Restarted becuase I felt like like we should start over.

Whats your stance on the issue?

If I'm counting right this is our 3rd topic on this hehehehe :-D

anyway..

I'm against it.. ALOT. I'll explain more later....

*Wack, Wack, Wack*

You know what that is, the sound of two male reproductive organs colliding into eachother... The End Result...

NOTHING

In all seriousness, its more for me just a lack of consideration for many other groups... I believe they aren't being very thoughtful about what makes other people mad. They claim its all for love, no it isnt... It has alot to do with financial aid they will recieve but by no means rightfully deserve. You have to consider in the overall, what will be able to be let go in a marriage following this. Hell I'll go kiss my friend and say I'm married to get more insurance help... When I'm old enough anyways...

Many other things come into play too, I mean Christianity was what created the idea of marriage. Under Christianity the Bible sais "Thou shalt not lay with a man, like he does a women for it is poullution" -Psalms, concerning the 10 commandments- . I mean they are just openly slapping the religion in its face and saying, I do not care that this is your idea... Me and My Partner are more important then your religous values... It seems a little irrational to me.

My honest conclusion to the situation is very judgemental but I feel that it is the only way to truly understand it more clearly... I mean as far as I see it, If me and this girl believed we loved eachother, I do not believe the lack of marrying her would be of huge difference in my life. Under the circumstances of Homosexuals I would say that they are becomming a little bit greedy over the wants they have. It used to be that homosexuals weren't even like allowed to live, 50-60 years ago it was not uncommong for a person to be murdered because he was gay. Then I woul dsay yes they deserve to be respected like other people. The reason I could say that for social issues more so then marriage is because of the fact that Homosexuals can not reproduce, which is truly what the marrital system seeks to aid at marriage, if there was a system set up for their situation and I looked it over then maybe I would think differently. Until then I don't really see a reason marriage is neccesary.

I am against marriage totally but if men and woman can get married so shud the same sex couples b allowed

wow....yet another homosexual marriage topic....

anywho....i support homosexual marriage completely. Marriage is about love. If you fall in love with somebody, even if they are of your same gender, the government should not be able to tell you weather or not you are aloud to mary that person. Besides, not letting homosexuals get married is not going to stop people from being gay....there are still going to be homosexual people, maybe even living next door to you. You cant change that, marriage is love!

true, they may want benefits, but one of the benefits of marriage is that you have control over your spouse if for some reason they were to slip into a coma or be put on life support. In the case of a homosexual couple, one partner may not be able to see the other if the family denies them access, even though they may have spent many years together.

[quote]*Wack, Wack, Wack*

You know what that is, the sound of two male reproductive organs colliding into eachother... The End Result...

NOTHING

In all seriousness, its more for me just a lack of consideration for many other groups... I believe they aren't being very thoughtful about what makes other people mad. They claim its all for love, no it isnt... It has alot to do with financial aid they will recieve but by no means rightfully deserve. You have to consider in the overall, what will be able to be let go in a marriage following this. Hell I'll go kiss my friend and say I'm married to get more insurance help... When I'm old enough anyways...[/quote]

So can't regular striaght people then, are you against them as well? I'm just curious, where are you getting this from? Do you have homosexual friends, I mean, actually good friends? I do, my best friend is a lesbian and my other friend is gay. They can love just as much as a straight person can, just becuase you get benefits doesn't mean thats what they're after. Just like not all straight people are after benefits. The door swings both ways with what your saying.

[quote]Many other things come into play too, I mean Christianity was what created the idea of marriage. [/quote]
It most certainly was not.

[quote]Under Christianity the Bible sais "Thou shalt not lay with a man, like he does a women for it is poullution" -Psalms,[/quote]

So what? Times are changing, many christians don't follow the old ways like they used to. Go read conversations with God or one of those types of books. They have a big following now

[quote]concerning the 10 commandments- . I mean they are just openly slapping the religion in its face and saying, I do not care that this is your idea... Me and My Partner are more important then your religous values... [quote]
I would hope they say that. Your putting your ideals above their happiness, thats selfish.

[quote]My honest conclusion to the situation is very judgemental but I feel that it is the only way to truly understand it more clearly... I mean as far as I see it, If me and this girl believed we loved eachother, I do not believe the lack of marrying her would be of huge difference in my life. [/quote]
But you still want to marry her correct?


