Pack Jason,
It is you who is closed-minded for not even taking the time to understand the argument most people have against gay marriage in the first place.
Damn liberals. Always bashing, never listening.
The religious reason (which by now is pretty much the only reason left) for not allowing gay marriage is because it defiles the sanctity of a holy act and committment.
Just because America (and now the rest of the world) is turning their backs on what marriage originally means, it does not change what marriage is. If you ignore its meaning, then that's your business.
However, to allow gay men or women to clearly violate what was laid down in the religion which just happens to be the one that founded your nation, is wrong.
They need to ban it, and then amend back the constitution to have marriage as the union between man and woman, as it was originally intended.
Do I hate gays? No. Got a bunch of gay friends.
Should gays have rights? Every right that I have as a straight guy.
Should they get married? No. Let them live together and have a partnership if they please. What they do in their house is their business. But by calling it a marriage, that makes it my business because it changes the values that MY marriage is based on to something that is unacceptable to me.
They can be life-partners, or whatever they want to call it. And they should get every right that a straight couple has, but it is not a marriage.
I want to address a few of these and simply hear your response, not trying to bash.
How is that if two men or two women make the same commitment that it isn't a holy act? You believe in a soul I assume if you are religious. Well, it is still a joining of two souls.
I agree that America is turning their back on what marriage means -- look at the divorce rate! More than half the "marriages" fail in this country. As somebody that holds such a high regard for the "sanctity" of marriage, I would think that you would be more outraged at drive-thru wedding chapels or shows on TV where people are getting married to strangers. Don't you see that as a much bigger assault? To me, it seems to be a mockery of the idea of marriage: two people that love eachother making a promise to one another.
Why does everybody say that Christianity founded this nation? First off, we aren't a religious state. But I know that isn't what you mean. Most of the ideals for our country came from JUDEO-Christian ethics and morals and the desire to not have an attachment to religion. But this is a minor quibble, nothing major as it can be debated on both sides.
So essentially this is a semantics game? Is it simply the use of the word marriage? You say that they should have every right as a straight person; so you believe they should be able to enter into a legally bind |
