Not Really Getting All the Hubub About Same-Sex Marriages.

  • 79 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24964 posts) -

I Mean c'mon, I really don't get it at all. What's the harm that it can do to anything when you let two guys or girls kiss in wherever they're getting hitched (like a beach or something, I dunno)? I mean, maybe if the ceremony takes place during rush hour and the guys are real lookers, there would be a problem because more than one thing would be getting rammed that day (like multiple cars or whatever), so what's wrong with it?

I dunno, I guess a consequence is letting homosexual couples have hospital visitation rights? It's not that uncomfortable to be in a waiting room with homosexual people. In fact, they're pretty fun lads and lasses who love talking about stuff, but yeah they're pretty bummed out about the whole hospital thing, so try to keep them in high spirits like any other struggling couple! But anywho, I just wanna ask everyone:

What's the downside of letting people with the same funny business smacker their faces together lovingly?

#2 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

because it clearly changes the definition of marriage, and we all know that's never ever, under any circumstances happened before

#3 Edited by TheFlush (5571 posts) -

It doesn't do harm. Gay marriage will happen in all of the US. People can try to stop it, but in the end they will lose.
The world won't stop turning, we're doing fine and gay marriage (which is simply called marriage) has been around since 2001 in my country.

#4 Posted by deeliman (2457 posts) -

Only religious nut jobs have problems with it.

#5 Edited by lamprey263 (24225 posts) -

IMO the government has no real reason to define marriage, the fight shouldn't have been for gay marriage, the fight should have been to remove the label of marriage in the name of secularism. Let churches or couples and such use the term marriage, as far as the government is concerned all should be considered civil unions. If a man and women want to get married in a church, fine, but the government should only see it as a civil union. Same should go for gays. Or hell, maybe two non-romantically involved people who are joined at the hip like Jay and Silent Bob, Ren and Stimpy, Bert and Ernie.

#6 Posted by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

Stupid people.

#7 Edited by Nuck81 (5861 posts) -

I fully support Gay marriage.

I also support a religious institutions right to deny the practice of Gay Marriage on their property.

But a poster above me is right. In another 10-15 years Gay Marriage will be legal all across the US. It's called progress.

The same thing happened in the 60's when white Christians were trying to deny equal rights to African Americans and other Minorities. Back then a Black Person and a White Person couldn't marry in some states.

#8 Posted by Netret0120 (2207 posts) -

It only matters when religion is involved.

A gay Christian man is looked down upon because of the beliefs in the bible. So religion is touchy

#9 Edited by Makhaidos (1614 posts) -

Because the gays are coming to decorate your house and plan your weddings in a fabulous fashion! EVERYBODY PANIC!

#10 Edited by picklesurprise (183 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

Because the gays are coming to decorate your house and plan your weddings in a fabulous fashion! EVERYBODY PANIC!

Ahhhh!

I hate fabulous things!

#11 Posted by thegerg (15461 posts) -

@lamprey263: So it's the terminology that you have issues with?

#12 Posted by thegerg (15461 posts) -

@THE_DRUGGIE: Your decision to stereotype gays so much really doesn't help your argument.

#13 Edited by leviathan91 (7763 posts) -

If gays marry, something bad will happen. I don't know what but it's something really, really bad.

#14 Posted by Newhopes (4587 posts) -

I don't give a shit what people do as long as they don't do it in front of me.

#15 Posted by Lone_Wolf_Lance (121 posts) -

Gay marriage needs to be stopped, because I don't want to get married to a man.

#16 Posted by chrisrooR (9027 posts) -

The issue of gay marriage is mainly an issue for people uncomfortable with the idea of two men having sex together.

Really, it's an issue of denying two people who love one another the right to be considered equal with another two people who love one another. The whole thing isn't an issue, and only bible thumping, quran thumping bigots have a problem with any of it.

#17 Posted by lostrib (37756 posts) -

Because some how two guys getting married will diminish a marriage between a man and a woman. At least that's the claim

#18 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13101 posts) -

Gay marriage killed my dog and stole my lunch money.

#19 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -

I have a problem with the government giving married couples tax benefits.

That's bullshit.

#20 Posted by darkmark91 (2873 posts) -

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

#21 Posted by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@darkmark91 said:

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

That doesn't explain why it shouldn't be allowed. Many religions support same sex marriage.

Also it's homosexual or gay, not homo.

