wait for poll

Are you for or against same sex marriage?

Please explain

personally i support it

I'm all for it.

isn't this more or less the same debate as in the iowa approving same sex marriage thread?

anyway you need an other choice. i'd support it if it was called anything but marriage

I am for it.

I don't see any harm in it.

isn't this more or less the same debate as in the iowa approving same sex marriage thread?

anyway you need an other choice. i'd support it if it was called anything but marriage
:agree I like the term life partner.

I am for it.

I don't see any harm in it.

Same here

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

"Civil Union", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

yep right with you.

I didn't realize this was already a debate elsewhere (the Iowa thread).

I've always felt this way about this particular subject.

I didn't realize this was already a debate elsewhere (the Iowa thread).

I've always felt this way about this particular subject.

yeah that thread sort of turned into a how do you feel about same sex marriage debate.

I mos def support it! My mother is in a same sex relationship. If you are straight and aren't married then you have no rights, same thing goes for same sex relationships.

I agree with everything Becca said. I have homosexual friends and relatives and they feel the same as well, and considering that marriage as it stands in this country was based off of the foundations of Christian marriage and Christianity does not support homosexuality, I don't know why any same sex couple would want to get "married."

I do think that same sex couples should have something else that gives them the same rights as a married couple would have. I thought civil unions did that though.

i just wanted to add a poll was all

i just wanted to add a poll was all

oh it's cool, just wanted to let you know that alot of opinions were expressed in the other thread.

I am for gay marriage, 100%.

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

You know, I love people like you. Even though you are religious and (I am assuming, correct me if I am wrong) believe that homosexuality is a sin or whatever, you think that gays should have equal legal rights. Kudos to you.

You gotta explain this marriage word issue to me though. Marriage isn't a word that started within Christianity. It didn't even pop up until the 1200's. If Christians want their own word for their marital unions, why not find the one in the bible and use it? Marriage just means the union of two things. You can marry ropes on a boat, corporations marry all the time when they merge, and artists marry colors when they paint.

Just to clarify, I don't care if Christians keep the word marriage all for themselves, but I think that if they are going to claim the word and use civil union for gay people, to be fair straight people will need to have a civil union to be legally joined as well. That way the government really does give everyone equal rights and can maintain a separation of church and state by not performing religious ceremonies.

Marriage began as a religious ceremony. As far as I know :lol

I haven't studied the history of the word itself, but in my head and in my heart, marriage is a covenant between a man, a woman and God.

:sigh I totally wish I felt like digging and finding the evidence to support what I just said. But I really just don't. :giggle

Like I said, I'm stuck on the title. I can usually see past "titles" and "lables", but in this case, I'm just stuck on it.

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

agree 100%

Marriage began as a religious ceremony. As far as I know :lol

I haven't studied the history of the word itself, but in my head and in my heart, marriage is a covenant between a man, a woman and God.

:sigh I totally wish I felt like digging and finding the evidence to support what I just said. But I really just don't. :giggle

Like I said, I'm stuck on the title. I can usually see past "titles" and "lables", but in this case, I'm just stuck on it.

I can understand that because I am hung up on it as well, just for different reasons. Mostly, the reasons for wanting to define the word as a man and a woman. I don't care if the union between a man and a woman is called one thing, and the union between a woman and a woman is called something else, and the union between a man and a man something else, too. I think my aversion to the whole thing is the religious aspect of it. I have a bad taste in my mouth with people claiming the word to mean what it does for religious reasons because that is usually followed by "homosexuality is immoral" and "being gay is a sin" and then of course, "sinners go to hell". If the word is going to be defined as a man and a woman, define it that way for historical or linguistics reasons, not because of religion because that inadvertently validates the inferior/superior labels that are places upon the unions themselves.

That is why gay people want the word marriage, because it has been defined as a man and a woman so fervently by people who believe that man and woman is good and right therefore making man and man or woman and woman dirty and wrong. In the eyes of the law, none of that should matter. It should be a contract, nothing more. Since the definitions of word change all the time, and many many words have more than one meaning, there isn't a legal reason for giving the word marriage to a certain group when no matter which group it is talking about it defines the same legal contract. KWIM?

Anyway, just rambling here. LOL. Just wanted to say I am stuck on it too, but for TOTALLY different reasons. LMAO.

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

I agree with you Becca.

I am all for it. I see marriage as two people who have joined their lives together. while everyones love is different, theirs is no less important.

