Tyrone Huckstepp

This conversation is closed.

Should gay people be allowed to get married?

That's right, the big question.

How do you feel about people being homosexual (girls and guys) and why?

Do you think that the individual should be able to have the same rights as everybody else, as in join the military?

What are your feelings why a gay couple should or should not get married, plus reasons?

Personal note: personally I am not gay, but I am for gay rights and feel that people who choose to be homosexual should be able to live no different to anyone else.

This is a touchy subject and I would appreciate if everyone would have respect for other people ideas and beliefs.

Thank you,

  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: I think we should toss marriage out of the legal and political sphere altogether and relegate it to the religion bin.

    If you want to legally register someone as your beneficiary or dependent, that is a whole other issue than who you want to stand before a group of people (or even just a judge) and vow to love them "forever". Clearly declaring undying love means little these days, why should there be laws governing it at all?
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: Very nicely put
    • thumb
      Aug 9 2011: marriage is more a cultural thing, a sort of celebration of a supposedly life long bond. it has a place in modern society, independently of any religions. but the state has nothing to do with it. just as it has nothing to do with art. but ssh, maybe they listen, and say, hm, why don't we also regulate art? better be careful.
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: I live in Canada where Gay people have the right to get married. When the human rights legislation was passed- NOTHING CHANGED but we now have a more equitable society where people can be as they are. The sea did not cover us and drown us but people are freer to be respected as they are. It is a good thing.
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: side note, it saddens me the hard right wing goverment up there is trying to strip the rights of MJ users and pushing it back to illegal status.
      • thumb
        Aug 9 2011: I have not really been following this Tim. I do know that we have been far more liberal on the marijuana issue in Canada than they are in the US. As a person who has never tried an illegal drug, I am not too involved in this issue but I have a son who feels strongly about it.
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: Hello Tyrone Huckstepp, I would just like to say this:

    Its ok to walk around drugged (about the legalization of some drugs) but if two people love each other, they can't get married.

    In my opinion, that sentence explains it all. Gay people should be allowed to get married.
  • Aug 7 2011: As with most choices made by people, I feel it is none of my business as long as their choice does not impact my liberties.
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: Or you could just "jump the broom" No offense intended. There are many ways to get married.
  • thumb
    Aug 7 2011: I am proud to say that the state I live in (Vermont, USA) was one of the first states in the union to legalize civil unions, and one of the first states to legalize gay marriage:>) HOORAY FOR US!!! We also had the first female judge in the country...first female legislative representative...first female governor...etc. etc....and that's all another topic:>)

    I felt much the same as you express...why not just civil union? I spoke with a lot of my gay friends, who had been living together happily for many years....
    "Civil Union" does not provide the personal rights coverage that marriage does.... like power of attorney...insurance benefits, visitation rights and health care decisions if one of the partners is unable to make those decisions. Some hospitals allow only immediate family members in ICU for example, so technically, a civil union partner could be denied access.

    Vermont now can guarantee the legal right of marriage to gay partners, and there are several other states that are coming on board too:>)

    In Vermont, same sex partners CAN adopt children, and so far, the results have been very positive. When I was working as a case reviewer for SRS (oversees children in state custody) we had several foster parents who were same sex partners and they were WONDERFUL with the kids. I have friends, same sex partners who adopted:>)

    The argument that same sex partners are going to wreck the institution of marriage and parenting is garbage!!! Look around and evaluate heterosexual marriages, and some children brought into some of those environments!!!
  • thumb
    Aug 7 2011: it would not be "the big question" if we would not try to tell other people how should they live. a state can not guarantee a right. it can only take away.
    • Aug 8 2011: It seems to me that states grant rights all the time. Of course they are also very good at taking rights away.

      Could you take a moment to clarify your position?
      • thumb
        Aug 8 2011: are you not willing to think about it? hint: if the state grants you the right to do something, who prevented you from doing that in the first place?
  • Aug 8 2011: If the two same sex people are happy to live together happily, they have the right to have it; this can be good friends. But if it is only for the sake of sex, it is not appearing fine to me.
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: Gay people shouldnt be ''allowed'' to do things we already do. They have every right to do whatever they like unless they hurt and harm other people. Who are we in the position to allow other people do things by the way?
  • thumb
    Aug 7 2011: I found it interesting that you stated in your opening remarks, "people who choose to be homosexual'. That appears to me as a bias on your part. No?

