapt as they always do.
loveandormoney
ninacax wrote:
I'm gay myself and I can't understand why straight people are against same sex marriage.
If you don't agree with it, is very simple, don't get married with anyone from your sex.


Why are heterosexuell people angry with gay people?

Gay people want to stay together with a bautiful human
they adore their darling.
Heterosexual people are looking ot marry somebody, whom their parants like.

Maybe because of the
grandson and granddaughters.

Some heterosexuell man look for a richt woman, because money is very important for them.

[/youtube]
geo_ps
long as they liked Smile
loveandormoney
How about girl boy relationships?

Should they like each other?
grofet
Gay and lesbian should be cure so they can be back to normal sex behavior. Some stupid people give a big respect to minority of people than majority of people. Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality and it's not related to human rights. People should follow God rights rather than Human rights since God rights is always right.
watersoul
grofet wrote:
Gay and lesbian should be cure so they can be back to normal sex behavior. Some stupid people give a big respect to minority of people than majority of people. Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality and it's not related to human rights. People should follow God rights rather than Human rights since God rights is always right.

What an absolutely bigoted, uneducated and ridiculous reply.
You can't even prove your god exists (whichever one you are referring to) let alone claim it to always be 'right'.
I continue to be amazed that people still think like that in the world today.
Ankhanu
grofet wrote:
Gay and lesbian should be cure so they can be back to normal sex behavior. Some stupid people give a big respect to minority of people than majority of people. Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality and it's not related to human rights. People should follow God rights rather than Human rights since God rights is always right.

If you're going to claim that homosexuality is a mental illness, you'd better show the research to support it.
The God bit is a complete non-starter.
loveandormoney
grofet wrote:
Gay and lesbian should be cure so they can be back to normal sex behavior. Some stupid people give a big respect to minority of people than majority of people. Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality and it's not related to human rights. People should follow God rights rather than Human rights since God rights is always right.



Good morning.
Interesting post.

"Gay and lesbian should be cure "
How do You cure them?
Do You give them clear water?

"so they can be back to normal sex behavior."
Is normal good?
What is a normal behavior?
Normal is, what the most people do.
84% of all married women are hitten by their husbands.
Worldwide.
Normal is good out of Your view.
Then You must be a boy does mean a man does mean a cowboy.


" Some stupid people "
Where do the stupid people live?
Why are You intelligent?


"minority of people"
If You are intelligent, then You did learn in school:

20 % of western people are gay
60% of western people are bisexual

20% of western people are heterosexual

Did You study mathematics and tell us
where is the minority?

Or is intelligence out of Your view to avoid science and reality?


" Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality"
Are Youz a doctor?

Did gay animals, there are, You can learn that at school,
watch to much TV?


"and it's not related to human rights."
Did Abraham Lincoln say so?


" People should follow God rights"
What kind of God or god do You know.
This has nothing to do with the Bible.
What does happen out of Your view, if You hurt Your laws of God?

" than Human rights since God rights is always right"
So Your god has nothing to do with humans, isnt it?


Regards
kaysch
I don't think there is anything right or wrong with people's views about gay marriages. More conservative or religios people will not accept it while others might see it as a human right.

At the end of the day this discussion is part of the change in social norms over the past decades. The whole discussion reflects the willingness of a society to transfer them into legal norms.

The traditional idea of a marriage is that a heterosexual couple is permitted by society to move together, have sex and have children. In western societies that order is no longer the norm but increasingly the exception. Now people start having sex, then put their households together and finally have children and/or get married. And homosexual couples are no different than heterosexual couples in this respect.
sonam
I don't care who will be married (man-woman, man-man or woman-woman) or any other combination if is possible (three woman and three man Razz ) but I think lot of married couples are not stable (gay or not gay) and after few years they are divorce. I am prefer the same rights for all but for me the right question is why married?


Sonam
loveandormoney
watersoul wrote:
grofet wrote:
Gay and lesbian should be cure so they can be back to normal sex behavior. Some stupid people give a big respect to minority of people than majority of people. Gay and lesbian is an mental abnormality and it's not related to human rights. People should follow God rights rather than Human rights since God rights is always right.



What an absolutely bigoted, uneducated and ridiculous reply.
You can't even prove your god exists (whichever one you are referring to) let alone claim it to always be 'right'.
I continue to be amazed that people still think like that in the world today.



Good morning.

"What an absolutely bigoted, uneducated and ridiculous reply."
Is it ugly to be friendly.
Are the cowboys heterosexual?


"You can't even prove your god exists "

We are insulting god and gods and we hope the audience will now say: This guy is the greatest man in the world. Better then god or gods.


"let alone claim it to always be 'right'"
Aggression and insulting should be right.

Isnt it?

"I continue to be amazed"

We can see that.

