I'm writing an argumentative essay on being against gay marriage and I need help. I'm not asking you to write my whole essay, I just need a little help starting. My teacher said not to use religious or moral arguments and stick with social or legal arguments. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Also it's for my college english class.I need help writing an essay on gay marriage?
The following is a previous post of mine but it's still relevant to your question:
--------------------------------------鈥?br>
First, let's agree on just this point: Government is supposed to be separated from the Church.
The first problem is how the secular government got mixed into religion.
This is what I believe to have happened: some short-sighted person thought that the government needed a way to classify joined couples who live together and have a combined income. Naturally, these couples were usually married and the person, who allowed marriage to be government regulated, thought that it would be easier to just call these conjoined individuals are ';married';. And all the privileges, taxes, and rights became tied to people who were ';married';.
Now married no longer has the denotation meaning: something as sacred as a the conjoining of man and woman and becoming one flesh. The government gave the word ';marriage'; a new connotation which is the joining of two people (no longer just man and woman) for LEGAL matters; that means living under one room, being taxed differently, and having a shared income.
When I first learned that the government actually recorded and took part in regulating marriage, I was shocked. Marriage is something absolutely religious and not at all secular. What ever happend to the separation between Church and State?
These ';gays'; (I don't know how else to classify them) ignorantly thought that marriage applied to them because of the new connotion that the government created. But what they really want are just the rights that come with marriage and have a this vain, worldy, materialistic marriage ceremony.
Summary: Gays don't deserve marriage. They may however deserve the rights that come with marriage. The government needs to stop mixing marriage with the government. They need to stop saying marriage because the word is absolutely limited to religion and so they have no part in it. I mean, Come on!, priests and elders no have to get a secular license to marry others. That's ridiculuous! Stop mixing government with the Church.
Solution: What the government needs to do is get a separate license that all people, including gays, who want to get married sign and just declare that they are two conjoined couples living under one roof and have a conjoined income and therefore need special consideration when being taxed. This way, marriage is by no means linked with the government and the term is no longer used by the government. By the way, the gay's can still have a fancy party but please stop calling it a marriage.
And, Yes!, this is all the government's fault.
If you disagree with me, then you just want to change the meaning of the word ';marriage'; into something of your own liking and that's just stupid. What if I get a bunch of people to start using the word ';right'; to mean left and the word ';left to mean right? You're doing the same thing with the word marriage.
Seeing the rest of the posters, I can tell that the majority of the people have not even read the Word of God and have no reasonable background knowledge to argue this.
--------------------------------------鈥?br>
Since you are dealing with religion, you only have logic as ur arsenal of argument.I need help writing an essay on gay marriage?
It's easier to write for gay marriage for social arguments. First, all those marriages and divorces are good for the economy. They employ florist, rental halls, retail stores, and divorce attorneys. Writing against gay marriage is difficult for social and legal reasons. I think the best reason against gay marriage is for the legal reason that there is no constitutional right recognized either by Amendment to the Constitution or by the Supreme Court of the United States that resolves whether it is a right. So until it's decided, the four states that allow gay marriage (and Californians who were grandfathered in before that state's constitutional ban) are really not allowing anything of consequence.
It would mess up their kid phsycologically. Their kid would also be at a loss of a mother and a father figure, and would feel socially akward.
******First off, before I get thumbs down from everybody for arguing against gay marriage, I am just trying to help this kid with his homework. I am not stating my opinion.******
It may be a tough angle, since not much research has been done in this area. I will choose the social arguments route and leave the legal view to others. Anyways, let us proceed.
Find something that most people value and argue that gay marriage will do damage to that value. The most obvious one is the human race. Most people would agree that they value the human race (although from a nihilist, such as myself, I would argue that there is no reason to value the human race). A second value could be the marriage between man and woman, but it would be hard to argue that gay marriage would hurt straight marriage. So, stick with the human race.
So, now, argue that our chosen value, the human race, will be in danger if gay marriage is allowed. This will be your hardest feat, due to the lack of research in this area. Here is a suggestions:
1) Defend the position that gay marriage is a learned behavior which may have some genetic factors but ultimately is a choice. Also, explore the possibility that straight people can switch orientations if persuaded to.
2) Then, argue that since it is a choice, the acceptance of gay people will lead more straight or unsure people to consider the possibility of choosing the homosexual lifestyle for themselves. Even people in marriages and committed relationships.
3) Argue that more people will choose the lifestyle till homosexuality is extremely prevalent. Explain that even man-woman couples will have outside same sex partners, i.e. same sex swinging will become a norm. Explain the possible devastating consequences to the children and family units as a whole.
4) Argue that the population could be in danger if too much homosexuality prevails and there is no dependable artificial reproduction method.
So, there are some rough sketches. Like I said, you won't be able to argue with much facts, since there is not much research, but you could say that it is safer too be cautious and wait for further research to be done before allowing gay marriage to proceed.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Should a fiance be expected to attend school functions of step kids from a previous marriage?
my fiance has step kids from a previous marriage. he still is involved in their lives.it bothers me that he doesnt want to spend anytime with my kids who will become his step kids,but is still very involved with his step kids from a previous marriage.Should a fiance be expected to attend school functions of step kids from a previous marriage?
He has already developed relationships with the step children from his former relationship. Give it time, he'll develop those with your children too if they allow him to. I think he should be commended for continuing his contact with those children. So often they are just walked away from and it is not their fault adults can't get along. He is being a good, strong male figure in their lives and someday he will be in your children's lives too. If something were to end your relationship with him someday, I hope he doesn't judge the kids by that and remains close to them too.
So bravo, you've found a man who doesn't walk away and dump children like they are extra baggage. Celebrate instead of worrying, he's going to make a great step dad to your kids too, just give it time.Should a fiance be expected to attend school functions of step kids from a previous marriage?
Personally, I'd be pretty annoyed. The two of you are embarking a new life together and your kids will become his kids, he should be getting involved with their lives.
At the same time it's also a little like asking him to stop seeing his friends. My step-dad and mum split up and I still spend time with him and his new family and once when my mum asked me not to, I told her where to go 'cos the guy was my dad for 10years.
I don't necessarily think its unreasonable that he wants to continue to be involved in their lives, but it shouldn't take precedence over your new start together because things will just start to fester.
A bit self centered, aren't you? He has a relationship with those step-kids. He helped raise them. Good for him that he is involved in their lives even though his relationship with their mother is over. These are KIDS. Get over it. As time goes on, he will develop a relationship with your kids, but sometimes there is a reason why a guy doesn't want to develop a relationship with their current woman's kids. Maybe their father is involved in their lives.
I don't think it is entirely right of you to feel jealous that he's spending time with his former step kids. My stepfather has been in my life since I was four years old, and I am now nearing twenty. He and my mother broke up a year ago, but he and I still have that father-daughter bond and I appreciate the fact that just because he and my mother were no longer working out, he didn't dump me as his kid also. Face it, kids and step parents develop their own bond and grow attached to one another, the form their own relationship that shouldn't be severed based on the break-up of the parents relationship. He will eventually form a relationship with your kids, especially if they are younger....but you shouldn't expect him to cut ties with his former stepchildren. It would probably be heartbreaking for all involved.
you can't really expect him to disappear from their lives, the kids shouldn't be punished because of the breakup. Of course, he does need to get involved in your children's lives too as he will be their step dad soon. You had better come to a compromise about how much time he will spend with his step kids and your kids, or hold off marrying him as this could come between you big time once you are married.
Sounds like you have a problem that should be dealt with in premarital counseling. It's actually very admirable that he cares about the kids he helped raise and that he wants the best for them. But it's a separate and very major problem that he doesn't want to help parent your kids. This could be a marriage killer and terrible for your kids. If I were you, I'd get professional help before you tie the knot. Good luck.
Overall, I think it's very commendable that he's involved with these stepkids. Where it might become annoying is if it's at the expense of your kids. There's not enough info, including how long he's known your kids and how old they are, to know if this is possible. But if that starts happening, I'd wonder about it, too, because I'd wonder if it was a way to spend time with his ex.
If they are his step kids, and not his biological children then you might have a winner on your hands. If this man cares enough about these children in spite of the fact that he isn't their father then he probably will be a good step father to your children as well.
But, since he's not showing any interest in your children you do need to find out the reason. And the only way to do that is to have a serious conversation with him about the issue. That is the only way to understand someone. Talking........
You divorce the spouse not the kids. It sounds like they love him and he loves them and the sooner your kids become those kids friends the better your lives will be.
He became involved With these children. He became a parent . It is a testimony to him of what a good man he is.
Maybe you are jealous because those are HIS KIDS! Your kids aren't his.
He has already developed relationships with the step children from his former relationship. Give it time, he'll develop those with your children too if they allow him to. I think he should be commended for continuing his contact with those children. So often they are just walked away from and it is not their fault adults can't get along. He is being a good, strong male figure in their lives and someday he will be in your children's lives too. If something were to end your relationship with him someday, I hope he doesn't judge the kids by that and remains close to them too.
So bravo, you've found a man who doesn't walk away and dump children like they are extra baggage. Celebrate instead of worrying, he's going to make a great step dad to your kids too, just give it time.Should a fiance be expected to attend school functions of step kids from a previous marriage?
