Personal tools
 
Views

Talk:Debate: Gay marriage

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

21st century - equal rights

I am a 27 year old straight male in a happy hetero relationship with a son on the way. However i see absolutely no reason why gay men and woman should not be alowed the same rights as straight couples. In our free country this is amazing that we are even still debating this issue, please can we all just join the 21st century? Ever heard of equal rights? It's freedom not just something nice to say about our country. --Green-bull 15:40, 27 September 2008 (CDT)

Homosexuality in nature

What about homosexuality in nature? There seems to be strong evidence that it exists between monkey and dogs and other animals. How does this affect the debate? -- Brooks Lindsay 21:21, 20 May 2008 (CDT)

Children in the argument

It seems to me as though the entire con argument is based on the idea of every marriage producing children, as time and again, the arguments rely on the supposed idea that children can only grow up healthily in a nuclear family. I'd like to see (past the section based solely on this argument) the removal of the welfare of children as a factor in the overall debate. I think this mainly because married gay couples are not going to have children unless they, as an individual case, have been fully vetted and checked by the authorities, as no accidental pregnancies can occur. Since most gay couples will not ever have children, it seems greatly unfair to use this as an argument against them.

On a more personal note, I am currently in a civil-partnership (essentially a marriage in all but name). We both have children from before we were married and, if anything, they are better off now, both financially and emotionally, as they no longer have to be left with nannies.

Discussion for this topic: same sex marraige (gay or lesbian marriage)

Gay, Lesbian, Homosexual,same sex marriages, all are wrong and contraditory to what God has spoken to us in Romans 1:26. We have turned our backs on the natural order of why we were created.

I ask you; if a man who loves another man and is a homosexual, why the relationship is to fall in love with a man who acts like a woman. A lesbian falls for a women who,looks,and like a man.

That is confusing, plus when given the opportunity to speak out, or in the parades, they dress outlandish, and what they do in there house can stay in their house.

Discussion for this topic: same sex marriage (gay or lesbian marriage)

For those who choose to actually READ their Bible, the passage begins at Romans 1:21 and outlines the punishment for people who misrepresent the word of God. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201:21-32&version=KJV This is not as much a statement on homosexuality, but on people who claim to speak for God. Look at these qualities in the above post: "Being filled with all unrighteousness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, deceit, malignity; Backbiters, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful."

To understand Christ's view on marriage, it is worthwhile to consider his own words. In particular Matthew 19 which covers Christs general notes on marriage and divorce. Matthew 19:12: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:12&version=KJV "For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." In Christs day, the Greek word Eunukos was used for gay people. The same word is used in Daniel 1:4-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=daniel%201:4-9&version=KJV which concludes "Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs."

So why do so-called "Christians" use out of context passages to punish innocent taxpaying citizens for what they are? Certainly Christ himself would be "rolling over in his grave" to see this type of behavior. Or perhaps it is simply a test of who understands the Word, and who doesn't.

Philanderers can marry. Adultery is punishable by stoning, but John McCain did it and wasn't stoned. Felons can marry, even in prison when they are on death row. Lepers can marry. Women past menopause can marry, as can very old men. Why is it all these are "normal" but someone who was born gay, and lives honestly with the world, pays taxes and gains a home, cannot participate equally in society?

Anyone who says civil unions are equal hasn't tried paying taxes as a gay married couple. It's a bizarre process. First you file an entire tax return to the IRS, and sign it as "Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct and complete." Of course, they are not true, because you are married. How do you know you are married? Because the marriage certificate, legal license is in your possession! The pictures hang on the wall and in the album. Several states now marry out-of-staters, and Canada has married gays for nearly seven years now. Despite the fact that you have a solemn and legal agreement, a lifetime committment before family and friends, and all the paperwork to prove it, the US Federal Government requires you to file as "Single". How can your return be both "true with penalty of perjury" and also entirely wrong?

The second problem in the US, is that gay married people are forced to pay taxes into a system that doesn't allow them to collect equally. Heterosexual couples have spouse benefits from social security, and inheritance benefits for tax free transfer of assets to surviving spouse. Homosexual couples pay taxes equally, and live equally honest lives, yet can collect neither benefit.

In America, any religion is free to think whatever whacko ideas they want to. There is no end to whacko faiths. They can misreading the Bible, forbid entrance to Lepers. They can dance with Pink Eyed Wombats. What our country stands for is that whatever their faith, it should not infringe on other people's rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. No American should be forced to lie on their taxes under penalty of jail time. People who have "come out" in an honest and open process, who commit to a lifetime partner before God and family, should not be degraded into denying their honesty and integrity. However cynical anyone is on marriage, or the meaning of marriage, to deny it to honest taxpaying citizens is clearly unjust and degrades the whole meaning of freedom, and the justice that America is supposed to stand for.

== HELP ==

1st, click descussion and then click edit, and then just write your name and write your view point about this debate


Comment by User:Durgeshsingh.arya

well from an ages it has been marriage between man and woman and few decades ago to gratify the lusture of sex or as a status symbol gay marriage has taken that hype .one don't understand how marriage can be between the person of same sex and in many cases where it has been tried had been a major failure..its just for 4 days and all ends with a dark night.to me and accordingly what the ethics say let it be among those whom God has created for it ..just for a atutus symbol if u want no one is there to stop you y to bother ..bt if any body need the tag of marriage there is a big sorry for that as it doesn't suits are custom.

Removed invalid arguments - explanation

"When comparing the outcomes of different forms of parenting, it is critically important to make appropriate comparisons. For example, differences resulting from the number of parents in a household cannot be attributed to the parents’ gender or sexual orientation. Research in households with heterosexual parents generally indicates that – all else being equal – children do better with two parenting figures rather than just one.The specific research studies typically cited in this regard do not address parents’ sexual orientation, however, and therefore do not permit any conclusions to be drawn about the consequences of having heterosexual versus nonheterosexual parents, or two parents who are of the same versus different genders." http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/documents/Amer_Psychological_Assn_Amicus_Curiae_Brief.pdf

"According to Herek’s extensive review of the literature in 2006, the research on which opponents to marriage of same-sex couples rely, look at the functioning of children in intact families with heterosexual parents compared to those children raised by a single parent following divorce or death of a spouse. They do not include studies that compare the functioning of children raised by heterosexual couples with the functioning of children raised by same-sex couples. In this group of studies, any differences observed are more accurately attributable to the effects of death or divorce, and/or to the effects of living with a single parent, rather than to parents’ sexual orientation. These studies do not tell us that the children of same-sex parents in an intact relationship fair worse than the children of opposite-sex parents in an intact relationship." http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20%281%29.pdf

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.