|
|
Post by felicityfitz on May 5, 2013 18:51:26 GMT -5
Will, you said that because a gay marriage cannot produce offspring that it is a sign of immortality. Well I highly disagree because as it so happens my mother is infertile, and cannot have children. This is why I was adopted. Does this make her immoral? Does she not deserve the right to get married? And also, why does marriage only have to be about babies? Why can't marriage be about two people uniting in love, and declaring that love to the world?
|
|
rutha
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by rutha on May 5, 2013 19:37:34 GMT -5
I feel like willL is argument is based on religious views and the rest of you are arguing based on the law and the rights of a person. If we keep arguing like this, nobody will ever win; just like I stated before the bible and the constitution can never work together because they contradict. I say gay marriage should be illegal because of my religious beliefs and you say gay marriage should be legal bases on the constitution. Both of these two tools will have reason why or why not this should be legal or illegal. To me, we will never get anywhere with this and nobody will ever win. I am against gay marriage but I mean I don't really care whether it gets legal or illegal; but then again, it goes against my religious relief but then again I can't argue based in my religious belief because not every one of us is a Christian so that won't really work. This is a question for the people who said they are Christians but say gay marriage should be legal: are you saying it should be because you are afraid of what other people would think of you or are you saying that because you believe deep in your heart that it should be?
|
|
|
|
Post by meganrux on May 5, 2013 19:40:30 GMT -5
Nick brought up a good point about bias. Aristotle, and anyone who is anti-gay for that matter, IS probably biased. Those who judge gays are so caught up in how things 'should' be when in reality, they are just going with what they know and what they're familiar with. It can be that some genuinely think it is wrong, but the opinion is biased.
|
|
|
|
Post by tkev317 on May 5, 2013 20:59:51 GMT -5
If God's will is to have sex and reproduce, then shouldn't priests be able to be married? Afterall, aren't priests suppose to act as a guide for their communities? Furthermore, wasn't Jesus known for forgiving "sinners" (in this case, "sinners" would refer to homosexuals) and accepting them? Therefore, shouldn't Christians be able to accept homosexuals?
|
|
|
|
Post by daveonneb on May 5, 2013 21:35:41 GMT -5
I agree with this but the only reason priests can't be married because it is by law for them not to be married. Is it their choice perhaps not since they aren't to ones who decided it. The church decided it or the council whoever set the standards in place for the church.
|
|
|
|
Post by drewcerney on May 5, 2013 22:25:26 GMT -5
Hannah, I totally agree with you. but i think the common question is the line between whats "okay"with the church and marriage is a church thing and the legal or state part of marriage. So what is everyones take on the line between church and state in marriage?
|
|
|
|
Post by drewcerney on May 5, 2013 22:27:14 GMT -5
I think if marriage is more towards state then gay marriage is fine and if marriage is more church then gay marriage is probably not fine based on most arguments. my personal belief is marriage is both church and state and the church hasnt changed with the times changing on views of homosexuality so gay marriage should be legal
|
|
|
|
Post by jamiewright on May 6, 2013 9:58:17 GMT -5
Erik, you have a great point and I agree with you about not bringing religion into gay marriage because you are totally right that religion is based on true love and respect for one another and if we are keeping people apart then I believe we stop that love. I have to say that every person has the automatic right to love and appreciate whoever they please and if they want to make it official that they care and will forever care for each other then why stop them? My only problem is that I am a catholic so the idea of calling this bond a marriage is not correct. The couple could call it whatever they want but a marriage in the eyes of the church is between a man and a woman. The gay couple should get all the benefits of a wedding and a bond between to people forever in the eyes of the world and the court but just don't call it a marriage
|
|
Felicity FitzGerald
Guest
|
Post by Felicity FitzGerald on May 6, 2013 11:10:24 GMT -5
Ruth, I think gay marriage should be legal because I completely believe in my heart that it should be. Yet I am Christian.
|
|
|
|
Post by basiafolga on May 6, 2013 17:10:27 GMT -5
I don't really understand why everyone is saying that gay marriage should be legal since we all live in a free country and denying gay marriage would be unconstitutional. I'm going to insert a universal point. So, based on a lot of people's opinions on this thread, should countries where people are not given basic rights legalize gay marriage? Like should North Korea, a communist, isolated, corrupted country, legalize gay marriage since its citizens don't have basic rights? How would you argue the legalization of gay marriage then?
|
|
|
|
Post by meganrux on May 6, 2013 19:16:35 GMT -5
Kevin brings up a great point. I seems hypocritical of priests and other celibate religious leaders to criticize the gay population when they are just as at fault. The only thing separating gays and straights is the ability to reproduce, but there is still the same amount of love in a gay's relationship as in straight relationships. So since they cannot reproduce, their union is considered invalid, yet the union of a man or a woman to the Church in Holy Orders, yielding the same inability, isn't. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by amyb96 on May 6, 2013 19:59:12 GMT -5
I strongly disagree with Will for a couple reasons. Firstly, as aforementioned, a person cannot help who he/she falls in love with and it is not the right of other people to judge them for it. Secondly, no one should deny anyone else the right to be with the person he/she loves in the way a heterosexual is. In response to Will once more, my aunt and her wife got married a year and half ago. Prior to that, I believe they were together six years. They have a loving and committed relationship that I cannot see ending any time soon, therefore, it is not the type of relationship that leads to failed marriages, especially since almost half of all heterosexual marriages fail.
|
|
|
|
Post by kristennoto on May 6, 2013 23:02:42 GMT -5
Going back to what Hannah said, I agree that gay marriage should be legal. I believe that this country gives us the right to choose freely. If so, then people should have the right to marry who ever they want. As Hannah said, it is contradicting. Our society today tells us to be different and special. If different means being gay and marrying your love, then so be it. It should be allowed in a country like ours. When discussing gay marriage, reproduction should not be a concern.
|
|
WillL
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by WillL on May 7, 2013 18:01:28 GMT -5
This is not true. I have stated numerous times that a government should be interested in future generations and that the insanely high infidelity rate among homosexuals proves that marital bonds do not exist in homosexual relationships. The argument "well they love eachother" just doesnt work here.
Also lets be honest here, the constitution provided that future generations make decisions about future issues (Elastic Clause, A: 1; S: 8; C:18), and encouraged debate and dissention. So just by saying that the constitution allows gay marriage (which it doesnt BTW) doesn't prove anything
|
|
WillL
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by WillL on May 7, 2013 18:02:51 GMT -5
The sacrament of Holy Orders calls for complete devotion to the people you are serving. This would be impossible if you have to serve a spouse also
|
|
