Opinsy: Gay couples should be allowed to marry

Read the article at reuters.com
published in law & crime , tagged under United States, obama, President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, gay marriage, gay rights, gay rights group, civil unions

Agree (81%)

Disagree (19%)

Debate (34)
Arguments For (2)
Arguments Against (1)
Articles
Videos

Sort By:

date goodpoints replies

Thomas Glover says: I really never see this question as a debate and wonder why so many people are against gay couples marrying.. I see it as simply this: If someone wants to do something, and its not hurting me, it's not hurting my family or friends, and it's not hurting ANYONE ELSE either, WHY SHOULD I CARE??? Let them do what they want!! It's none of my business or anyone else's. Who are we to tell a couple in love what they can and can't do? Really. Give it a rest. from: littlestar714, I AGREE

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Emely Vermeiren says: I agree. When two people love each other, they can choose what they do. Their is nothing wrong with two people of the same sex marrying each other, they have the same rights as every other human.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Dom Turner says: I totally agree. Marriage was around well before any church decided to take it as their own, so why should homosexuals not be allowed to enter into a loving, committed relationship under the title of marriage?

(3) Good Point Reply

report

Ste says: The beauty of the 'religious argument' is some religions are happy to perform gay marriages and support it - and some, are not. With recent news (see below) that faiths will be given the choice to 'opt-out'. Marriage, in a legal sense, should therefore be legal.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Fiona Beth says: Latest in the UK is that David Cameron supports religious marriages for gay couples - no reason why they should miss out on the "institution" http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/07/churches-same-sex-weddings-compromise

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Josh Oldham says: What do you conservatives want - more single gay people? I smell a conflict of interests. They just want gay people to stay on the market.

(1) Good Point Reply

report

Hannah Kennedy says: People should be able to marry whomever they want, be that man or woman. Gay marriage being wrong in the eyes of the church causes so many more problems. What about "straight camps" where parents can send there gay kids or gay people can go themselves to get help to be straight rather than being gay. I watched a program where a very religious family had a gay son and the mother likened that to him being a terrorist just because her religion says its wrong. How can it be okay to penalise someone for who they love when god is supposed to love all his children no matter what.

(1) Good Point Reply

report

Littlestar714 says: I really never see this question as a debate and wonder why so many people are against gay couples marrying.. I see it as simply this: If someone wants to do something, and its not hurting me, it's not hurting my family or friends, and it's not hurting ANYONE ELSE either, WHY SHOULD I CARE??? Let them do what they want!! It's none of my business or anyone else's. Who are we to tell a couple in love what they can and can't do? Really. Give it a rest.

(2) Good Point Reply

report

Alex Hugosen says: Yes, God loves all people, but marriage is a religious ceremony between a man and a woman. Their are civil unions available for gays if they really want to commit to each other. I don't see the argument - gays don't need marriage at all. It's the government you need to be nagging at if you want equal rights, not the church.

(0) Good Point Reply 1 reply, 1 person

report

freshcn says: For anyone wishing to quote religion here, is your God not a LOVING God? He loves ALL people, taking their differences into account. People who love are priceless - their sexuality is unimportant.

(0) Good Point

report

Peter Marshall says: For anyone wishing to quote religion here, is your God not a LOVING God? He loves ALL people, taking their differences into account. People who love are priceless - their sexuality is unimportant.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Mister Scarface says: Anyone touting Christian rhetoric as a reason NOT to allow gay people to marry infuriates me. LEARN ABOUT THE HISTORY OF YOUR OWN RELIGION. Marriage was not considered a sacrament until 1215, before which it was considered as a legal contract between two adults...that's it. It was WRITTEN IN as a sacrament, decided by MEN of the Fourth Council of the Lateran under Pope Innocent III. Tell me...How is the "original" design for marriage (yes I'm speaking specifically to you Toni) based on a "holy" Christian union?

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Toni Sinclair says: I disagree with this SO BADLY! I am not homophobic, I have many gay friends however, gay people should not be allowed to marry, purely and simply because of the Christian Catholic tradition it originates from. You can be blessed, or take part in a civil union ceremony, but marriage is completely different. To allow gay people to marry completely goes against the majority or religions but especially the christian-catholic religion which it originates from. We have to respect that, it is against the religion and we can not change something that has existed for thousands a years. The marriage of gay people goes against what marriage was originally designed for and should not be changed, there are other ways to 'prove' your love.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Anthony Lee Vanover II says: My philosophy is that people should be able to do as the please without violating others. So while I agree that homosexuals should be allowed to marry; I do not agree that any particular pastor of a church should be required to perform a marriage ceremony for a homosexual couple. Any particular denomination or sect of a religion may choose not to recognize homosexual marriage by the state as a valid marriage.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Ste says: 'Almost Identical Rights' are a prejudice in themselves - homosexuals are not almost identical to heterosexuals, they are identical - outside of sexuality we are all humans, and therefore should be treated equally until given a reason not to (for example, if you murder someone). In 20 years we will laugh at how stupid it was to debate this. I am completely for gay marriage.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

