I just know Homosexual is no longer censored.
First to answer your question I live in Indy and I know It's extremely conservative so It's doubtful it will pass. and second it shouldn't pass. Marriage is a reproductive contract (It basically means that you can't have s.ex with anyone else) so it makes no sense to say that two people who cant reproduce should have a contract like that.
@ Osvaldo I'm black and there is a BIG difference with what skin color I was BORN WITH and what some CHOOSE's to do. I GET SOOO P.ISSED when ppl try to equate choosing to stick they're d.icks in someones @ss to being one race or the other. HOMOSEXUALITY ≠ RACE
would: Any god who condems people for the way the live is not worth worshiping. What about where god tells people to massacre cities, and kill the pregnant women.
So people being racist isn't sinning? Really? Cruelty towards other people is more of a sin than being gay 'is'. The bible says wearing woven fabric and having your hair cut is a sin, also. The difference between this is that racism isn't a religious belief. Homosexuality is. There's absolutely no seperation between state and religion and that's the only reason people see it as a problem. Laws shouldn't be linked in religion.
Marriage isn't a contract that means two people have to exclusively sleep with their partner. Marriage is a link between two people, regarding their commitment to one another, their kinship, support for eachother, and legal obligations.
Marriage from a legal standpoint means that after their spouse dies, they are entitled to their funeral life, finances, and the entire life they have created together.
Marriage is not a contract to reproduce. That's not what marriage is or ever should be. Marriage is a link of legal and emotion obligations.If a gay couple has been together for 45 years, and one of them dies, their partner has no right to the house, car, or life they have created together if it's under their spouses name. They have no right to any belongings that remind them of their spouse. They have no right to anything they have created together, Even though they created that life the same way same se.x couples do.
Although I don't support gay marriage. Shade: I wouldn't say "reproductive" contract because what about the woman that can't have kids, are they allowed to get married? but rather it's a "love" contract because the between two people; although homosexuals feels as though they "love" that other person too. (and I do not want to hear from anyone about "I can't tell people who they can and can't love"). And as I said before it is already legal everywhere. (I still don't support)
Although I don't support g,a,y marriage. Shade: I wouldn't say "rep,roduc,tive" contract because what about the woman that can't have kids, are they allowed to get married? but rather it's a "love" contract because the between two people; although hom,ose,xu,als feels as though they "love" that other person too. (and I do not want to hear from anyone about "I can't tell people who they can and can't love"). And as I said before it is already legal everywhere. (I still don't support)
I seriously do not think that g a y marriage across the country will happen anytime soon, or even in many states. "Marriage" as an act and even the word is an extremely sacred thing for so many people, that in order for civil unions to be legalized, wording and mechanics will have to be changed. I'm not against civil unions, but I cannot think of marriage as anything other than between a man and a woman. "Civil union" is a much better suited phrase, and I think if these distinctions were made, a lot more people would be less opposed to the idea itself.
Government-condoned marriages aren't an inalienable right. Freedom to live our lives free from slavery is.
S.odomy is a choice (perhaps a hard one for some, but still one nonetheless); race is not.
Whether or not h.omosexuality is wrong, it has about as much to do with race as the Man on the Moon.
collin: banning gay marriage is slavery
banning g.ay marriage is slavery
Exactly my thoughts, CollinF. =)
I thought about the "Infertile" case I dont have a good argument for that yet... oh well.
for infertile, should all women divorce after men.opause (please can we end this fast I don't want to think about m.enopause)
I will start by saying that I am not in the least supportive of gay relationships. I will also say that I am a Catholic. I do, however, also believe that it's someone else's choice as to whether or not they want to be g.ay. I have no problem with it. What I do have a problem with is g.ays who say I oppress them by being a Catholic. For a simple example I can ask you to find a simple comment from a g.ay that, when they accuse their attackers, doesn't involve Catholics, and you probably won't, because when they consider the "oppresive ones" that fight them, Catholics are usually number one on the list.
Also, being a Catholic doesn't leave me with resentment for those who choose to be g,ay. If someone is a good practicing Catholic they won't go out there attacking people, they just don't have to accept their beliefs. Yet they're attacked, and way too much.
Not here either
Living in Indiana and having been on the Senate floor of the state before, I can firmly say ga.y marriage will not be allowed any time in the near future. The average person here is very conservative, to an almost annoying point, and I'm a conservative myself. Not only that, but the Republicans have a super majority in both the houses in the Statehouse, and the partisanship isn't nearly as bad here as on the national level- many Democrats are even pretty conservative. Basically, it's all one big Republican party in the state legislature, not to mention the governor, so ga.y marriage is not happening here.