#22 Edited by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@darkmark91 said:

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

That doesn't explain why it shouldn't be allowed. Many religions support same sex marriage.

Also it's homosexual or gay, not homo.

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

#23 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13101 posts) -

@Fightingfan said:

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

Dude, the Sumerian religion held homosexuality sacred.

#24 Posted by Aljosa23 (25132 posts) -

Dumb people (usually Republicans) are stuck in the 1950's and want others to join them. Quite sad, really.

#25 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -

@br0kenrabbit said:

@Fightingfan said:

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

Dude, the Sumerian religion held homosexuality sacred.

Homosexuals acts were not as they were trying to increase the population during the bronze age.

It was probably tolerated (As in they were not going to hang you), but not promoted.

Regardless the majority of today's religions come from that time period. The general consensus of those religions is homosexuality isn't good, and thus it's not going to happen as those religions are still dominate today and influence people's perception of life, and overall morality.

#26 Posted by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@Fightingfan said:

@br0kenrabbit said:

@Fightingfan said:

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

Dude, the Sumerian religion held homosexuality sacred.

Homosexuals acts were not as they were trying to increase the population during the bronze age.

It was probably tolerated (As in they were not going to hang you), but not promoted.

Regardless the majority of today's religions come from that time period. The general consensus of those religions is homosexuality isn't good, and thus it's not going to happen as those religions are still dominate today and influence people's perception of life, and overall morality.

Freedom of religion. The amount of followers is irrelevant

#27 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13101 posts) -

@Fightingfan said:

@br0kenrabbit said:

@Fightingfan said:

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

Dude, the Sumerian religion held homosexuality sacred.

Homosexuals acts were not as they were trying to increase the population during the bronze age.

It was probably tolerated (As in they were not going to hang you), but not promoted.

Regardless the majority of today's religions come from that time period. The general consensus of those religions is homosexuality isn't good, and thus it's not going to happen as those religions are still dominate today and influence people's perception of life, and overall morality.

Homosexuality was pretty central to the Sumerian religion, as well to the Greeks and Egyptians. Though this was strictly man-on-man, as the female belonged to her father/husband (though in some traditions women had to become prostitutes in the temple before they could marry, but that was strictly man-on-woman as women couldn't legally purchase the services of a prostitute).

Read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah again.

#28 Edited by darkmark91 (2873 posts) -

@Fightingfan said:

@toast_burner said:

@darkmark91 said:

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

That doesn't explain why it shouldn't be allowed. Many religions support same sex marriage.

Also it's homosexual or gay, not homo.

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

I know many religions accept homosexuals, but do not accept their marriage, so lets not true to confuse the two. But if there are religions that allow gay marriage then it should be allowed. However, then we get into the issue of what is a religion and not a cult.

#29 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13101 posts) -

@darkmark91 said:

I know many religions accept homosexuals, but do not accept their marriage, so lets not true to confuse the two. But if there are religions that allow gay marriage then it should be allowed. However, then we get into the issue of what is a religion and not a cult.

All religions are, by definition, cults.

-a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

-a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

#30 Edited by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -

@darkmark91 said:

@Fightingfan said:

@toast_burner said:

@darkmark91 said:

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

That doesn't explain why it shouldn't be allowed. Many religions support same sex marriage.

Also it's homosexual or gay, not homo.

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

I know many religions accept homosexuals, but do not accept their marriage, so lets not true to confuse the two. But if there are religions that allow gay marriage then it should be allowed. However, then we get into the issue of what is a religion and not a cult.

Cult = religion.

The difference is when there's more then a couple of crazies we cal it religion.

#31 Edited by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@darkmark91 said:

@Fightingfan said:

@toast_burner said:

@darkmark91 said:

It is because marriage is suppose to be a religious thing, since that is where it stems from. It really should not be a legal/political thing. And most holy books state that it is between a man and a woman; usually so they can procreate.

This whole making homo marriage legal fiasco is not being handled the right way. There should be laws to grant the same benefits to homo's as to married couples.

That doesn't explain why it shouldn't be allowed. Many religions support same sex marriage.

Also it's homosexual or gay, not homo.

Not the religions that come from the sumer period of humanity, and those are the majority religions.

I know many religions accept homosexuals, but do not accept their marriage, so lets not true to confuse the two. But if there are religions that allow gay marriage then it should be allowed. However, then we get into the issue of what is a religion and not a cult.

All religions are cults.