[quote]Under the circumstances of Homosexuals I would say that they are becomming a little bit greedy over the wants they have. It used to be that homosexuals weren't even like allowed to live, 50-60 years ago it was not uncommong for a person to be murdered because he was [homosexual]. Then I woul dsay yes they deserve to be respected like other people. The reason I could say that for social issues more so then marriage is because of the fact that Homosexuals can not reproduce, which is truly what the marrital system seeks to aid at marriage[/quote]

Not really, people get certian benefits to help out with kids if they have them. Marriage isn't about money.

You know, here it is

I know many kids that are gay napoleon, in 6 posts your have assumed the position of my guardian whereby you know my every move.

As for the thing about putting themselves over my ideals... That would be all well and good if they didnt place their selves over someone elses first, I use the Boy in a girls only club as a point. You dont just waltz into a girls bar as a guy and say I'm here whether you like it or not. I don't care if this is YOUR club, or YOU set the rules.. My point was to not say my ideals are more worthy, but more to say... You shouldn't just take over someone elses idea, just because you feel like it.

Yes you are right, so can straight people. But seeing as how it is a man and women relationship you can have a greater assumption (i know your good at them) that they are more likely in it for true love. Homosexuallity YES it can be for real. But fact remains there is that chance more so then two straight people.

Yes I would want to still get married if re , but it wouldn't drive me to that extent some are going to get married. I mean obviously people are getting a little pissed at them for trying to change things to include them. As I said before, a comprimise would be more sensible, I know you can agree with me there. I different title for homosexual people, they could still be reconized but congress would definitly have to alter some benefits, I think it would help people cope easier.

And btw,
Why do you think a guy and a girl always want to get married, do you think that it doesn't add to the good things about marriage. Maybe not entirely for money but the thought does exist.

But chance doesn't matter. Just becuase the majority is straight doesn't mean gay people shouldn't have their rights not fulfilled.



I agree -


I assume your talking about having kids here. Gay people want to have children just as much as straight people.

1) No, Christianity did not create marriage, non-religious civil marriages existed long before (and after) Christianity came about. Even in America, marriage was originally a civil ceremony, and only become a religious one later on, at the pressure of the church.

2) What does religion have to do with government? You're saying that it's acceptable for the president to take one religion's values, and make them into a law which US citizens of all religions or no religion must follow?

3) How is allowing gays to marry going to harm you? Why is it any of your business who someone marries? It seems a little irrational to me. :roll:

People are trying to say that allowing gays to marry will "destroy the sanctity of marriage". That's a load of crap. Currently 50% of marriages in the US end in divorce, everywhere you turn, there are "Who wants to marry a ________" TV shows, Brittney Spears is getting quicky 24 hour marriages. Yeah, marriage is really sacred in America. :roll:

1) Not being thoughtfull of what makes other people mad?? What about being thoughful about what makes gays mad?

2) Yeah, damn those homos for wanting the same rights that straights have. Greedy bastards. :roll:

3) 50-60 years ago, it was also not uncommon for a black man to be murdered because he was black. :? Are you saying that the blacks should be grateful to whites for no longer killing them because of their race? Would you have thought that the blacks were "greedy" by wanting to vote? Or marry interracially? Or own property? After all, we already stopped murdering them... what more do they want?

4) So by your logic, straight couples who aren't going to have children shouldn't be allowed to marry either? If they're not going to reproduce, what's the point of marriage? :roll:

Im sick of repeating, this is what came to last time...

Wish the last topic wasn't closed.

*brings it down a notch* The other topic was locked because it was a bit to heated. Lets not go back to that.

I would also like to add that Once on state allows it people can go get married in that state and move back to their home state and sue the state for not recognizing their marriages.

I am, of course*, for homosexual marriages.

The main reason is that I am hard pressed to come up with an example of any time in history when one group of people were given the same rights as another group of people, and the results were bad.

It definitely won't destroy the sanctity of marriage as only 11% of the population is gay and only some fraction of them would get married. There is no way <11% of the population is going to destroy something that the other 89% also participate in.

*No, I'm not gay.

Here in mass.. the day for legalizing gay marriages :-/ is may 17th... whenever someone says that day at school everyone makes funn of it. ect.