Personally, I'd be pretty annoyed. The two of you are embarking a new life together and your kids will become his kids, he should be getting involved with their lives.
At the same time it's also a little like asking him to stop seeing his friends. My step-dad and mum split up and I still spend time with him and his new family and once when my mum asked me not to, I told her where to go 'cos the guy was my dad for 10years.
I don't necessarily think its unreasonable that he wants to continue to be involved in their lives, but it shouldn't take precedence over your new start together because things will just start to fester.
A bit self centered, aren't you? He has a relationship with those step-kids. He helped raise them. Good for him that he is involved in their lives even though his relationship with their mother is over. These are KIDS. Get over it. As time goes on, he will develop a relationship with your kids, but sometimes there is a reason why a guy doesn't want to develop a relationship with their current woman's kids. Maybe their father is involved in their lives.
I don't think it is entirely right of you to feel jealous that he's spending time with his former step kids. My stepfather has been in my life since I was four years old, and I am now nearing twenty. He and my mother broke up a year ago, but he and I still have that father-daughter bond and I appreciate the fact that just because he and my mother were no longer working out, he didn't dump me as his kid also. Face it, kids and step parents develop their own bond and grow attached to one another, the form their own relationship that shouldn't be severed based on the break-up of the parents relationship. He will eventually form a relationship with your kids, especially if they are younger....but you shouldn't expect him to cut ties with his former stepchildren. It would probably be heartbreaking for all involved.
you can't really expect him to disappear from their lives, the kids shouldn't be punished because of the breakup. Of course, he does need to get involved in your children's lives too as he will be their step dad soon. You had better come to a compromise about how much time he will spend with his step kids and your kids, or hold off marrying him as this could come between you big time once you are married.
Sounds like you have a problem that should be dealt with in premarital counseling. It's actually very admirable that he cares about the kids he helped raise and that he wants the best for them. But it's a separate and very major problem that he doesn't want to help parent your kids. This could be a marriage killer and terrible for your kids. If I were you, I'd get professional help before you tie the knot. Good luck.
Overall, I think it's very commendable that he's involved with these stepkids. Where it might become annoying is if it's at the expense of your kids. There's not enough info, including how long he's known your kids and how old they are, to know if this is possible. But if that starts happening, I'd wonder about it, too, because I'd wonder if it was a way to spend time with his ex.
If they are his step kids, and not his biological children then you might have a winner on your hands. If this man cares enough about these children in spite of the fact that he isn't their father then he probably will be a good step father to your children as well.
But, since he's not showing any interest in your children you do need to find out the reason. And the only way to do that is to have a serious conversation with him about the issue. That is the only way to understand someone. Talking........
You divorce the spouse not the kids. It sounds like they love him and he loves them and the sooner your kids become those kids friends the better your lives will be.
He became involved With these children. He became a parent . It is a testimony to him of what a good man he is.
Maybe you are jealous because those are HIS KIDS! Your kids aren't his.
Can you really live happily in an open marriage?
Recently found out my husband of 10 yrs has been meeting guys online and hooking up over lunch, for at least 5 years maybe longer. I haven't confronted him yet. We have 2 young kids. Working to be financially independent but not there yet.Can you really live happily in an open marriage?
it takes a certain breed of person to be ok with an open marriage. the fact that he lied to you for 5 years.... i dunno. keep working on that financial independence. not sayin get out now just be prepared.Can you really live happily in an open marriage?
Hmm...this is a tough one, the fact that he lied about it for so long would disturb me, and on a side note (have you always known he was bisexual?) that would floor me to find out my partner is sleeping with same sex partners. I feel bad that you have 2 small kids caught up in this but you seem pretty level headed about it and are taking a calm approach that is good. I believe an open marriage can work if both members have good self esteem and there is little to no jealousy. Those 2 things destroy an open marriage faster than anything. But ask yourself would you truly be happy knowing he's off doing this thing with other guys and that potentially someday you may want to do the same? Don't stay married (just for the kids) this does not work and often damages the kids further. Like the other person suggested get that financial Independence and then make a move to make your self happy. Don't just stay married for the kids.
I don't think I could stand not confronting my man if I found out something like that. It took me all of about 20 seconds when I found infidelity. How do you do that?
Perhaps he doesn't want an open marriage. Wouldn't that mean that you will be able to date guys also? Sometimes the shoes don't look so well being worn on the spouse's feet. He might not go with that plan.
I think your best bet is to kiss that guy goodbye. The finances will work out somehow. Your kids will be happier. You can find a straight, decent man who doesn't cheat and he can be who he is without sneaking around.
I don't know about this open marriage thang, but my question would be something like this.....How can you love the most beautiful woman in the world like this??
Deep love and deep happiness is pure and clean to me!
Open marriage would never cross my mind, not even in a million years time. When stuff like this happens, something is not right at all. You have a absolute problem somewhere in your marriage.
Of course hot sex is beautiful, but its just sex and sex only. What good does sex do without feeling any love or warmth whatsoever? Don't tell me your love feels ice cold???
Making love to someone else, just kills your beautiful sex drive for the beautiful wife.
Yes. You can. And he can get a restraining order against you for harassment and stalking for finding this out online about him. You must have been stalking him. He should get a restraining order against you. He has a right to be happy. He needs to stop you stalking him and he should be able to get a restraining order easily as you've obviously been finding things out and that's stalking.
no such thing is the perfect life. we have to work hard and make the difference about life. going the same with married. Always need work on it to make it better.
communicating is the key. tell your partner what you like, don't like. what make you happy or sad....... if you two can not even expressing yourself from one to another than soon enough your married is going throw out the window
Work quickly on being able to be financially independent. Trust is a key to marriage and sounds like this is not going to be ok. Prepare yourself for the ultimate challenge. No you can't live happily if it's bugging you.
it's possible, but the fact that he lied to you really is bad. If you feel you can't work it out, don't. Staying together for the kids is only traumatic for them.
If I were you I'd concerned about STDs
with all the stuff u can get out there why would anyone want to
Not in my world.
That is sicked.
Yes
it takes a certain breed of person to be ok with an open marriage. the fact that he lied to you for 5 years.... i dunno. keep working on that financial independence. not sayin get out now just be prepared.Can you really live happily in an open marriage?
Hmm...this is a tough one, the fact that he lied about it for so long would disturb me, and on a side note (have you always known he was bisexual?) that would floor me to find out my partner is sleeping with same sex partners. I feel bad that you have 2 small kids caught up in this but you seem pretty level headed about it and are taking a calm approach that is good. I believe an open marriage can work if both members have good self esteem and there is little to no jealousy. Those 2 things destroy an open marriage faster than anything. But ask yourself would you truly be happy knowing he's off doing this thing with other guys and that potentially someday you may want to do the same? Don't stay married (just for the kids) this does not work and often damages the kids further. Like the other person suggested get that financial Independence and then make a move to make your self happy. Don't just stay married for the kids.
I don't think I could stand not confronting my man if I found out something like that. It took me all of about 20 seconds when I found infidelity. How do you do that?
Perhaps he doesn't want an open marriage. Wouldn't that mean that you will be able to date guys also? Sometimes the shoes don't look so well being worn on the spouse's feet. He might not go with that plan.
I think your best bet is to kiss that guy goodbye. The finances will work out somehow. Your kids will be happier. You can find a straight, decent man who doesn't cheat and he can be who he is without sneaking around.
I don't know about this open marriage thang, but my question would be something like this.....How can you love the most beautiful woman in the world like this??
Deep love and deep happiness is pure and clean to me!
Open marriage would never cross my mind, not even in a million years time. When stuff like this happens, something is not right at all. You have a absolute problem somewhere in your marriage.
Of course hot sex is beautiful, but its just sex and sex only. What good does sex do without feeling any love or warmth whatsoever? Don't tell me your love feels ice cold???
Making love to someone else, just kills your beautiful sex drive for the beautiful wife.
Yes. You can. And he can get a restraining order against you for harassment and stalking for finding this out online about him. You must have been stalking him. He should get a restraining order against you. He has a right to be happy. He needs to stop you stalking him and he should be able to get a restraining order easily as you've obviously been finding things out and that's stalking.
no such thing is the perfect life. we have to work hard and make the difference about life. going the same with married. Always need work on it to make it better.
communicating is the key. tell your partner what you like, don't like. what make you happy or sad....... if you two can not even expressing yourself from one to another than soon enough your married is going throw out the window
Work quickly on being able to be financially independent. Trust is a key to marriage and sounds like this is not going to be ok. Prepare yourself for the ultimate challenge. No you can't live happily if it's bugging you.
it's possible, but the fact that he lied to you really is bad. If you feel you can't work it out, don't. Staying together for the kids is only traumatic for them.
If I were you I'd concerned about STDs
with all the stuff u can get out there why would anyone want to
Not in my world.
That is sicked.
Yes
I have a question about marriage vows and the idea of marriage?
Isn't it unrealistic to vow that you will always love someone and always be there for them?I have a question about marriage vows and the idea of marriage?
If you are getting married just for the sake of having a wedding and party and getting gifts; yes. If you actually love this person and want to be with them for the rest of your life, then it's absolutely realistic.I have a question about marriage vows and the idea of marriage?
If you're in love and want to marry that person, then vowing to always love and be there for them isn't unrealistic. Marriages have up and down periods, maybe you won't love the person *as much* as you did when you first met them sometimes, but you still love them. You may be frustrated, angry, etc, with them, but you would still love them and be there for them.
