Poll: Do you support gay marriage?

[Matt King]

although i would like to know, if two guys get married do they have separate bachelor parties?

That's a good question - do you throw two parties or just one big one? It would be more cost efficient to have one big one, methinks. And they could even get away with paying for only one stripper, rather than one each.

but if it's just one big one, maybe it would get a bit awkward

 

[bojackx]

I do support it, but if you have a church that doesn't want to marry two gays, then that's up to them, and there's always the registry office.

 

[fenrizz]

Yes, I support gay marriage.

My concience won't let me not support it.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

My favourite quote on this issue is: "Saying gays should be happy with civil partnerships is like saying blacks should be happy to be able ride the bus at all".

Fuck that. Have you ridden a bus lately? Shit sucks.

OT: I really don't care. Like, if I tried to give less fucks, I may explode. Marriage is stupid. A piece of paper doesn't confer upon me and whatever partner I may have anything we didn't already have. Except tax breaks. 'Cause fuck you, government.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Yes, I support gay marriage.

My concience won't let me not support it.

Double negative! Always so confusing for a second.

 

[Galletea]

In times like this I like to turn to the oxford english dictionary.

1)the formal union of a man and a woman, typically as recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife: she has three children from a previous marriage
-[mass noun] the state of being married: women want equality in marriage
-(in some jurisdictions) a union between partners of the same sex.
So in the instance of gay marriage, it is a formal union between two people which is recognised by law and is thus marriage. The only reason it has been a man and a woman, is because you weren't allowed to be gay when they came up with the term.

And yes, I do agree with it, if people want to spend their lives together then why shouldn't the law recognise that?

 

[RatRace123]

I don't see one single thing wrong with gays getting married, and I mean actually "married", like they get to use that word to describe it. I don't think marriage between a man and a woman is any more or less sacred than the marriage between two men or two women.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Leave the term "marriage" to Man-and-Woman relationship. Since man could write and record, marriage has been used to define a Man and a Woman together.

All fine and good but you have to remember that the meaning of words can and has changed over the centuries.

Also why defend the term "marriage?" the word has been screwed over for a VERY long time, the wording "for as long as you both shall live" (at least I think that's how it goes) has been all but abandoned in this modern age of quicky divorces. Clinging to the "sanctity of marriage" when people have broken their vows in less than an hour screams of being hypocritical. Gay people should have the right to break solemn vows made at an altar like everyone else.

 

[Xan Krieger]

I'm against gay marrige but for equal rights. I believe marrige should be removed from law and replaced with civil unions, I think it would make a nice compromise that everyone could agree to.

Fun fact: The people I talk to most on Facebook are gay and two girls I intend to hang out with in the near future are lesbians who are in a civil union (or were but Amendment one passed).

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

While I am less comfortable than I ought to be with the concept of the physical side of homosexual relationships, I have nothing against extending all the same legal rights to such couples others enjoy. After all, being uncomfortable with the realities of such things is my personal failing and if some vindictive god has something against being fair to two people in love then I'd say it's time to pick a less petty deity.

 

[TheHighDino]

This.. this just annoys me now. I mean, sure, be Christian, be any religion you want to be. But as soon as you're denying people, mainly people that you don't even know, from being happy because they are different from you and it's different from what you're comfortable with? That's discrimination and you are the worst kind of dick.

Have you're religious morals and ideals, but don't force them on others.

Oh, and writing " gay "marriage" " makes you a huge dick as well.

-rant over-

 

[Supertegwyn]

Yes, on the terms that Gay marriage is shortened to.....

Gmarriage.

I want that word to be real.

 

[electric_warrior]

It doesn't bother me, so I don't see why not.

I'm in favour

 

[DoPo]

although i would like to know, if two guys get married do they have separate bachelor parties?

That's a good question - do you throw two parties or just one big one? It would be more cost efficient to have one big one, methinks. And they could even get away with paying for only one stripper, rather than one each.

but if it's just one big one, maybe it would get a bit awkward

Nonsense - it would be fun. Instead of two small and dull parties, they'll have one big one. Besides, as I said, they could go with only one stripper then - they'll just need to pay a bit for overtime but it wouldn't be double the price. And there would be just one cake for the stripper to jump out to - additional reduced costs (especially since if there are two strippers, the cake would need to be bigger). And if they have their bachelor party in Vegas, they can get married then and there, and the party goers will be the wedding guests. See how practical it is?

This means that homosexuals would have more money to spend to help the economy. Or something.

 

[Ickorus]

I support it but it should be something done completely separate from the church.

 

[RyoScar]

Gay people should be able to marry the person they love, simple as that.

 

[The Mighty Stove]

I don't see one single thing wrong with gays getting married, and I mean actually "married", like they get to use that word to describe it. I don't think marriage between a man and a woman is any more or less sacred than the marriage between two men or two women.

Well hell, look at people like Kim KarStupidian. Look at some of these celebrities:

Britney Spears and Jason Alexander: 2 days
Carmen Electra and Dennis Rodman: 6 Days
Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries - 72 days
Mario Lopez and Ali Landry: 2 weeks
Kid Rock and Pam Anderson: 4 months

And those are just a few to name. :/

Not to mention couples that divorced and got remarried to the SAME person.
Marriage just isn't sacred anymore. IF ANY argument wants to be made against homosexuals marrying, stricter rules should be set for said establishment.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Go ahead and be happy; but please, and I do mean this in the most amicable way: Leave the term "marriage" to Man-and-Woman relationship. Since man could write and record, marriage has been used to define a Man and a Woman together.

Your argument is fundamentally undermined by the fact that language is not a fixed thing. Words take on new meanings all the time. But, it should be noted, words rarely change their meaning entirely. They tend to maintain the kernel of an idea. For example, awesome in the most common context does not mean awe inspiring but it does imply someone thought something was really cool. But, to focus more on your very specific point, common usage of the word marriage indicate the kernel of the definition is the union of two compatible things. One could use the word marry (derived from marriage) in a context of "part a of a machine is married to part b".

The root of the definition, that special part that is so very hard to alter with time, has nothing to do with specifying the types of things but rather their compatibility.

 

[fenrizz]

Yes, I support gay marriage.

My concience won't let me not support it.

Double negative! Always so confusing for a second.

Ah yes, that sentence was not very well constructed, was it?

I blame the fact that it is early morning over here.

 

[Khazidhea]

Yes, it does make it less valid, because who the hell are you to force your own archaic beliefs onto someone who does not follow them. I believe in equal rights for everyone, and I believe that your messiah did as well.

I am not trying to force my beliefs on anyone else, yet I am as entitled as anyone else to stand up for what I believe in. And in this case I am standing up for my definition of marriage, NOT on how I view other people should be able to conduct their relationships. Others don't believe what I do, and as such shouldn't be held to the standards I believe in. Yet we have legal restrictions that we need to obey, and we are all equally allowed to pursue our beliefs and try and get laws changed.
I agree that gay people should be able to pursue their right to have a relationship in whatever manner they care to, and as such should be able to have the equal rights/benefits as anyone else in a comparable position, and are as deserving of entering a familial unit. I am not affected by their relationship, and it is no less likely to better or worse than those of current marriages. What I am disagreeing with is a matter of language, why should the term marriage be extended past what it is currently, why shouldn't a new term arise and be adapted for this purpose? I am not judging here, I am not trying to seeking to make either side 'lesser', they should, under law be equal. But, while equal, I don't believe they are the same.