Weigh In: Legalizing Gay Marriage

Originally posted by Lady Pi Phi
I don't believe marriage is the sacred institution it once was. 50 percent of marriages end in divorce anyway, so it's resonable to say the same will be for homosexual marriages.

How many men and women have gotten married and said "well if it doesn't work out, I can just get a divorce". If marriage is going to be taken so lightly nowadays, what's the big deal if a same sex couple feels they want to spend the rest of their life together?

If some people are going to be so blase about marriage, then why don't heterosexual couple just have commitment ceremonies? Why is it necessary to get married?

This is EXACTLY the problem. Marriage doesn't mean anything to people anymore. Marriage is for LIFE. I'm not even religious (I believe in God, but I'm not a member of any particular religion), so it's not that I'm against it because of the bible or whatnot.

My problem with legalizing gay marriage is that people don't value what marriage is anymore. I am getting married in a year and my future husband and I have discussed that we will be married for LIFE.... come what may, divorce is not an option. It is simply not. Even if, heaven forbid, we become morbidly unhappy - we have made our vows and those vows are to work it out. Both of my parents were divorced before they met each other, and remarried to have me. Both of them say that while they are much happier in their second marriage (yay for parents who love each other!!) that they are very guilty over breaking their vows and that they should not have married their first spouses. They taught me to value the vows I will say in front of the Justice of the Peace, and that they are not vows that can be broken.

If we're going to teach children (and adults) to learn to respect the meaning of what marriage is, we need to set limits on who can be married. Marriage is between a man and a woman who love one another and plan to spend their life together. Marriage is not between me and my brother, or me and my sorority sister. I may love them, and want to have them in my life forever, but marriage is not the venue for that. There are other ways to express that love... and it's not through marriage.

edited to add: I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this.... so flame on. I'm going to be away from the computer until tomorrow morning, so I'll reply to all RESPECTFUL questions/discussion then. I'm not going to reply to flames.

[MoxieGrrl]

Ginger, you made some very good points. Even though we disagree, I can understand what you are saying. The institution of marriage needs to be respected. I think that marriage should be for those who respect their vows, are ready to make a lifelong committment, and above all else, love each other. These things can be fullfilled by anyone - gay, straight, whatever.

It makes me sad to think that a person could be dying and their wife/husband would not be able to be by their side because they are not married. That is crap.

And at the end of the day, God wants us to be loved, love each other and love Him. Period.

[Lady Pi Phi]

Originally posted by Ginger
This is EXACTLY the problem. Marriage doesn't mean anything to people anymore. Marriage is for LIFE. I'm not even religious (I believe in God, but I'm not a member of any particular religion), so it's not that I'm against it because of the bible or whatnot.

My problem with legalizing gay marriage is that people don't value what marriage is anymore. I am getting married in a year and my future husband and I have discussed that we will be married for LIFE.... come what may, divorce is not an option. It is simply not. Even if, heaven forbid, we become morbidly unhappy - we have made our vows and those vows are to work it out. Both of my parents were divorced before they met each other, and remarried to have me. Both of them say that while they are much happier in their second marriage (yay for parents who love each other!!) that they are very guilty over breaking their vows and that they should not have married their first spouses. They taught me to value the vows I will say in front of the Justice of the Peace, and that they are not vows that can be broken.

If we're going to teach children (and adults) to learn to respect the meaning of what marriage is, we need to set limits on who can be married. Marriage is between a man and a woman who love one another and plan to spend their life together. Marriage is not between me and my brother, or me and my sorority sister. I may love them, and want to have them in my life forever, but marriage is not the venue for that. There are other ways to express that love... and it's not through marriage.

edited to add: I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this.... so flame on. I'm going to be away from the computer until tomorrow morning, so I'll reply to all RESPECTFUL questions/discussion then. I'm not going to reply to flames.

While I understand your comments, this is not what I meant.

I'm never meant to say that a homosexual couple would take their vows any more or any less seriously than the next heterosexual couple. My problem with marriage is that there are far too many people entering so lightly into a union that once was supposed to be till death do you part. Now it's until I get bored of you or something better comes along. In fact I believe that it is heterosexual couples that have made the mockery of "marriage".

I believe that if a homosexual couple is truely prepared to spend the rest of their lives together, then let them. They're not hurting anyone. If two people truely love each other and are willing to make that lifetime commitment, then I would like to see that happen. I DO NOT want to see a heterosexual couple get married because that what they think they're supposed to do.

P.S Sistermadly I think that's so cool that you were married by a lesbian feminist Buddhist

P.P.S OUlioness I want to wish your Dad and his partner all the happiness in the world.

[Cloud9]

You know, this is interesting, I've been talking to some of my homosexual friends about this topic, and you might be surprised as to what they and (according to them) their gay friends think. They in fact do not support gay marriage. I know what you're all thinking: "Whaaaa?"

