An interesting gay marriage piece...

[fireheart17]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/o...-1225954647950

This is the editorial....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/o...-1225954018578

And this is one of the opinion pieces done by one of the more decent reporters (she pretty much tells it like it is)

Both of them deal with gay marriage, which is due to come up for a conscience vote in my state as more and more politicians come out in support of gay marriage. The interesting thing is that while federally, gay marriage is still questionable, they're getting around the law by having the STATE recognise it.

Since the original gay marriage thread was closed down (why was it closed down?), I figured I may as well bring it up, especially with these two articles/editorials in mind.

So basically, my questions are:

1) With these two articles in mind, gay marriage-yay or nay?
2) If the logic of "marriage is for procreation" is meant to be true, then what about infertile men and women? Since they can't breed, does that make them unable to get married?

[HYHYBT]

1) With these two articles in mind, gay marriage-yay or nay?

Definite, huge, Kermit-the-Frog-style "YAAAAYYY!!"

2) If the logic of "marriage is for procreation" is meant to be true, then what about infertile men and women? Since they can't breed, does that make them unable to get married?

Marriage is for officially uniting people. Sometimes, children result; sometimes not. Sometimes, for that matter, the cart goes before the horse.

[Plaidman]

There is not a single font size in the multiverse big enough for me to say yay.

It fills me with rage, like, Saiyan Rage, Nerd Rage, Hatred Rage super mega Rage that people hate the idea of two men (or two women) marrying. They quote the bible as reasons why. Maybe I should buy their daughters as slaves, as same man that stated that also said that people should sell their daughters into slavery. OH! And fish too! Can't eat fish. Not to mention we cannot talk or touch or even be in the presence of a woman on her period. All Leviticus.
(Daughter Slavery is Exodus 21:7, and Lev 25:44 also states we can buy slaves from neighbors, like Canada and Mexico.
No contact with a woman on period is Lev. 15:19-24)
No eating shellfish is Lev. 11:10
Exodus 35:2 also states people that word on Sabbath should be put to death.


If your going to use the bible as a freaking defense against it, then you should follow it all.

I never understood why oh why it's so hard for people to allow that others should be married. This doesn't open books to adults marrying children. This doesn't open books to allow people to marry animals. Contracts are noid and void under 18 without permission, and animals cannot consent.

It can be hard enough for some people to get another as is. There is a small selection of people that stay with their sex dolls. (Which of course, is no end of ridicule for those poor souls. So what if it's a doll? Yeah, I know, not a real person. Ever thought that they can't get anyone? That so many years of loneliness caused him/her to just put a soul into someone that could love them? Everyone needs love.

Its utter and total bullshit to ban it based on gender. It sickens me.

[tropicsgoddess]

The whole thing about the moralists, religious zealots and the like hollering about how gay marriage breaks the sanctity of marriage is utter bullshit to me. The sanctity of marriage is not a man and woman uniting as one, it is two people (gay or straight) in a loving and consenting relationship uniting as one to spend their days with each other for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health till death do us part.

[blas87]

I am more concerned with soliders dying in the Middle East, government crazily over-spending and taxing people to death, the average American still hardly able to live comfortably financially, government trying to control health care, and a whole other realm of problems than I will ever be concerned about trying to deny gay people the right to marry.

It's fucking LUDICROUS. All these problems in the world, and people are up in arms about two people of the same gender being in love? Oh my, that's just so terrible! We must put a stop to it! For Heaven's Sake.....and let's hide behind a Bible for our reasoning why and crusade to prevent them from having the same rights as heterosexual people, before we fix the real problems in this world!

Oh it riles me up so much.

Well, here's something from the Bible that we ought never forget: Be kind and love one another as I have loved you.

[Ginger Tea]

thout shal not kill
crusades anyone
oh but its ok if its in gods name

gay marriage 2 thumb's up (not saying where) to it, it's not hurting me that 2 men like cock and want the same cock when they are 70.

