Why gay marriages should be allowed

[Wiesty]

and no im not gay i just have a good point

If gay marriges were to be excepted by the government etc. and was a normal way of life.
The world would have more children off the street,
a smaller population
and happier people

They Homosexuals would get their way so there would be no more gay rights movements making the goverment and people happy.

Since gays cant have children some would adopt children. Getting more and more children off the street or danger or welfare.

And since they cant have children there would be a smaller population of people leaving more room for people, that way regular babies could still be born and at the same time theres still space for the ever growing world.

which would hopefully stop our method of moving to mars

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 06:38 PM
and no im not gay i just have a good point
I find it interesting that you had to make it clear what your sexuality is. Why?


Homosexuals would get their way so there would be no more gay rights movements making the goverment and people happy.

The gay rights movement exists to counter gay oppression, which exists in many different forms. Giving gay people the right to marry won't end that oppression.


Since gays cant have children

Gay people can procreate, they just can't procreate with their partners.


And since they cant have children there would be a smaller population of people leaving more room for people, that way regular babies could still be born and at the same time theres still space for the ever growing world.

I know you mean well, but I have to say that these reasons are not reasons to allow homosexuality to exist. The reason homosexuality should be accepted is because people believe that it is acceptable.

Gay liberation will only happen when there is no opinion about it.

[Guerrilla22]

Supposedly all men are created equal in the united States, I guess that doesn't apply to if you aren't a hhertosexual.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Forget the practical arguments, gay marraige's should be allowed full stop. On a perhaps more extreme not why do you need to prove your love through marraige, perhaps that more interesting. The only reason most people do is for practical purposes, how mahy atheists do you think get married, an awful lot.

[Hate Is Art]

The guy is like 12 (I think, feel free to correct me) he is probably insecure and just feels the need to resassert himself, don't pick the poor little pieces Joe.

Gay Marriage should be accepted for the simple reason that it is acceptable, there are no arguments against other then pointless homo-phobia.

Let homo-sexuals do what they like, who care?

[The idealist]

The simple answer to most questions.
Don't ask "Why?"
Ask yourself "Why not?"

[Dawood]

Personally I find the idea of marriager in itself repulisive, but if people want it, then why not?
How would it make my life worse?

[Nickademus]

most people use the religion argument to counter gay marriage ... but if they are so afraid that allowing gay marriages would tarnish the traditional definition of a union between a man and a woman before god, then why aren't civil unions abandoned as well?

[elijahcraig]

Gay people can procreate, they just can't procreate with their partners.

:lol:

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2004, 08:57 AM

:lol:
Is it not going to go into your signiute...........<_< i&#39;m offended

[Wenty]

Personally I find the idea of marriager in itself repulsive

Why? Think repulsive is a tad too heavy.

[The idealist]

Marriage is two people confessing ("I confess yer&#39;onner. I love that woman. BUT SHE LOVES ME TOO&#33; *Jury gasps*" :P ) that they love each other.

What is wrong with that? Unless you think the idea and morales of marriage have been twisted slightly, which I do too.

[Guerrilla22]

On a perhaps more extreme not why do you need to prove your love through marraige,

This is definitely how I feel, however the whole point is that there are benefits to being married, on top of that some people wish to get married, why should someone be denied the very same right that others enjoy because of their sexual orientation.

[elijahcraig]

Is it not going to go into your signiute........... i&#39;m offended

Nah...I&#39;m running out of space and don&#39;t want to remove anything just yet.

[apathy maybe]

Marriage was originally created for economic reasons, if you got a good partner this was a bonus. Only recently has love really come into it (economic reasons still exist, but in Australia, at least, the advantages apply to de facto relationships as well (correct me if I&#39;m wrong)). I see no reason to prevent homosexuals marrying, even if I see no reason for it.

It is not just a religious thing. My brother (right-wing, only one in the family), is not religious at all and yet he still thinks that marriage is between a man and a woman.

(As a side note, the fucking govt. here is moving to outlaw homosexual marriages (marriage is a federal affair in Australia). They can&#39;t stop adoption with in states, but they are also moving to stop adoption from overseas by homosexuals. (And people wonder why I hate this fucking government.))