Since soem states arnt aloowing it yet everyones gunna run here and we're gonan become the gay state ~~> got that from a friend

The last topic I had a lotta information and I dont feel liek repeating it so i'll probally just copy it from there and post it here leter

im against it

that's nice, care to throw some intelligent reason along with that? That isn't enough, back up your belief

I'm still all for it. I don't see how it will destroy the sanctity of marriage, and I don't see how straight people should be bothered by it.

an opinion only goes so far - you have to be able to back up that opinion - care to share why your against it?

We'll listen, just give us your reasons.

how is it not enough? i waznt trying to debate on anything, i waz saying what i thought, cant people just have an opinion on something and that be it?

punkrockblonde:

If you seen the previous homosexual marriage posts people usually back up what they say...
These posts get very interesting


Back to topic

before i get all debate crazy, i am interested in what you think gives a homosexual the right to get married.

their right are not being defied... they have the Civil Union which gives them all the same rights as a straight married couple. Just because they do not have the title, doesnt mean anything. Figurativle speaking a female can not be called MR, becasue it would not be natural correct. Well a homosexual getting married would also not be natural. I believe it was napoleone in the last room, lol, that said homosexuality is comon in the animal kingdom, however it is very rare considereing that animals only mate for reproduction, excluding the dolphin or porpoise of course. In reality homosexuality is not "natural."


Now I would like you to consider the president. rather irrevelant i understand, but see if you can comprhend.

A person from Iraq, or asia, could not be elected as president because they are not from the United States, everyone is ok witht hat. It is not a defiance of their rights correct....

Yet they can rin for like a town office, ar as a town official.... rather interesting.

Personally i dont consider it a defiance of their civil rights because they have teh Union, and i dont consider marriage something guarenteed to every individual.

Massachusetts to allow same-sex marriages starting Monday
First state in U.S. to allow such unions

BOSTON, Massachusetts (Reuters) -- Same-sex couples will legally exchange vows Monday when Massachusetts becomes the first U.S. state to allow gay marriage, an election-year milestone likely to fuel legal and political battles nationwide.

Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples are expected to seek marriage licenses as of Monday from city and town clerks in Massachusetts, followed by the customary ringing of church bells and the cutting of wedding cakes -- many topped with the figures of two brides or two grooms.

"May 17 is a historic day: It's the day that marks a new chapter of equality for gay and lesbian families," said gay rights activist Marty Rouse. "For the first time in U.S. history, we can receive the critical legal rights and protections that come only through marriage."

Thousands of same-sex couples were married at San Francisco City Hall earlier this year but the marriages were not recognized by the state of California. A mayor in New York state is being prosecuted after performing gay marriages in February.

The famously liberal city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, home to Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has ordered its clerk to begin accepting applications at midnight, and the first weddings are expected later that morning.

The issue has catapulted Massachusetts into the national spotlight, especially in an election year when its junior senator, Democrat John Kerry, is expected to face Republican President Bush in the race for the White House.

Both candidates oppose gay marriage, with Bush backing a constitutional ban and Kerry favoring limited legal recognition for same-sex couples.

Conservatives have blasted Massachusetts' top court, which ruled last year that a state ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional and allowed same-sex couples to wed legally.
Final hurdle cleared

The final hurdle was cleared Friday when the U.S. Supreme Court failed to block a last-minute legal challenge filed by conservative opponents of same-sex weddings.

A federal appeals court has agreed to hear the case next month, but by that time clerks will probably have granted hundreds of marriage licenses to homosexual couples.

Some may be given to out-of-state gay couples who come to Massachusetts in defiance of Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, who has told them to stay home amid fears his state could become "the Las Vegas of same-sex marriage."

Citing a 1913 state law that prevents Massachusetts from marrying any couple if the marriage would be "void" in their home states, Romney's administration has warned clerks they can issue licenses to out-of-state couples only if they plan on settling in Massachusetts.

Several clerks, noting the statute has not been applied to heterosexual couples for many years, plan on issuing licenses to all gay couples from out of state who request them. Gay rights advocates say they plan to challenge the law.

It is expected some couples will take their marriage licenses back to states where they may not be not recognized, setting up legal test cases that courts around America will have to resolve.

"The creation of a right to same-sex marriage in the end will not strengthen the institution of marriage within our society but only weaken it as marriage becomes only one lifestyle choice among many others," said Boston's Roman Catholic archbishop, Sean O'Malley.

