This conversation is closed.

What is your opinion on same sex marriage?

I'm interested in hearing different opinions from different people around the world.
If you have a strong view. Please share :)

  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: I think gay people should be allowed to marry.
    Why should straight people be the only ones who have to suffer?
    ~Dolly Parton
  • Sep 4 2013: A marriage license is just a scrap of paper from the government. It is as worthless as all other government issued paper. It is the feelings that two people have for each other that are the important thing. Those cannot be changed by paperwork and will continue regardless of the feelings of others. If we are to keep couples of any persuassion from living together as if they are married then we must monitor every bedroom in the world to make sure they aren't put to "improper" use. I doubt the morals and the sanity of anyone who would want that job.
    • thumb
      Sep 4 2013: 1) "All government issued paper is worthless."-- Driver's license; birth and death certificate; social security card; registration of doctors, lawyers, contractors, counsellors, dieticians, child care workers, etc. you say get rid of them all? That is hard to take seriously. 2) "We cannot monitor every bedroom so let's normalize homosexual marriage."-- Why would that philosophy/logic not be applied to any unacceptable behavior? We cannot monitor every piece of merchandise on American store shelves so let's normalize shoplifting. That is hard to take seriously. If there are any sound reasons to normalize homosexual marriage I don't think your two will be among them.
      • Sep 4 2013: I do not believe in government licensing of professions. We should all do our own due diligence when dealing with such people. I'm just as dead or just as alive whether the government certifies it or not. Social Security is involuntary and will pay the people back less than what they put into it. It is only of value to the government that is stealing the difference.

        We do not monitor every item on every shelf because the cost of the occassional theft is less than the cost of doing the monitoring. The cost of monitoring everyone's bedroom is not only financially prohibitive but would deprive everyone of something more precious, the right to privacy. The damage done would far out weigh the benefit.
        • thumb
          Sep 4 2013: You think I should be allowed to fly an airplane over crowded cities even though I am "self-taught" and have no formal training, qualifications, experience, or certification? You also think the reason to normalize homosexual marriage is because it would be too costly to enforce its prohibition? We know from centuries of experience how little it costs to enforce a ban on homosexual marriage.
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: The real fight on same sex marriage is not about the man / man or woman / woman union .... it is about medical dangers, insurance, and benefit entitlements.

    Religions catch the blunt of the "war" on same sex marriage ... that is because they are the easy and obvious target. The big money and the real war on the legality is insurance, medical, and political. It is interesting that historically the socialist / communist countries do not tolerate homosexuality in any form .... however in the USA the liberal forum of legalizing all forms of sexual unions is supported. That begs the question ... when the Socialization of America is complete will these acts be tolerated? My guess is no.

    You have asked one of the most liberal sites on the web about a liberal standard. Sodomy laws were repealed in 2003 by a ruling of the SCOTUS. However, it is still illegal in San Francisco to either give or receive oral sex. Now that is funny. I found that under silly laws listed under San Francisco.

    So in conclusion .... we should stop the argument of same sex marriage and debate the real issue surrounding it because that is where billions of dollars are at risk as well as lives and political futures.

    Renee ... this has been discussed many times ... why do you revisit it now?
    • thumb
      Sep 4 2013: Robert,
      Perhaps the question of same sex marriage continues to be revisited because some folks still have issues with it? Just a thought:>)
      • thumb
        Sep 4 2013: Granted many people have issues with it ..... I was just interested in after all of the press on this issue what was the need to do it again .... There is not much ground left to cover so I was wondering what was the "specific" we could address.
        • thumb
          Sep 4 2013: I wholeheartedly agree with you Robert.....not much ground left to cover. It seems like a basic human right for people to be able to choose their life partner. It also seems like discrimination for others to decide what is right and what is wrong with adults choosing their partners.

          However, there are still places where same sex marriage is not allowed, and there are still groups which discriminate, so perhaps it still needs to be discussed.
      • thumb
        Sep 4 2013: As I originally stated perhaps the billion dollar issues surrounding same sex subjects should be the focus .... this has become political and emotional .... it really boils down to money and health issues.
        • thumb
          Sep 4 2013: I guess we see it a little differently Robert. I have lots of friends in same sex partnerships, and they like having the right to choose and marry their life partner. Many of them have lived happily with their chosen partner for many years.