I am for gay marriage, 100%.



You know, I love people like you. Even though you are religious and (I am assuming, correct me if I am wrong) believe that homosexuality is a sin or whatever, you think that gays should have equal legal rights. Kudos to you.

You gotta explain this marriage word issue to me though. Marriage isn't a word that started within Christianity. It didn't even pop up until the 1200's. If Christians want their own word for their marital unions, why not find the one in the bible and use it? Marriage just means the union of two things. You can marry ropes on a boat, corporations marry all the time when they merge, and artists marry colors when they paint.

Just to clarify, I don't care if Christians keep the word marriage all for themselves, but I think that if they are going to claim the word and use civil union for gay people, to be fair straight people will need to have a civil union to be legally joined as well. That way the government really does give everyone equal rights and can maintain a separation of church and state by not performing religious ceremonies.

im right there with you 100%.. in the bible it talks about marriages being the joining of families more for economic gain than love. marriages were arranged without the actual participants having a say at all. if they were lucky a relationship grew between them, but the true purpose of marriage was property exchange. the new husband would receive control of the dowry given to the wife by her family. we put such a religious emphasis on something that was purely economics!
world history 101 was a huge wakeup call for me regarding all our traditions...

I can understand that because I am hung up on it as well, just for different reasons. Mostly, the reasons for wanting to define the word as a man and a woman. I don't care if the union between a man and a woman is called one thing, and the union between a woman and a woman is called something else, and the union between a man and a man something else, too. I think my aversion to the whole thing is the religious aspect of it. I have a bad taste in my mouth with people claiming the word to mean what it does for religious reasons because that is usually followed by "homosexuality is immoral" and "being gay is a sin" and then of course, "sinners go to hell". If the word is going to be defined as a man and a woman, define it that way for historical or linguistics reasons, not because of religion because that inadvertently validates the inferior/superior labels that are places upon the unions themselves.

That is why gay people want the word marriage, because it has been defined as a man and a woman so fervently by people who believe that man and woman is good and right therefore making man and man or woman and woman dirty and wrong. In the eyes of the law, none of that should matter. It should be a contract, nothing more. Since the definitions of word change all the time, and many many words have more than one meaning, there isn't a legal reason for giving the word marriage to a certain group when no matter which group it is talking about it defines the same legal contract. KWIM?

Anyway, just rambling here. LOL. Just wanted to say I am stuck on it too, but for TOTALLY different reasons. LMAO.

Ya know...75% of the time I don't even agree with you, but I LOVE the way you think and this was extremely well-said. :thumbsup

(for the record, I'm 100% with ya on this one)

I absolutely support it. First off, the USA does not have an official religion or language or whatever. The only thing that makes Same Sex marriage a problem is religiously for this country. There's nothing legally a problem. So, since we're not a purely Christian nation, I don't understand why Christian values (or whatever other religions care) are being imposed on the whole populous regarding homosexuality.

Second, I honestly don't see what the big deal is. Everyone should have the opportunity to the same marriage possibilities. Doesn't mean their marriages will last, or heterosexual marriages will suddenly fail more, but since when are we back in the business of making certain groups second class citizens? Wasn't that all supposed to be over in the 60s? :sarcasm

It's all about love. If you're in love, do what you need to do. Plenty of heterosexual couples choose not to get married. We're not forcing them to - why are we forcing homosexual couples not to?

Regardless if it was for property or love, it was still a man and a woman, and it was still before God. It's not as if **poof** one day the people of the world said "let's bring God into the picture...". I can't find anywhere in the bible that states a specific reason to be married - be it for property or love - so I'm not surprised that people were betrothed, I'm not surprised it was economic. But really - the historical reasoning behind marriage is irrelevant.

And if it doesn't matter what it's called, if it's no big deal, then why should anyone care if it's called a "civil union" vice "marriage"? If the christians are so stuck on the word, but we're out of line because hey after all it's only a word, then why not just take a civil union and call it good? Sounds like a compromise...

It's not the rights I have a problem with - I already explained all that. It's just the title. Just the word.

I'd love to stay and play - but I'm wiped out. I'm going to bed now :lol

I just haven't been in much of a debating mood lately. I said my piece, and that's about all I've got for ya.

:offtobed

i support it. i have no problem with it being a "marriage" instead of "civil union". as long as two people love each other that's all that should matter IMHO.