Let me explain. While they all want the rights and privileges alloted to spousal couples, they all seem to agree that the label of marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples. They would prefer to have a term specifically pertaining to homosexuals. It's more of a semantics issue, i.e. they want the same thing, different name, as marriage rights.


Anyways, whatever they call it in the end, those rights should be granted. No matter your personal beliefs on the "sanctity" or "Godliness" or whatever else, that has nothing to do with your fellow citizen's right to lead their life in the way that they choose. Rights should only be restricted if they are in some way harmful to others, and "my marriage is cheapened" doesn't cut it as an excuse. The real reason the conservatives are freaking out over this issue is that it will limit the ways in which they can control the lives of gay people. It's ridiculous that they can be refused parenting rights, tax benefits, inheritance rights, and as someone said, be prevented from visiting their loved one in the hospital! Can you imagine if your spouse was dying and you couldn't see them because "oh, sorry we don't grant your kind the rights of spouses, you'll have to wait for the funeral." ????? If you're still fuzzy on the issue, think of it this way: replace "gay" with Jewish, or German, or Black, or Arab, or Asian, or... Get the idea?

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally posted by lovelyivy84
What happened to all the people who are against gay marriage? Can't you guys elaborate? cash78mere? Ginger? anyone?

I'll bite LI84 My post is to everyone and in general terms (so when I post YOU, I don't mean you specifically, but in general).

Not legalizing gay marriages is NOT the same as telling someone what they can or can not do in their bedroom.

Someone earlier posted that " any reason to deny same sex couples the right to marry is somehow based in religion. Where do you think the whole purpose and idea of "marriage" comes from? That's right, the Bible, which is not a specific religion, the actual word of God.

Marriage is reseved for a MAN and a WOMAN.

Here are a few examples:
Romans 1:27
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

These a few of the many SPECIFIC passages that state that marriage is between a man and woman -no matter how you try to interpret it, twist it, or even attributed it to the soceity back during those times (which by the was during the time when the Bible was written, homosexuality was rampant) the meaning is still the same.

Now, any Christian will tell you that homosexuality is sin no different than those who engage in sex before marriage or someone who committs murder. Neither one is more acceptable than the other.

There are provisions for gay unions. Just like a hetrosexual couple that lives together outside of marriage, there are "common law "guidlines that every state has. although I am not sure how gay couples fit into this.

[Cloud9]

Now, any Christian will tell you that homosexuality is sin

Well, any Christian who takes the bible literally. I always keep in mind that the bible was orally passed, written, rewritten, translated, retranslated, edited, and re-edited by man. Man is fallable. And often the men of religion have had other agendas besides simply sharing the truth of faith. Just a sidenote...

But either way, rights of marriage, or the equivalent thereof is regulated by the government, which supposedly enforces separation of church and state. There can be no law that forces priests, ministers, etc. to perform ceremonies. But there must be a law that allows homosexuals to be legally joined by some sort of official. Christianity(and any other faith) does not and should not rule this country.

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally posted by Cloud9
Well, any Christian who takes the bible literally. I always keep in mind that the bible was orally passed, written, rewritten, translated, retranslated, edited, and re-edited by man. Man is fallable. And often the men of religion have had other agendas besides simply sharing the truth of faith. Just a sidenote...

But either way, rights of marriage, or the equivalent thereof is regulated by the government, which supposedly enforces separation of church and state. There can be no law that forces priests, ministers, etc. to perform ceremonies. But there must be a law that allows homosexuals to be legally joined by some sort of official. Christianity(and any other faith) does not and should not rule this country.

To everyone:

Anyway translated, the passages that I posted above read the same, even if you go back to the original translation. And if the whole "translation" thing is the problem, why can we not apply this logic to the rules and laws that govern our society?

After all, why is murder illegal? Why is it not ok to walk into a store and just take what you want without paying for it? What makes these acts wrong and according to who? These are all grounded in biblical principles, but yet there is no problem with it even if we are infringing on the rights of those people who believe that it is ok to murder someone or that it is ok to go to Kroger and steal.

In closing my point is basically to say that we (as people in general) shouldn't just pick and choose what parts/passages of the Bible to use and apply. Its not right to stand firm on the Bible when it comes to "love" using it as the gospel truth, but then totally ignore the other passages that make us uncomfortable.

Honestly, there is no middle ground with God or His Word.

[Munchkin03]

Originally posted by MoxieGrrl
It makes me sad to think that a person could be dying and their wife/husband would not be able to be by their side because they are not married. That is crap.

This is why I believe that there must be some sort of government-sanctioned civil union for all couples. I have known too many gay couples who have been together for decades--and when one gets sick or dies, the other partner has NO automatic legal recourse.

About marriage being for life...why can't a gay civil union be for life? A man whom I respect very much in my profession has been with his partner for 65 years--more than any heterosexual marriage I know.

If a gay civil union "threatens" heterosexual marriage, what about a young girl who is a serial engager just because she wants to be a Mrs.? What about someone who has seven or eight ex-husbands?

