Is there any REASON gay marriage is wrong?

[Dense_Electric]

I'm sorry, are you thinking of the animals that go through a sex change? Because I have never heard of gay animals other than the whole gay penguin bullshit.

May I point out to you that you're using the internet, the single most powerful communications and learning tool every devise? If you've never heard of something, it takes all of a few clicks to remedy that. Do your research.

He created the concept of heterosexual sex, and some idiots got skullfucked in the womb and decided that they liked it from the same sex. Ok I know it's never said in the Bible that it's wrong, but fuck it, it's FUBAR and gays should go burn on a ****** (that is technically a burning stick, I'm guessing it came to mean gays as they were burned at the stake (?)).

You know, I'm religious too, but you don't see me telling people to go burn just because my personal beliefs say something is wrong (for the record I've got no problem whatsoever with gays, as far as I'm concerned if God has a problem with it, that's his jurisdiction, not mine). You don't have to like it, you don't have to be okay with it, but you should at least try to be respectful about it.

No, I don't.

Actually I was kind of thinking that too. Must just be the lighting in the picture, the hair looks sort of blonde.

Except you're not a christian. Or at least not a follower of Christ and his new covenant. Please study your leviticus harder, especially before you next time eat leavened bread (thats most bread).

That's pretty much just it. Leviticus also says that eating shellfish is evil, as is wearing clothes made of more than one type of material, as are men with long hair or women with short hair. Religious or not, the Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation of a translation of a translation.... of a collection of ancient texts written by humans. Not everything in it is going to be undeniable truth.

No, no it isn't.
It was around before and apart from the religious concept of marriage, and all the legal benefits of marriage have nothing to do with religion.

The religious aspect is secondary, even today.

I'm not going to argue which one should take predominance over the other, but you have a very good point - it's as I've said before, marriage from a legal standpoint and marriage from a religious standpoint should be two separate entities. No, I don't expect the church to sanction gay marriage, as it would go against its doctrine. The doctrine of the government, however, is supposed to remain secular, and I can therefor not think of one good reason why it should be illegal.

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

I disagree with using the term "marriage" because the idea of "marriage" as it is has been the same for thousands of years, and now we have to change it because... why exactly? Because less than 10% of the worlds population demands a change of ideas? What's next? "Marriage" to a goat? "Marriage" to your left hand? Once you break the defined nature of the language, where does it end?

Why not civil union? Why not a whole new word? Why must it be "marriage?"

By the way, that's Elton John's opinion, as well as mine. I'm not against civil unions, but I am against using the term "marriage."

because two human beings should have the same rights to a legal and financial contract, regardless of the gender of the person they choose to enter it with. if you don't like that they want to call it a marriage, i'm sorry, but being legally married in the countries that are debating marriage equality gives a different set of rights than a civil union does. so either close the gap or close your mouths-debating semantics when my uncle can't visit his husband in the hospital is enough to make me want to shake everyone who brings up this argument.

 

[GodofCider]

Okay, let me explain why the church don't allow for Gay marriage:


You can't procreate and there is no way to consumate the marriage. Other then that, it's cool.

1)Then what do you say to infertile hetereosexual couples wishing to be wed?
2)Consummate: Verb: Make (a marriage or relationship) complete by having sexual intercourse.
Silly rabbit, trix are for kids.

 

[Slash Joel]

Being a Biologist i will be taking the view of natural selection and ignoring the fact that they have yet to prove true or false if the gay gene exists. The gay mutation, yes a mutation everything that u have on ur body was once a mutation in ur ancestors, gives the person in question no way to reproduce if they follow their heart. There for they can not pass on their genes to their offspring and thus that mutation service no purpose and will die out. As for it being psychilogical thing i have no idea. So there is a scientific hypothesis based on Darwin's theory that says why bother they'll be gone soon.

 

[Hatchet90]

It goes against God, science, nature, the works. I personally can't find a reason for it to be right.

 

[Ipsen]

Only aspect I can see wrong with 'gay marriage' is the rather obvious fact that, between themselves, the couple cannot produce their own progeny. Other than that, it's just fine. Would be nice if the two actually love each other, but I won't push desires....

 

[Small Waves]

It goes against God, science, nature, the works. I personally can't find a reason for it to be right.

>Religious Sacrament
>Scientific or natural

Pick one. Also, get off the computer. Harnessing electricity just ain't natural.

 

[Dense_Electric]

It goes against God, science, nature, the works. I personally can't find a reason for it to be right.

It's ultimately not a matter of whether it's right or not, it's a matter of the government overstepping its boundaries. Who the fuck is some old guy sitting behind a desk a thousand miles away, and what is his involvement in whatever anyone chooses to do with a consenting partner of either sex in their own bedroom?