It's all good Becca. Just trying to see where you are coming from. I don't have anything against using civil union and keeping marriage for straight people. Hell, marriage can be just christian people for all I care. I just want the government to stick to the whole equal rights thing that gives Christians the right to worship at all, along with homosexuals and atheists and minorities, and call all contracts that unite two parties together civil unions then. If marriage is religious, let it be religious and keep it out of government.

:) :thumbsup


Ok - I really am :offtobed now. It's DH's fault that I'm still here :rofl

It's all good Becca. Just trying to see where you are coming from. I don't have anything against using civil union and keeping marriage for straight people. Hell, marriage can be just christian people for all I care. I just want the government to stick to the whole equal rights thing that gives Christians the right to worship at all, along with homosexuals and atheists and minorities, and call all contracts that unite two parties together civil unions then. If marriage is religious, let it be religious and keep it out of government.

see even i'd be okay with that lol

:) :thumbsup


Ok - I really am :offtobed now. It's DH's fault that I'm still here :rofl

Haha, addict!

see even i'd be okay with that lol

See, compromise can be reached! :P And if anyone can reach it, it's me and Jill. :hugs

I am 100% supportive of human rights.

Rights for everyone regardless of race, gender, disability, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, anything. A person is a person, no matter what.

It is my belief that the word marriage is totally a semantics issue. I say, do away with it all together. Have Civil Union Licenses instead of Marriage Licenses. Let each church make their own choice. I do not care.

Those that say they do not like the word marriage being used for gay people, cannot possibly say then that they support the gay population. RIGHT NOW, the word marriage is used by the government. So until that changes, I feel that to support the idea of equal rights you have to support the use of that word for all.

I say, if you love someone the gov't and anyone else should stay out of it and let you be happy.

What if someone said "I don't hate black people, but gosh, I think marriage is only between white people" that would be HORRIBLE, how is this any different? Just like race, sexual orientation is a DEFINING trait people have, how can people hate you for something over which you have no control?

Haha, addict!



See, compromise can be reached! :P And if anyone can reach it, it's me and Jill. :hugs

exactly :)

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.

Call it anything but a marriage. I agree with Becca.

i think as long as hollywood starlets are able to turn marriage into a joke lasting 56 hours, two same sex people who are honestly in love should be able to marry each other.

Even when heterosexual atheists want to make a legal commitment to eachother, it is still called a marriage. Why should it matter what you call it? Homosexuals should have every right to get married and CALL it a MARRIAGE. What makes heteros better than them?

I am 100% supportive of human rights.

Rights for everyone regardless of race, gender, disability, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, anything. A person is a person, no matter what.

It is my belief that the word marriage is totally a semantics issue. I say, do away with it all together. Have Civil Union Licenses instead of Marriage Licenses. Let each church make their own choice. I do not care.

Those that say they do not like the word marriage being used for gay people, cannot possibly say then that they support the gay population. RIGHT NOW, the word marriage is used by the government. So until that changes, I feel that to support the idea of equal rights you have to support the use of that word for all.

I say, if you love someone the gov't and anyone else should stay out of it and let you be happy.

What if someone said "I don't hate black people, but gosh, I think marriage is only between white people" that would be HORRIBLE, how is this any different? Just like race, sexual orientation is a DEFINING trait people have, how can people hate you for something over which you have no control?

:agree

im all for it. homosexual people are people too. they have the right to be happy just like everybody else. if that means getting married then so be it. who are we to say they can't?! that's what makes me so upset is that it is thier choice not mine, it does not affect me in one little bit, so why do i pick if they can be married or not?!

Why now, the breeders certainly haven't done a good job of it, let someone else try now. Besides, the only reason the government is in it is for the fees.

I agree completely with Becca.

My views on this evolve all the time, so who knows.

"Civil Union", "Life Partners", sure.

"Marriage", no.

Yes, I'm caught up in a title. In my eyes, marriage is one man and one woman, in the name of God, and yadda yadda yadda.

I feel that homosexuals have every right to make a legal and binding commitment/agreement with each other to spend the rest of their lives together. I believe they should have the same rights as husbands/wives do. I am not saying that their love for each other is any less powerful than my love for my husband. DIFFERENT maybe, but not any less powerful. I do NOT, however, believe it should be called marriage.


I completely agree!

I have no problems with it at all.

It doesnt really bother me at all, as long as it doesnt hurt anybody....why not

I support it and think religion does not own the word or rather concept of marriage it predates most mainstream religions.

