#1 Dating Site for Successful Singles and Admirers
Millionaire Blogs > Scarletibis24's blogs > Gay Marriage
Gay Marriage Sort by:
Author
scarletibis24
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 160
Posted on Wed, Aug 09, 2006 22:05

"Those who do not know their opponent?s arguments do not completely understand their own." ~ Sexual Values: Opposing Viewpoints I've known several comedians who would start a joke with something akin to "We all have one in our own family. A crack head, funny Uncle Joe, who was really just a child molester, the one who is always unemployed, begging for money, and the gay one [family member]" etc. Well, as it turns out, I have several gay family members. And it doesn't bother me one bit. I never understood that out of all of the things or types of people to hate, some people choose good Samaritans who happen to be gay. What's the big friggin' deal? Especially why anyone would oppose gay marriages. Oh, that's right- it allegedly desecrates the "sanctity" of marriage. Uh huh. This in a country where we have had reality shows such as "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" or where celebrities often get quickie marriages and then divorced in less than seventy-two hours. Before I actually read any material on the subject, I never did understand fully why people would be opposed to gay marriages, besides the fact that they are prejudice, of course. But as I researched more of the subject, I found that the reason goes far beyond phobias of gays and what they may or may not do behind closed doors. The reason that these seemingly hateful people have against gay marriage is "the word of God." I believe in God and Jesus Christ, however, I am not one of those types of people who take the Bible literally word for word. Nearly all of the material I read regarding the reason why gays should not be allowed to be legally married is because "it is against God's will." Nearly all of people against gay marriages quoted some scripture from the Bible, and would be followed by a statement similar to "So you can see, God sees this act as an abomination. To even have a desire or thought of gay acts will make you lose your spot in heaven" etc. They like to use the word "abomination" quite a bit. If we were to take everything to heart that's in the Bible, then any menstruating woman would be an "abomination" as well. So herein lies the fallacy: there is supposed to be a separation of church and state, and in the definition of marriage, it says that ": the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law." (Street Law 216) It is limited to man and woman because of the Bible. Besides the fact that this definition of marriage is formatted under the laws of the Bible, which it shouldn't be because of the alleged separation of Church and State, why is it that people automatically assume that the Bible is the correct text to use anything as a basis for when there are so many other religions out there? And what of the people who are not religious at all? No one considers the benefits of gay marriage. If two people are truly in love and wish to be together legally as well as in the eyes of God, whom I believe loves all of His children ("I have looked out on everything I have made and behold it is very good." Genesis 1:31), then why not allow gays the right as the rest of us heterosexual Americans has as well? This is supposed to be a nation of freedom, when this bias clearly points out that it is not. Many people against gay marriages, or people prejudice against gays, or homophobes consider it all to be deviant acts. But if we accept their unions, it can possibly help with low-self esteem that can lead to social problems. If one is gay, then one probably knows it at a fairly youthful age. Shouldn't we give gay kids "a sense of a real and responsible future, instead of a void where they will be condemned no matter how they live their lives?" (Sullivan) EMAIL OF THE DAY: A statement of the obvious: "It seems to me that maybe something that goes without saying needs to be said again-- one of the steps that any sane policymaker would take to slow the resurgence of HIV infection among gay men would be to recognize-- and, indeed, encourage-- gay marriages. Obviously, marriage is not for everyone, straight or gay, but the availability of marriage inarguably decreases the spread of STD's among straights. Why wouldn't it have the same effect among gays? It certainly couldn't hurt." Some viewpoints I have read consider homosexuality to be the "assault of what remains of America's sexual morality," (Sexual Values: Opposing Viewpoints) that gays and lesbians are a danger to society. But how is it that if two people who are committed to each other and want to have a family be wrong? I have seen first hand some heterosexual married couples who were just entirely one hundred percent wrong for each other, and where the environment had become hostile. For a couple to be straight does not give them an advantage to a happy, healthy marriage. If anyone wants to take "the plunge," then they should