Who here is opposed to gay marriage?

[uconnyc]

If so why?

[mdguss]

1. I am opposed to gay marriage:

Because I believe it intrudes on the right to freely practice religon.

I support visitation rights for gay couples, I support gay adoption (to qualified parents), I support the right to file a joint tax return, and I support domestic partner benefits (so long are churches are not forced to provide them).

I think marriage is somewhat religious and legalizing gay marriage would intrude on the rights of religon.

[roughsatori]

2. "it intrudes on the right to freely practice religion"???????

Your logic eludes me.

[Dookus]

4. marriage

has two aspects: religious and legal. Nobody is saying the churches have to perform gay marriages. But as far as the legal, secular definition of marriage goes, then gay people should certainly have equal rights.

You're still free to marry in your church - gay marriage has no effect on that.

[LeftCoast]

5. Ok, I'm confused

I don't understand how gay marriage intrudes on your religious practices, unless you mean that your religious practices give you the right to determine everyone elses rights.

Please do clarify. I'm real curious...

[cally]

15. I once made this argument

and then just talked myself into a corner. If marriage is a religious rite than why should the state disavow religious rites? Marriage is sacred, but not all marriages are religious events. If you believe that religions have a roll in marriage, then shouldn't all religions have a roll? Many churches, synagogues, temples, etc recognize gay marriage. So what makes the state have the right to refute their beliefs? If you support the free practice of religion then why not accept gay marriage as a sanctified marriage.

That's why I talked myself into a corner. I was advocating civil unions as a compromise. That's what it is..a compromise. If you honor religious rights, I don't see how you can't honor a marriage performed in a religious ceremony.

The civil rights are just not even debatable. Everyone deserves civil rights.

[xultar]

3. I oppose for cute gay men only

I don't oppose marriage btwn lesbians or marriage btwn ugly gay men.
Is there a problem with my stance? :shrug:

[tishaLA]

12. So you're saying your position on gay marriage is

....the prone position?

A good position indeed.

[MercutioATC]

6. I think it's an unnecessary issue.

We could very easily let religion "have" marriage and call the legal institution something else (like "civil unions"). Religions could decide which "marriages" they'd approve, but none would have any legal standing (kinda like a marriage today if you don't get a marriage license).

The ONLY legal device for joining couples would be a "civil union". Any couple (straight or gay) could get one. This is the device which would convey the legal rights. "Married" couples could get one too, like they get a marriage license now.

I'm sick of hearing fundies bitch about what "God" wants. Let them HAVE "marriage". Let's call the legal process something else.

[incontrovertible]

7. unless there's a government mandate that churches have to perform them,

or provide the same facilities and support for the weddings as they would to marriages that they do sanction, I'm not opposed to it at all. I think the first amendment trumps all others. My wife and I were turned down in our requests to rent a number of churches for our wedding, because we were living together already. I thought it kind of backward and unfriendly, but they were entitled to their religion.

Do I think it'd be a good idea for our candidate to add a line to the stump speech saying "I will only appoint Supreme Court justices who will vow to uphold gay marriages, and rule unconstitutional any laws restricting them?" No. Ten years from now, with a leftist court, that will be the end result anyway. No need to gamble Roe v. Wade or the fourth amendment by pushing it into the collective face of the electorate. I find the timing and prominence unfortunate.

[mdguss]

10. Intrudes on religion

by forcing some churches to materially support (through health/other benefits) relationships that are contradictory to their beliefs. I think that is wrong, and for that reason I oppose gay marriage. I am NOT saying that this will force churches to perform gay marriage. It won't, but it will intrude on the practice of religion. But we've already had this debate twice today. My opinion has been expressed. It's in the minority here and in the Democratic Party. But that is ok. It is what I believe to be right.

I support visitation, right to file joint tax return, etc. Additionally, if the election becomes about gay marriage (and judges) we'll get creamed. It's not the right time to fight on this issue.

[kalian]

8. Not opposed...

I strongly believe in individual rights not instilled by religious
dogma.
I may not agree with the lifestyle but I will defend them to the
death if need be. Its about freedom...nothing more and
nothing less.

[bhunt70]

9. I'm not.

[IronLionZion]

11. How about waiting until AFTER we beat Bush

to pursue gay marriage? Doing it now will be a certain loss for the Democrats. That's why our candidates are saying civil unions.

Remember that gays will have more rights and a better chance for gay marriage with a Democrat in the White House. Don't ever forget that.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. I'm only opposed to it for me

I'd be paying alimony to half the women in the country if it were legal. :shrug:

[Moderator]

14. locked

inflamatory AND wrong forum.