Poll: Do you support gay marriage?

[pwnzerstick]

Whenever this topic comes up I always remember the quote by Liz Feldman, "It's very dear to me, the issue of gay marriage. Or, as I like to call it: 'Marriage.' You know, because I had lunch this afternoon, not gay lunch. I parked my car; I didn't gay park it". Also the fact that there were votes to take away the rights for gays to marry totally undermines the whole definition of rights. You can't take someones rights away without due process of law, and a vote is not due process. The whole point of rights is that even if 99% of the population opposes the rights of a 1%, those rights cannot be taken away, they are RIGHTS.

 

[Sethzard]

Marriage has been going on longer than we've been recording history properly. It's not a religious thing, it's a way for two people to share a bond and in these modern times get certain economic benefits. I think that anyone who wants to get married to another consenting adult should be allowed to. I think that child marriage or forced marriage are wrong, but marriage between two people who love each other is a brilliant show of affection no matter what the genders involved.

 

[BartyMae]

... Right now churches don't have to marry people if they don't want to.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that they did. It just seems unreasonable, to me, to not be able to force them to if the legal benefits are directly tied to being married. If there's no legal benefits to it, then I don't think they should be able to be forced to. Not saying what it is, but what I think should be. This also applies to any couple, regardless of sexual orientation.

 

[Imat]

Do I actively support it? No. Am I opposed to it? No. 's far as I'm concerned people can marry whomever they want.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

I think marriage as an institution, for both straight and gay people, is so outdated it should have no place in our modern age, but that doesn?t mean innocent and consenting adults should be flat-out banned from it on the flimsy basis of sexuality.

Seriously, I don't know why this issue keeps on coming up. What is with religious fundamentalists' obsession with homosexual strangers that they have no business poking their zealotic noses into? Just grow the fuck up and let them be.

 

[UbiquitousCube]

I feel as one of the less than 50 people who voted no, I feel I should explain the reasoning behind my answer. Like the original poster I consider myself to be a christian. Unlike the original poster however, I as an individual do have a problem with homosexuality in general, and thus gay marriage, BECAUSE I'm a christian. My argument here is for those who consider themselves to be christian but still like assume that it is "OK". If everyone else would please just label me as religiously biased and move on to another post, that would be great. Arguments which lack common ground are pointless and I would like to avoid them if possible.
First of all the issue of my support for gay marriage comes not from my issue with the institution of marriage, but by the homosexual connotation behind it. As a christian, I see homosexuality as wrong because the the bible specifically calls it an abomination. Males should not feel the same passion towards one another as they would feel towards a woman because it is unnatural. The issue with homosexuality is that it is not natural. Man and woman were designed, by God, to be together. Now do I hate homosexuals and want to burn them alive because of how they are? No. I disagree with the way homosexuals think just as much as many people reading this disagree with the way I as a Christian think. So seeing as I disagree with homosexuality in general, how can I agree with allowing them to be married?
Now homosexuality happens and there isn't much I can do about it but comment about it on the side. Now the issue of gay marriage on the other hand is a tad bit different. Marriage is still a state based institution, therefore it can do whatever it feels like. However what it is supposed to represent to us Christians is the eternal joining of a man and a woman for their happiness and that of their descendants. I think that it takes a man and a woman to properly raise a child. Can one or the other raise one? Yes. Can homosexuals do it? Yes. However, in these cases something that the child needs is missing. I believe that gay marriage goes against that which marriage stands for in the first place, i.e. raising and educating children, thus it should not be allowed.

 

[phantasmalWordsmith]

I can't honestly think of a single good reason not to allow same sex marriage, so yeah.

 

[ninjaRiv]

I honestly don't understand why it's an issue. If you're against it, don't marry a guy. Also, don't look. But there's no reason anybody should be against it, anyway. In a perfect world, everybody would chill the fuck out.