I'm with Becca and Trina on this one!

I am for gay marriage, 100%.



You know, I love people like you. Even though you are religious and (I am assuming, correct me if I am wrong) believe that homosexuality is a sin or whatever, you think that gays should have equal legal rights. Kudos to you.

You gotta explain this marriage word issue to me though. Marriage isn't a word that started within Christianity. It didn't even pop up until the 1200's. If Christians want their own word for their marital unions, why not find the one in the bible and use it? Marriage just means the union of two things. You can marry ropes on a boat, corporations marry all the time when they merge, and artists marry colors when they paint.

Just to clarify, I don't care if Christians keep the word marriage all for themselves, but I think that if they are going to claim the word and use civil union for gay people, to be fair straight people will need to have a civil union to be legally joined as well. That way the government really does give everyone equal rights and can maintain a separation of church and state by not performing religious ceremonies.


:agree

I'm all for it. Two people of the same sex getting "married" doesn't effect my life any. If they are happy then right on go for it.

Why now, the breeders certainly haven't done a good job of it, let someone else try now. Besides, the only reason the government is in it is for the fees.

WTH is a breeder? And i dont know what fees you are talking about, we paid 35 bucks for a license and that was it?!?!

Even when heterosexual atheists want to make a legal commitment to eachother, it is still called a marriage. Why should it matter what you call it? Homosexuals should have every right to get married and CALL it a MARRIAGE. What makes heteros better than them?

I was thinking this too. Many people connect the word marriage to christians. Well does that mean that atheist, buddist, hindus and everyone else who isn't a christian should not be able to use the word marriage either. I mean they're not christians and as many have said ( I'm paraphrasing here so don't shot lol..) " Marriage came from a christian belief...Let it be used by the church.." So basically if someone isn't a christian, then the word marriage shouldn't be used???? What about homosexuals who are christians?? ( yes this could open up a can of worms so sorry if it does) but there are many GBLT people who are still christians, still go to chruch, and still believe in the bible.. They know that they're are going to have to face God one day and they're ok with that. b/c in the end.. who cares what we on earth say when God is the only one they'll have to answer to...

With that said, I'm allllll for it and really hope taht one day people can FULLY except them for who they are.

I support the union of love, and I don't care who loves one another.

WTH is a breeder? And i dont know what fees you are talking about, we paid 35 bucks for a license and that was it?!?!

breeders are those who can hae sex and make babies

I support gay marriage. I agree, too, that it should be one word for all govermental aspects of it, and if religions want to use another word to signify their version of it, that would be cool too.

breeders are those who can hae sex and make babies

There is a full explination to the breeder comment on the "just for the record" board. It had turned into a whole discussion on its own before I woke up...But to restate here...
I used breeder as a term for straight people versus gay people...not parents or people who could have children verses those who can not or do not See the other post for more...

As for the money making part, historically, it cost a whole lot more to to get married, but even at $35 dollars a shot, how many couples get married every day. Plus there can be more fees. Tax wise, there used to be the "Tax penalty" where a married couple would pay more taxes on the same amount of income then the individuals would have.
Currently, "marriage" is used by the government to regulate a much larger bundle of rights...See our own situation for one detail...a girl/boy freind of a servicemember v. just being a bf or gf. There is extra money, notification, rights to visit, etc.

I have heard the term "breeder" in the gay community but in a joking matter, not really meaning to be offensive. My really good friend Nick is gay and he jokingly calls me a breeder and himself "one of the gays". I'm sure that there are people that say it to be offensive but I have never heard it that way and I have a LOT of gay friends. (I grew up in and near a strong gay community.)

There is a full explination to the breeder comment on the "just for the record" board. It had turned into a whole discussion on its own before I woke up...But to restate here...
I used breeder as a term for straight people versus gay people...not parents or people who could have children verses those who can not or do not See the other post for more...

As for the money making part, historically, it cost a whole lot more to to get married, but even at $35 dollars a shot, how many couples get married every day. Plus there can be more fees. Tax wise, there used to be the "Tax penalty" where a married couple would pay more taxes on the same amount of income then the individuals would have.
Currently, "marriage" is used by the government to regulate a much larger bundle of rights...See our own situation for one detail...a girl/boy freind of a servicemember v. just being a bf or gf. There is extra money, notification, rights to visit, etc.

yeah i read it after i posted my comment