I'm not into organized religion so I discount anyone who preaches what the bible says should and should not be done, as it has been shown throughout history, laws of man superseed the bible as we have seen the errors of slavery and many of the things that the bible said were ok to do.

It's not illigal for 2 or more men to have sex with each other as long as they are over the legal age
It's not illigal for the same people to co habit and be married in all but name
Laws are changing to level the field that no matter you gender or oriantation you should (not always working) be treated the same
So the next logical step is to either
aboish marriage as an out dated idea as alot of hetrosexual couples cohabit or
enable gay, lesbian and transgendered to marry as if they were any other couple

granted the church might not let you hold the event in their churces, but you can get civil weddings held anywhere that has recieved a licence in the UK and I'm guessing its the same or similar in other countries.

[Mytical]

Here is my thought on Gay Marriage. If two people can find each other, make each other happy, and want to be with each other..what does it matter? If you find somebody to make you happy in this crazy world, the more power to you. Don't care what sex you and they are, heck you can be purple with pink pokadots, doesn't matter to me. As long as you treat each other right, and love each other, everybody else can step off. I just have one small caveat. They have to be able to consent with full knowledge of what they are consenting to. Other then that...go nuts

[EricD]

My opinion on the whole marriage debate:

Marriage is a religious institution and as such should not be regulated by government.
If we are to have this mythical separation of church and state, then the government should stay out of it.

If your church or whatever recognizes same-sex marriage (and some do) then it should be allowed.

If you are non-religious then getting married should be a pre-negotiated contract, which by most legal definitions can be gender non-specific.

first link on google for mythical separation of church and state:
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...-and-discourse

[Mytical]

Pardon my french, but what in the blue blazes does marriage have to do with religion? Do people not know that marriages happened before things like Christianity was even heard of? Sure, sometimes it was as simple as two people living together, and it might not have always been called marriage..but the joining of two people (or more) has been around for a LONG time.

True, marriage often had a deity that was supposed to acknowledge it, but religions that came way before Christianity or Muslim practiced it. So..if you want to argue that religion should decide who is married or not, you'd have to track down which religion did it first. Then only people who followed that religion would be able to get 'married'. I know that the worship of the 'spirits' came many many years before the following of 'God' or such. So guess only the people who worship mother earth, father sun, etc should be able to be married?

[Boozy]

Marriage in the West was originally a tool for social and economic control, but as with most things, the authorities packaged it up in religion to sell it to the populace.

While the women's liberation movement has removed many of the original reasons for marriage, I still think marriage offers a convenient "package deal" for the many benefits a couple can get. It's a simple way of saying, "We are a family unit recognized by the government". It's easier and cheaper for everyone than applying for each and every benefit separately.

[ExRetailDrone]

I cannot express how pro-gay-marriage I am. If two people love each other and want to commit to each other for life, they should be allowed to, as long as they are of legal age to enter into a binding contract. Because that really is what marriage is - a legal contract between two consenting adults. It can be religious if the parties involved so choose, but at the base, it has nothing to do with religion.

I have a marriage contract with my husband. Want to know where I went and paid for it? The courthouse. I am not religious and neither is my husband, so we decided on a non-religious ceremony performed by a non-religious officiant in a non-religious setting. But we are still married in the eyes of the law. It may once have been a purely religious union, but its definition has broadened over the decades. So, given that for the most part it is considered a legal contract these days, I find it discriminatory that gays and lesbians are shut out of it. I can completely understand if a religious house denies performing marriage ceremonies to a gay/lesbian couple, because that is their right as a private institution, but for the government to now allow them to enter into a contract once they are of legal age is appalling.

[Mytical]

Boozy..

I hope everybody got that I was being kinda sarcastic. I just love how certain religions scream how it would kill the sanctity of marriage. When marriage was around long before those certain religions were even heard of. Heck even the Greek and Romans, with their vast number of 'gods' had marriage. Want even older? Egyptian's had marriages. Don't know if they were called 'marriages' but it was the same basic principle.