Should gay marriages be banned?

[Beck]

For me the answer is yes... While this isnt a certain religious issue, marriage was created by God.. so if Homosexuals desire to be married..do it by the standards of the world.. "civil union". You can look at marriage in any major religion and see that its between male and female... so gay marriages should be banned... but if they want to be joined together..call it what it is to the world....and it isnt marriage its a civil union. Dont do it in the church, dont do it in a mosque, dont ask for a minister, or a priest or a eman to do it... go down to a judge and do your thing...

[Jasmine]

elderbeck said:

For me the answer is yes... While this isnt a certain religious issue, marriage was created by God.. so if Homosexuals desire to be married..do it by the standards of the world.. "civil union". You can look at marriage in any major religion and see that its between male and female... so gay marriages should be banned... but if they want to be joined together..call it what it is to the world....and it isnt marriage its a civil union. Dont do it in the church, dont do it in a mosque, dont ask for a minister, or a priest or a eman to do it... go down to a judge and do your thing...

feeling like participate on Family Fued... Good Answer *clapping*

[Beck]

jasmine said:

elderbeck said:

For me the answer is yes... While this isnt a certain religious issue, marriage was created by God.. so if Homosexuals desire to be married..do it by the standards of the world.. "civil union". You can look at marriage in any major religion and see that its between male and female... so gay marriages should be banned... but if they want to be joined together..call it what it is to the world....and it isnt marriage its a civil union. Dont do it in the church, dont do it in a mosque, dont ask for a minister, or a priest or a eman to do it... go down to a judge and do your thing...

feeling like participate on Family Fued... Good Answer *clapping*

Its the only thing I could say without coming across like a bigot..the truth is god still loves them.. and if they wanted to come to church and worship and repent they have every right just like the smoker, the drinker, the fornicator, the liar, etc... but just dont expect for God to just over look the problem that they deal with...lol. his way is his way... and aint no changing it... sorry.

[krazeeboi]

Beck, I actually take a similar stance.

[Beck]

krazeeboi said:

Beck, I actually take a similar stance.

What is weird is some of my "friends" cant understand my position on it..

[krazeeboi]

I can believe it. They probably think you're a flaming liberal because of it, LOL.

[stillfocused]

Not knocking the person..just the sin. My cousin practiced homosexuality and it cost it him his life. Yet, when I went to him on his death bed..I did not stand before him and pronounce judgment; yet, I left him with a smile on his face. I wasn't ready to for to go; yet, he was ready to go. Having always loved him..hating the sin; yet, this is what many don't understand that from either side.

Krazeeboi..you stuck something. Christianizing it is not the way to go. I am going out on a limb; in 2004 many stood and casted a vote because of their beliefs on this issue. Yet, even though there was a stand made; there was no victory. Because in my own opinion this thing has gotten worse.

When my son was growing up I always told him EVERYTHING he did whether good or bad affects someone else. Now with this issue..it's lawlessness and in order continue to live and do whatever they want to do, wherever they want to do it. There must be removal of all boundries that say this wrong and it will not be tolerated here. I live on near the Mexico border and believe me anything goes. There is no regard for the laws of the state or the USA; the country in which many have crossed into. Walking through the desert by night; scorching hot during the night and day; often with the proper supplies. Yet, when they arrive they thrive because the resources they needed is made available to them. Abd the same with issue of same sex marriage..many tolerate it because it's not in their backyard. It's not a problem until a teacher begins to touch " Lil Sammie" and tell him things like it's okay be gay. Everybody's doing it.

The Word of God says that where this no vision the people. Translated..where there no insight the people do whatever they want to do; as there are no restraints. There has to be some order to how we live in.

[Jasmine]

I had this discussion with my younger sister, who is a Lesbian. She asked me, why do christians feel that gays should not be allowed to enjoy the rest of their life with the mate that they love, like any other husband and wife.

I said Repeat what you just said. She said what? I said, the last ending of your comment to me. She said what husband and wife? I said yes. I said even in a civil union, you will not be considered Husband and wife, and do you know why? because a husband and a wife, consists of a man and a woman, which is the definition of a Marriage. She said, well I should be able to marry whom I choose whether its a man or woman. I don't have to be defined as husband or wife. We are 2 women.