Tourism officials in Cape Cod's Provincetown, where many gays live, say they expect at least $1 million in extra business from a wave of gay unions. Owners of a gay wedding registry, Rainbow Wedding Network, say thousands of couples from New England have signed up for gifts.

^^ I live in Mass^^
greattttt
:-/

The future is here, you should embrace it.

If it means mass being the first state.. and alot of gays are gonan be swarming up here to get a lisence where gonna be changed from the "bay state" to the "gay state"

So what? A name is a name

Since we are the only state legalizing this :-/ The homosexuals will be like coming up here to get married... they'll be like everywhere!

Whats so bad about that? They're people just like you and me, it sounds like you hate them for being gay.

Hate is kind of a harsh word for it , I mean Mass is fine how it is we dont need thousands of peoples coming up here just to get married

So then the marriages should take place through out all of america (which will probably end up being the case) instead of mass then?

I mean when you pack all those people into a state for marriagexs when there are 49 more states! I mean they cant just come and crowd up all here

Actually, there are sheep/cows etc with homosexual tendancies, too. There have been studies done on it, I'd find a link but quite frankly I can't be bothered, and don't know if they have been posted on the Internet.

Good on Massachusetts, I say.

The news report here said that some homosexuals were just going to get married in Massachusetts then go back home. Their license wouldn't be valid back where they were from but it was the fact that they could say they were married that was the draw card.

Marriage shouldn't be segregated on sexual preference. Predjudice is a horrible, horrible thing. What makes this any worse than racism? Marriage is the ultimate step for people who are in love.

I know I posted a link about it on one of our many Homosexual boards somewhere ...hmmm...

i honestly have no problem with homosexual marriages. if you are in love with someone, why should the law stop you? just because they are gay doesn't mean they don't have feelings too! it irritates me when some of my (catholic) friends preach on and on about how wrong it is, being gay and wanting to get married. i have nothing against catholics either, because i am one, but they really don't give a valid opinion, just that God and the church say that it is wrong.

Ok so there are "homosexual" sheep and cows, but should we base our rules on what cows, and sheep do??? I think not. I was referring to the majority of the natural world, not a few specific animals.

Cows and Sheep mate - does that mean we shouldn't?

And Human homosexuals are just as rare as sheep and cows are. Homosexuality is not the majority of the population, just as homosexuality is not the majority in the natural world.

I want one of you to give me a reason for why homosexuals cannot marry/be together/whatever without makeing immature insults or baseing your answer in religion politics or the morals society beat into your head without backing up those morals with a good legit reason

Actually, there are also homosexual penguins and albatross, too. My point is, you will find homosexual tendancies in many, many species of animals so your point about it not being "natural" is 100% A-grade bullocks.

Next, please.

Well, How about you just check out our locked topic for this and see our reasons there so that we dont have to type them all for you

http://www.aimgirl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10177

Or you could copy and paste?

You could copy and paste ;-)

and take credit for your idea's? never

You could always just put it in a quote :-)

Just let the people marry it dosent harm a bloody thing, There are a lot of laws that America dosent need, I belive in legalizeing homosexual marrage and polygamy There should be no restrictions who we can love and how many people we can love and nothing should stop people who love each other from expressing it publicly though marriage, I dont see marriage in a religious way but more in a way of expressings deepest of feelings for one another I would like one person to tell me whats wrong with that

well i really think that it doesn't matter i mean that is just wrong if someone loves eachother let them love each other i mean how does it harm us its not like we are the ones who are going to get married with the homosexual ppl that is just wrong its like taking sumones right away i think if they want to married just let them get married seriously :roll:

This actually hits sort of close to home. I've been with my current boyfriend for about four months ... and I love him a lot. Who is going to tell me that we arent allowed to be bound together any way we please? I'm not making a good point I know ... I'm a bit upset, sorry. Um ... it would just break my heart if I someday ask him to marry me, and we find out it's impossible ... I dont know what I would do. Dont I have the same right show him my dedication as everyone else?

Yes, this is why Mass. is your friend, even if they're terrible drivers xD

Massachusett'z people arn't bad drivers... sometimes... depends where you are haha.

Anyway.. I'm moving.. but it'z not out of state.. how lucky am I to be the only state *sigh*

I would consider an honor.