by all means be allowed that right just like anyone else. I believe the opposition to gay marriage and the opposition to gays is simply the replacement to biracial marriages and opposition to blacks. It seems as if [as a whole and as a community or country] we don't have something to fear and hate, then we simply cannot function. In 1958 in Virginia, a white man and black woman wished to marry, but it was illegal in their state. They went to Washington D.C., got married and returned home. They were shortly thereafter arrested, and the charges would only be dropped if they moved out of the state of Virginia for twenty-five years. They left, fought the case, and later won. The case was Loving v. Virginia. Nikki Giovanni once said that "if Mathew Shepard wasn't Emmet Till, then who was he?" I think that with time, people will move on from hating gays and gay marriages to something else entirely, as they did with racial differences and anything or anyone else before it. Our country is deep seated in prejudice and hatred, though some would like to believe it is righteousness and following the word of God. How long will it take before we stop hiding behind the Bible? "When you look at the crystal meth epidemic or the underlying psychological reasons to pursue sex for sex's sake, you have to include the fact that gay teens and gay men have close to no social incentives for coupling or monogamy? Marriage will save and lengthen gay lives, as it saves and lengthens straight ones. There will be no ultimate solution to HIV in the next gay generation without it." (Andrew Sullivan) Some people are against gay marriage because of the welfare of the children. Some people fear that a gay couple will attempt to make their children gay, forcing them into a life of "deviancy." Or what of when the gay couple divorces? Who will have the legal right over the child? If one of the parents is the biological one, then the answer should be simple. But what if the child is adopted? Then clearly, that should be debated in a court case for custody, just as with any heterosexual couple who had adopted a child and are then divorcing. I think the law and defintion of marriage should be altered. I think that it should include man and woman, woman and woman, or man and man. As long as it is a union between two persons alone, then it should be legal in the "land of the free" that is America. The term "free" should include all races, ethnicities, creeds, religions, and sexual preferences. If we want to talk about the "welfare" of the children, then, going back to what Andrew Sullivan mentioned, how is this train of thought affecting the gay youth as well as straight children? We are teaching the straight children by poor example that it is okay to single people out, and to condemn, and to be unaccepting of those who are different from us. We are teaching them to not see people on the content of their character, but on their personal, private business. We are teaching gay children that there will eventually be no love or acceptance for them as far as relationships and having families of their own. We are teaching them that straight people are better and will go to Heaven, and we are teaching them self hatred. Have we learned nothing from the "separate, but equal" time in our history? We are in fact allowing history to repeat itself, which should not be occuring. It may not be the same situation, but it is in fact parallel. "We have now had one year of legal same-sex marriage in our state. Despite predictions, we have not witnessed any threat to so-called 'traditional marriage.' There has not been an attack on family, and almost all would admit that very little has changed. In fact, however, something has changed. Many of our citizens have experienced the joy of marriage for the first time where the laws of our state have said, 'You are equal.' We have seen that joy in our son. To take that away would be an injustice. It would be devastating for our family and the real values we believe family should represent" (The Boston Globe) And what of mothers and fathers who want their children to be happy and healthy, no matter what their sexual lifestyle? We are working on the deconstruction of our community. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sexual activity or legal bindings between two consenting adults. If we want to talk about abominations and deviancy, then what of a situation involving a pedophile wishing to marry an eleven year old? Then there would be cause for strong opposition. In the past year or so, Mary-Kay Letourneau married her former victim Villi Fualaau. A lot of people decided that perhaps it really was true love for those two, in spite of the extreme age gap and that it was between teacher and student (Villi was 12 at the time their relationship began). They also have two children together. Though some still feel it's gross, the two lovers had the right to legalize their union under the eyes of God, even though the relaionship started when he was only a child, and essentially, she was marrying her victim. When wi

