<p>Ok here is what is wrong by this WHOLE debate. </p>
<p>1.) People don't like gay marriage because of their religious views.
-NEWS FLASH! America isn't a theocracy. Eating animals is against my religion but I'm not going to try and ban people from eating meat. It's ridiculous. </p>
<p>2.) People can't have kids in gay marriage.
-I can't, does that mean I can't get married? Cause some a** decided to rape a little girl and leave her unable to have children, she shouldn't be able to get married? (The she applies to me and everybody else who that's happened to.)</p>
<p>3.) Again it's "unnatural."
-That's why homosexuality exists in every recorded species of animals on the planet? Male seahorses care for the eggs, does that mean it's unnatural? And like somebody else said... air conditioning and cars are COMPLETELY natural. W/e. </p>
<p>4.) It will affect our children.
-Yes, the same way that exposing your children to other religions and races has such a negative effect. If THAT'S your biggest concern then you should read what white people wrote about blacks and why they couldn't play with their kids even 40 years ago. </p>
<p>Seriously, join us in the time when EVERYBODY has the right to life, liberty, and happiness. Anybody want to argue with me about this, I'm very open for a debate right now.</p>
<p>The entire argument that "America is a Christian nation" is fundamentally flawed. First of all, although some colonies had strict religious policies or mandated at least Half-Way church attendance for voting, most of the founders were Deists.</p>
<p>The gay marriage debate is fun because there's no way the other side can present real FACTS to prove their point without a lot of creativity. It's all a matter of opinion. Furthermore, there is a strong legal, economic, and civil argument for lifting the ban.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Eating animals is against my religion but I'm not going to try and ban people from eating meat.
<p>I'm a form of Neo-Pagan most closely related to Wiccan. It's a religion my grandma passed down to me that doesn't actually have a name lol. BUT I'm thinking about converting to Hinduism because it MUCH more closely matches my beliefs. Hbu?</p>
<p>Jainism - very old Indian religion, closely related to Buddhism. A few million people in India still follow it, and there's a growing amount here. It pretty much follows the general theme in Indian religions of non-violence, karmic theory, and reincarnation of souls, but there's no concept of a God and many would say it's more extreme than Buddhism (but I disagree).</p>
<p>I've never heard of it... but I'm very interested in it now. Non-violence, karma, and reincarnation are very central to my beliefs. As well as that there is a spirit in everything (which is tied to reincarnation). Is there something like that in Jainism??</p>
<p>I believe there are a few paragraphs in PCEP's AP World History textbook about it, but it seems to present it as a very extreme religion. Carroll's and Doc's rooms also have posters on it (the same one, like the ones for all the religions). There is a concept of a spirit in everything, the concept of atma or soul, which is perfect but its powers are obstructed by karmas. That concept is found in Hinduism and Jainism but not Buddhism, which is one major conflict between Jainism and Buddhism.</p>
<p>Anyway, back to gay marriage. I wouldn't say I'm for it in that I wouldn't encourage it to occur, but I certainly wouldn't say I'm for banning it. Keep it legal. I see no point in banning it.</p>
<p>The thing is, no one is actively trying to stop gays from getting marriage. People just aren't interested in changing the definition of marriage. It could be for political reasons, but...even liberal states like NY and California haven't voted for gay marriage. Marriage is between man and woman. A gay man can marry if he wants, and so can gay women. They want to marry each other. This is preferential treatment they're requesting, not "the same rights as everybody else." I can't marry my best guy friend for the tax cuts, and two guys can't marry because they love each other. Sounds equal to me.</p>
<p>"The thing is, no one is actively trying to stop gays from getting marriage. "</p>
<p>ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? There are always anti-gay marriage protests, and people actively stop legislation to give gays equal rights. </p>
<p>"A gay man can marry if he wants, and so can gay women. They want to marry each other."</p>
<p>WHY would you marry somebody you're not in love with. It's people like you that make it hard for people to be who they really are and why states haven't legalized gay marriage.</p>
<p>"This is preferential treatment they're requesting, not "the same rights as everybody else.""</p>
<p>UHM. HOW is this PREFERENTIAL treatment to ask for basic rights that all straight people have? I can't marry somebody I love because they're a woman but if they are a man then suddenly it's ok? Then why are we allowed to interracial marry now? Or interreligion marriage?</p>
<p>I agree with the comparison to interracial marriage. Back in colonial times, at least according to Howard Zinn, anyone in certain colonies who married a slave or a Native American was to be banished, or something. There's no plausible reason this should have been true, but essentially, people thought that the creation of a new "mongrel" race was a degradation of the term marriage.</p>
