[liddyp]

i don't know if there has been a thread on this already but i was wondering what your opinions are on this subject especially since the US president elections are coming up. i for one, am for gay marriage and very happy the california supreme court overturned the ban on gay marriage. (btw yay for ellen and portia!)

[小甜密]

I think gay people are awesome! They're good partners to shop with and have great sense of humour. I just don't get why hella people be so work up about banning gay marriage. That's like the LAST THING they should worry about when America is about to go into recession, or possibly WWIII.

PS. FTW for California! :]

[HtyPotter]

I'd support civil union and giving gay couples certain rights that are given to married heterosexual couples, but no matter how good the PR machine is, I don't feel comfortable calling gay unions "marriage." Everyone grew up understanding "marriage" to mean one particular tradition, practice and convention. They can't just change the definitions of words because they want it both ways. Take the privileges, take the new institution of civil unions, and be happy they got the substantive things they wanted. I understand some of them want the romanticism of the WORD marriage, because "marriage" implies tradition and conservative values. But they're two men or two women - there's nothing traditional or conservative about them. The word "marriage" was designed to describe a man and a wife. Just because a gay union doesn't have a word doesn't mean you just change the definitions of everything else. MAKE a new world for it. Civil Unions are fine. Just because I call a semi-automatic rifle a "shirt" doesn't mean I can take it on a plane.

[liddyp]

I'd support civil union and giving gay couples certain rights that are given to married heterosexual couples, but no matter how good the PR machine is, I don't feel comfortable calling gay unions "marriage." Everyone grew up understanding "marriage" to mean one particular tradition, practice and convention. They can't just change the definitions of words because they want it both ways. Take the privileges, take the new institution of civil unions, and be happy they got the substantive things they wanted. I understand some of them want the romanticism of the WORD marriage, because "marriage" implies tradition and conservative values. But they're two men or two women - there's nothing traditional or conservative about them. The word "marriage" was designed to describe a man and a wife. Just because a gay union doesn't have a word doesn't mean you just change the definitions of everything else. MAKE a new world for it. Civil Unions are fine. Just because I call a semi-automatic rifle a "shirt" doesn't mean I can take it on a plane.

hmm thats interesting that you would say that. the thing is marriage gives you more rights. for instance, you can share insurance, health benefits, and many more things. adoptions are harder too without being married. why do gay people have to make up new words for things. that just separates them more from heterosexuals? why can't everyone just be equal?
btw what does semi-automatic rifle being a shirt have to do with anything?

[dancingbymyself]

I think that gay marriage should be legal. I don't really care. But I don't think gay people should be married.
Haha that makes no sense. I believe in a firm separation between church and state.
I don't think gay people should be gay from a moral standpoint. (That makes me sound like a bad guy lol.)
But I think they should have the option to be gay if they want to.... and have the same rights as any other person.
I think they should be able to visit their husbands/wives in the hospital, and get insurance and stuff like that.

[HtyPotter]

hmm thats interesting that you would say that. the thing is marriage gives you more rights. for instance, you can share insurance, health benefits, and many more things. adoptions are harder too without being married. why do gay people have to make up new words for things. that just separates them more from heterosexuals? why can't everyone just be equal?
btw what does semi-automatic rifle being a shirt have to do with anything?

I spoke about the privileges (they're not "rights." Getting tax breaks is not a natural or civil right.). I think gay couples should be able to get most of them. Like hospital visitation, inheritance, etc. Some privileges (in the form of tax breaks) are given to married couples to encourage them to have children, but it's not immediately apparent that these should automatically apply to homosexual couples. But if a homosexual couple does adopt, they can claim the child as a dependent and get many of the same privileges anyway - they just don't get it AUTOMATICALLY by virtue of being in a union. And that makes sense.

Technically, they have exactly the same rights as everyone else. I'm a heterosexual. I can theoretically get married to a woman, or enter into a civil union with a man. I would just not prefer to do the latter. A gay male can marry a woman or enter into a civil union with a man. He would just prefer the latter. There's no difference in rights and no inequality. He has exactly the same opportunities that I do.

The rifle comment was just to illustrate that just because you call an object a different word, that doesn't make the object different. Marriage has always meant one thing, and you can't just change the meaning of WORDS because you whine about it enough. I mean, if you want REAL equality, literally, then why even call them "gay"? "Gay" implies a difference from norm, which is "straight." Maybe we should just call all gay people "straight" so that they're equal? Maybe all "black" people should be called "white" so that everything is 100% equal between them? It's not a good argument.