dAndyHiwayman says: The church regularly uses the argument that marriage is for procreation, and therefore should not be allowed for same-sex couples (although then do not answer the questions this brings about infertile people, older couples or others who do not/cannot have children). While we do have civil partnerships in the UK, it is always discussed as 'providing nearly equal rights to a married couple'. For many, this makes it about gaining rights, not about the commitment two people are making to each other. Marriage should be about two people who love each other - man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Jim Rogers says: To provide a bit of context, the article upon which this question is based (cited above) is specifically referring to the US, where indeed many religious organizations are actively working to prevent homosexual couples from being able to enter any type of marital or civil union. Not all religious groups, but many that wield considerable political clout. Just like segregation, this will be a dark stain on the history of many American religious institutions.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

WoollyMindedLib says: marriage doesn't belong to any one religion, or if you walk into a registry office - to any religion at all. prohibiting marriage on any ground of definition therefore seems shaky.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

IsaRubik says: The fact that the Church, due to religious conceptions, do not allow homosexual marriage doesn't mean homosexual people have to have their right to make a contract of this sort denied.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Alan Hope says: Marriage is not a church affair. In most places in Europe at least, a church wedding still has to be legitimised in the registry office, before the law. Let people who want to, marry by law, and let the church stick to their own congregation. It's simply a question of equal rights: gays and lesbians need to have the same rights as everyone else. Not "almost identical rights," Colin Rowe, but the same rights.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

LittleChildrenC says: Gays should have exactly the same rights as everyone else. Therefore, if straight people can marry, gays should be allowed to marry too.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Colin Rowe says: The almost ironic thing about this is there are very few gay people who care about this issue. In the UK civil partnerships offer gay couples almost identical rights as married heterosexual couples, with the key difference being they are not technically married. All this means is they cannot call themselves as married. If you were to ask me whether or not I support gay marriage I would say I support it in so much as I believe gay couples should have the same rights as straight couples, but this particular argument is not really where the debate should be.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

sheilafairlamb says: @kayleighrogers Marriage is not a religious/church thing. It is a contract between two people that can take place outside of a religious structure. I would never force a Church to marry gay couples if they do not agree with it but the Church shouldn't force society to restrict gay peoples right to marriage.

(0) Good Point Reply 1 reply, 1 person

report

Kayleigh Rogers says: @sheilafairlamb Sorry I badly phrased it, I meant to put church marriage so as to be referring to marriage in a church. I don't think the Church is restricting gay people not to be able to get married, they just are restricting whether they can get married in a church. I went to a gay wedding recently, and everyone including the couple were using the 'term' marriage.

(0) Good Point

report

Kayleigh Rogers says: Marriage is a religious/church thing. And I agree with gay couples and civil partnership but its up to each individual church to decide whether they allow it, not the government or gay people who think they have the right to marry in a church that doesn't agree with their way of life. I'm an atheist, I wouldn't be allowed to marry in a church, so what?

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Alejandro Rivas V. says: I love homosexuals. Therefore I hate not are told them the truth. Therefore I hate being cheated telling them that “all is well”. Therefore I hate that “we respect” instead of approaching and love them. I love homosexuals. Therefore I hate homophobia. Therefore I hate not talked them of True Love Therefore I hate not preacher them of JESUS. Therefore I speak them of freedom, Love and eternal life.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Studglove says: I'll no doubt be considered out of tune here, but my view is that whilst recognising a gay couple's right to co-exist our laws should differentiate between marriage as a traditional institution and rights to co-habit, whether homosexual or heterosexual. It's the very core, right or wrong, of our society.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Muffinaurora says: @JimRogers I really like your argument. Your point regarding civil rights is articulated very well. In the western world we pride ourselves on the equal treatment of all people so how can it remain that we allow certain groups to perform particular acts that we deny to others. To me it represents a massive failing by any state who is unable to recognise this.

(1) Good Point Reply

report

Jim Rogers says: From a freedom of religion standpoint, any church should be free to open or restrict who can participate in a ceremony demonstrating commitments between people and a deity. That should have nothing to do with the state's ability to confer benefits between two people who enter into a marital contract. That is a question of civil rights, and ALL people should have equal rights in that area.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Tyson Quick says: It's simply a civil liberty that we should finally make legal. After this we can move onto more important issues.

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Sleuthwarpath says: By not allowing gays the same benefits as married couples, institutions and the government miss out on talent and compllicate tax matters more than necessary. http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2008/04/_pro_preempting.html

(0) Good Point Reply

report

Studglove says: The definition of marriage should still be that it is a bond between a man and a woman. This has nothing to do with whether being gay is right or wrong, it's a simple fact. Gays are free to live together like a couple, but not as a married couple.

(0) Good Point Reply

report