If you are fickle and uncommitted I suppose it is.If you truly love someone then no. There are time when you may not like them but if you truly love a person it doesn' t just go away. Early within marriage it is more passion and sex appeal than love. True love comes through weathering the storms of life with someone and knowing they are there when needed reguardless.
No. Some people manage to stay together and stay in love through the hard times. There's a couple at my church who have been married for over 40 years, and my minister and his wife just renewed their vows after 22 years of marriage. Marriage is hard work, but if you love the person the hard work is worth it.
It isn't if you're with your soul mate.
No!
Nope!!
If you are getting married just for the sake of having a wedding and party and getting gifts; yes. If you actually love this person and want to be with them for the rest of your life, then it's absolutely realistic.I have a question about marriage vows and the idea of marriage?
If you're in love and want to marry that person, then vowing to always love and be there for them isn't unrealistic. Marriages have up and down periods, maybe you won't love the person *as much* as you did when you first met them sometimes, but you still love them. You may be frustrated, angry, etc, with them, but you would still love them and be there for them.
If you are fickle and uncommitted I suppose it is.If you truly love someone then no. There are time when you may not like them but if you truly love a person it doesn' t just go away. Early within marriage it is more passion and sex appeal than love. True love comes through weathering the storms of life with someone and knowing they are there when needed reguardless.
No. Some people manage to stay together and stay in love through the hard times. There's a couple at my church who have been married for over 40 years, and my minister and his wife just renewed their vows after 22 years of marriage. Marriage is hard work, but if you love the person the hard work is worth it.
It isn't if you're with your soul mate.
No!
Nope!!
Was ending slavery, womens rights, and interracial marriage left up to the voters to decide?
Was ending slavery, womens rights, and interracial marriage left up to the voters to decide?Was ending slavery, womens rights, and interracial marriage left up to the voters to decide?
slavery - no, 13th amenment ended it
ban on inter-racial marriage - no, supreme court case, loving vs virginia ended it
women's rights - no the 19th amendment gave women the voteWas ending slavery, womens rights, and interracial marriage left up to the voters to decide?
States have to ratify Constitutional amendments. This is usually done by the state legislatures, so voters do not decide directly; their representatives do.
There is not, as far as I know, any amendment about interracial marriage. This is usually decided by individual states--but a state cannot have a law that is deemed unconstitutional. In other words, a state could not say that women can't vote--the Constitution says they can.
Edit: Sgoldperson, what on earth are you going on about? Nobody mentioned the Emancipation Proclamation, which most people realize did not free any slaves. And this is how the Constitution is set up; there is a process for adding amendments. Argue with the Founding Fathers.
Nice try but what you are really saying is that you don't trust the voters. Actually last I check slavery was truly ended BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION. Check your history and you will see slaves were around AFTER 1865. You will see the Emancipation Proclamation only ';freed'; the slaves in the REBEL STATES. It was about POLITICS not about human rights. Anyway since it was a Constitutional issue then YES it was left to the voters, or at least should have been. Why don't you throw in ABORTION? It is the same type of Judicial Fiat that Homosexual Groups are trying to currently perform.
My point was that slavery was ended by the Constitution and yeah voters have an influence there. With Women's rights there is no way to try and say it is anything different. You say most know that the EP didn't free the slaves but I'd argue that. That's still what they were teaching when I was in school(up until I was in college) and most aren't going to take the time to learn otherwise, and I'm not even 30. Most still think the Civil War was really simply about slavery. Yeah some of us are more educated, but I wouldn't say most are because I go by the general population.
no if that was the case a lot of things would be different right now.
That is congress and the president that handle those things
No,
it was Congress that did that.
slavery - no, 13th amenment ended it
ban on inter-racial marriage - no, supreme court case, loving vs virginia ended it
women's rights - no the 19th amendment gave women the voteWas ending slavery, womens rights, and interracial marriage left up to the voters to decide?
States have to ratify Constitutional amendments. This is usually done by the state legislatures, so voters do not decide directly; their representatives do.
There is not, as far as I know, any amendment about interracial marriage. This is usually decided by individual states--but a state cannot have a law that is deemed unconstitutional. In other words, a state could not say that women can't vote--the Constitution says they can.
Edit: Sgoldperson, what on earth are you going on about? Nobody mentioned the Emancipation Proclamation, which most people realize did not free any slaves. And this is how the Constitution is set up; there is a process for adding amendments. Argue with the Founding Fathers.
Nice try but what you are really saying is that you don't trust the voters. Actually last I check slavery was truly ended BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION. Check your history and you will see slaves were around AFTER 1865. You will see the Emancipation Proclamation only ';freed'; the slaves in the REBEL STATES. It was about POLITICS not about human rights. Anyway since it was a Constitutional issue then YES it was left to the voters, or at least should have been. Why don't you throw in ABORTION? It is the same type of Judicial Fiat that Homosexual Groups are trying to currently perform.
My point was that slavery was ended by the Constitution and yeah voters have an influence there. With Women's rights there is no way to try and say it is anything different. You say most know that the EP didn't free the slaves but I'd argue that. That's still what they were teaching when I was in school(up until I was in college) and most aren't going to take the time to learn otherwise, and I'm not even 30. Most still think the Civil War was really simply about slavery. Yeah some of us are more educated, but I wouldn't say most are because I go by the general population.
no if that was the case a lot of things would be different right now.
That is congress and the president that handle those things
No,
it was Congress that did that.
What do you think about sex before marriage?
I want to know what majority of the people think about teenage sex. sex between teenagers ages 15 - 19 maybe. If it is ok, i would also like to know your age.Thanks!What do you think about sex before marriage?
I think it's fine. I also think if she's not giving sex before marriage, he's getting it somewhere else...What do you think about sex before marriage?
It does,nt worry me ,i have never given it much thought.Marriage is only important to the people who feel the need to give a total,honest,lifelong commitment and keep it. Sex before marriage is just a matter of primieval lust with teenage lads on the constant prowl for trophies and experience.Girls mature much earlier having totally different outlooks and desires,they are generally looking for the right mate,and usually make the mistake of giving themselves totally to the first candidate.Everyone has the ability to ruin or enrich their own life,sex before marriage is, now,just another event in life.
Each to their own: people should be able to do what they want, preferably without hurting anybody along the way.
Often the no sex before marriage thing is sexist, because it's like girls need to stay pure for their husbands on the wedding night, but boys can do whatever they want - which I do NOT agree with.
Also, unless you're religious, what's the point of marriage anyway?
I'm 16.
I have no issue with sex before marriage.
For teenagers, however, they should respect the age of consent law in the country they live in.
(Whether you agree with it or not, it's there for a reason)
An judging by the number of ';is it safe'; questions that get asked around here, so countries need much better sex education lessons for teenagers
When I was younger, I'm 26, I thought sex between teens was hot and fun but now that I have a teenage niece I think sex between teens is very bad. Teens should really really wait until they're older like 18 and 19 before having sex and only with someone they really trust and care about. 13 up to 17 is too young to me. And running around screwing everything you see is really stupid, dangerous, and immature. But kids will do what they want so as long as parents enlighten their kids on practicing safe sex only it's alright with me.
I'm 15, and I believe that pre-marital sex is ok, as long as you abide by these three conditions:
1) You're emotionally/physically ready
2) It is planned
3) It is protected
4) You trust ur significant other
Also, ask yourself what's your reason for having sex with this person?
Are they the right ones? How will you feel afterward? How will this change the relatioship?
Personally, I would never have sex until i turn 18 and officially become an adult. I would also discuss it with my mum and make sure i feel comfortable with it.
I'm 17 -18 on Friday-. I lost my virginity in a verrrry stupid way when I was 14. I think it's alright if you have dated multiple people and know the difference between peoples intentions and the difference between really caring for someone or just 'liking' them.
A lot of people are mentally too young to take on responsibilities that may come with that action. I just think if the person is truly mature enough to take on that responsibility, then yeah, I think it's fine.
If it is something both of them have planned, and they are emotionally ready, planning would include protection not only from pregnancy but also STDs. I really do not know where or if a line needs to be drawnas far as age is concerned. I'm over 30 and still looking for all the answers
I think you should wait until you get married, I even have a purity ring.
It's more attractive for me if a guy still had his virginity after being around other influences.
It's cute to save it for a loved one, because you can never get it back.
People who sleep around often aren't in love, they're called whores.
And it's gross. Especially 15 year olds.
I think wait until you are at least 17 or 18. You need to be mature enough to handle it. I think sex before marriage isn't a bad thing, I just don't agree with people having meaningless sex. You need to be serious with the person, and I am against one night stands etc. I'm 17.
I am against sex before marriage. It's a religious thing. I personally will wait until I am married (if prop 8 passes, I might have to move to Massachusetts). But everyone has their own opinion on it, and who am I to judge them?
I agree with the answerer above me. I am against sex before marriage as well. If the girl gets pregnant, the father is responsible for the child till s/he turns 18 whether the couple is still together or not.
i think it's okay if you love the person. i'm in love with my gf and we have a sexual relationship, and are getting married when we're older.
i'm 16.
Young girls should save their virginity for their husbands as a gift on their wedding night.