 

[Blend]

I feel as one of the less than 50 people who voted no, I feel I should explain the reasoning behind my answer. Like the original poster I consider myself to be a christian. Unlike the original poster however, I as an individual do have a problem with homosexuality in general, and thus gay marriage, BECAUSE I'm a christian. My argument here is for those who consider themselves to be christian but still like assume that it is "OK". If everyone else would please just label me as religiously biased and move on to another post, that would be great. Arguments which lack common ground are pointless and I would like to avoid them if possible.
First of all the issue of my support for gay marriage comes not from my issue with the institution of marriage, but by the homosexual connotation behind it. As a christian, I see homosexuality as wrong because the the bible specifically calls it an abomination. Males should not feel the same passion towards one another as they would feel towards a woman because it is unnatural. The issue with homosexuality is that it is not natural. Man and woman were designed, by God, to be together. Now do I hate homosexuals and want to burn them alive because of how they are? No. I disagree with the way homosexuals think just as much as many people reading this disagree with the way I as a Christian think. So seeing as I disagree with homosexuality in general, how can I agree with allowing them to be married?
Now homosexuality happens and there isn't much I can do about it but comment about it on the side. Now the issue of gay marriage on the other hand is a tad bit different. Marriage is still a state based institution, therefore it can do whatever it feels like. However what it is supposed to represent to us Christians is the eternal joining of a man and a woman for their happiness and that of their descendants. I think that it takes a man and a woman to properly raise a child. Can one or the other raise one? Yes. Can homosexuals do it? Yes. However, in these cases something that the child needs is missing. I believe that gay marriage goes against that which marriage stands for in the first place, i.e. raising and educating children, thus it should not be allowed.

You identify yourself as Christian a lot there.

I'm curious, if Christ appeared to you today and told you that any people who loved one another, whatever their gender, could be married, would you change your mind?

Purely hypothetical question.

 

[omega 616]

There is no reason not to support it, (old joke incoming!) they have as much right to be unhappy as the rest of us!

For the traditionalists out there, wasn't it "traditional" to actually live by your vows ... as in "till death do us part"? Gone are the days of 50+ years of marriage, now it's a divorce every 60 seconds.

Time to get with the times people!

 

[Risingblade]

Why is there no I don't care either way option?

I know a lot of people say this and I am not trying to single out this instance so if you say this apply it to you.

If you do not care if people in a homosexual relationship call them selves married, you support gay marriage by not caring they call them self that.

In other words two men or women say "We are married" you respond "I do not care" that is a lack of opposition and thus by default an acceptance and support to the fact they are married

You do not care, thus you let it happen, thus you approve of, thus you support gay marriage because you do not care if it happens.
You do not care, yet you oppose, yet that means you do care, thus you're a fucking liar for saying you don't care

So to stay neutral I should oppose some and support some.

 

[Soxafloppin]

Most definately, two people in love should have the right to marry eachother.

I'm not religous or a dickhead so why the fuck not.

 

[kickyourass]

I know it's not very classy for me to say this, but you're either lying here or you're stupid. That has never ever been the case in this universe, I mean your own Bible said at one point that marriage is not one man and one woman, it's one man and as many women as he can properly feed, clothe and sex up on a regular basis (and those women were barely a step up from being slaves). If I as an Atheist know that, how are you a Christian and yet do not know the words contained in your own damn book?

I'd be interested in you giving an actual book, chapter and verse where polygamy is treated in a positive light (by God) in the Bible. I agree that a man often had many wives in the Bible, including those who were godly persons, but there is a great deal of difference the Bible commenting on traits of an individual and condoning their actions.

Since this doesn't directly relate address the original topic I'll give more of a rebuttal in spoiler tags so those who aren't interested can move on to more relevant posts.

The Bible doesn't cover up the flaws of its heroes, rather it shows humanity in its deepest sins. Like many other practices performed by the Israelites (such as idolatry), often picked up after mingling with pagan nations, the portrayal of the effects of polygamy are never in a positive light, instead the problems of such relationships are presented (domestic issues abound due to competitiveness and resentment among the women, and even todays unrest in the Middle East can be traced back to the rivalry of Abraham's two wives and their children).

You may be able to make a case that God tolerated the practice until the population of his people had sufficiently matured, before seeking to regulate the evil practice. But from what I know the norm as established by God is one man for one woman. I'm not saying that is no arguement to be made for polygamy in the Bible, but that's your case to make not mine, and from my readings I don't see a strong case for it.

Just to back up my points with specific instances:

Solomon, a king of Israel, maybe the most well known in regards to polygamy with 700 wives and 300 concubines, is in direct contradiction to Deuteronomy 17:16-17 (the only direct command against polygamy), a verse directly aimed at the future kings of Israel "and he shall not acquire many wives to himself" (there are two other 'shall nots' in those verses which showed Solomon was also living wrongly in other areas). His having other wives caused problems with his relationship with God later on in his life, 1 Kings 11:4 "when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God".

