<p>ok... list if your for or against gay marriage, and your reasons... im just curious, and want to know what people's opinions are....</p>
<p>for.</p>
<p>because there's no valid reason against it.</p>
<p>for. </p>
<p>it helps reduce the population.</p>
<p>This has been **done</a> before<a href="and%20well,%20I%20might%20add!">/b</a>.</p>
<p>LOL mzlover hahahahahaha that makes me laugh</p>
<p>im for it.</p>
<p>i agree that there is no argument against. but there are many for =P</p>
<p>For. As a devout Catholic, I do not agree with it, but I will respect two people's right to marry, regardless of age, race, religion or gender.</p>
<p>im strongly against it</p>
<p>First off, it destroys the traditional family image.
Secondly, it's going to screw up public school education because if they embrace homosexuality, then public schools will soon be required to teach this perversion. Textbooks will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships.<br>
Lastly, religious freedom will be in danger. For example, in Canada, anything deemed to be homophobic can be punished by six months in prison or by other severe penalties.
Not to mention, tampering with His plan for the family is immoral and wrong and you will certainly go to Hell. That is all.</p>
<p>lol im just kidding, im actually for it.</p>
<p>i had to do this presentation with my partner in class and i was the one who had to play the part of someone against gay marriage so i just listed some ^ there...plus i wondered how some of you would react :P</p>
<p>against it</p>
<p>I am against the government dealing with anything called "marriage" at all. Marriage is a religious thing, and every faith and person should decide for themself what marriage will mean to them.</p>
<p>As far as the part of marriage government does regulate, that should be open to any two people wanting to sign such a contract. Hell, no reason it shouldn't be open to three or more people, too.</p>
<p>hmmm marriage in asia isnt based on religion.</p>
<p>fhshortie - i know u said ur for it, but if those were someone's arguments against it...it would be really easy to shut him/her down.</p>
<p>i am against another thread that'll go the same way as soooo many others</p>
<p>yeah i know, my arguments are lousy probably because i can't see why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed in the first place</p>
<p>Marriage is a social construct that has a rich history and a very religious tradition. Marriage should become solely the domain of religious institutions, and they should set down their own rules based on heritage, scripture, and their beliefs.</p>
<p>The government should only be involved in granting civil unions, and these should be open to any two people, as long as the relationship is not incestuous. Civil unions should provide the same benefits as marriage used to, and the state should simply get out of the marriage business.</p>
<p>Then marriage would become a religious construct (as it properly should be), and civil union would become the legal construct (as it properly should be).</p>
<p>This issue should be decided by majority vote and not by judges.</p>
<p>"This issue should be decided by majority vote and not by judges."</p>
<p>-I disagree. The United States is not run by a mob. We need intelligent individuals who are trained in law to decide the consitutionality of gay marriage and not some hick from Alabama.</p>
<p>Terrorists think of us as "western demons." Why? Well one of the main reasons is because they think of our culture as "decadent." Being gay is hardly even an option in the society of developing countries like those that harbor terrorists. Imagine if they heard that Uncle Sam not only likes gays (a foreign concept in itself), but is willing to let them get married! </p>
<p>Alas, there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet. </p>
<p>Jihad!</p>
<p>MzLover3-are you saying that we should not have gay marriage because it will upset terrorists? Who cares about them? They will hate us no matter what. Those animals aren't going to try any harder just because The U.S. has gays.</p>
<p>If you read post #3 you will see what I really believe. </p>
<p>"Those animals aren't going to try any harder just because The U.S. has gays." </p>
<p>There is no logic whatsoever to that statement. Of course they will try harder because they are always trying harder and something like gay marriage will only reaffirm what they already believe about the US population---that it is chiefly made up of "Christian devils" who enjoy pooping on the heart and soul of their civilization (the Qur'an) in their spare time. </p>
<p>BTW, I suggest that you try not to call people "animals" online. You never know who might be reading.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am against the government dealing with anything called "marriage" at all. Marriage is a religious thing, and every faith and person should decide for themself what marriage will mean to them.
[/quote]
Finally, I agree completely.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Marriage is a social construct that has a rich history and a very religious tradition. Marriage should become solely the domain of religious institutions, and they should set down their own rules based on heritage, scripture, and their beliefs.</p>
<p>The government should only be involved in granting civil unions, and these should be open to any two people, as long as the relationship is not incestuous. Civil unions should provide the same benefits as marriage used to, and the state should simply get out of the marriage business.</p>
<p>Then marriage would become a religious construct (as it properly should be), and civil union would become the legal construct (as it properly should be).
[/quote]
There's an issue where me and General Rak completely agree about, down to the logic? Go figure! Although it seems the type of logic used here somewhats contradicts the logic about the selfishness argument, we'll save it for that thread.</p>
<p>But while we're talking about it, I'm against it. Marriage is a word that should have a definition, and the line should be drawn as reproduction is most commonly found in nature, between one male and one female.</p>
<p>However civil unions should be granted to any pair who supports each other financially and live together, with a long-term commitment.</p>