As for adults, such as middle-aged divorcees, I suppose the rules are a bit different.
sex after marriage is responssible and moral, however sex should be between adults ONLY married or not, I define an adult as someone who pays there own bills and has there own place.
I think it is their choice on whether or not they wait until they are married, but as far as age... I think the best choice would be waiting till at-least age 17-18.
If the two of them consent its fine. Although they may regret it later.
It's fine. Whore yourself around if you want even (as long as it's safe).
Sex is fun. I'm 17.
Thats fine if the Vicar doesnt mind.
I'm gay so I don't have much choice do I? It's great.
UH HUH ITS AWSOME MAN
it happens. :: shrugs :: you only live once right? i'm 17.
its there choice i wouldnt do it personaly
well
though tis fun But i don't accept it :)
i'm 22acne scars
I think it's fine. I also think if she's not giving sex before marriage, he's getting it somewhere else...What do you think about sex before marriage?
It does,nt worry me ,i have never given it much thought.Marriage is only important to the people who feel the need to give a total,honest,lifelong commitment and keep it. Sex before marriage is just a matter of primieval lust with teenage lads on the constant prowl for trophies and experience.Girls mature much earlier having totally different outlooks and desires,they are generally looking for the right mate,and usually make the mistake of giving themselves totally to the first candidate.Everyone has the ability to ruin or enrich their own life,sex before marriage is, now,just another event in life.
Each to their own: people should be able to do what they want, preferably without hurting anybody along the way.
Often the no sex before marriage thing is sexist, because it's like girls need to stay pure for their husbands on the wedding night, but boys can do whatever they want - which I do NOT agree with.
Also, unless you're religious, what's the point of marriage anyway?
I'm 16.
I have no issue with sex before marriage.
For teenagers, however, they should respect the age of consent law in the country they live in.
(Whether you agree with it or not, it's there for a reason)
An judging by the number of ';is it safe'; questions that get asked around here, so countries need much better sex education lessons for teenagers
When I was younger, I'm 26, I thought sex between teens was hot and fun but now that I have a teenage niece I think sex between teens is very bad. Teens should really really wait until they're older like 18 and 19 before having sex and only with someone they really trust and care about. 13 up to 17 is too young to me. And running around screwing everything you see is really stupid, dangerous, and immature. But kids will do what they want so as long as parents enlighten their kids on practicing safe sex only it's alright with me.
I'm 15, and I believe that pre-marital sex is ok, as long as you abide by these three conditions:
1) You're emotionally/physically ready
2) It is planned
3) It is protected
4) You trust ur significant other
Also, ask yourself what's your reason for having sex with this person?
Are they the right ones? How will you feel afterward? How will this change the relatioship?
Personally, I would never have sex until i turn 18 and officially become an adult. I would also discuss it with my mum and make sure i feel comfortable with it.
I'm 17 -18 on Friday-. I lost my virginity in a verrrry stupid way when I was 14. I think it's alright if you have dated multiple people and know the difference between peoples intentions and the difference between really caring for someone or just 'liking' them.
A lot of people are mentally too young to take on responsibilities that may come with that action. I just think if the person is truly mature enough to take on that responsibility, then yeah, I think it's fine.
If it is something both of them have planned, and they are emotionally ready, planning would include protection not only from pregnancy but also STDs. I really do not know where or if a line needs to be drawnas far as age is concerned. I'm over 30 and still looking for all the answers
I think you should wait until you get married, I even have a purity ring.
It's more attractive for me if a guy still had his virginity after being around other influences.
It's cute to save it for a loved one, because you can never get it back.
People who sleep around often aren't in love, they're called whores.
And it's gross. Especially 15 year olds.
I think wait until you are at least 17 or 18. You need to be mature enough to handle it. I think sex before marriage isn't a bad thing, I just don't agree with people having meaningless sex. You need to be serious with the person, and I am against one night stands etc. I'm 17.
I am against sex before marriage. It's a religious thing. I personally will wait until I am married (if prop 8 passes, I might have to move to Massachusetts). But everyone has their own opinion on it, and who am I to judge them?
I agree with the answerer above me. I am against sex before marriage as well. If the girl gets pregnant, the father is responsible for the child till s/he turns 18 whether the couple is still together or not.
i think it's okay if you love the person. i'm in love with my gf and we have a sexual relationship, and are getting married when we're older.
i'm 16.
Young girls should save their virginity for their husbands as a gift on their wedding night.
As for adults, such as middle-aged divorcees, I suppose the rules are a bit different.
sex after marriage is responssible and moral, however sex should be between adults ONLY married or not, I define an adult as someone who pays there own bills and has there own place.
I think it is their choice on whether or not they wait until they are married, but as far as age... I think the best choice would be waiting till at-least age 17-18.
If the two of them consent its fine. Although they may regret it later.
It's fine. Whore yourself around if you want even (as long as it's safe).
Sex is fun. I'm 17.
Thats fine if the Vicar doesnt mind.
I'm gay so I don't have much choice do I? It's great.
UH HUH ITS AWSOME MAN
it happens. :: shrugs :: you only live once right? i'm 17.
its there choice i wouldnt do it personaly
well
though tis fun But i don't accept it :)
i'm 22
Can I forgive him and continue my marriage with the one that has betrayed me the most?
I have found my husbands secret life. He is a sex addict and has been committing adultry for the last 3.5 years. He has been with seven different women, some of those being couples, threesomes and posing with another woman as a couple in this lifestyle. How do I find it in me to forgive him and trust him again. He is so so sorry and hates himself for doing this to his family. We also have two small children and possibly one on the way. Thanks for advice.Can I forgive him and continue my marriage with the one that has betrayed me the most?
Once is a mistake, twice or more is a habit.
It's easy to say he hates himself once the deed is done. Real love comes from restraining yourself in the first place.
Walk away from this one.
EDIT: If you should decide to stay with him, stay knowing that the behavior will probably not change. He may have periods of not doing anything, but chances are it will always be an issue. Accept that if you decide to stay.Can I forgive him and continue my marriage with the one that has betrayed me the most?
He's not sorry. He was having fun...without you. Your marriage is so bad, he didn't feel comfortable talking about his sexual fantasies with you. So he acted them out with people he was more comfortable with than you.
Why should you forgive him? Obviously, you are not compatible with him. You should have never married him because you can't communicate with him, nor him with you. Unless you are willing to become a part of his fantasies and participate, your marriage is doomed.
I am going through the very same situation right now. My husband had three girlfriends on the side and there were countless other things I discovered. Anyway, I will forgive him but I will never forget. I thought everyday when he told me he loved me and how beautiful I was and on and on that he was truly sincere. Now, all those things are just a lie to me. He never meant anything he said or he never would of hurt me to the extreme he did. I have been a complete disaster for the past 3 months, all I do is cry and wonder why. I trusted him with my life and he destroyed it. I wouldn't take him back if someone paid me all the money in the world.
He isnt sorry, he will do it again. You can forgive them the first time, but after that move on. My ex husband had a similar problem. He swore he had stopped and would never do it again bc he was sorry and saw how bad it hurt me. Well, well, he did it again, several more times. Think about your self and your safety....everytime you sleep with him you are also sleeping with all those other skummy people! Get yourself STD/HIV tested, you can never be too safe!
I'm so sick of people being sorry after the fact. If he's an addict, he should have let you know upfront and gotten help. He's not sorry. He's just sorry he's been caught and doesn't want to leave you. He enjoys the comfort he has with you. I don't think trust could ever be established after so much cheating. What he has done is very extreme.
You will have to decide for yourself how much ';heart ache'; you can take. He has failed you before, and will probably do it again. You both should attend marriage counseling. The main thing that should be important, is making a stable life for your children.
You might be interested in these sites:
http://www.cheaters.com
http://www.thescriptonline.com/content/i鈥?/a>
it's not going to be easy. if there were no kids involved, i'd say walk away but this is not the case. professional marriage counseling is the only way and that is still a long shot
I say only by going to a pastor together and him changing his life around spiritually, he has to repent, see his sin, and turn to Jesus.
All things are possible with God. This is scripture.
can you forgive him . if not ..kick him out ..
Once is a mistake, twice or more is a habit.
It's easy to say he hates himself once the deed is done. Real love comes from restraining yourself in the first place.
Walk away from this one.
EDIT: If you should decide to stay with him, stay knowing that the behavior will probably not change. He may have periods of not doing anything, but chances are it will always be an issue. Accept that if you decide to stay.Can I forgive him and continue my marriage with the one that has betrayed me the most?
He's not sorry. He was having fun...without you. Your marriage is so bad, he didn't feel comfortable talking about his sexual fantasies with you. So he acted them out with people he was more comfortable with than you.
Why should you forgive him? Obviously, you are not compatible with him. You should have never married him because you can't communicate with him, nor him with you. Unless you are willing to become a part of his fantasies and participate, your marriage is doomed.
I am going through the very same situation right now. My husband had three girlfriends on the side and there were countless other things I discovered. Anyway, I will forgive him but I will never forget. I thought everyday when he told me he loved me and how beautiful I was and on and on that he was truly sincere. Now, all those things are just a lie to me. He never meant anything he said or he never would of hurt me to the extreme he did. I have been a complete disaster for the past 3 months, all I do is cry and wonder why. I trusted him with my life and he destroyed it. I wouldn't take him back if someone paid me all the money in the world.