 

[ReservoirAngel]

It goes against God, science, nature, the works. I personally can't find a reason for it to be right.

How about 'because it gives rights to a portion of your fellow man'? Seems like a pretty good reason to allow same-sex marriage to me.

 

[liquidangry]

People don't seem to understand this concept. Marriage is a highly religious and ritualized ceremony. To a religious person, there is no such thing as a secular marriage even between a man and a woman. Trying to convince a Christian that they should accept gay marriage is like trying to convince them that they should convert to Islam.

 

[conflictofinterests]

*giggle* Reason *giggle* In this debate? Hardly.

I think the people who want gay marriage illegalized are arguing from a religious standpoint, and too often operating under the assumption that the story of Soddam and Gomorrah in the Bible was literally true, and that countries and cultures that accept homosexuality and where homosexuality is practiced in abundance will be smote by the almighty hand of God. If this were the case, then yeah, I'd be scared shitless of the country legalizing gay marriage. However, as I live in the real world, this does not concern me as much.

 

[Tilted_Logic]

I myself couldn't think of any negative reason, but it was mentioned to me that for the child of a unisex couple it can be extremely difficult.

I had a friend that was raised by a lesbian mother, and based on what I know of him, a father figure would have greatly improved his life.

So while I'm in no way against gay marriage, I would like to know more about the children involved; whether or not having parents of the same sex has had a negative impact.

 

[meryatathagres]

I want to reiterate that not producing children is actually good for the planet in a global sense.

 

[conflictofinterests]

People don't seem to understand this concept. Marriage is a highly religious and ritualized ceremony. To a religious person, there is no such thing as a secular marriage even between a man and a woman. Trying to convince a Christian that they should accept gay marriage is like trying to convince them that they should convert to Islam.

Marriage has been more of an economic institution than a religious one. The church just wanted in on it because there was a lot of money to be had.

 

[meryatathagres]

People don't seem to understand this concept. Marriage is a highly religious and ritualized ceremony. To a religious person, there is no such thing as a secular marriage even between a man and a woman. Trying to convince a Christian that they should accept gay marriage is like trying to convince them that they should convert to Islam.

Marriage wasn't invented by Christians. It wasn't invented by Jews either. I suggest you at the very least type "marriage" into wikipedia. And preferably google a bit further.
As an institution, marriage predates written history.

Also here's a link for you old covenant fanboys: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

 

[Eldarion]

Being a Biologist i will be taking the view of natural selection and ignoring the fact that they have yet to prove true or false if the gay gene exists. The gay mutation, yes a mutation everything that u have on ur body was once a mutation in ur ancestors, gives the person in question no way to reproduce if they follow their heart. There for they can not pass on their genes to their offspring and thus that mutation service no purpose and will die out. As for it being psychilogical thing i have no idea. So there is a scientific hypothesis based on Darwin's theory that says why bother they'll be gone soon.

So much wrong in this post I don't even....

First of all, everyone doesn't need to live their lives in an effort to pass on their genes or whatever.

Second, don't quote Darwin if you have NO FREAKING CLUE why homosexuality is a positive thing or how it has managed to stay alive in our species. Homosexual qualities in heterosexual males is hypothesized to increase his attractiveness to women and improve his chances of having kids. This has been true FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. Its an integral part of human society.

Seriously, try reading about the things you are using to argue with. Your ignorance astounds me.

 

[Vault101]

I still find it sad that gayness is somthing that "should be hidden away to proect the children" or what ever I mean if its in your religion so what? you should be able to deal with it

anyway I remeber some time a go the Australian soap opera "home and away" actually tried a gay relationship between to women, (Im still amazed they did it) it went fora bit then controversy from some people

anyway the charachter decided she wasnt gay anymore, the other one went away forever and it was never spoken of again

anyway thing is I kind of respect the people of the show a little more now for trying that...because it actaully got me watching but unfortunatley they had to go back to bland blandess of some chisled blode guy and ditz wondering if they love each other or not (basically every relationship in that show)

 

[Xrysthos]

I apply this logic to the problem:

1.
Most religious institutions consider homosexuality a sin (to the best of my knowledge, though more secular groups might take a different approach).

2.
Marriage, in my mind, is more of a religious covenant than a legal one.

3.
Gay marriage is as a result an attempt to gain approval by an institution that is in general opposition to said gay couple's lifestyle. Why not resort to a different kind of partnership?

If tax reasons is the answer, then the system has to be changed. If not, I fail to see the appeal. To be honest, as a heterosexual, I wouldn't mind an alternative myself, seeing as I am a non-believer. Marriage, in my mind, is an outdated tradition, at least as a religious event, though a legal partnership is a good thing.