[Kobbot 401]

Heres my two cents,
If a guy wants to get it on with another guy, or a woman wants to get it on with another woman, and the realationship bettween the two is genuion, they can be married. Who cares is they make kids, there are allready enoughf that are living on the streets as previously stated. And if the people love each other why whould heterosexual people get involved in there sexual perferances.
By the way, I aint gay.

[Commie-K]

I love how everyone needs to make sure everyone understands they&#39;re NOT gay.

I&#39;m all for gay marriage but I do not think that they HAVE to get married to show that they love each other. They don&#39;t have to prove anything to anyone if they know that they love each other...

(PS - I&#39;m not gay) :D

[Kobbot 401]

Originally posted by Commie&#045;[email protected] 25 2004, 10:17 AM
They don&#39;t have to prove anything to anyone if they know that they love each other...

I agree with Commie-K, I could love my girlfriend (if i could ever get one) and not have to get married to her. Isent that what dateing is all about. Who really give a crap who your with, may it be man or woman, just as long as your happy, do it.

[Blackguard]

Originally posted by Commie&#045;[email protected] 25 2004, 11:17 AM
I&#39;m all for gay marriage but I do not think that they HAVE to get married to show that they love each other. They don&#39;t have to prove anything to anyone if they know that they love each other...

I agree that marriageis is just a piece of paper that tells you what you allready know-that you love your wife/husband.
But if people want confirmation of their love why shouldnt they get married. I support every person who wants to get married not depending on sex, religion, rase, ...

[rebelgames]

Originally posted by Commie&#045;[email protected] 25 2004, 10:17 AM
I love how everyone needs to make sure everyone understands they&#39;re NOT gay.

I&#39;m all for gay marriage but I do not think that they HAVE to get married to show that they love each other. They don&#39;t have to prove anything to anyone if they know that they love each other...

(PS - I&#39;m not gay) :D
i agree. it&#39;s just comical.

[Guerrilla22]

I&#39;m not gay, but I&#39;ll try anything once. ;)

[Raisa]

I think if you want it to matter for the government then the two consenting people of working age should go get a civil union.

If you want to have a parade or a marriage or what ever after that then thats all your buisness, but any one who wants it to matter legally should get a civil union.

[Kobbot 401]

Heres a thought, the gays want to be reconized and allowed to be married. They want to be treated equal. They have parades and through tantrums about it. Lets have a straight person parade. And then have a white history month, nothing aginst black people, but just so were all really equal.

[Ziggy]

i&#39;m for gay marriage but i love this quote from john waters "i don&#39;t understand gay marriage, why would gays want to participate in such a heterosexual practice"

[Palmares]

I agree with what some have already mentioned: marriage should be availible to anyone who wants it, but it is not a true indicator of love.

Marriage has legalises a couple&#39;s &#39;union&#39;, giving them economic security, etc. However, if a couple really loved each other, why would they want a situation which forces them to be together (with divorce as the expensive key to the lock)? Is that more tantamount to a couple that didn&#39;t love each other? If you ask me, if a couple wish to marry, I believe they don&#39;t trust each other (and thus negates the possibility of &#39;true love&#39;) becuase they are using marriage as a safeguard against being (easily) left. People may disagree with me, but this is perhaps because I see this as something on the subconscious level, and thus many would be indenial about not trusting (and thus not &#39;truly loving&#39; - as in &#39;true love&#39;) their partner.

Could you imagine a &#39;gold digger&#39; not marrying her rich &#39;lover&#39;?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 05:05 AM
i love this quote from john waters "i don&#39;t understand gay marriage, why would gays want to participate in such a heterosexual practice"
before I start, im not straight...but i&#39;d try anything once&#33;

[Eddie999]

It is my view that, as homosexuality occurs in nature amongst animals, it is a perfectly natural thing and as a person has the right to be gay in society then they should also have the right to get married if they are gay.

The religious (Christian usually) argument is awful. The Old Tetament has become so inaccurate and corrupted over centuries of translations and &#39;updates&#39; that is almost completely irrelevant. In the New Tesatament we are led to believe by Jesus that all people are equal. Therefore gays should therefore be equal in society and should be allowed to marry.