He isnt sorry, he will do it again. You can forgive them the first time, but after that move on. My ex husband had a similar problem. He swore he had stopped and would never do it again bc he was sorry and saw how bad it hurt me. Well, well, he did it again, several more times. Think about your self and your safety....everytime you sleep with him you are also sleeping with all those other skummy people! Get yourself STD/HIV tested, you can never be too safe!
I'm so sick of people being sorry after the fact. If he's an addict, he should have let you know upfront and gotten help. He's not sorry. He's just sorry he's been caught and doesn't want to leave you. He enjoys the comfort he has with you. I don't think trust could ever be established after so much cheating. What he has done is very extreme.
You will have to decide for yourself how much ';heart ache'; you can take. He has failed you before, and will probably do it again. You both should attend marriage counseling. The main thing that should be important, is making a stable life for your children.
You might be interested in these sites:
http://www.cheaters.com
http://www.thescriptonline.com/content/i鈥?/a>
it's not going to be easy. if there were no kids involved, i'd say walk away but this is not the case. professional marriage counseling is the only way and that is still a long shot
I say only by going to a pastor together and him changing his life around spiritually, he has to repent, see his sin, and turn to Jesus.
All things are possible with God. This is scripture.
can you forgive him . if not ..kick him out ..
What does the Mormon Church believe about marriage?
Does the Mormon Church encourage age difference in marriage. I know of several situations where several Mormons have a 20 year age difference in their marriage. Is it okay for Mormon women to marry men much older?What does the Mormon Church believe about marriage?
Church leaders don't get involved in who we marry. They do caution us to marry those with similar values as ourselves, but that's just common sense. Marriages between very different people don't work as well.
Still, there aren't any rules. I can't see church leaders encouraging a marriage between, say, a very young girl and an older man (or, I suppose, a young man and an older woman), but as long as the girl is legal, that's her call. Marriage is a personal thing, and church leaders don't really have any say in our choice of spouse.What does the Mormon Church believe about marriage?
Mormons believe that husband and wife should be equal partners in the marriage relationship. So I suppose this means there needs to be approximate maturity equality between man and woman. If that reads as a specification for women to marry older men (since men mature slower than women)... then so be it. But, I've never heard a discussion of age at church, nor have I ever read anything doctrinal in the Bible or anything.
However, on a funnier note, once I was talking with my brother (29 yrs. old and single) I jokingly asked him if he has any age boundaries. He told me that the minimum age that he will ever date is (his current age + 13) / 2 == so that means his current minimum age is (29+13)/2=21. You can see that (if this is a real rule and not a joke) that the allowable age difference increases with his own age. I suppose if you followed this rule you would have to be like 50 before you marry a girl that is 20 yrs younger. But, that is hardly church doctrine.
I only know one Mormon couple like that. After my uncle and his first wife divorced he married a much younger woman. The church neither encourages nor discourages an age difference in marriage. They don't say a single word about it. My hubby is 2 years older than me. I'd say we're about the norm. In fact, aside from the one that I previously mentioned, I can't think of a single couple who have more than a 6 year age difference.
Now, why wouldn't it be ';ok'; for Mormon women to marry older? Other people do it. Is there something wrong with that? It's not my cup of tea but love doesn't always fall within our ideologies.
And to the poster above, Mormons don't believe marriage is till death do us part. Mormons believe that if you're sealed in a temple, your marriage can be eternal.
There are many things within the church that we are simply taught correct principles with which we may govern ourselves and then left to our own devices. This would be one of those things. I would say it is very rare for that kind of age difference to happen. Culturally the reaction to it would vary depending on where you are at but I have never ran into a case where it was encouraged.
What do we believe about marriage?
The Family:A Proclamation to the World, summarizes our beliefs on the family.
My Mom died and my Dad was alone. My Mom's sister's husband died and she is alone so my Aunt and my Dad sometimes go out, it is weird to me (they are both Mormon and married ot their spouces in the temple) but they are old enough.
Mormons see marriage just as any other Christian would.
Death do us part.
Mormons are known for being very tight family oriented.
Encourage? No. Most of the married Mormon couples I know are within 5 years of being the same age of each other.
we dont encourge it but we dont care as long as the person treats you right and loves you than thats what matters
I don't think the Mormon church has anything specific to say about it.
google it?
It's okay for anybody to marry men that are much older. The only specifications I ever heard about age difference was that each new wife should be about 5 years younger than the last.
U can marry more than one woman.
Church leaders don't get involved in who we marry. They do caution us to marry those with similar values as ourselves, but that's just common sense. Marriages between very different people don't work as well.
Still, there aren't any rules. I can't see church leaders encouraging a marriage between, say, a very young girl and an older man (or, I suppose, a young man and an older woman), but as long as the girl is legal, that's her call. Marriage is a personal thing, and church leaders don't really have any say in our choice of spouse.What does the Mormon Church believe about marriage?
Mormons believe that husband and wife should be equal partners in the marriage relationship. So I suppose this means there needs to be approximate maturity equality between man and woman. If that reads as a specification for women to marry older men (since men mature slower than women)... then so be it. But, I've never heard a discussion of age at church, nor have I ever read anything doctrinal in the Bible or anything.
However, on a funnier note, once I was talking with my brother (29 yrs. old and single) I jokingly asked him if he has any age boundaries. He told me that the minimum age that he will ever date is (his current age + 13) / 2 == so that means his current minimum age is (29+13)/2=21. You can see that (if this is a real rule and not a joke) that the allowable age difference increases with his own age. I suppose if you followed this rule you would have to be like 50 before you marry a girl that is 20 yrs younger. But, that is hardly church doctrine.
I only know one Mormon couple like that. After my uncle and his first wife divorced he married a much younger woman. The church neither encourages nor discourages an age difference in marriage. They don't say a single word about it. My hubby is 2 years older than me. I'd say we're about the norm. In fact, aside from the one that I previously mentioned, I can't think of a single couple who have more than a 6 year age difference.
Now, why wouldn't it be ';ok'; for Mormon women to marry older? Other people do it. Is there something wrong with that? It's not my cup of tea but love doesn't always fall within our ideologies.
And to the poster above, Mormons don't believe marriage is till death do us part. Mormons believe that if you're sealed in a temple, your marriage can be eternal.
There are many things within the church that we are simply taught correct principles with which we may govern ourselves and then left to our own devices. This would be one of those things. I would say it is very rare for that kind of age difference to happen. Culturally the reaction to it would vary depending on where you are at but I have never ran into a case where it was encouraged.
What do we believe about marriage?
The Family:A Proclamation to the World, summarizes our beliefs on the family.
My Mom died and my Dad was alone. My Mom's sister's husband died and she is alone so my Aunt and my Dad sometimes go out, it is weird to me (they are both Mormon and married ot their spouces in the temple) but they are old enough.
Mormons see marriage just as any other Christian would.
Death do us part.
Mormons are known for being very tight family oriented.
Encourage? No. Most of the married Mormon couples I know are within 5 years of being the same age of each other.
we dont encourge it but we dont care as long as the person treats you right and loves you than thats what matters
I don't think the Mormon church has anything specific to say about it.
google it?
It's okay for anybody to marry men that are much older. The only specifications I ever heard about age difference was that each new wife should be about 5 years younger than the last.
U can marry more than one woman.
How do you deal with jealousies? I am in a lousy marriage and so jealous of others' better marriages.?
Help! What is wrong with me?How do you deal with jealousies? I am in a lousy marriage and so jealous of others' better marriages.?
1. Don't watch romantic movies. It's not real
2. Don't read romantic books...again, not real
3. Most people hide the bad stuff in their marriage
4. Focus on the good in yours and work to make yourself a better personHow do you deal with jealousies? I am in a lousy marriage and so jealous of others' better marriages.?
Jealousy is nothing more than your own insecurity and unhappiness. Deal with it. You can have just as happy a marriage as anyone else if you and your husband work at it together and respect each other. Why is your marriage lousy, because you feel like a failure as a wife and blame your husband or constantly compare your marriage to someone else's? There probably isn't anything to wrong with you. It could be as simple as low self esteem or you married the wrong guy. It is not your husbands job to make you happy, it's your job to be happy with yourself first as an individual. Do you love and respect yourself? If you don't you can't expect anyone else to. .Are you still both in love with each other? Do you both want the marriage, if not then end it. How is your communication with your husband? Does he know how you really feel about yourself and the marriage? If he doesn't you need to take a big girl pill and tell him. If he doesn't know how you feel he can't help you. You owe it to him to be honest. Marriages can't work without respect, love, honesty and communication. Does your marriage have any of these things?
People do of course hide the bad in their marriages. But how about trying to look at what you find attractive in another marriage and applying it to your own. For instance, another couple talks about going to the lake, having a fancy dinner, things like this. Try them! Do some new things! Do the things that the people in that ';better marriage'; will do! Maybe then you'll realize you have nothing to be jealous about. Put some effort into it! I hope you find the happiness in your marriage again! Don't let it slip away!
If you're jealous of other's better marriages, then you need to sit down, make a list of what's wrong and address them with your partner. If you don't think it's worth the trouble, then it's not a healthy relationship for either of you. You're going to be miserable if you don't do something about it. Who wants that kind of life? Fix it or chuck it.
