Controversial Topic

---

Posted by gaby25

hey, I've never seen that!!! I want to see it now that you ladies are talking about it.

---

Definitely some good movies. They came out a while ago like years ago so you could probably find them in the old drama section of the movie store.

---

Posted by Kriss2c

I think they should be allowed to, doesn't it fall under '...the pursuit of happiness.'

I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

---

its the pursuit that is guaranteed, not the happiness

I am generally in support of gay marriage, but find it awfully suspicious that this issue hit media attention during the last few weeks of a charged election climate.

Plus there is the financial issue in regards to federal benefits and taxation - and don't even get me started on that!

---

Posted by ChristineC68

Would you believe I read in the paper this week that some conservative politician said that by altering the definition of who can be married (man and woman) could eventually lead to people marrying animals

---

Christine, that argument has been made on this site by members of this community as well.

I have been involved in too many drama posts about this topic already, so all I will say is that I do support gay marriage and I do not support marriage between people and animals

leading to marry animals? I guess you can see his feelings about people and how he thinks about them! If he would think that everyone would just go out and do that if they were allowed?
Scary that these kind of people are the ones in control right now? (Scary ultra conservatives)

But don't you think a dog-husband would be really loyal?


I am 100% for Gay Marriage!!!!

---

Posted by ChristineC68

Would you believe I read in the paper this week that some conservative politician said that by altering the definition of who can be married (man and woman) could eventually lead to people marrying animals

---

What an idiot!! That is plain stupidity

I did not see the show, but I do not see what the big deal is on gay marriages.


I debate with my husband about this all the time.

What is it that they are doing wrong- NOTHING IMO. They love each other, they want to build a life together- let them be.

People do not understand that you DO NOT CHOOSE to be gay, you are born that way. I think this is what people do not understand.

Oh well, that is my opinion.

---

Posted by NIHA

---

Posted by ChristineC68

Would you believe I read in the paper this week that some conservative politician said that by altering the definition of who can be married (man and woman) could eventually lead to people marrying animals

---

What an idiot!! That is plain stupidity

---

Of course it is. The SAME argument was used against interracial marriage.

No one's married their dog yet.

Marriage gives certain legal benefits and rights to couples - pension benefits, child custody, property rights and other things too. In that aspect I think civil marriages should be allowed.

I remember when this gay makeup artist (very famous guy, Kevin something) died suddenly a few years ago, he had a partner and the family of the man that died wouldn't let him live in the house that they had lived in afterwards. I don't remember the entire story but it seemed to me that if they were legally married the parents of the man the died would not have been able to do that. I didn't think it was fair at all.

I found this website that explains alot of things.
Legal Marriage Primer on BuddyBuddy website

I'm not really sure about religous marriages though. I don't know alot about what the Bible says about homosexuality, unfortunately (so much for my Catholic schooling). I know the Catholic Church is against it obviously but what the actual teachings are as to why (other than 'it's a sin') I'm not sure of.

One the other side of the coin though (and I dont' mean to sound hypocritical - this literally just popped into my head) don't legal marriages need to be sexually consumated to be binding? Or is that something the Church requires (ie: if the marriage hasn't been consumated and the people want an annulment they can?)

Say if it is a legal thing...then would same sex couples be legally 'consummating' a marriage?

As for the things I described above in the 1st paragraph, I think that marriage should be allowed for same sex couples - the legal rights...I don't see why they shouldn't get those rights.

Edited to correct a grammatical error

---

Posted by gaby25

I also feel that this is a faith-based issue not a state one. I mean, we have the govt who forbids prayer in schools because of the whole seperation of church and state issue but now they are getting involved in marriage? I could go on and on but that's it for now.

---

It's not really. A marriage is a legally binding contract, too. People can get married in a county courthouse and it's just as legal as getting married in a church. So the state has a right to step in in that case.

I'm not against same sex marriage, but I just wanted to point that out.

---

Posted by Maribelle7777


One the other side of the coin though (and I dont' mean to sound hypocritical - this literally just popped into my head) don't legal marriages need to be sexually consumated to be binding? Or is that something the Church requires (ie: if the marriage hasn't been consumated and the people want an annulment they can?)

Say if it is a legal thing...then would same sex couples be legally 'consummating' a marriage?

As for the things I described above, I think that it should be the same for same sex couples as opposite sex couples - the legal rights...I don't see why they shouldn't get those rights.

---

I think the consummating a marraige is an excuse to grant a religious dissolution of a marraige and has nothing to do with making the marraige legal.

And I am pretty sure that gay couples would consummate their marraige.

---

Posted by ChristineC68



I think the consummating a marraige is an excuse to grant a religious dissolution of a marraige and has nothing to do with making the marraige legal.

And I am pretty sure that gay couples would consummate their marraige.

---

Yeah I wasn't sure...

I look at it from this perspective: its not whether or not I support gay marriage - I'm not gay, so why do I care what gay people do.

I DO NOT support discrimination. Pretty simple if you ask me.

and that whole man-dog thing is completely incomprehensible to me. There is absolutely no logic behind that argument, IMHO. Ignorance and fear of the unknown maybe. But def. not logic.

---

Posted by Maribelle7777

---

Posted by gaby25

I also feel that this is a faith-based issue not a state one. I mean, we have the govt who forbids prayer in schools because of the whole seperation of church and state issue but now they are getting involved in marriage? I could go on and on but that's it for now.

---

It's not really. A marriage is a legally binding contract, too. People can get married in a county courthouse and it's just as legal as getting married in a church. So the state has a right to step in in that case.

I'm not against same sex marriage, but I just wanted to point that out.

---

I know that marriage is a legally binding contract. I wasn't referring to marriage being a faith-based issue I was actually referring to the idea of same-sex marriages and whether the govt 'allowing' them to. I mean is a constitutional amendment necessary? not that it's going to be passed anyways I agree with you on the church thing though. It has long been known that the church is against it and that's fine but I just don't understand what the hell the govt has to do when it comes to a person deciding who they can marry. The govt can step in all they want when it comes to LEGAL issues (which marriage is) BUT like I said not on deciding who one can marry.

Thank GOD so many Americans take marriage so seriously...I mean what is next? A show that has a family pick the future husband for their daughter and she never even saw him...oh, wait that has been done...hum...about a dwarf who has to go into hot tubs with women and pick a wife...wait, again already done.

Point is: marriage was NEVER religious. It was born out of a women's need for a man to control her property/money and make decisions for her. Yes, the result was children but not always. Plus I know plenty of unmarried couples that have child so that point is not valid either.

---

Posted by eroxgirl


I DO NOT support discrimination. Pretty simple if you ask me.

---

personally I am for same sex marriaged...


politically I am for the federal government to get out of our lives...we were nto supposed to have such a strong fed gov't...thats what the freaking 10th amendment is for!!!!

---

Posted by yabbobay

---

Posted by eroxgirl


I DO NOT support discrimination. Pretty simple if you ask me.

---

personally I am for same sex marriaged...


politically I am for the federal government to get out of our lives...we were nto supposed to have such a strong fed gov't...thats what the freaking 10th amendment is for!!!!

---

Also aren't the republicans that want less gov't, unless you don't agree with them, then they want more.