[Kobbot 401]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 09:32 AM
The religious (Christian usually) argument is awful. The Old Tetament has become so inaccurate and corrupted over centuries of translations and &#39;updates&#39; that is almost completely irrelevant. In the New Tesatament we are led to believe by Jesus that all people are equal. Therefore gays should therefore be equal in society and should be allowed to marry.
Add into that, that the Morman church is strongly aginst homosexuality, and that they have become one of the strongest religions in the world. That kind of infulance is very powerfull when it comes to allowing gays to be wed.

[apathy maybe]

How the hell have the Mormans become "one of the strongest religions in the world"? The Catholic Church is the biggest single religion. Christianity is the biggest religion grouping. Islam the second biggest grouping.

[Ayn_Rand_Lives]

The Catholic Church is the biggest single religion. Christianity is the biggest religion grouping. Islam the second biggest grouping.

Atheism would be the largest "religion" if it could be considered one. Regardless, it&#39;s the most popular ideology concerning the existence of god.

Hey, here&#39;s an idea: how about get the government out of marriage altogether. Let it be known that marriage was out of the jurisdiction of the government (in America) before the progressive era of the 20th century.

[Revolt!]

Atheism would be the largest "religion" if it could be considered one.

Extend the meaning of religion to this sphere and it gets into all kinds of subjectivity.


Hey, here&#39;s an idea: how about get the government out of marriage altogether

Any reasons for this.

[mark_d]

okay, "Ayn Rand Lives" was apparently banned from this forum, so i now must use my friend&#39;s name.

Long story short: the government is an agency of force, and force has no place withing the relationship of two lovers, no matter what their orientation might be.

[DarkAngel]

I agree. If black people were really to be treated equally by the rebulican white men, then there would be no black history, it would just be treated as an era in regular history. And gay people should not parade around in my opinion, but they should be treated the same and allowed the same rights as any other person. If you want true equality then stop damanding all this shit, with the parades, n the special months gezzzzz

[Guerrilla22]

[QUOTE]Atheism would be the largest "religion" if it could be considered one. Regardless, it&#39;s the most popular ideology concerning the existence of god.

Its the most logical ideology concerning god, however it is far from being the most popular.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 04:15 AM
I agree. If black people were really to be treated equally by the rebulican white men, then there would be no black history, it would just be treated as an era in regular history. And gay people should not parade around in my opinion, but they should be treated the same and allowed the same rights as any other person. If you want true equality then stop damanding all this shit, with the parades, n the special months gezzzzz
We don&#39;t get special months. Black history isa fucking joke. I&#39;ve never been to a school that actualley did anything on black history...and I&#39;ve been to about 8 or 9 different schools.

However European history is taught everyfucking where. I&#39;m seriously sick of Europe. Other than the ancient middle east/china. Everything else is europe.We don&#39;t even get taught about modern china, or the modern middle east.

[Trissy]

That&#39;s because (if you&#39;ll allow me to adapt a quote about Elvis)...

Before anybody messed up anything, the Europeans messed up everything&#33;

mmm....a catchy new slogan for the EU perhaps?

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

I wonder if somone raised by two men or two women would be more likely to become a homosexual. I get a feeling like if I were raised by two gays I would be less likely to become a homosexual, sort of a rebellious thing. Obviously not everyone raised by hetrosexuals becomes gay but there are more strait people in general than gays, right?

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Actually and not to sound like an asshole or some pro-European whatever history up to a certain point can be told basically through the achievements of European culture, the exceptions come in societies in South America etc. but all are shown to be advanced against the backdrop of European culture.

Thats how it is.

[Guerrilla22]

Originally posted by el&#045;[email protected] 16 2004, 09:29 PM
I wonder if somone raised by two men or two women would be more likely to become a homosexual. I get a feeling like if I were raised by two gays I would be less likely to become a homosexual, sort of a rebellious thing. Obviously not everyone raised by hetrosexuals becomes gay but there are more strait people in general than gays, right?
Since homosexuality is something that you are born with, it seems unlikely that your natural instincts would be changed by having homosexual parents. Take the scenario that happens much more often: a homosexual child living with straight parents trys to be straight and repress his feelings, almost always the child will eventually come to accept that he/she is gay because they cnnot change the way they are.

[Wenty]

Since homosexuality is something that you are born with

How do you even know this is true.