Jealousy is one of those human emotions that nothing good ever comes from it. Instead of spending all your time and energy coveting what others have. Put that energy into making your marriage better. The only way to change a bad marriage is for both parties to work on it together and give 100 percent of themselves to it everyday.
Are you sure that is what you mean? Or are you just sick and tired of your own lousy mess that you have? You got yourself into it and you can get yourself out of it. So what is wrong with you? If you are staying in it so you have something to complain about, fine, but you only shoud have one chance to do that here. After that get off of your butt and do something about it. And make a better choice next time. Or is that part of the problem too, you don't know how to make a good choice? Practice for most of us is the answer. Nothing came to us easily or on the first try.
Remember many of those marriages you're jealous of probably only look nice from the outside.
With that said, you should figure out a way to get out of your lousy marriage, whether it's by working with your spouse or by getting out of it completely.
Instead of hating others for their happy marriage ( no marriage is perfect BTW) how about working on yours? If your partner doesn't want to improve what's wrong than it's time to move on.
Well instead of spending all your time thinking about others marriages why don't you spend that time working on your own marriage or if it is that bad then find yourself.
1. Don't watch romantic movies. It's not real
2. Don't read romantic books...again, not real
3. Most people hide the bad stuff in their marriage
4. Focus on the good in yours and work to make yourself a better personHow do you deal with jealousies? I am in a lousy marriage and so jealous of others' better marriages.?
Jealousy is nothing more than your own insecurity and unhappiness. Deal with it. You can have just as happy a marriage as anyone else if you and your husband work at it together and respect each other. Why is your marriage lousy, because you feel like a failure as a wife and blame your husband or constantly compare your marriage to someone else's? There probably isn't anything to wrong with you. It could be as simple as low self esteem or you married the wrong guy. It is not your husbands job to make you happy, it's your job to be happy with yourself first as an individual. Do you love and respect yourself? If you don't you can't expect anyone else to. .Are you still both in love with each other? Do you both want the marriage, if not then end it. How is your communication with your husband? Does he know how you really feel about yourself and the marriage? If he doesn't you need to take a big girl pill and tell him. If he doesn't know how you feel he can't help you. You owe it to him to be honest. Marriages can't work without respect, love, honesty and communication. Does your marriage have any of these things?
People do of course hide the bad in their marriages. But how about trying to look at what you find attractive in another marriage and applying it to your own. For instance, another couple talks about going to the lake, having a fancy dinner, things like this. Try them! Do some new things! Do the things that the people in that ';better marriage'; will do! Maybe then you'll realize you have nothing to be jealous about. Put some effort into it! I hope you find the happiness in your marriage again! Don't let it slip away!
If you're jealous of other's better marriages, then you need to sit down, make a list of what's wrong and address them with your partner. If you don't think it's worth the trouble, then it's not a healthy relationship for either of you. You're going to be miserable if you don't do something about it. Who wants that kind of life? Fix it or chuck it.
Jealousy is one of those human emotions that nothing good ever comes from it. Instead of spending all your time and energy coveting what others have. Put that energy into making your marriage better. The only way to change a bad marriage is for both parties to work on it together and give 100 percent of themselves to it everyday.
Are you sure that is what you mean? Or are you just sick and tired of your own lousy mess that you have? You got yourself into it and you can get yourself out of it. So what is wrong with you? If you are staying in it so you have something to complain about, fine, but you only shoud have one chance to do that here. After that get off of your butt and do something about it. And make a better choice next time. Or is that part of the problem too, you don't know how to make a good choice? Practice for most of us is the answer. Nothing came to us easily or on the first try.
Remember many of those marriages you're jealous of probably only look nice from the outside.
With that said, you should figure out a way to get out of your lousy marriage, whether it's by working with your spouse or by getting out of it completely.
Instead of hating others for their happy marriage ( no marriage is perfect BTW) how about working on yours? If your partner doesn't want to improve what's wrong than it's time to move on.
Well instead of spending all your time thinking about others marriages why don't you spend that time working on your own marriage or if it is that bad then find yourself.
Why is there so much negativity towards marriage?
Whenever i venture into the Marriage section it seems everyone is so grumpy!
Ok so the Divorce section is linked to it, but how come there is never anything positive about marriage?
Is no one happy being married these days?
Why is there so much negativity towards marriage?
I've noticed this too. I think people just don't put as much effort into the marriage as they should. And they are always blaming the other person. Marriage counselors definitely have job security! Maybe I'm biased because I haven't been married yet but I can't wait to get married. I'm engaged and can't imagine life without my fiance. Why is there so much negativity towards marriage?
We are so happy being married to each other, there are no words to express it. Sure, we have our ups and downs, but we have that thing called the line of communication, respect and friendship that keeps us able to talk. We work each issue out to where it is no longer an issue and then it is forgotten forever. Never to be brought up ever again. It is gone. Only new issues are discussed.
This is not our first marriage for either one of us, but it is our last. We are two misfits that have found each other and the bond between us is so powerful, there is NOTHING that can't be worked out.
My husband and I are very happily married. We love each other very much. :)
I think there is a lot of negativity on here because the only time people really feel the need to come on an advice forum when they need advice -- i.e. when things are not going well. :)
me and my husand are happily married. together 5 and three quarter years married for 4 and a quarter.
my mum and dad together 40 years and married 34. have been together since 14 happily married.
there are loads of people happily married
because in older days wife r treated like animal..... but now it is kalyug so it was interchange.... so now husband r treated like animal so there was so much negativity towards marriage
Because its not natural for 2 humans to stay together for a lifetime in these modern times. Maybe it was a good idea when life was tougher back in the day.
I love my husband and being married to him.. we are best friends and do everything together!
Because people get married for the wrong reasons.
i'm happily married...when i'm at work.
Ok so the Divorce section is linked to it, but how come there is never anything positive about marriage?
Is no one happy being married these days?
Why is there so much negativity towards marriage?
I've noticed this too. I think people just don't put as much effort into the marriage as they should. And they are always blaming the other person. Marriage counselors definitely have job security! Maybe I'm biased because I haven't been married yet but I can't wait to get married. I'm engaged and can't imagine life without my fiance. Why is there so much negativity towards marriage?
We are so happy being married to each other, there are no words to express it. Sure, we have our ups and downs, but we have that thing called the line of communication, respect and friendship that keeps us able to talk. We work each issue out to where it is no longer an issue and then it is forgotten forever. Never to be brought up ever again. It is gone. Only new issues are discussed.
This is not our first marriage for either one of us, but it is our last. We are two misfits that have found each other and the bond between us is so powerful, there is NOTHING that can't be worked out.
My husband and I are very happily married. We love each other very much. :)
I think there is a lot of negativity on here because the only time people really feel the need to come on an advice forum when they need advice -- i.e. when things are not going well. :)
me and my husand are happily married. together 5 and three quarter years married for 4 and a quarter.
my mum and dad together 40 years and married 34. have been together since 14 happily married.
there are loads of people happily married
because in older days wife r treated like animal..... but now it is kalyug so it was interchange.... so now husband r treated like animal so there was so much negativity towards marriage
Because its not natural for 2 humans to stay together for a lifetime in these modern times. Maybe it was a good idea when life was tougher back in the day.
I love my husband and being married to him.. we are best friends and do everything together!
Because people get married for the wrong reasons.
i'm happily married...when i'm at work.
I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
The television commercial by the National Organization for Marriage says
';There is a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong.';
Will I need a marriage counselor to save my marriage?
Will I lose my job due to gay marriage?
I am frightened for my marriage, what can I do?I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
It will be difficult. You will be tested as you have never been tested before. The first step is to seek a community that will help you pass this test, nay trial, of same sex faith, hope, ardor and commitment.
Follow these simple steps:
1. Reach for your check book;
2. Ascertain your outstanding current balance;
3. Write a check for that amount and make it payable to the ';National Organization for Marriage,'; or simply ';GNOME.';
4. Mail the check in a envelope that is properly addressed with a sufficient amount of postage;
5. If it will help, the National Organization for Marriage will accept plastic to fund its efforts to save your job and marriage, but not necessarily in that order;
6. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept food stamps, assignments of unemployment benefit checks, Section 8 vouchers, CDOs, CDSs, mortgage-backed securities or other OTC financial derivatives.
A representative of GNOME named Newt will be in touch with you post-payment to help you develop an individualized plan to save your job or your marriage in accordance with God's will. The plan will be as simple or comprehensive as our circumstances and your donation permit.
We are frightened for your marriage too. That is why you need to pick up the phone and dial 1-800-NEWT-GNOME today. Don't delay. The sanctity of your heterosexual marriage may depend upon it.I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
Don't worry. Marriage between man and woman is always gonna be the only true marriage. Anything else is just a sick, deranged, liberal farce.
Best batten down the hatches and weather the storm. Keep away from poufs who will try to trick you into doing what you shouldn't.
I just don't understand people's fascination with other people's bedrooms and relationships............I dont get it
Please tell me! How hard is it just to let people live thier own lives?
This one is not as good as the last spoof.
';There is a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong.';
Will I need a marriage counselor to save my marriage?
Will I lose my job due to gay marriage?
I am frightened for my marriage, what can I do?I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
It will be difficult. You will be tested as you have never been tested before. The first step is to seek a community that will help you pass this test, nay trial, of same sex faith, hope, ardor and commitment.