#32 Posted by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

#33 Posted by deeliman (2457 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

What about religious homosexuals that really want to marry because of their religion?

#34 Posted by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@deeliman said:

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

What about religious homosexuals that really want to marry because of their religion?

Considering established religions' view on homosexuality, I find the term "religious homosexuals" hard to take seriously I'm sorry rofl

#35 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7807 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

Separate but equal doesn't usually end up being equal.

#36 Posted by deeliman (2457 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman said:

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

What about religious homosexuals that really want to marry because of their religion?

Considering established religions' view on homosexuality, I find the term "religious homosexuals" hard to take seriously I'm sorry rofl

Why? You're a Muslim, right? But do you follow every single rule in the quran? Probably not. Same thing with Christians. There are a lot of religious homosexuals, I even know a few.

#37 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -
@GazaAli said:

@deeliman said:

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

What about religious homosexuals that really want to marry because of their religion?

Considering established religions' view on homosexuality, I find the term "religious homosexuals" hard to take seriously I'm sorry rofl

He without sin shall cast the first stone.

It's idiotic to judge homosexuals for lifestyle when religious people commit equal if not more sin. Assuming God is real; I doubt he cares more about two men sleeping together compared to someone who beats their wife on Saturday, but goes to church on Sunday like nothing ever happened.

#38 Edited by TheFlush (5571 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

I fully agree. If two guys want to hump each other AND have a piece of paper stating so its really fine by me.

But I kind of find it odd that homosexuals want to legally "marry" so bad. What's so bad about civil unions? Its a win-win situation: The religious can preserve "the sanctity of marriage" and the homosexuals can have all the rights and privileges of a legal marriage.

Maybe its a protest against sexual discrimination or something I don't know. If I were homosexuals, I wouldn't give two fucks about the whole thing. As long as I'm getting all my rights, I will proceed and call it whatever the fuck I want to call it.

Civil union is not the same as marriage.

And if they were the same, we wouldn't need to have 2 names for them.

#39 Posted by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@deeliman
@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

#40 Edited by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

#41 Edited by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

#42 Posted by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

#43 Posted by TheFlush (5571 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

Then I am lucky for not being religious. Whatever their doctrines say is completely irrelevant.

#44 Edited by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

ok

#45 Posted by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@TheFlush said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

Then I am lucky for not being religious. Whatever their doctrines say is completely irrelevant.

Whatever floats your boat my friend. Its not like religion will cease to exist without your adherence to it or anything.

#46 Edited by toast_burner (21788 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

@TheFlush said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

Then I am lucky for not being religious. Whatever their doctrines say is completely irrelevant.

Whatever floats your boat my friend. Its not like religion will cease to exist without your adherence to it or anything.

Where did he say it would?

#47 Posted by GazaAli (23007 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@TheFlush said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@toast_burner said:

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

Not everyone is a Muslim

I didn't say that, like ever. I'm just speaking from my own background that's all.

which is irrelevant

Then I am lucky for not being religious. Whatever their doctrines say is completely irrelevant.

Whatever floats your boat my friend. Its not like religion will cease to exist without your adherence to it or anything.

Where did he say it would?

How about you show me where I said that he did first?

#48 Posted by Makhaidos (1614 posts) -

@GazaAli said:

@deeliman

@Fightingfan

I myself am not judging anyone here, couldn't care less to begin with. It is true that all religious admit to be sinners, but in the different religious doctrines, sins are of different scale and magnitude and homosexuality is high on the scale, like really high, at least in Islam that is.

What a weird thing to put on the high-priority list. You'd think Muhammad would have had more important things to attend to during his time.

#49 Posted by lamprey263 (24225 posts) -

@thegerg: I'm for gay marriage for equality sake, but I'm against the government having anything to do with marriage if the term is to be considered a religious one, in the interest of secularism they should refer to such unions as civil unions (even for straight people too).

#50 Edited by Jimn_tonic (819 posts) -

from what i've seen, i think the majority of gay-bashing comes from 3 things

a)repressed homosexual or bisexual urges

b)the inability to realize the natural repulsion heterosexuals have towards homosexual acts. It's the same thing regarding the sexuality of our parents, or animals; we don't like to see it, or think about it, but it's irrational to have any moral obligations against it.

c)anti-gay political, and cultural propaganda. my fave was from a conservative radio host who said that the majority of the S.S. were homosexuals, and hitler intentionally recruited homosexuals.