[Trissy]

I wonder if somone raised by two men or two women would be more likely to become a homosexual
I don&#39;t believe they&#39;d be more or less likely to become homosexual. I don&#39;t think anybody remotely considers their parents when they&#39;re deciding whether they&#39;re attracted to someone...I think they only think of their parents when it comes to being open about who they find themselves attracted to.


Actually and not to sound like an asshole or some pro-European whatever history up to a certain point can be told basically through the achievements of European culture, the exceptions come in societies in South America etc. but all are shown to be advanced against the backdrop of European culture.

Thats how it is
Of course Europe has had many positive effects on the world. It&#39;s just I tend to see all the problems they caused through the creation of their various Empires (the British worse then most I&#39;m tempted to say) more then the benefits they brought about. That is to say I look at the cost of virtues, more then at the virtues themselves.


Since homosexuality is something that you are born with
Like Adam said, I&#39;m curious as to know how you can assert this with such confidence. I have never been swayed by the argument that homosexuality is entirely genetic or that it is entirely the result of upbringing and environment.

Oh and I&#39;d just like to say that I&#39;m definately not &#39;not gay&#39; in case anyone was wondering :unsure:

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 09:32 PM
Actually and not to sound like an asshole or some pro-European whatever history up to a certain point can be told basically through the achievements of European culture, the exceptions come in societies in South America etc. but all are shown to be advanced against the backdrop of European culture.

Thats how it is.
.....Oh shit that makes perfect sense...because Africa didn&#39;t exist until slavery...and Asia...well they just ebbed in to existance when the Europeans visited, then went back to not existing when they left.

The problem is that all anyone cares to talk about is Europe. There are hundreds of College level courses dealing with african civilization during the periods before and after slavery, it&#39;s just that the public school system chooses not to talk about it.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM
.....Oh shit that makes perfect sense...because Africa didn&#39;t exist until slavery...and Asia...well they just ebbed in to existance when the Europeans visited, then went back to not existing when they left.

The problem is that all anyone cares to talk about is Europe. There are hundreds of College level courses dealing with african civilization during the periods before and after slavery, it&#39;s just that the public school system chooses not to talk about it.
I agree. A lot of the important parts of history are be found in the Middle-East and Africa. I can&#39;t think of anything concerning Asia though.

[LuZhiming]

I&#39;m curious what exactly people have in mind when they mention the good Europe created in the world? What exactly do they have in mind? My mind is almost blank on this one, someone please fill me in.

And Chairman Mao, what do you mean when you saying you can&#39;t think of anything concering Asia? India? China? Those were probably two of the most advanced civilizations for a long time, they have very rich histories.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 01:49 AM
I&#39;m curious what exactly people have in mind when they mention the good Europe created in the world? What exactly do they have in mind? My mind is almost blank on this one, someone please fill me in.

And Chairman Mao, what do you mean when you saying you can&#39;t think of anything concering Asia? India? China? Those were probably two of the most advanced civilizations for a long time, they have very rich histories.
I am thinking of religion in Africa and science in the Middle-East. What parts of advanced civilisation developed in Asia? I know that some non-Western religions developed in Asia.

[Ziggy]

the world was east oriented until the age of exploration. There was a technology and arms race between the european countries which led to incredibly fast advancements, then it became west oriented.

the west would&#39;ve been in the gutters without the east.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 20 2004, 09:21 AM
I am thinking of religion in Africa and science in the Middle-East. What parts of advanced civilisation developed in Asia? I know that some non-Western religions developed in Asia.
Gun-powder? :huh:

Somehow, I thought that would be important, but if not then yeah I guess you can ignore China. Except of course for Opium :P

Oh, and by the way, the Middle East is in Asia.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM





The problem is that all anyone cares to talk about is Europe. There are hundreds of College level courses dealing with african civilization during the periods before and after slavery, it&#39;s just that the public school system chooses not to talk about it.

Its probably because we are Europeans over here and Americans tend to be descendants of Europeans. People study their own history, however African-American history of course should be studied, I have no idea what the situtation os over there with.