Follow these simple steps:
1. Reach for your check book;
2. Ascertain your outstanding current balance;
3. Write a check for that amount and make it payable to the ';National Organization for Marriage,'; or simply ';GNOME.';
4. Mail the check in a envelope that is properly addressed with a sufficient amount of postage;
5. If it will help, the National Organization for Marriage will accept plastic to fund its efforts to save your job and marriage, but not necessarily in that order;
6. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept food stamps, assignments of unemployment benefit checks, Section 8 vouchers, CDOs, CDSs, mortgage-backed securities or other OTC financial derivatives.
A representative of GNOME named Newt will be in touch with you post-payment to help you develop an individualized plan to save your job or your marriage in accordance with God's will. The plan will be as simple or comprehensive as our circumstances and your donation permit.
We are frightened for your marriage too. That is why you need to pick up the phone and dial 1-800-NEWT-GNOME today. Don't delay. The sanctity of your heterosexual marriage may depend upon it.I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
Don't worry. Marriage between man and woman is always gonna be the only true marriage. Anything else is just a sick, deranged, liberal farce.
Best batten down the hatches and weather the storm. Keep away from poufs who will try to trick you into doing what you shouldn't.
I just don't understand people's fascination with other people's bedrooms and relationships............I dont get it
Please tell me! How hard is it just to let people live thier own lives?
This one is not as good as the last spoof.
What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
I just don't get it, why do people care what two other people want to do? What negative effect would it have on your life? Just wondering....I am straight and married and it would have no effect on me at all!What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing. I'm straight and married also and, frankly, I am offended that people who are in love and ready to commit who also happen to be gay don't have the same rights as I do.What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing.
If people would keep church and state separate there wouldn't be a problem. Because they dont, hence the problem
it's about making law to protect only a certain group of people.any legislation that is done this way is dangerous ground.
the idea of 'marriage' came from the church, and by using it, technically the government is not observing the separation of church and state. i heard someone give this solution, which i think is a pretty good one- let the churches have the 'marriages' and the government have the civil unions. as long as a wedding in a church would be recognized by the government, as they are now- only as a civil union, it would eliminate the issue. that way, each denomination or individual church would decide on same sex marriage.
nothing at all, but people's prejudices against gays and lesbians. really, if people think the validity of their own marriage is in danger if gay people marry eachother, then they should not be married.
There is nothing wrong with it. I love how arguement seems to be centering around somatics. Who cares what the religious definition of marriage is? Only those who are following that religion. The governemnt should not get involved with the definition and just allow everyone to get married. If the government allows the population to create laws based on religious preference (as it is trying to do with dictating who can be married) then it is violating the constitution which seperates church and state. There is an answer above that says that the constitution's demand for seperation means that marriage should be a institution based on religion and as such should be protected by allowing civil unions and not gay marriage. That is backwards. If we follow that thought then those argueing for this protection of the marriage institution by the government is asking the government to uphold one religion above all others...wait that seems to be happening with christianity in the US anyway...
I wonder when the US is going to start following that whole seperation of Church and State requirement and stop upholding christianity above all other religions?
Nothing. It just seems that it is not a ';marriage.'; ';Civil Union'; makes more sense to me. I think people get annoyed that everyone else has to change what a marriage is just to suit some people.
I'm with you, I just don't know. I don't have a problem with it.
If its a government issue, its a state issue. Because its definitely not anywhere in the constitution for the us government to regulate it.
Neither is straight marriage for that matter, and somehow the government got its fingers inside that also.
*Why would one want to ban gay marriage, while there are horrendous things such as gay pride parades going on? How is a couple worse than that?
As a conservative (most people would call me a Goldwater conservative), I understand that this is not any business of the government. If you aren't violating the rights of another, the government has no business regulating your behavior.
Truthfully, the government should not be involved in the marriage business. It should be a contract situation. If two consenting adults wish to enter into a contract creating certain obligations, who are we to disagree?
Because some people actually believe in the Bible and the Constitution as it was written.. You people that want to say separation between Church and State have no clue what that means according to the Constitution...
I have no problem with people being gay, but when it crosses the line into the term marriage I have real problems with people crossing that line to make a point.. Marriage is an institution that means the love and bonding between Man and Woman.. If you allow this institution meaning to be cracked it only opens it up to the meaning that it's ok to call Man and Animal a marriage too.. If they want to be together then why not just use the term Union?? It's nothing but the liberals way to slap an institution in the face and take away the meaning of marriage.
Nothing is wrong with it. It should not be illegal.
I have a proposal; let's allow civil unions (with the same rights as marriage) without even considering the question of sexuality.
There might not be a huge call for people who are not even sleeping together to form a credit/social responsibility/important life decision type of alliance, but it could be useful to some.
Why do we even care who's sleeping with who?
(Wait a minute....I know the answer....It's that horrible human urge to say ';You're not allowed to do that, and you deserve to be treated like garbage for even trying';)
no there is a problem, in the bible it states that it is wrong. and it just doesnt seem right, does it? there wouldn't be all this trouble if man stayed with woman the way it is supposed to be and another thing! you cant seperate the bible from the constitution, guess who were christians and/or involved in some sort of church, our fonding fathers! people who signed and helped with the constitution and build our country for that matter were christians! they believed that homosexuality is wrong, i believe it is truly wrongacne scars
Nothing. I'm straight and married also and, frankly, I am offended that people who are in love and ready to commit who also happen to be gay don't have the same rights as I do.What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing.
If people would keep church and state separate there wouldn't be a problem. Because they dont, hence the problem
it's about making law to protect only a certain group of people.any legislation that is done this way is dangerous ground.
the idea of 'marriage' came from the church, and by using it, technically the government is not observing the separation of church and state. i heard someone give this solution, which i think is a pretty good one- let the churches have the 'marriages' and the government have the civil unions. as long as a wedding in a church would be recognized by the government, as they are now- only as a civil union, it would eliminate the issue. that way, each denomination or individual church would decide on same sex marriage.
nothing at all, but people's prejudices against gays and lesbians. really, if people think the validity of their own marriage is in danger if gay people marry eachother, then they should not be married.
There is nothing wrong with it. I love how arguement seems to be centering around somatics. Who cares what the religious definition of marriage is? Only those who are following that religion. The governemnt should not get involved with the definition and just allow everyone to get married. If the government allows the population to create laws based on religious preference (as it is trying to do with dictating who can be married) then it is violating the constitution which seperates church and state. There is an answer above that says that the constitution's demand for seperation means that marriage should be a institution based on religion and as such should be protected by allowing civil unions and not gay marriage. That is backwards. If we follow that thought then those argueing for this protection of the marriage institution by the government is asking the government to uphold one religion above all others...wait that seems to be happening with christianity in the US anyway...
I wonder when the US is going to start following that whole seperation of Church and State requirement and stop upholding christianity above all other religions?
Nothing. It just seems that it is not a ';marriage.'; ';Civil Union'; makes more sense to me. I think people get annoyed that everyone else has to change what a marriage is just to suit some people.
I'm with you, I just don't know. I don't have a problem with it.
If its a government issue, its a state issue. Because its definitely not anywhere in the constitution for the us government to regulate it.
Neither is straight marriage for that matter, and somehow the government got its fingers inside that also.
*Why would one want to ban gay marriage, while there are horrendous things such as gay pride parades going on? How is a couple worse than that?
As a conservative (most people would call me a Goldwater conservative), I understand that this is not any business of the government. If you aren't violating the rights of another, the government has no business regulating your behavior.
Truthfully, the government should not be involved in the marriage business. It should be a contract situation. If two consenting adults wish to enter into a contract creating certain obligations, who are we to disagree?
Because some people actually believe in the Bible and the Constitution as it was written.. You people that want to say separation between Church and State have no clue what that means according to the Constitution...
I have no problem with people being gay, but when it crosses the line into the term marriage I have real problems with people crossing that line to make a point.. Marriage is an institution that means the love and bonding between Man and Woman.. If you allow this institution meaning to be cracked it only opens it up to the meaning that it's ok to call Man and Animal a marriage too.. If they want to be together then why not just use the term Union?? It's nothing but the liberals way to slap an institution in the face and take away the meaning of marriage.
Nothing is wrong with it. It should not be illegal.
I have a proposal; let's allow civil unions (with the same rights as marriage) without even considering the question of sexuality.
There might not be a huge call for people who are not even sleeping together to form a credit/social responsibility/important life decision type of alliance, but it could be useful to some.
Why do we even care who's sleeping with who?
(Wait a minute....I know the answer....It's that horrible human urge to say ';You're not allowed to do that, and you deserve to be treated like garbage for even trying';)
no there is a problem, in the bible it states that it is wrong. and it just doesnt seem right, does it? there wouldn't be all this trouble if man stayed with woman the way it is supposed to be and another thing! you cant seperate the bible from the constitution, guess who were christians and/or involved in some sort of church, our fonding fathers! people who signed and helped with the constitution and build our country for that matter were christians! they believed that homosexuality is wrong, i believe it is truly wrong
Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
Can you come up with a valid argument against legalizing same-sex marriage without using your religion or you're subjective morality?Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
no, but I cant get light out of a bulb without plugging it in either.Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
Sure no problem.
