Well, if you read the article, you realize there really isn't a dilemma at all. They simply aren't married. So there is no marriage to disolve. No need of a divorce. You can't end a marriage that never existed. They are both free to simply walk away. Massachusetts doesn't recognize them as married any more than Connecticut does. They got married in Massachusetts true, but the only marriages valid in Massachusetts are those that were performed for people who either lived in Massachusetts or who lived in a state that would recognize the marriage as legal. Since neither of these two things existed at the time of the marriage, the ceremony wasn't legal.
To be honest it's more about a moral issue than most realize. The majority or so to be believe the majority thinks in their opinion that same sex marriage is bad but even though it states in the bible it is a sin to fornicate the same sex, not all people are christian. Therefor it doesn't matter to them. Also if they are like me and don't care what anyone thinks of them, they would do it just because they said they can't.
QUOTE |
Gay marriage should be mandated by the states. It should be just as acceptable as the marriage between a man and a woman should be in any courthouse across the nations. Gay marriage also should be decided upon by each individual church. If a church wants to marry a couple, so be it. If they don't, that is their religion and practices, but should not direct what happens legally and outside of the church. |
Maicman I think the last US election was a subtle referendum on this issue. I saw on a major US TV network that gay marriage was one of the key moral issues people went to vote on, which is truly sad.
That aside, I would totally agree with glyphfury on this issue. Religion is a belief, it is not a set of rules that society lives by. Lets forget about semantics, marriage in layman's terms is the union of two people. You don't need to believe in a religion to be married. Homosexuality was rife when Jesus walked to earth so why do we hang such negative connotations over it. Does the bible actually preach against homosexuality in its original form? In fact nobody knows whether Jesus or any of his followers may have been that way inclined.
I personally don't understand why people are homosexual, but that doesn't make it wrong. Each to their own. If two men or women want to experience the joy's of being married then who are we, and who is the State or church to prevent them. Not legalising or recognising someone's union isn't going to prevent them from having that relationship so it really is a pointless law. But if that is what the majority want then you have to respect it and move on.
First of all I want to specify that although I don't like the idea of homosexuality, I learned to accept it. I'm not really sure that what I'll write is 100% accurate and I don't want to accuse or offend anyone, but this is how I feel it. In my opinion the people who disagree with gay marriage are more troubled with the idea of homosexuality, than the idea of marriage between homosexuals. In other words, if you CAN accept that two same sex person are in love, what is the problem if they get married (you can include here also the religious issues).
Offtopic but, Let's say that homosexuals get the right to marry ... the next step will be the adoption ... now tell me what kind of sexual education will get the adopted kid |
For me, I think the trouble I have with it is I don't want to normalize it. This is, of course, what homosexual's want to happen. To them, they consider their behavior normal for them and they want others to see it that way. I don't want that.
I am concerned that if we allow homosexual marriage we are saying there is no difference between a heterosexual couple and a homosexual couple. I don't think that is true and I don't want society to come to a point where that is the prevailing belief. I am afraid to have homsexual marriage viewed with the same normality as living together before marriage has become in the past 30 years.
Offtopic but, In some places in the US, homosexuals already are allowed to adopt. |
QUOTE |
For me, I think the trouble I have with it is I don't want to normalize it |
Offtopic but,
in that case, no offence, but I pity your country. |
The problem I have with gay marriage is the term marriage being used. To me marriage is between a woman and a man and is more religious in nature. With that said I do not have a problem between two people of the same sex forming a union for the purpose of sharing health benefits, retirement benefits and rights of inheritance upon the death of the partner. I do have reservations about same sex couples adopting children. The elimination of a female mother or male father is a concern; my boys have learned things I could never teach them from my wife and likewise they have learned things from me that a woman could not teach them.
Offtopic but, Earlier it was stated that god helped to form the U.S. constitution. I disagree with this statement, our constitution was written to prevent the formation of a state religion, it is meant to allow all religions the right to practice. The freedom of religion should not be taken as a freedom from religion. All religions have the right to practice here, you just can not force someone to practice a specific religion. |
Message Edited! Added offtopic tags. Please keep all off topic statements isolated with offtopic tags. |
QUOTE (Ramer @ 4-Jun 05, 6:20 PM) |
The problem I have with gay marriage is the term marriage being used. To me marriage is between a woman and a man and is more religious in nature. |