Comments - Latest Popular Stories, Instablogs Community by Agaric

Heather

Heather — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

“You mark my words, this is just the beginning in a long downward slide in relation to all the things that we consider to be abhorrent,” said Robertson.

Salvador

Salvador — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

I see absolutely nothing wrong with gay marriage, just look at people who get married for a green card, really fucking sacred eh?

Jess

Jess — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

I’ve always considered marriage to be more of a religious designation anyway.

Mazen

Mazen — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Marriage is a religious ceremony. There is Separation of Church and State. Hence, the government should not be messing with religious definitions. If the homosexual minority wants legal unions, that’s fine. But stay away from Marriage, it’s is a religious institution.

Jessica

Jessica — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

which one of Britney’s Spears marriage was a religious ceremony?

Salvador

Salvador — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Marriage wasn’t originally for religious purposes.. but for political communes between royal families. Therefore.. gays should be able to get married. NOT in a church of course, but by a court.. yes

Fernando

Fernando — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.

Holeya

Holeya — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

I’m against “gay marriage”. Sorry, but a marriage is a man and woman joining together for the purpose of partnership, procreation, and mutual encouragement. Gay couples cannot procreate, therefore, it is not a “marriage”.

Nuya Bidness

Nuya Bidness — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

50 year olds can’t procreate either, so you want all marriages annulled when women pass child bearing age, since as you say it is not a marriage?

Oscar

Oscar — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

should anyone deemed medically unable to procreate be denied marriage, then?

Victor

Victor — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Gays have every right as a straight person in civil unions. The people have defined marriage as a union between a man and women. People have given them those rights, but some gays want everyone to condone their actions and the people morally cannot.

Nuya Bidness

Nuya Bidness — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

So do away with all marriages and make it contract based, that is more appropriate method of protecting the interests of both parties in an equal partnership. Then people can go to whichever clergy they chose to have the union blessed.

If it is just a matter of you objecting to the use of the ”word” marriage, then propose a euphemism for the word.

Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

How can you teach in school that gay people are equal to heterosexual people! How can you have this?!

Nuya Bidness

Nuya Bidness — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Erhm!... Because all humans are equal?

The second that you decide that certain humans do not deserve any rights, is the second that you become a Nazi or a slave owner or a pimp or a child molester or rapist or a Taliban or any of the other groups that view some people as less than human.

It then becomes very easy to justify violence and oppression. Once that group is subdued, then you find other groups that are not quiet human enough for your tastes and on and on and on until you have winnowed away humanity to only included people who are just like you.

Oscar

Oscar — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

wow Kevin,

You must be one of those that has a list of prerequesites before rendering someone human or worthy of justice and equality.

They are human, we all are..Gay, straight, bi, trans, and everything and color in between.

Anthony

Anthony — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Considering the fact that the Romans practiced homosexuality legally, I would say that there is nothing wrong in legalizing the gay’s marriage.

Kareem

Kareem — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Matt

You are very right while saying that “is it all about marriage or other rights”. I think people don’t want to discuss the other rights of Gays and they have made only gays marriage an issue. These are the deliberate attempts to divert the people’s minds from other issues of gays.

Nuya Bidness

Nuya Bidness — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Anti-discrimination laws should be all that is needed, no need to make special laws for special groups. That is what causes the divisions and leads to abuse of the laws.

For instance, hate crime laws, assault and murder are already crimes but the laws are used to pit jurors against one another based on race or sexual orientation.

Domestic violence laws are sometimes used by women to exact revenge against their partners since those laws have harsher penalties than simple battery laws.

Why all crimes are not treated equally is a mystery to me.

James

James — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Getting married is one’s personal affair. Why do people think that they can decide on others behalf. If someone is homosexual, he/she will remain so, no matter how hard to try to make them normal.

Let them live the way they want to. Others should rather focus on their own marriages.

Lynne K

Lynne K — Wed, 27 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

What consenting adults choose to do behind closed doors is no body’s business.

My understanding of marraige is when two people want to acknowledge their committment and love to each other as in a legal partner ship.

Many ”normal” marraiges fail or a partner can die so they can then turn to the legal processes to sort out assets etc.

This right should be given to all partnerships, and if they want to be married let them make the legal commitment.

Love is love - and what right has any one to judge people who love each other and want commitment.

There just isn’t enough love of any kind in this world.

Michael Kerjman

Michael Kerjman — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Sorry, I am the least proficient in playing English.

What is all this fas about “marriage” and “civic registration”?

Australia recognises same-sex unions - for state safe-network reasons surely. Why not people to register for being responsible over wellbeing of partners and offspring if any?

Was natural copulating with a stable partner registered in the ancient times pre-historical or this is a costly ceremonial to legalise sexual relations in exchange for providing life-hood as appeared much later?

And all these religious attachments-let Lord have what belongs to the Lord, and Caesar-what belongs to Caesar: in a free world strangers are not supposed to pip through bedroom doors, also sex-rumours are a hot topic saturating anything in/by/with media quite openly.

Pierre P.

Pierre P. — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Also Latvia allowed propaganda of zoophilia, you are right speaking on this human topic.

OneHumanity Please

OneHumanity Please — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

This experiment should be tried. What results we get, what are the effects, counter - effects, side effects, and certain statistics coming out of this would only prove us helpful. Those involving into such marriages should do so on their own risks. They would very naturally be discriminated by the society howsoever we would refuse.

And ye, we live in an overpopulated and crowded world. Gay marriages would at least help in reducing some number.

And why is this not considered in India and China? They have one of the must skewed female/male ratios in the world, only next to Arabs. In case of Arabs, we can’t talk this as talking gay marriage to Arabs is like committing suicide. I think population control would be the most helpful thing out of legalizing gay marriages.

Nuya Bidness

Nuya Bidness — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

I dont think it would have any effect on population because these people would not be producing children anyway, whether married or not.

What does happen is that they get someone else to have babies for them or go to sperm banks. But it is expensive and difficult so they rarely have more than 2.

very few of them want children but what they do want is be able visit their partners in the hospital when the hospital only allows family members. They also want to be able to own property together, have rights of inheritance, tax breaks that are given to other families and joint health insurance.

Think about it like this, I can sign my husband’s paycheck, put the money in the bank and then write out checks to pay the mortgage on our house, if we were not married, I couldn’t do that.

If we weren’t married, we would have to have separate contracts written up to allow me to have power of attorney over his business matters, and another to have joint ownership of our house and another to state that I lived there to be able to order utilities. If he died his will could be contested by his family members and those people would get control over property that I paid half of and on and on and on. It is a practical matter but most people are too emotional to be practical.

The fact that people can be discriminated against due to religious pressures is barbaric and inhumane.