[Sistermadly]

Originally posted by MoxieGrrl
Ginger, you made some very good points. Even though we disagree, I can understand what you are saying.

She made some passionate declarations, but I'm still not clear on just how two men or two women in a committed relationship who want to express their committment in front of their friends, their families, and their God, threatens the so-called "sanctity" of heterosexual marriage.

I actually struggled with marriage before I decided to take the plunge. I felt like a hypocrite (there's that word again) for taking place in an institution that denied the most basic human right -- the pursuit of happiness -- to some of my nearest and dearest friends. I still rebel against people conveying status on me just because I took an oath and signed a legal contract.

A few weeks ago an estranged friend of mine contacted me. When we decided to start talking again, he told me exactly why he didn't come to my wedding. He told me that even though he was happy for me, and was thrilled that I'd found someone to love and share my life with, he couldn't make himself take part in something that he and his partner of nine years -- NINE YEARS -- couldn't share in. I was hurt when he told me, but I completely understood his position.

The woman who organized my wedding was one of my oldest friends -- and she's a lesbian. She was there with me through everything, from finding my dress to picking out the flavour for the cake. Her partner was our photographer. After one wedding show, she finally told me that even though was thrilled that I was getting married, every time we went out to do something for my wedding, she felt a little icy stab in her heart, because she and her partner of EIGHT YEARS couldn't take place in this social ritual.

I'm offended that something so basic as expressing one's commitment in MARRIAGE is held over gay people's heads as some sort of untenable, unreachable goal. Marriage is not some silly club where only the best get in. Marriage is not a Fraternity. If two people love each other and have decided to join their lives together legally, socially, romantically, and spiritually, the gender of those people shouldn't matter.

If those people who feel that the "sanctity" of marriage is threatened by gay men and lesbians, perhaps what is really in order is a revisitation of what marriage means in modern society. After all, with a greater than 50% divorce rate and the rise in infidelity and polyamourous relationships, it doesn't seem like us straight folks are doing such a bang-up job on protecting the institution.

Edited to Add: The gay male friend I mentioned above headed to Toronto last weekend to get married -- the day of the blackout! I haven't heard from him, so I'm hoping that they were able to tie the knot this week. They're actually immigrating to Quebec so that their relationship will be legally sanctioned. I can't say I blame them.

[Cloud9]

Honestly, there is no middle ground with God or His Word.

Honeykiss, that's great rhetoric for a discussion among Christians. But realize that your God is not everyone else's God. And in terms of government, it doesn't matter, because of the separation of church and state.

If I rob someone, I am taking their property. If I murder someone, I am taking their life. If I fall in love with another woman, that does not trespass on any of another person's rights. That is the fundamental difference. If you are looking to control others according to your personal faith and beliefs, you are living under the wrong governmental system. Theocracies work that way. Democracies were never meant to.

[Sistermadly]

Originally posted by Lady Pi Phi

P.S Sistermadly I think that's so cool that you were married by a lesbian feminist Buddhist

Yeah, as you'll see from my most recent post, I had a very Gay wedding. I even let gay men and lesbians line up in the bouquet toss line.

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally posted by Cloud9
Honeykiss, that's great rhetoric for a discussion among Christians. But realize that your God is not everyone else's God. And in terms of government, it doesn't matter, because of the separation of church and state.

If I rob someone, I am taking their property. If I murder someone, I am taking their life. If I fall in love with another woman, that does not trespass on any of another person's rights. That is the fundamental difference. If you are looking to control others according to your personal faith and beliefs, you are living under the wrong governmental system. Theocracies work that way. Democracies were never meant to.

I see your point Cloud9. Even with the whole seperation of church and state idea, our society is STILL based upon biblical principles that we use everyday, although now our greater society is now trying to undo that.

Sorry guys, and I am not anticipating changing minds on here, but I don't believe gay marriages should be legal. It says it plain and true in the Bible. And if I take the Bible for what it says on matters such as love, angels, etc. I also take it for what it says or other things that may be "unpopular" in todays society.

Thanks for the discussion guys!

[SigmaChiCard]

Originally posted by Cloud9
Honeykiss, that's great rhetoric for a discussion among Christians. But realize that your God is not everyone else's God. And in terms of government, it doesn't matter, because of the separation of church and state.

Great Post

[Optimist Prime]

Originally posted by Honeykiss1974
To everyone:

After all, why is murder illegal? Why is it not ok to walk into a store and just take what you want without paying for it? What makes these acts wrong and according to who? These are all grounded in biblical principles

No they aren't. They are based on teaching of The Buddha.

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally posted by Optimist Prime
No they aren't. They are based on teaching of The Buddha.

In my post, I am refering to the laws of the US and the principles that they are based upon.

I am not saying that ONLY the Bible contains these two specific teachings, as I am sure there are others that probably mirror the Bible on this.

If you have believe that the US is based upon Buddha's teachings, please expand on your thoughts, with some point of references for further reading.