[lido0l_zen]

zomg. We had this debate so many times in soompi. BUt anyways yes i believe in gay marriage and dadadada and all those those gay rights thing. And i believe the that law (i forgot what it was called) should be struck down that if it does pass it will ban all gay marriage. I think its called something 8? =]

[EHNerJI]

i'm not against it, but i don't really.. encourage it LOL.
as long as they're happy i guess. i don't mind.

[Sense91]

i'm not against it, but i don't really.. encourage it LOL.
as long as they're happy i guess. i don't mind.


would you be comfortable if a gay couple moved in next door?
i wouldnt. so im against it

[makelovenoises]

I support gay marriage. I mean, isn't marriage about finding your soulmate, when two lovers want to spend a lifetime? I don't see any dumb restriction like " - BUT has to be male+female."
Some are arguing that humans are mad to reproduce, and gay people cant. BUT its not like banning marriage will make the gay's marry the opposite sex. Some will call them bad names for doing something their not attracted to

[masturyan]

I'm all for the lesbian experience.

[IlikeChicken]

Yes.

I really don't see why not, we have it in Canada for a while now and I don't see any change..Liek omg gay people are totally gonna kill us with their gayness!

i'm not against it, but i don't really.. encourage it LOL.
as long as they're happy i guess. i don't mind.


would you be comfortable if a gay couple moved in next door?
i wouldnt. so im against it

You don't make sense..Gay couple moving next door to you has nothing to do with gay marriage. Someone gay couple can be living next to you right now and what? Your life is ending?

[liddyp]

I spoke about the privileges (they're not "rights." Getting tax breaks is not a natural or civil right.). I think gay couples should be able to get most of them. Like hospital visitation, inheritance, etc. Some privileges (in the form of tax breaks) are given to married couples to encourage them to have children, but it's not immediately apparent that these should automatically apply to homosexual couples. But if a homosexual couple does adopt, they can claim the child as a dependent and get many of the same privileges anyway - they just don't get it AUTOMATICALLY by virtue of being in a union. And that makes sense.

Technically, they have exactly the same rights as everyone else. I'm a heterosexual. I can theoretically get married to a woman, or enter into a civil union with a man. I would just not prefer to do the latter. A gay male can marry a woman or enter into a civil union with a man. He would just prefer the latter. There's no difference in rights and no inequality. He has exactly the same opportunities that I do.

The rifle comment was just to illustrate that just because you call an object a different word, that doesn't make the object different. Marriage has always meant one thing, and you can't just change the meaning of WORDS because you whine about it enough. I mean, if you want REAL equality, literally, then why even call them "gay"? "Gay" implies a difference from norm, which is "straight." Maybe we should just call all gay people "straight" so that they're equal? Maybe all "black" people should be called "white" so that everything is 100% equal between them? It's not a good argument.

Why can't homosexual couples get the "privieges" of tax breaks? Just because they are gay doesn't mean they don't want kids. They should be treated the same as heterosexuals. They shouldn't have to claim their kid as a dependent either.

[DRELLA.]

yes . I do support gay marriages . because my friend is gay .
and he has a boyfriend . their relationship is like any other normal couples .
so i don't see why they can't have the same privileges . so I support all the
way ! >D

[sweetxsimple]

I give my whole support to gay marriage. My leadership teacher is gay, yet he's so down to earth too. You should have seen his face when I first saw him. His smile was worth a million bucks. Gay people deserve to be happy too, and seeing my teacher with such a ... glow on his face just... compelled me to give my whole support to Gays. =)

Everyone deserves to be happy.

[ritzy!]

They're humans, just like us... just let them be..

Whatever floats their boats as long as it doesn't sail your way if you don't like it..

[HtyPotter]

Why can't homosexual couples get the "privieges" of tax breaks? Just because they are gay doesn't mean they don't want kids. They should be treated the same as heterosexuals. They shouldn't have to claim their kid as a dependent either.

Yeah, people should treat other people equally, ideally. As a Korean-American, I'm a minority, and I depend on laws that prevent me from facing discrimination. My rights shouldn't be violated because I'm not in the majority. The answer isn't to change the definition of "white" to include Korean people. I'm happy being Korean, and I'm happy there are distinctions that make me different in those ways. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and civil unions can be between two men or two women or two whatever. You get the same state marriage benefits as a married couple and equal protection under the law. But they're not the same thing, and laws designed EXPLICITLY and SPECIFICALLY with married heterosexual couples in mind may simply not apply to homosexual couples, because many of the argumetns for those laws in the first place no longer apply when it's not one man and one woman.
I'm not sure where you live, but very few people adopt children. It simply wouldn't be sensible or fiscally responsible to assume that gay couples automatically deserve certain tax breaks unless they actually go out and get children.

[DOVAHKIIN]

This has been posted and debated how many times?

And people get out of hand about the topic how many times?

Closing this before it will get out of hand.