In Ireland, the South studies Irish Republican history and the North British history despite living on the same island, go figure... :D

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 19 2004, 12:27 AM
I agree. A lot of the important parts of history are be found in the Middle-East and Africa. I can&#39;t think of anything concerning Asia though.
Asian philosophy has always been a side development to the Western tradition.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 01:49 AM
I&#39;m curious what exactly people have in mind when they mention the good Europe created in the world? What exactly do they have in mind? My mind is almost blank on this one, someone please fill me in.



You can&#39;t think of any European achievements? I am sorry, I assume you are not being serious.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 20 2004, 11:18 PM
Gun-powder? :huh:

Somehow, I thought that would be important, but if not then yeah I guess you can ignore China. Except of course for Opium :P

Oh, and by the way, the Middle East is in Asia.
The Middle-East has Eurasia to the North and Central Asia to the east.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 20 2004, 01:21 PM
I am thinking of religion in Africa and science in the Middle-East. What parts of advanced civilisation developed in Asia? I know that some non-Western religions developed in Asia.
innoculations, gun powder, a good load of philosophy, martial arts, a rich history of diverse cultures.

And above all else the most important thign they&#39;e given us are Asian Women and Noodles

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 01:14 PM



Its probably because we are Europeans over here and Americans tend to be descendants of Europeans. People study their own history, however African-American history of course should be studied, I have no idea what the situtation os over there with.

In Ireland, the South studies Irish Republican history and the North British history despite living on the same island, go figure... :D
North America isn&#39;t one homogenous globule of people. It is one of the most diverse places on earth.

It was home to an indigenous culture that was wiped out by 3 different cultures, settled by 3, which brought over slaves that were from hundreds of different cultures, allowed immagrants from dozens of different cultures to come over. It&#39;s one huge meltingpot...excuse the cliche.


The only more diverese place on earth i can think of is the African Continent which has thousands of langauges from thousands of different cultures

[Guest1]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 21 2004, 11:26 AM
The Middle-East has Eurasia to the North and Central Asia to the east.
They&#39;re still in Asia.

Which means anything you credit to them you mest credit to Asia. That includes mathematics, astronomy, language, algebra, medicine, etc...

[Wenty]

North America isn&#39;t one homogenous globule of people. It is one of the most diverse places on earth.

I&#39;m sure if you trace it back far enough this is the same for most places. The U.S stands out because its history is so short.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 22 2004, 01:23 AM
They&#39;re still in Asia.

Which means anything you credit to them you mest credit to Asia. That includes mathematics, astronomy, language, algebra, medicine, etc...
I credit the things I mentioned as being Asian in discrovery not to Asia but to the far East. And, where I described the Middle East I am referring to the part of Asia described as the Middle-East.

[The idealist]

It has just crossed my mind that the only reason this forum was created was so that we could have a good yell at anyone who was against homosexual marriages.

And about everyone who denies being gay (not that I say they are), I think they are just afraid of the fobia that surrounds the subject. (+ possible sexual insecurity)

Why the hell should I tell you if I were gay or not? Afraid the great gay boogieman would reach out over the internet and grab you?




By the way, the chinese also invented the wheelbarrow. (not to be sniffed at)

[choekiewoekie]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 30 2004, 09:43 PM
.. Afraid the great gay boogieman would reach out over the internet and grab you?





:lol: And the fact is that most post hee are pro marriage between gayzz..., if i am correct. So no need to be afraid at all :P
You must be very narrowminded to be afraid of the gay bougieman i guess :rolleyes:

[Raisa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 10:05 AM

How do you even know this is true.
I think everyone is kinda bi inside ;) This idea makes alot of people uncomfortable.

[Edward Norton]

think everyone is kinda bi inside This idea makes alot of people uncomfortable.

Any proof for that?

[DRS]

I&#39;m straight, 100% straight&#33; in the words of al murray " I WAS NEVER CONFUSED " but i dont see the problem with gay marriage, if 2 people love each other, they should be allowed to make that commitment.

i think there should be some sort of ceromony for athesists, because half of the people they get married in a catholic/christian church arnt even christian

[Edward Norton]

I cant understand why anyone would want to get married straight or gay.

Marriage is just so tacky.

Anyways the whole reason being gay is a whole lot more fun than being hetro is the constant fucking, one night stands and the whole hedonistic lifestyle associated with the gay scene.

Who would want to give that up for a house in the suburbs, mowing the lawn on a sunday and daytime TV? :blink: