<p>First, I'd like to give a "hello" to all of you. Thanks for taking the time to read this thread.</p>
<p>I would like to know your opinion of same-sex (gay) marriage.</p>
<p>Do you support the right of same-sex couples to marry? If so, why do you? If not, why not?
Do you support the right for couples of the same sex to have a civil union in place of marriage? If so, why do you? If not, why not?
Do you have better questions to pose? Good. Share them.</p>
<hr>
<p>I greatly look forward to hearing from the diverse crowd that is CC. However, I do not want this thread devolving into a flame-war. Please respect others' opinions. If something is explicitly incorrect, or you perceive a fundamental misconception in a user's undesrtanding of either position, feel free to respond to the error. You may also refute points made by the those on the other side of the fence, but please take great caution in doing so. Try to use as objective a manner as possible. Neither G-d nor Thomas Jefferson will back up your claims, so please don't argue into a corner. This isn't a debate of sexuality.</p>
<p>The opposite would be to "oppose" the right of same-sex couples to marry. Or, to not believe that they there is a "right" to be opposed. I phrased it poorly.</p>
<p>I absolutely support gay marriage, civil unions, and the equal treatment of gays throughout The United States. I don't relate to or understand religious fundamentalists. I would be content if Jerry Fallwell got shot tomorrow.</p>
<p>ok you still confused me, but i think that they should have a right to get married... i figure we all have one life to live, we might as well let everyone do whatever makes them happy</p>
<p>Now, which do you support? Gay marriage or civil unions? According to you, they should have the right to do both? Which one do you personally endorse, for your state? Do you see marriage and civil unions as equivalent?</p>
<p>"Do you believe that a same-sex couple should be allowed to adopt?"</p>
<p>On that topic, you should be aware that same-sex marriage circumvents the adoption process. That is, if one partner has legal custody of an adopted child, the spouse is automatically granted the same status. So, the right of same-sex couples to adopt should only be answered by those who either oppose gay-marriage or endorse civil unions in place of civil marriage.</p>
<p>I personally don't care about civil unions or marriage. As a straight female, I don't ever plan on getting married. I just don't see the point. If you love someone, why not just live with them and be partners? Breaking up is much easier. From a personal point of view, I don't see the point in marriage, but if someone wants to marry another person, why not? Who's it going to hurt?</p>
<p>Poison.ivy-I really respect your opinion. I don't agree with certain things(wearing brown on black really irritates me), but I believe that people should have the right to commit this fashion faux-pas as long as it doesn't affect anyone else negatively.</p>
<p>I respect your position, but this is a misconception. Civil marriage grants many rights to both you and your spouse (on the order of 1400 enumerated ones). Everything from benefitting from a spouse's pension plan after their death to sharing a fishing license depends on being legally married. What most young people consider to be important are the income tax incentives and decision-making rights a spouse has in medical emergencies.</p>
<p>[Edit: Also, as a constituent of your state, you may have to vote specifically on the issue of civil unions vs. civil marriage vs. neither. So, it probably will affect you somewhow.]</p>
<p>Right, and I think that civil unions should be available to same-sexes. I do understand the issues with wills, etc. I think that marriages should be available to couples, but if southern hicks are too backwards to accept alternative lifestyles, then civil unions should be enacted to adjust ignorant people to change.</p>
<p>Interesting point, Hippodrome123. As devil's advocate, if nothing more, I'd point out that enacting civil unions nationwide could set an unhealthy precedent. To some, it would imply that civil rights can be compromised on. Another thing to bear in mind is that civil unions grant no federal rights. The definition of a civil union varies from state to state. So, the adjustment might happen only in title, not in an actual transfer of rights. Possibly.</p>
<p>I'm in favor of respecting same-sex couples but I'l also in favor of the government taking no role in marriage whatsoever. It should be up to the individual - I believe that marraiges should have no benefits.</p>
<p>If two people are attracted to each other (being of the same sex) and have genuine love for each other, I don't see why they should be segregated from people who genuinely love someone of the opposite sex. Sure, it goes against tradition but so do a lot of our modern day beliefs. If the love is there why shouldn't the support be there? It's just like saying segregating people of a different race: they can't help the color of their skin, or in this case, who they're attracted to (don't argue if gayness is learned or natural, that's a different thread if anyone wants to start it).</p>
<p>Check out my location under my name; it somes up all of my beliefs in a couple of words.</p>
<p>simfish, I am pleasantly surprised to hear that opinion. I have not heard that view before. It does raise an interesting question of how government benefits from couples' marriages. I somehow doubt that there would be incentives for the sole purpose of keeping up (what you seem to see as) a tradition.</p>