<p>It's not the same though. I really find it offensive when people try to compare gays wanting to get married with African-Americans fighting for civil rights.</p>
<p>^^ Please tell me how CIVIL rights for non-whites is ANY different from CIVIL rights for gays? WE'RE ALL PEOPLE AND SHOULD HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS!!</p>
<p>"It's not the same though. I really find it offensive when people try to compare gays wanting to get married with African-Americans fighting for civil rights."</p>
<p>Um, why? There was the same stigma against interracial marriages as well, so this issue isn't new - people always want to limit the rights of others so that they are still comparatively superior. </p>
<p>As insensitive as it sounds, racial issues have more credibility than gay issues. Fighting for rights that have been denied from you because of your skin color or country of origin is much more, eh, imperative than rights you think you deserve based on who you have sex with.</p>
<p>No it's not. It's only more imperative to some people because those people are shallow and judge differences more based on skin color than deeper issues.</p>
<p>They're actually about the same. Both are unchangeable facets of a person, which often influence their cultures, their friends, their success in life, and so forth. The only difference is we've overcome the culturally-ingrained racism (mostly), but have yet to mostly overcome the culturally-ingrained homophobia.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As insensitive as it sounds, racial issues have more credibility than gay issues. Fighting for rights that have been denied from you because of your skin color or country of origin is much more, eh, imperative than rights you think you deserve based on who you have sex with.
[/quote]
That's a terrible way of phrasing it. Much better would be to go with: "Fighting for rights that have been denied from you because of where you were born is much more imperative than rights that have been denied from you because of how you were when you were born". Only, then, it sounds as logical as it is - which is probably why you didn't state it that way... it kind of reveals all the holes in it.</p>
<p>I think it's ridiculous that the people who whine and moan about how gay people profane the "sanctity of marriage" have the audacity to say "well, they could marry a lesbian!" If that's not profaning the sanctity of marriage, I don't know what is. Marriage is not "the right to marry SOME PERSON OF THE OPPOSITE SEX", it's "the right to marry SOMEONE YOU LOVE".</p>
<p>"As insensitive as it sounds, racial issues have more credibility than gay issues. Fighting for rights that have been denied from you because of your skin color or country of origin is much more, eh, imperative than rights you think you deserve based on who you have sex with. "</p>
<p>So fighting for rights because of how you were born ... is different for fighting for rights because of how you were born?? Now which one of those is race and which is your sexuality?</p>
<p>Just so you know, gay people like straight people are in loving, committed relationships for more than just the sex. And again, it could be applied to race as well.</p>
<p>And yes, despite those experiments and observations with rats (Turkish scientists believe disco music makes them more likely to "turn" gay) and penguins (the absence of females in a population has led some males to "become" gay and use pebbles as eggs), being gay does have a strongly genetic component. I'm not arguing for biological determinism, which is clearly false. However, there have been studies shown that strongly imply that sexual orientation is not a "choosable" characteristic. For example, the eldest child in a family is least likely to be gay, the youngest is most likely. Instead of what conservatives would posit as alienation or desire to be different, the current most accepted hypothesis is that the mother will send more antibodies to send the foreign body, especially in males, after she's had a certain number of children.</p>
<p>^^ Lol I defy that by being a first-born and bisexual. Mwahaha, so it's my mommy's fault. Yay mommy. :]. </p>
<p>But just as you say you cannot change what color you are born, you can also not change what sexuality you were born to prefer. By banning gay marriage you are essentially saying, "Oh, we didn't like how you were born, so no marriage rights for you. No being joined to the person you love and want to spend the rest of your life with." Again, IS THAT ANY DIFFERENT THAN RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN MARRIAGE?</p>
<p>No, I'm saying I think marriage is and should stay solely between one man and one woman. </p>
<p>My thing is, I think the gay community is just as dismissive of religious people and their beliefs. Gays don't care about why people don't feel they should get married, they just care about having an issue to feel put upon about. They know marriage is innately religious. They know the Bible doesn't exactly condone their lifestyle. Yet they expect people who take the Bible and its teachings seriously to just arbitrarily look the other way so they can get their way.</p>
<p>Call me cynical, but I think the whole issue is too parochial at this point.</p>