Verses refering to marriage being one man and one woman (singular tense), Genesis 2:24; 1 Timothy 3:2,12; Ephesians 5:23

My view on the topic, I'm in a similar position to the OP, if there was a similar arrangement for gay couples which gave the same legal benefits as marriage I may not be against that. But for me marriage is one man and one woman, and just because it is formed on a religious basis doesn't mean that my opinion is any less valid than anyone elses.

Sorry to tell you this, but giving your people rules on how to behave in a polygamous relationship is condoning polygamy. You don't instruct someone in how to do something, if you don't want them doing that thing.
The specific verse I was referring to was Exodus 21:10: If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
What is that if not giving your people clear instructions about polygamy? There's no mention of a limit to the number of wives so I can only assume this applies to as many as you can reasonably provide for.

Here's a few more verses for you to think about, I'll leave out instances of men simply having multiple wives since it is true that simply saying someone did a thing isn't really an endorsement of that thing.

2Samuel 12:7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

12:8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

Here we see God giving King David multiple wives and saying if he wants more he can have them. If you don't want someone to have multiple wives, you don't give him multiple wives.

Deuteronomy 21:15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:
21:16 Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:
21:17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.
Instructions on how to treat the sons of multiple wives.

There you go, 3 examples of God either directly encouraging polygamy, or directly instructing polygamous people how to act, with a complete lack of condemnation. Thus entirely destroying the idea that "The Bible only encourages man and woman marriage."

I look forward to your rebuttal.

 

[Something Amyss]

But while we're on the subject, marriage has traditionally allowed marrying your daughter; do you support incest?

I support incest. Don't besmirch the good name of incest to further your cause!

XD I humbly retract my statement.

Id also note that the "this is the way its always been" isnt really true, either... Its generally true for western christian cultures for the past few hundred years. Plenty of other cultures have recognised gay or even transgendered couples as perfectly acceptable, and using their word for the equivalent of marriage (because of course the word "marriage" is only a few hundred years old, and only in english speaking countries)

Not to mention that a lot of what we consider marriage these days evolved out of common-law marriages. Not everything, mind.

Shame on those 22 who opposed it! If you don't like gay marriage, just don't marry someone of the same sex. SImple!

Personally, I'm just proud that almost 800 people have voted "yes" on this site. It's nice to see how progressive we can be.

 

[Something Amyss]

There's other ways to get married. You don't have to go through a church to get legal recognition of your marriage.

In some states, you get married through a religious figure, it seems. I'm in VT, and we get civil marriages through a Justice of the Peace, so the two are separate (Though a minister of some sort could be a JP, but if he wanted to be one, he'd be legally required to marry anyone, even gays).

Civil marriage really should be a civil affair brokered by a civil body, but it appears that's not always the case.

As a christian, I see homosexuality as wrong because the the bible specifically calls it an abomination.

The original wording is "ritually unclean." But that aside, if you oppose homosexuality because it's named in the Bible, are you okay with people marrying their daughters, having multiple wives, etc?

Males should not feel the same passion towards one another as they would feel towards a woman because it is unnatural.

It's not unnatural. It occurs within nature, ergo it is natural.

Now do I hate homosexuals and want to burn them alive because of how they are? No.

Isn't that in itself, a selective interpretation, though? Assume the "eww, homos" wording of Leviticus is right (BTW, hope you follow the rest of Lev; no shelfish, no pork, no hamburger unless it came all from the same animal, no cotton blends), Leviticus 20:13 clearly says:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

So you are against homosexuality because the Bible says so but you DON'T want to kill them despite the Bible saying so because....Ponies?

 

[superbatranger]

I've yet to see a decent argument in its oposition

People think that because the Bible says homosexuality is wrong that it should apply to everyone. Anyways, I fully support it. My best friend is gay and so is my older stepbrother. I want them to have the right to marry.

 

[BartyMae]

There's other ways to get married. You don't have to go through a church to get legal recognition of your marriage.

Fair enough, but I still think that the legal part should stop being called marriage and start being called "civil union", for both heterosexual and homosexual couples.

The only problem is that there's not really a verb version of "union". "I'm going to marry Jane." vs. "I'm going to...unionize (with) Jane." Not exactly the same, haha.