Gay Marriage; Right or Wrong

[California Girl]

Marriage is neither right nor wrong no matter who participates.

Marriage is a legal contract entered into by two consenting adults nothing more.

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Marriage is neither right nor wrong no matter who participates.

Marriage is a legal contract entered into by two consenting adults nothing more.

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

 

[konradv]

Marriage is neither right nor wrong no matter who participates.

Marriage is a legal contract entered into by two consenting adults nothing more.

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

That's a red-herring. When has the government told churches who they must marry? Gay people can find churhes that will and would be unlikely to go somewhere where they are made to feel unwanted. The problem is governments not legally sanctioning whatever church are willing to perform gay marriages.

 

[Newby]

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

I agree, it should just be a legal document. Technically I always thought you were considered married by the state once the license was issued. You don't need a service or ceremony, just the signatures of those involved and a witness. They typically take care of that either right before or right after the ceremony. The ceremony is just window dressing.

 

[AmericanFirst]

I am not asking you guys if I should get married I am just wondering if it is right or wrong. A lot of people say gay marriage is wrong, I on the other hand say Gay Marriage is perfectly natural. I do not see what the big deal is either. When I run for congress, one of my campaign promises is I will make gay marriage legal in North Carolina. Currently we have to travel to Virginia to get married because they support gay marriage, North Carolina doesn't.

It is not natural. If it was God would have created Adam and Steve not Adam and Eve.

 

[johnrocks]

It's neither right or wrong to me, it should be up to those who want to get married, if George Washington didn't need government permission to get married why should any other consenting adult need it?

 

[Nosmo King]

Marriage is neither right nor wrong no matter who participates.

Marriage is a legal contract entered into by two consenting adults nothing more.

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

Marriage is a legal contract. That makes it the business of the state. Otherwise, we would have to go to churches or some private sector entity to enforce every contract. And that's not what America was set up to do, is it?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Well said.

The "sanctity" of marriage is long dead.

A better question would've been "is being gay right or wrong"? Even this my answer would've been neither, but it would've been an improvement.

So in other words I think gay marriage should be legal, but I don't think government should have a hand in any marriage. Leave that up to churches, insurance companies, etc.

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

There is no such thing as separation of church and state in the constitution. Marriage nshould be in a church between a man and woman.

 

[Nosmo King]

I am not asking you guys if I should get married I am just wondering if it is right or wrong. A lot of people say gay marriage is wrong, I on the other hand say Gay Marriage is perfectly natural. I do not see what the big deal is either. When I run for congress, one of my campaign promises is I will make gay marriage legal in North Carolina. Currently we have to travel to Virginia to get married because they support gay marriage, North Carolina doesn't.

It is not natural. If it was God would have created Adam and Steve not Adam and Eve.

It's not Adam and Steve. It's Adam and Steven.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

I agree, it should just be a legal document. Technically I always thought you were considered married by the state once the license was issued. You don't need a service or ceremony, just the signatures of those involved and a witness. They typically take care of that either right before or right after the ceremony. The ceremony is just window dressing.

Well said, I have no problem with a church turning away a gay couple or any couple for that matter.

 

[Dr.Drock]

It's not for you decide that the 'sanctity' of marriage is dead. It might be for you - and for many others.... but it isn't to many more.

Marriage, to me, is a religious commitment, nothing to do with the state or anyone else. I couldn't give a rats ass if the state wants to license gay to get 'married'.... as long as they don't force Churches to do likewise.

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

I agree, it should just be a legal document. Technically I always thought you were considered married by the state once the license was issued. You don't need a service or ceremony, just the signatures of those involved and a witness. They typically take care of that either right before or right after the ceremony. The ceremony is just window dressing.

Well said, I have no problem with a church turning away a gay couple or any couple for that matter.

I agree also it should just be a piece of legal paper showing consent and marriage and what not.

 

[Immanuel]

I think that gay marriage is none of my business.

I do not think that the government should be in the "marriage" business at all.

I believe the government should license "civil unions" or "civil partnerships" or what have you and those should be the legal contracts granted to a man/woman relationship, a man/man relationship or a woman/woman relationship.

As for marriage, it belongs to the church. The various churches should make their own decisions as to who they will marry. Some churches today won't marry couples that are "living in sin". There are some churches that will ordain homosexuals and many of these churches would also be willing to marry homosexual couples if it were legal. These churches should be allowed to do so while churches that believe homosexuality is a sin against God should not be forced to do so.