Regards
mustatab
well its a debated issue. Gay or lesbion marriages are not allowed in any religion. Socially no civilization till now had the guts to allow them. But I feel it should be left on the people but then if we leave this to people then so many new things might be in line. Where do we draw the line. Is it we are still confused.
If nature or God would have intended gAY OR LESBIAN MARRIAGES THEN ALL WOULD BE MEN OR WOMEN.

So where do we stand . Tomorrow people would like to drink below the age of 10. Then where will we stand.

Next would be stealing and then where will we stand.

SO enlighten me.
the_emissary
People just have too much time to waste (to afford being against gay marriage)

I say get married, I'm not gay but I believe that humans should live as their hearts desire (with the law)
loveandormoney
mustatab wrote:
well its a debated issue. Gay or lesbion marriages are not allowed in any religion. Socially no civilization till now had the guts to allow them. But I feel it should be left on the people but then if we leave this to people then so many new things might be in line. Where do we draw the line. Is it we are still confused.
If nature or God would have intended gAY OR LESBIAN MARRIAGES THEN ALL WOULD BE MEN OR WOMEN.

So where do we stand . Tomorrow people would like to drink below the age of 10. Then where will we stand.

Next would be stealing and then where will we stand.

SO enlighten me.


I will enlighten You.

You say
using drugs
and
beeing gay is the smae?

Where did You make this experience?


Regards
Nick2008
Just wanted to bring up an interesting article I found on the BBC today about why some gay people are against same sex-marriage.

Some arguments made by homosexuals in the article include:
Quote:

"We're not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions," says Soroff.


and

Quote:

"Gay activists should instead put their energies into environmental issues like climate change, because there's a chance to make a morally more defensible and more urgent difference."


and

Quote:

"We've got marriage, it's called a civil partnership [United Kingdom] and I rejoice in the fact that people like me who are different from straight people can do something they can't. I relish that."


It was interesting to read some of the arguments against same sex marriage by the kinds of people who we generally associate as trying to fight for marriage equality. These kinds of gay people do not seem to be too caught up about the definition of "marriage" and are looking towards issues that are much more pressing to mankind in the grand scheme of things. As long as the government recognizes the partnership, does it really matter if it's called "marriage" or not? As the article argues, "Rights are more important than a name".

Article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22758434
loveandormoney
Nick2008 wrote:
Just wanted to bring up an interesting article I found on the BBC today about why some gay people are against same sex-marriage.

Some arguments made by homosexuals in the article include:
Quote:

"We're not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions," says Soroff.


and

Quote:

"Gay activists should instead put their energies into environmental issues like climate change, because there's a chance to make a morally more defensible and more urgent difference."


and

Quote:

"We've got marriage, it's called a civil partnership [United Kingdom] and I rejoice in the fact that people like me who are different from straight people can do something they can't. I relish that."


It was interesting to read some of the arguments against same sex marriage by the kinds of people who we generally associate as trying to fight for marriage equality. These kinds of gay people do not seem to be too caught up about the definition of "marriage" and are looking towards issues that are much more pressing to mankind in the grand scheme of things. As long as the government recognizes the partnership, does it really matter if it's called "marriage" or not? As the article argues, "Rights are more important than a name".

Article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22758434



"Gay activists should instead put their energies into environmental issues like climate change,"

So
the gay people work against the industry.
Interesting idea.
pauline5765
Yeah, straight people tend to discriminate gay people, especially if they grew up in a very conservative environment, where their religious book says, "God will punish gay people." or something.

Gay marriages are more acceptable in liberated and freedom-loving countries.
loveandormoney
pauline5765 wrote:
Yeah, straight people tend to discriminate gay people, especially if they grew up in a very conservative environment, where their religious book says, "God will punish gay people." or something.

Gay marriages are more acceptable in liberated and freedom-loving countries.


Sorry this is wrong:

NOT STRAIGHT people do discrimination.
Watch a schoolyard.
watersoul
loveandormoney wrote:
pauline5765 wrote:
Yeah, straight people tend to discriminate gay people, especially if they grew up in a very conservative environment, where their religious book says, "God will punish gay people." or something.

Gay marriages are more acceptable in liberated and freedom-loving countries.


Sorry this is wrong:

NOT STRAIGHT people do discrimination.
Watch a schoolyard.

I agree that the assertion "straight people tend to discriminate gay people" needs supporting evidence in a debate but I would expect the same level of verification for "NOT STRAIGHT people do discrimination.
Watch a schoolyard."
codersfriend
I depends on the culture you are on. Some places persecute this while others respect. either you should deal with it by adjusting or go to a place where it is accepted I guess
loveandormoney
watersoul wrote:
loveandormoney wrote:
pauline5765 wrote:
Yeah, straight people tend to discriminate gay people, especially if they grew up in a very conservative environment, where their religious book says, "God will punish gay people." or something.