Available only
to logged in members

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
gshawnct
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 2
Posted on Fri, May 04, 2007 16:56

I think the problem is that so many people are so misinformed about what homosexuality is. As with so many other topics, when we as people do not understand something or cannot explain something, we fear it. Other peoples' fears should not prevent two people from being able to freely express their love and devotion to one another.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
siracko
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1
Posted on Mon, Jan 22, 2007 00:01

Homosexuality is god's way of insuring that the truly gifted aren't burdened with children. ~Sam Austin No government has the right to tell its citizens when or whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody. ~Rita Mae Brown, speech, 28 August 1982


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
scarletibis24
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 160
Posted on Tue, Jan 16, 2007 19:26

Well, I see some brought this back... cool beans. Dreamt- I agree 100%~ and I really hate the lame comparisons of comparing gay marriage to marrying an animal of some kind. It's ridiculous. Foxfire007- (cool name, btw) Absofriggin'lutely :D katiegrlK2B- I think people who put their focus into opposing it so strongly clearly have way too much time on their hands. sepelo7- Hmm... whatcha pondering?


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
sepelo7
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 639
Posted on Sun, Jan 14, 2007 17:11

hmmm


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
KatieGirlK2B
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 405
Posted on Sun, Jan 14, 2007 15:58

The way I see it is this: - no gays came to my wedding and protested me marrying my husband so I have no problem with gays marrying whomever they want in the privacy of their own event. - any who want to declare their love for each other in whatever way they choose are not doing it so that it will affect me in any way and therefore it's none of my business. - IT IS THE 21ST CENTURY. It's time we let go of traditions that were created by a society that let chickens run around the hut, that bathed in ponds and streams ONLY in the summer and who warmed themselves by burning hunks of wood in fire surrounded by rocks. - any act that is performed as a celebration of love and respect CANNOT BE A BAD THING.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Foxfire007
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 178
Posted on Sat, Jan 13, 2007 12:16

Good blog Scarlet! I feel that gays should have the right to marry. It doesn't hurt anyone. In the end, there is only one that we will stand in front of to be judged and that will be the only judgement that matters. "thou shall not judge"


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
dreamt
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 2
Posted on Sat, Jan 13, 2007 10:58

The way I see it - if two people love each other that much that they are willing to stand up in front of every person that makes up their world, declare it, be proud of it and state that they commit their life to that one person - what an amazing, awe inspiring thing to do, and no-one has the right to deny or take away that right from anyone else. If people out there feel the need to ruin the bond and commitment of others then they really need to get lives of their own.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Kolohe510
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 33
Posted on Fri, Aug 18, 2006 07:36

If you love each other and want to get married, you should be able to. I'm so sick of hearing that marriage is meant for only a man and woman. No offense, but not to long ago Caucasian and African American people had to drink from different water fountains. One day, gay marriage will be legal, and their is nothing anyone can do about it. So for all of you who are against it, GET OVER IT. DOESN'T GOD WANT US TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER?


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
SkatingTech
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1
Posted on Thu, Aug 17, 2006 17:44

Scarlet, I love your post! I am involved in a marriage equality task force at my church here in Virginia. There's a constitutional amendment on our fall ballot that defines marriage as between a man and a woman and further goes on to rule out all benefits of marriage to co-habitating couples. With your permission, I'd love to copy the text of your post and pass it on to fellow members of the task force. It's well reasoned and logical. In addition to the debate on gay marriage, I think there should be discussion concerning the whole purpose of marriage. Let me explain. Marriage, as it exists here and now in the United States, is descended from the medieval marriage contract. At that time, women were not much better than property, and the purpose of the contract was to ensure that the woman's possessions would pass to the husband when she died. Or to the eldest son, if her husband pre-deceased her. Younger sons were expected to make their own way, if possible, or join the priesthood, if not. Daughters were expected to marry or join the convent. Fortunately, we're not as, well, medieval as that! But vestiges exist. For example, when I married in my early 20's, I "inherited" my ex-husband's bad credit and driving records. Under Louisiana law, I've heard that the old inheritance laws still stand unless there's an airtight will. A couple of novels I've read speculate that, in the future, marriage will not be "till death do us part," but will be a contract with a set period of time - say 5 or 10 years. It would be renewable for another term if both parties agree. I find this idea interesting. Would couples work more dilligently at maintaining a relationship if they knew there was a set term? Or wouldn't they? I think an open discussion about what marriage *is* - as opposed to what it is *not* - would be a breath of fresh air!


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 33
Posted on Thu, Aug 17, 2006 17:27

Angelface, let me answer your question with one of my own. When had marriage *not* been defined as between a man and a woman? All that aside, I agree with your comments. I think you also see that marriage is not the only thing that mankind has screwed up.


0 up Bookmark and Share
carterandy
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1
Posted on Thu, Aug 17, 2006 14:40

Angelface2005 wrote: "The laws of the U.S. of A. were founded on the Judeo-Christian religion, not Islam or Hinduism or any other religion." You'd be surprised to find that the USA wasn't found on Judeo-Christian religion. Our founding fathers were Deists. Deists believed that there was a higher power, but they did not worship them exactly. They rarely went to church and they lived their lives normally, without a bible. It wasn't, actually, until the late 1500's before Christianity and Catholicism substantially grew and church began to be a regular thing for a majority of Americans. AND, if you want to get technical, the Chinese may have discovered America before Christopher Columbus did.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
scarletibis24
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 160
Posted on Fri, Aug 11, 2006 12:38

Hotlegs2000: So not only are you admitting to being a pedophile, you're admitting to being an icestuous one as well? Angelface2005: I know this topic won't be resolved (here), but I just felt like posting my own thoughts as opposed to piggybacking on Kalliope's already full blog. And though I do not agree, you, as is everyone else, is entitled to your thoughts. Thank you for presenting them intelligently. EternalNow: I hope you and whatever pet it is that you own will be happy together. However, I do not condone nor agree with bestiality. chancesare: Thank you for your thoughts as well.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
EternalNow
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 17
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 19:15

I just don't see why marriage has to be between two humans. Many profoundly love their dogs even more than other people. Some people love their gardens more than other people. This bias against inanimate objects denigrates the true feelings of many people. If marriage is about declaring ones love to the world, it's hard to see why such things should not be allowed, their love recognized by the state with the associated benefits (tax, medical, social, etc.) that come with marriage.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 33
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 16:58