          I am proud to live in one of the first states to allow civil unions, and same sex marriage. So these loving couples can be officially recognized and have the same rights under the law as other people have.
      • thumb
        Sep 4 2013: I agree ... I still do not think that is the major objections ...

        1. Homosexual domestic violence among men alone dwarfs 500 to one the 1,317 hate crimes nationwide last year allegedly motivated, by disapproval of homosexuality, the FBI reported.

        2. The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports "homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea, and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices." While "women who have sex with women are at significantly higher risk of bacterial, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women."

        3. The Center for Disease Control reports men involved in homosexuality are 860 percent more likely to contract sexually transmitted disease, partially because they "have large numbers of anonymous partners, which can result in rapid, extensive transmission of STD's...threatening national HIV infection prevention efforts."

        4. Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports "life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men is eight to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday."

        These types of reports are what scares the insurance and medical professions. It is also alarming to employers who will see sick leave and missed work days. The costs associated with any medical treatments in the areas mentioned above are off the chart. This has rewrite the actuarial charts for death payments. As profits go down the costs will always go up.

        I also have friends who are in a same sex relationship .... they are good people. My lady friends wife just passed of cancer. I have been to their home often and love them both. The fight they had was never about the couple .... but rather rights and benefits.

        We are on the same side ... just that I say the real war is about money.

        Thanks .....
        • thumb
          Sep 4 2013: Robert,
          What is your point? I do not perceive a "war" Robert, and I totally agree with Scott...
          "other peoples' relationships are none of my business. love is good. more of it is good. live and let live"

          Robert, The question is..."What is your opinion on same sex marriage?"
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: In a world where millions of babies/children have no parents and there are couples who would want to adopt these homeless infants and kids... Some couples who cannot produce their own, but can be parent anyways. Some of which understand how it is to be a minority and segregated who really can make a stronger, smarter and braver child for the future...

    Seems like my opinion doesn't matter when something good for the rest of the world can happen.

    Simply - I believe your question shouldn't have to be asked. It should already be known any LGBT person should be equal to anyone 'straight' - and this type of discrimination towards sexual orientation proves how little people care about 1. history, 2. biology and 3. individual rights (morality).

    My opinion is there should no longer be an opinion. Plenty more important topics to worry about, and if religious beliefs get in the way - that is when campaigning (non-violently) should take place to the leaders of said religion, not the followers.
    • Sep 4 2013: Fair enough.
      But we all still have opinions and its good to share them around i believe.
      I'm not disagreeing with anyone here. I'm just listening.
      • thumb
        Sep 4 2013: Perhaps, somewhat, this question is innately offensive to me now, the more and more I study and think about diversity-issues.

        The more I realize how factors of age, gender and race can cause more harm to society than worrying about sexual preferences... I realize two things 1. gay-marriage is just another hot topic (necessary, but now pop-cultured) and 2. a lot of religious orientation effects the decision of LGBT-marriage within a society and culture.

        WE, right now, are playing into 1. which makes it just trendy and an interesting topic to find opinions on. BUT, 2. is perhaps where more stress and emphasis should be focused.

        What religions are against homosexuality? Why? What exactly is wrong with it in that theological construct? Is there wiggle room? Are there exceptions? What about human history, were there religions that championed free-sex?

        We all do have opinions, sometimes that is not enough!
        • Sep 4 2013: You have a good point Nicholas. I respect that and i am listening.
    • thumb
      Sep 4 2013: Hi Nicholas......nice to see you again:>)

      Simply put, I think/feel it is a human right to be able to choose our partner, and you're right Nicholas, that if some folks think it's not ok, they probably are not aware of history, biology or human rights.

      I'm wondering if you have checked out any of the other discussions on this topic? There are quite a few:>)
  • thumb
    Sep 5 2013: I am for same-sex marriage. Before stating my reasons and thought process, I am heterosexual and live in the US (in a state that I *think* bans gay marriage or something like that).

