Gay Marriage: Yes or No

Yes or No to Gay Marriage

  • Yes

    Votes: 38 73.1%

  • No

    Votes: 10 19.2%

  • I'm not sure

    Votes: 4 7.7%
  • Total voters
    52
Also just because marriages used to stay together more often doesn't mean all those marriages were necessarily "working" at the time.
 
I think marriage is for lonely people, gold diggers and sex addicts.
 
slant said:
....no.
Eew.
Click to expand...

I can give you TONS of reasons to why your response is nonsence especially as an opinionated representative of a point of view to my former statement!!!!

1. You are a tomBoy.
2. You don't believe in love in the first place.
3. You are not familiar with 'dreams' (you said)
 
Last edited:
Quinlan said:
Also just because marriages used to stay together more often doesn't mean all those marriages were necessarily "working" at the time.
Click to expand...
I know, that's what I meant with my example. People feared the church.
I also think it has to do with the emancipation of women, because the 'man' isn't the necessary provider anymore, and women can live on their own.

So therefore couples divorce easier.
 
Pristinegirl said:
I have never thought about it this way, but now that you said it. I find it very inspiring! Thank you ^^




What a disgusting approach! I have no idea where you got this bullshit from. I almost find it insulting, extremely saddening and I can't help but take it personal. Marriage is not about MOST women being chauvinistic?!?!?! Neither do MOST women marry due to lack of TRUST! I'll tell you, for MOST women it is about living the childhood dream of being a princess for a day!!



Oh how distressing cynicism is... It really is poisonous! I have faith in 'living happily forever after, The end!' Glad that you believe in it too!
Click to expand...

I forgot a comma, should have been. mostly women, to be a chauvinist (me being a chauvinist)
 
I agree they weren't always working. In terms of the relationship between the couple. But it used to be seen as something that was predetermined yno, like God had decided they should be married so they had to work through their problems no matter what. That was the point, sometimes the relationships were bad but they had to try, and pray I guess. I'm not necessarily saying that this is a particularly healthy thing but just the way it was seen, and still is in a lot of places. I have an Indian friend who believes this whole-heartedly.
 
slant said:
Dude, I'm not a tomgirl.

I don't like sports.
Click to expand...

Don't you guys mean tomboy? I'm not familiar with all these terms though <.<

Nicola Jane said:
I agree they weren't always working. In terms of the relationship between the couple. But it used to be seen as something that was predetermined yno, like God had decided they should be married so they had to work through their problems no matter what. That was the point, sometimes the relationships were bad but they had to try, and pray I guess. I'm not necessarily saying that this is a particularly healthy thing but just the way it was seen, and still is in a lot of places. I have an Indian friend who believes this whole-heartedly.
Click to expand...

I don't believe in God.
 
You don't have to believe in God. But as marriage has traditionally been a religious institution this is all relevant to the argument.
 
There are a lot of non-religious elements in marriage that appeals to people, the recognition and celebration of the commitment and love for each other with your extended family and friends. Sure you can have your own personal private commitment to your true love but then why wouldn't you want to celebrate it and have it recognised by others?
 
Nicola Jane said:
You don't have to believe in God. But as marriage has traditionally been a religious institution this is all relevant to the argument.
Click to expand...
Then your argument is invalid, since I wouldn't think it determined by God.

And all you people making assumptions that I have a fear of commitment:
Do all of you maybe lack trust? That your partner will leave you if you don't marry, just because he/she can do it easier then if you were married?
 
We're humans, we have free reign to change traditions and insitutions as we see fit. It doesn't change the original purpose of the act or its meaning.
 
Nicola Jane said:
We're humans, we have free reign to change traditions and insitutions as we see fit. It doesn't change the original purpose of the act or its meaning.
Click to expand...
Indeed we can, so therefore gays should be able to marry.
Because we humans, who made up the institutions and traditions can change them.
 
prankster said:
Indeed we can, so therefore gays should be able to marry.
Because we humans, who made up the institutions and traditions can change them.
Click to expand...

exactly, which is why marriege doesnt HAVE to be religious.
 
Nicola Jane said:
You don't have to believe in God. But as marriage has traditionally been a religious institution this is all relevant to the argument.
Click to expand...

According to wikipedia marriage predates reliably recorded history, therefore marriage is not the exclusive domain of religion or any one religion. I think it had been hijacked by religion and now hijacked back by the non-religious (as will happen with things people find meaningful).
 
I'm kinda against the idea of "marriage" in general for everyone, (I think it should all be called civil unions as that's all the government has a right to prescribe) but if I can do it as a straight person with a woman I love, gays should be able to marry their partners too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top