Gay marriages are more acceptable in liberated and freedom-loving countries.


Sorry this is wrong:

NOT STRAIGHT people do discrimination.
Watch a schoolyard.

I agree that the assertion "straight people tend to discriminate gay people" needs supporting evidence in a debate but I would expect the same level of verification for "NOT STRAIGHT people do discrimination.
Watch a schoolyard."


Only
not straight people are aggressive
against strangers
against their children
against their parents
against their partner.


Regards
Nyasro
I think gay marriage is similar to being together with best friend of same sex.
We, man, straight people's friendship comes in trouble when girl comes to man's life
if that both best friend were gay then there friends will long last as well
and they can do anything as they have thought.

Gay marriage or straight marriage its, man or women choice or couple choose to do
anything to their lives.

Is that curse being gay then? no never.
Its man/women mentally to have sex with.
so, as every one has right to freedom,
they have right to judge and choice as well
as marriage.

[P.S. They are just my views.]
codegeek
To be honest, I don't particularly care. I think it's fine if two people who are in love get married, same sex or not; it's really nobody else's business. I don't understand why people would make it such a big issue and try and deny someone their fundamental right to freedom.
Peterssidan
I don't like forced cultural rituals like marriages and I would prefer if it wasn't mentioned in the law at all. Each "group" could decide what marriage meant to them (if it means anything at all) and carry out marriages the way they want, of course within the boundaries of the law like everything else. Some would allow gay marriage while some others would not. As long as there is no legal implications of being married there wouldn't be much of a problem.
loveandormoney
Nyasro wrote:
I think gay marriage is similar to being together with best friend of same sex.
We, man, straight people's friendship comes in trouble when girl comes to man's life
if that both best friend were gay then there friends will long last as well
and they can do anything as they have thought.

Gay marriage or straight marriage its, man or women choice or couple choose to do
anything to their lives.

Is that curse being gay then? no never.
Its man/women mentally to have sex with.
so, as every one has right to freedom,
they have right to judge and choice as well
as marriage.

[P.S. They are just my views.]


Good morning.



Sorry this is wrong,
there is a difference.

"I think gay marriage is similar to being together with best friend of same sex."

Let explain to You: What is sex.

"We, man, straight people's friendship comes in trouble when girl comes to man's life"

Then there is no friendship.

Friends go out also with their girlfriends and friends.

Woman does not mean problem.

"if that both best friend were gay then there friends will long last as well"
Why?


Regards
codersfriend
I think it really depends on the culture.. here in the Philippines that form of marriage is unaccepted. Although there are debates that there should be.
alvarorojas4
everyone can love, I'm in pro of the same sex marriage Very Happy
Pande
Whenever I hear about these debates, I turn the other direction and want to destroy the marriage contract as it is anyway.

If you want to live with someone and copulate with them, then just do that. Why do you need papers, name change, federal tax changes, benefits, etc etc? Why should someone who has not found a partner or doesn't care to find a partner be denied these things?

It will be interesting to see if the common-law marriage act in the states will then be forced to apply to homosexuals also. >Very Happy
Pande
Peterssidan wrote:
I don't like forced cultural rituals like marriages and I would prefer if it wasn't mentioned in the law at all. Each "group" could decide what marriage meant to them (if it means anything at all) and carry out marriages the way they want, of course within the boundaries of the law like everything else. Some would allow gay marriage while some others would not. As long as there is no legal implications of being married there wouldn't be much of a problem.


Precisely!
loveandormoney
codersfriend wrote:
I think it really depends on the culture.. here in the Philippines that form of marriage is unaccepted. Although there are debates that there should be.



"I think it really depends on the culture."

This is funny.
Manila is in Asia.

OK

There it seem to be a problem.

Africa also problem.
Europe also problem.
America and Australia
also a problem.

What culture are You talking about.

Do You talk about the culture of the humans, who live on the moon?

Regards
talibhsn
I am extremely against the same gender marriage either gay or lesbian bcoz both man and women make themselves complete which cant be fulfilled by same gender partner.
moncong
why should be marriage?
loveandormoney
talibhsn wrote:
I am extremely against the same gender marriage either gay or lesbian bcoz both man and women make themselves complete which cant be fulfilled by same gender partner.


What do You want to say with the word complete?

What kind of human is complete?

Regards
Related topics
Conservative Christian Dictionary.
Gay Marriage
I want to get married to my 8 yr old daughter....
Gays - Do You Accept Them?
Gay Marriage
What are your thoughts on gay marriage?
Gay Marriage
Children and same sex couples (marriages)
Netherlands considers burqa ban
Gay adoption laws
Pope restates gay marriage ban after California vote
do you agree for same sex marriages?
New Zealand legalizes Gay Marriage
Should a marriage between 2 satanists be legally recognized?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Relationships

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.