Immie

 

[R.D.]

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

Marriage is a civil institution - that's why it is not mandatory to be done in a church etc..and still legal. All marriages must have a valid license given by the municipality.

The silly confusion that a religion must accept and preform gay union is pure propaganda.

 

[Dr.Drock]

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

Marriage is a civil institution - that's why it is not mandatory to be done in a church etc..and still legal. All marriages must have a valid license given by the municipality.

The silly confusion that a religion must accept and preform gay union is pure propaganda.

Think about it from a real world perspective too, if a church doesn't want to marry gays, and the gov't forces them too, you think they're going to give a damn how well the ceremony is run or will the pastor care about doing his best work?

 

[del]

I am not asking you guys if I should get married I am just wondering if it is right or wrong. A lot of people say gay marriage is wrong, I on the other hand say Gay Marriage is perfectly natural. I do not see what the big deal is either. When I run for congress, one of my campaign promises is I will make gay marriage legal in North Carolina. Currently we have to travel to Virginia to get married because they support gay marriage, North Carolina doesn't.

It is not natural. If it was God would have created Adam and Steve not Adam and Eve.

did you make that up all by yourself?

brilliant

 

[Nosmo King]

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

Marriage is a civil institution - that's why it is not mandatory to be done in a church etc..and still legal. All marriages must have a valid license given by the municipality.

The silly confusion that a religion must accept and preform gay union is pure propaganda.

Think about it from a real world perspective too, if a church doesn't want to marry gays, and the gov't forces them too, you think they're going to give a damn how well the ceremony is run or will the pastor care about doing his best work?

Churches in the South remained bigoted and refused to marry inter-racial couples. Once people realized that racial differences are only skin deep, those bigoted churches saw their membership drop.

I suppose homophobic churches will have a similar enlightenment once people realize love is love and to restrict it based on stupidity is a dead end street.

Churches only SANCTIFY a marriage. The state issues licenses to enter the contract of marriage.

 

[Sky Dancer]

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

Marriage is a civil institution - that's why it is not mandatory to be done in a church etc..and still legal. All marriages must have a valid license given by the municipality.

The silly confusion that a religion must accept and preform gay union is pure propaganda.

Think about it from a real world perspective too, if a church doesn't want to marry gays, and the gov't forces them too, you think they're going to give a damn how well the ceremony is run or will the pastor care about doing his best work?

First of all, we are talking about civil marriage law. The marriage license itself. The license comes first, and then the ceremony. Changing this law will in no way force churches to marry gay couples.

It will allow gay couples to marry. Period and obtain all the rights and priveleges that come with the license.

This is about the license first, not the ceremony.

Gays and lesbians have already been married in church ceremonies and private gatherings. What they haven't been, is legal.

 

[Sky Dancer]

the state should NOT sanction nor recognize church marriages. If one wants a marriage to be legal they should have to have a civil ceremony.

So many people whine about separation of church and state but have no problem with the state vesting power in a priest. It's hypocritical

I agree, it should just be a legal document. Technically I always thought you were considered married by the state once the license was issued. You don't need a service or ceremony, just the signatures of those involved and a witness. They typically take care of that either right before or right after the ceremony. The ceremony is just window dressing.

Well said, I have no problem with a church turning away a gay couple or any couple for that matter.

Me either. I have no problem with a church, temple, mosque etc turning away a gay couple from a marriage ceremony.

My beef is with city hall turning them away for civil marriage licenses.

During the window when gay marriage was legal in California, my partner of 26 years and I were married in a Buddhist ceremony by our Lama and witnessed by our entire Buddhist sangha. Then we went for the license. The clerk said, don't tell me that you've been married already, you're supposed to get the license first!

I live in a small, rural county. I thought we'd be the first couple to apply for a marriage license. To my surprise, a couple of men who'd been together for 40 years beat us to it.

 

[rightwinger]

Gay marriage does not harm me at all

I have no problems with consenting adults who love each other being able to formally declare their relationship

 

[Sky Dancer]

I am not asking you guys if I should get married I am just wondering if it is right or wrong. A lot of people say gay marriage is wrong, I on the other hand say Gay Marriage is perfectly natural. I do not see what the big deal is either. When I run for congress, one of my campaign promises is I will make gay marriage legal in North Carolina. Currently we have to travel to Virginia to get married because they support gay marriage, North Carolina doesn't.

I salute you for your open view and your willingness to run for congress. I wish you great success.