As a social policy, the issue of gay marriage is moot. I'm sure many might think me naive, and that's okay. The fact is, the constitution and the bill of rights guarantees rights to all. Gay men and women have the same rights as straight men and women. Period. There is absolutely no need to mess with the constitution about this. As to marriage, it is a privilege, not a right. Well, I think it's a privilege if I don't think about my ex!!! LOL Marriage is defined, and always has been defined, as a union between a man and a woman. If common sense doesn't inform you of that, then think simply about the mechanics of sexuality. Do you get power when putting two plugs together? Is there a connection between two female jacks? Nature itself testifies against gay relationships. Wake up! Gays want to be recognized as a group with rights, in part, to legitimize their unnatural proclivities, and, in part, to assert the gay agenda in America. They want the same rights as those afforded according to the natural order, but theirs is not a natural order. An entirely different issue is whether it is morally right to espouse homosexuality. I don't think I'm going to open that can of worms here. Suffice to say that it is controversial for a reason. God loves gays as well as straights, but one needs to decide whether to be gay is in keeping with his plan for people.


0 up Bookmark and Share
scarletibis24
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 160
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 15:50

Bonnie: Thank you for your comment and your thoughts. I love how you presented your position intelligently without being insulting. CDinCo: Lol, thanks :D I wasn't aware of the premiums benefits. I also concur with it being a public forum, and I wasn't aware that my opinions would be considered so... offensive in comparison to other things being posted here. But to each his own, I guess. cheriamour: I also agree with your position and reasoning. Very well presented.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
CDinCO
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1320
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 11:45

Scarlet. I implore you to ignore Eternal. His dribble and nonsense are that which only he (and apparently whoever his ficticious God is) believe. "And who are you to impose your morality of "consent" on others..." UH, this is a public forum MORON! Not only can she write it but nobody MADE you read it. FIRST AMENDMENT BABY~!~ You know "Eternal," there is actually enough time to provoke some intelligent thought through typing in a blog. Why don't you do that before imposing YOUR "morality," or lack thereof, on everyone else. As I mentioned to "fit" if you are so contemptuous against anyone with a thought outside of yours, please revert to the "christian singles" site where you can interact with your own "like kind" while the rest of us continue reading, challenging, appreciating, participating and interjecting into the poignant, and sometimes challenging blogs with open minded and usually bright people.


Courtney :)

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
cheriamour
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 08:30

Homosexual couples deserve equality and respect as heterosexual couples enjoy. Gay partners need legal documents that protect their relationship and each of them should the relationship fail, just as marriage offers heterosexual couples. America's state-by-state approach to gay unions is producing a patchwork of varying laws that complicate legal and family issues. The closest parallel in our legal history to the debate over gay marriage has been the miscegenation laws of the 1950?s, interracial marriages. These laws prevented interracial marriages between whites and blacks. Keeping gay marriage illegal also violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Laws against same-sex marriage discriminates on the basis of sex because it makes one's ability to marry depend on one's gender. Classifications, which discriminate on the basis of gender, must be substantially related to some important government purpose and tradition by itself is not an important government purpose. There is no constitutional basis for denying gay couples marriage, and every constitutional reason why our government should actively pursue legalizing gay marriage in order to give gay men and lesbians their rights as equal citizens of the United States and to ensure their inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness that every American is guaranteed. At one time it was considered perverted and unnatural for black and white people to want to marry each other. Despite protests from the prejudiced, the Supreme Court defended the rights of the people. As time goes by the voice of the people will become loud, the lower courts will rule in favor of gay marriage and the USSC will agree with the law so whether it be in 5, 10 or 20 years we will see the right of homosexuals equal those of heterosexuals in every area including the marriage arena.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
CDinCO
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 1320
Posted on Thu, Aug 10, 2006 08:19

Oh GOD... Get Eternal out of here? We are ALLOWED our own opinions... Get off your soggy soap box! You probably CAN marry a tree, a guy in the mid-west just married his HORSE for GOD's sake! Pay attention! I believe in it, why not. Plus, the more benefits they receive the better the chances our premiums will go down due to increased participation ; )


Courtney :)

Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
scarletibis24
Available only
to logged in members

total posts: 160
Posted on Wed, Aug 09, 2006 23:45

EternalNow: Who am I, you say? I suppose I am nobody, nothing. My opinions and thoughts obviously do not matter. I am just an insignificant woman prattling away about things I clearly do not understand. Thanks. Thank you for comparing other human beings to inanimate objects and pets. How wise you are.


Reply / add comments   Quote   Report abuse    0 up Bookmark and Share
Follow - Email me when people comment