I said then why do you go out of your way to look and dress like a man, knowing that you are a woman? She said, this is just me. I said actually it isn't, because I remember when you wore dresses and dress shoes. I remember when you had a so called boy friend. Its not you, Its what you ran to.

She responded, yeah yeah, but this still doesn't explain why "ya'll" feel everybody has to abide by "ya'll" rules. I said not my rules, God's law. If you want to marry a woman...you have the peragative to do so, but dont expect "us" to call it a marriage, because marriage is the union between a man and a woman. In God's eyes, it won't be considered a marriage, but two people in sin.

Of course she didn't agree, which is fine. I told her that, she wouldn't be a lesbian for to long anyway. She just laughed and said ok..I said watch! then started singing.

A change is on the wayyyyy.

[krazeeboi]

Jasmine, you said some important things. And one reason why I said that this isn't a religious issue (or more accurately, strictly a religious issue) is because every major religion defines marriage as an institution between a man and a woman.

So in other words, it's not a religious issue, it's a SOCIAL ISSUE.

Now the question: why do we have marriage?

[stillfocused]

Why do we have marriage ? One is the reasons to create life.

[krazeeboi]

THAT'S what I was getting at. Marriage is the only institution that ensures the perpetuity of society, and it provides the context for optimal child rearing. Marriage is about families, and families are about children. And since two members of the same sex cannot procreate, they do not qualify for marriage. So you see, you can make the argument from a social and even a biological point of view, make perfect sense, and have no need to invoke religion.

[nina]

Some animal species are monogamous for their lifetime. They build their dwelling together, reproduce, raise their offsprings together, who then go on to do the same.
Should we call that a "marriage"?
What makes the difference?

[livinganewlife]

nina said:

Some animal species are monogamous for their lifetime. They build their dwelling together, reproduce, raise their offsprings together, who then go on to do the same.
Should we call that a "marriage"?
What makes the difference?

Humans are "highly evolved" animals{at least some of us} and the difference is what God says...

[nina]

Doesn't it bring us back to square one if what makes the difference is what God says?
The point - I think - originally was to show that there should or should not be gay marriages, without resorting to religious reasons.
Then, the question was asked "Why do we have marriage?"

KB mentioned... "THAT'S what I was getting at. Marriage is the only institution that ensures the perpetuity of society, and it provides the context for optimal child rearing. Marriage is about families, and families are about children. And since two members of the same sex cannot procreate, they do not qualify for marriage. So you see, you can make the argument from a social and even a biological point of view, make perfect sense, and have no need to invoke religion."

This part "Marriage is the only institution that ensures the perpetuity of society" did not seem to hold to me because, if that's the case, it is not marriage - as an institution - which ensures the perpetuity of society. What does is the ability to physically reproduce, the "institution of marriage" has nothing to do with it. That's what lead me to asking about the difference etc...

In fact, from that angle, there is no need for marriage. Marriage as an institution does not enable or impair the sexual/reproductive function. In the current state of science, even that part is not mandatory anymore to perpetuate society: people resort to in vitro fertilization and other artificial means to conceive or "have" a child they call their own..

Also, some heterosexual couples cannot conceive. Does that make their marriage invalid or of a lesser standard? Certainly not.

It's not a legal, social, biological or religious matter. It's a spiritual matter.

[krazeeboi]

nina said:

Some animal species are monogamous for their lifetime. They build their dwelling together, reproduce, raise their offsprings together, who then go on to do the same.
Should we call that a "marriage"?
What makes the difference?

LOL, where this come from Nina? You better stop eatin' steak before you go to bed! ;D

The difference is that marriage is a social institution. It is a social contract that is officially and legally recognized by the larger society. It takes self-aware, sentient beings to have such an arrangement, and this is simply not true of animals.

Furthermore, there are humans who do the same, yet they are not married and if they don't have that piece of paper that declares them married, we don't consider them married (even common-law marriages must be declared as such by a justice of the peace).