    I view marriage as a definite and physical (there's a license or something right) bond between two people who love each other and are dedicated to each other (right after typing two I thought, "Hmmm... what's wrong with more?", but then decided to think about that for another time or discussion (which I will most likely make, so look out!)). I think homosexuals (unless anyone objects, I will now use "gays" (BTW for me, gays contains men and women) instead of homosexuals just for avoidance of carpal tunnel syndrome) can love each other and be dedicated to each other, so naturally I don't see what's wrong with them marrying.

    A common or at least recent argument I've heard against gay marriage was that marriage is a passage to heaven or something along those lines. Now, I can see how someone might think gay affection and/or sex (someone should clarify for me) is not right or moral, but that is for a different debate. Marriage, as far as I know, is a *man-made* (asterisks means bolded; don't like using caps) institution. I believe basic morals are universal and timeless and therefore the way to get to heaven (I have problems w/ some people's ideas of heaven, but again different debate) will be the same throughout any place and any time. Just a quick example, pornography wouldn't be a sin, but fantasizing, lusting, or seeing something erotic would be the wrong aspect of pornography (again just example, not emphasizing a personal opinion). Since marriage hasn't been around forever or since the dawn of humanity (again personal belief, but prolly pretty accurate), it can't be on the timeless "rubric" of getting into heaven, or for me, something that could be used immorally.

    Hopefully this comment wasn't too fragmented, but I've got some homeowrk so I'll reread it another time. Please ask for
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: other peoples' relationships are none of my business.

    love is good. more of it is good. live and let live.
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: I have no problem with it.

    The thing that used to bother me was when gay couples adopt children, and those children bore the brunt of the stigma attached to having two dads or two mums - a potential source of harrassment, bullying and/or isolation in the school playground.

    It doesn't bother me now because I think the stigma and assumptions are disappearing quite quickly as parents generally are becoming more aware and tolerant. Also because I realised that in being bothered about it, I was actually in my own small way perpetuating the stigma myself.
    • Sep 4 2013: I'd go as far as saying that they should be readily allowed to adopt children.
      The reason is that the alternative is that those children would otherwise end up in foster homes for all of their lives, which I see as worse than living in a semi-normal family.

      Babies might get snatched up by adopting couples in no time, but for older children, there is never any shortage of orphans that no one wants to take in.
      Heterosexual couples should still be given priority over those, but after those are done with their pickings, there is never shortage of surplus.
  • Sep 4 2013: If they want to marry each other, let them. Why should I care, one way or the other?
    Live and let live. They're not harming me in any way, so I see no reason to stop them.

    In fact, if anything, I should care to allow them, simply because once you start stripping one minority's rights, its not long before other minorities start getting the same treatment, and civil liberties are hurt for the lot of the populace.
  • thumb
    Sep 5 2013: Part II

    clarification or ask questions or refute or criticize. Thanks! Since we don't have much time, just PM me!
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: Depends on what one's definition of marriage is ?

  • Sep 4 2013: Licensing is used far more often to prevent people from joining professions than it is to insure the quality of the professionals.

    If I so choose I can go buy an airplane right now and attempt to fly it. It is unlikely that anyone would stop me if I was even a little clever about it. The lack of a slip of paper would not stop me nor is it likely to stop anyone else. If someone is foolish enough to fly a plane without knowing how they are certainly foolish enough to violate licensing laws.

    The cost of prohibition is not the only issue but it is the main one from the perspective of practicallity. If there is harm in homosexuality then the homosexuals are only hurting themselves and it is no business of mine. If you feel that it offends God then you also know that God can deal with it without your help.
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2013: I think it's acceptable. On what basis would it not be? Some people say it might lead to the legalization of incestuous marriages. Nowadays I'm wondering what would be wrong with an incestuous marriage, I can't see any problem, what do you think, Renee?
    • Sep 4 2013: Thanks for sharing.
      I think its silly, the way people think of these ideas that having same sex couples marry is going to cause major problems. Because opposite sex marriage can probable cause all of the same problems these people are thinking of.
      It is acceptable.
  • Sep 4 2013: Why not respect everyone's opinion? Marriage has a religious context to most people, but something like it is important to same-sex couples. Traditional marriage is marriage. Call this other relationship a same-sex union or whatever. This is called compromise. Why should people care otherwise?