    I agree with the statements thus far. Marriage has a religious significance. I believe 'civil unions' are appropriate, with all the public rights of a married couple. Why couldn't a man and a woman opt for a 'civil union'?
    • thumb
      Aug 7 2011: I agree with your opening statement, I have it on good authority (not myself, but close friends) that homosexuality is not a choice indeed. I think the belief that it might is one reason why some of the people who are opposed to homosexuality try to take away the rights of gay men and women. They believe that if they do that, gay people will find that life too difficult and switch to a straight life. That doesn't happen of course.
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: Thanks for pointing that out, it does sound bias. I do not believe that being gay is simply a choice and I apologize for the remark that implied it is. I simply chose the wrong words.
  • thumb

    E G

    • 0
    Aug 28 2011: Guy , lesbians : they are only a bit abnormal in their sexual orientation .................. the first thing we should do is to help them to become normal, after that we can respect them .
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: marriage SHOULD be re defined.
    ya i said it.

    AND lets be honest, gender is decided mostly by the parents, blue room, or pink?
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: No. Marriage is between opposite genders. They should have something else.
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: Dear Rafi,
      Do you have an idea of what this "something else" might be? The definition of marriage includes: "an intimate or close union". Instituting the legality of "civil union", was unsuccessful in addressing the issue of rights for same sex partners. Many states in the USA even recognize "common law marriage"... partners living together for a certain number of years, even without the benefit of marriage are recognized for legal purposes. However, same sex partners were sometimes denied the same legal rights as others, no matter what catagory was used to try to define the laws.

      I agree with Matthieu's comment...this is about human rights. With the laws that were (and still are in some states) in place, those who were/are in a same sex partnership were denied certain human rights, that are granted to some people. "They" are people Rafi. Do you honestly want to deny some people human rights because of his/her sexual preference?
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: "Big question" really? Keep asking....
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: Please specify?
      • thumb
        Aug 8 2011: Look at animals (because we are animals) same sex is in nature, this shouldn't be a big question, it is a "big question" due to ignorance and that is all.
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2011: Only if they're in love, but I guess that rule should apply to heterosexuals too.
  • Aug 7 2011: I believe that any person that is of legal age in their state should be allowed to marry the person they want to spend the remainder of their life with. Now, with this being said homosexual or heterosexual should have the same rights when they get divorced. It seems from some articles I have read that homosexual couples that married when it was legal may now be in the middle of divorce but do not want to split assets or pay alimony or split parental duties if children are involved. Children, Joint income, joint taxes and joint assets all count if you are heterosexual, so it should be the same for homosexual marriage too.

    If you want equal rights...its equal all the way...you cant pick and choose because you are homosexual and the marriage didn't last. And BTW if I was the judge in a homosexual divorce; all the time spent together prior to legal marriage would count since in some states palimony is legal.
  • thumb
    Aug 7 2011: Yes, homosexuals should have the same rights as everyone. I see no reason why not. My feeling is that one day in 100 years time, we'll look back and we will truly be embarrassed that gays were neither allowed to marry or adopt children.
  • thumb
    Aug 7 2011: Getting married is a religious thing so we have to understand what it means to get married. For humans the world is full of opposites and duality (good or evil, man or woman,rich or poor, strong or weak, etc.) God however is one, neither good or evil. The Garden of eden is this state of perfection where everything is one. In marriage the two opposites, man and woman, come together and have two become one. allowing gays to marry would alter the definition of marriage and so lose its religious meaning.

    On the other hand gay people simply want to be together and marry.

    I am not for or against gay marriage but I think the meaning of marriage should be recognized in this debate.
    I'd like to hear others so please respond, thanks.
    • thumb
      Aug 7 2011: I do think the meaning of marriage should be recognized in this debate too. Last time I checked it was possible to get a civil marriage that did not contain any religious component to it. That it was originally a religious ceremony (debatable given that Ancient Greece and China had their own version of marriage separate from the Monotheistic faiths) is really of no consequence here.

      Let's be honest, the opposition to gay marriage isn't really a question of keeping marriages religious, atheists and people of different faiths have been marrying for centuries. It really is a case of people having homophobic tendencies (not you Thadeus ;-) ). There is this idea that if gay people are denied certain rights, they'll just vanish in thin air.
    • thumb
      Aug 8 2011: What about the gays and lesbians that are religious?
      • thumb
        Aug 8 2011: aside from eastern relgions, has there been any western religions that have not, in the past, outlawed and murdered gays?