The act of procreation and the raising of your genetic offspring are arguably the biggest and most important aspects of human life. Certainly you can lead your life prioritizing other aspects higher but you can't deny that the conjunction between man and woman ranks quite high within our cosmic responsibilities.
Being of such undeniable importance our collective nation has provided a bill of rights so to speak, an agreement of terms both legal and spiritual, infleunced by culture which defines and provides special privilege for such unions between two people.
Marriage is the definition of an agreed union between man and woman to propagate our existence as a species.
So to change the definition of marriage and remove the aspect of procreation and genetic offspring creates an entirely new definition.
What then is the union between man and woman?
Regardless of civil rights legislation or impassioned speech making - that union is still something wholly different than a same-sex union. Sorry that's just reality. They are two different things.
It is rather overly emotional and frankly irrational to destroy one definition only to create two new definitions. Particularly when the ';new'; definition of man woman unions will in fact simply be the exact same thing it always was. But thanks to semantics having caused much duress, stress and futilely wasted energy.
Clearly you could change the terms of your question or restate it such a way to attempt to rebuke the simple logic above, however it will not refute the fact that male/female unions are different than same sex unions - and therefore, strictly categorically speaking, will be it's own unique entity.
Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
Yes. It should not be legalized, because this would an infringement of our First Amendment rights.
';Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.';
The bottom line is that marriage, is and always has been an establishment of religion, therefore government should have NEVER gotten involved in it. The Constitution grants them no authority in this matter. Marriage should have been left up to the church. If the state wants to offer contractual unions that offer special benefits, they should do so through civil unions, not by redefining marriage. Mark my words, if laws are passed that legalize gay marriage, it won't be long before priests are being thrown in jail for hate crimes or discrimination when they refuse to marry gays. Make no mistake, this debate is about freedom of religion, not gay rights.
According to your logic, probably not (but you have a preconceived acceptable answer, don't you?)
Marriage is a religious ceremony and therefore should not be recognized by the state. That means that ';married'; should not be a legal status.
If you give benefits for one religious ceremony, where does it end? I've been Baptized, should I get a tax break? Of course not. Why then, should it be any different if I get married?
Thumbs down all you want; I'm just advocating separation of church and state.
Wow. more people than I thought want the government to decide our religion for us.
I can argue FOR same sex marriage using religion.
I can also argue FOR it using legal grounds.
I can also argue FOR it using my own personal experience growing up with gay role models.
There are many political issues where I could agree with some points of the other side (abortion comes to mind), but there is no question in my mind about supporting gay marriage.
the only problem is with Definition.
the combination of both gay and straight sex terms being used as as a single term will cause errors, due to the fact that too many loop holes will form through laws.
the definition and creation of separate terms for both sects would be ideal as it would make aspects easier for people, employers and judges to define on a more accurate basis.
the term marriage could become misleading if not used in the right context. if people are fine with being gay and being married they can attain to a term that has the same meaning but lowers the confusion.
mostly people tend to get aggreivated about the terms. so a change in terms, like, civil union etc. will give more accurate information on the circumstances of the relationship but still hold with few exceptions the same lawfull right as marriage.
change the term everyones happy.
mostly.
lol - they will marry for the benefits.
What is preventing me from marrying one of my male friends for his benefits. He has a very sweet insurance package.
They cannot have children - I was told I couldn't have children when I was 15, does that mean I should not have issued a marriage licenses?
American Tradition - now there is a stretch. At one time it was tradition to kill natives, keep slaves and burn witches.
There is no reason outside of religion that could be easily refuted, outside of the fact that survivor benefits will be a drain on social security. However if you twist that bad boy around, it actually support gay marriage since survivor benefits are a legal entitlement granted by secular government and protected under the bill of rights. Which means that there cannot be any exclusionary language.
Yup. Thousands of people will marry their best friends for the insurance, tax and medical benefits. They are worth thousands of dollars a year.
And it isnt my morality, it is everyone elses'. Marriage is marriage and not gay marriage because society thinks marriage is special and should be celebrated. If we thought gay relationships were special we would have a ceremony for them.
the only reason anyone can ever come up with is websters dictionary and legalities, the former being a dumb reason and legalities, well, people play with the system all the time anyway so why dont we just let the homosexuals have the right to marry.
you know, if all of the homophobes would just acknowledge that we exist and deserve the right to a peaceful life with the same privilage as them, then they wont have to hear from us!
isnt that great? they can just go back behind their cutain and that would be it
well the original term of marraige is a union of two ppl, a man and a woman, so if you have two men or two women what is that supposed to be called? no matter what, to me, it can never be called a marraige so why try to do it? just my opinion. also if kids were to come about in this so called marraige, they would be messed up! this should not be legal.
Tradition. When we legalize this, it will never end. It will be group marriage after that.
';Love is love, blah, blah...'; I certainly love my dog and my guinea pig. Soon I'll be able them marry him too, huh?
When I was a kid, I used to say ';I love ice cream,'; and my brother would say ';Then why don't you marry it?'; Well soon that will be a reality and it is SICK.
Gay couples will adopt or artifically have children. Who will think that they should be homos. Soon the whole world will be a big orgy or a lot of gays... there will be no reproduction.
We currently separate male and female bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Well, we might as well quit cause it's really cool to be gay now.
Gays, and I'm not trying to be hurtful, but they tend to be ';loose.'; Gays are MUCH more likely to have HIV/AIDS. If it weren't for them, we KNOW there would not be AIDS. Some gay guy had sex with an ANIMAL. It only will spread disease.
That's only a little, by the way.
what's the big deal? gay couples have the same rights as heterosexual couples. they can make a will and leave property, wealth, etc to their partner same as any other couple. in addition there is special consideration based on sexual preference when it comes to 'hate crime' laws that give preferential treatment to gays in a crime. and guess what else? gays aren't being denied rights that straight people have. i can't marry someone of the same sex either. it is an issue that applies to everyone, not just gays.
weren't we brainwashed to think that the gay culture is separate and distinct from the straight lifestyle? but now they want to be like us? i just don't get it. live your lives. you're not being oppressed.
%26lt;republican
I think that same-sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples.
But the term marriage is reserved for religious couples.
And if the term marriage is so sought after, then religion will always be involved.
I support lesbians and gays all the way. not because I fell like they need it but because I want women to stay the fu*k away from men.
they screw up our lives and make our lives a living hell.
the more lesbians the better. so they can stay the hell away from men.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0xoKiH8J鈥?/a>
To me it is about them trying to change the definition of a word that already has and has had a definition for many years now. What gives them the right to just go around changing definitions of words to suit them? I mean really. It's kind of cocky of them. (no pun intended)
yes - why ruin your life? You can simply walk away from your crazy partner now. Why get married and let them take half? I agree with your comments on reducing breeding. We do have too many people now and not enough resources to sustain them.
Can you define the word marriage in a historic sense without using the word religion.
It's a biblical term.
My problem with gay marriage has nothing to do with religion as I am an atheist, my problem with gay marriage is that it diminishes gender roles in society.
marriage is EXCLUSIVELY a religious institution....the left uses gay marriage to attack churches(white churches)...because they were rejected by their families,and by proxy,the church...
There is no explicit constitutional right to homosexual unions, nor is there an explicit ban on them. This makes them entirely a state matter per the 10th Amendment.
Yes. Marriage generates a father and mother, the best combination of nurtureres to raise children.
Government shouldn't be marrying people at all and therefore shouldn't increase the number of circumstances under which they do.
It' s impossible to do so. The whole issue is sexist. Why can every female citizen marry a man, but I can't? Just because I have a couple different parts?
To use a famous quote.... ';YES WE CAN!';
Government operates on the system of popular vote. If the populous does not want gay marriages then it should not be recognized. Simple as that.... Are we done here yet?
No because marriage is a religious rite. Civil unions are not.
I asked a similar Q and the problem revolved around the word marriage and what it means
Lets see ,if I want to raise German shepards , should I get two males or two females . ( by today's mind set I guess it makes no difference
Yes. Men and women belong together. That is how babies are made. When two women or two men can make a baby you let me know and i'll vote to legalize gay marriage
Children need a male and female figure in the home to balance. Not a butch and a fairy
Perflexed...you are AAAAWWWEESOMMMMEE!!!! Kudos!!!
I'm all for legalizing it. But some would say that changing our 'American Tradition' of always having a man and a women together would just be unethical. That's about all I can pull outta my bum.
no, but I cant get light out of a bulb without plugging it in either.Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
Sure no problem.
The act of procreation and the raising of your genetic offspring are arguably the biggest and most important aspects of human life. Certainly you can lead your life prioritizing other aspects higher but you can't deny that the conjunction between man and woman ranks quite high within our cosmic responsibilities.
Being of such undeniable importance our collective nation has provided a bill of rights so to speak, an agreement of terms both legal and spiritual, infleunced by culture which defines and provides special privilege for such unions between two people.
Marriage is the definition of an agreed union between man and woman to propagate our existence as a species.
So to change the definition of marriage and remove the aspect of procreation and genetic offspring creates an entirely new definition.
What then is the union between man and woman?
Regardless of civil rights legislation or impassioned speech making - that union is still something wholly different than a same-sex union. Sorry that's just reality. They are two different things.
It is rather overly emotional and frankly irrational to destroy one definition only to create two new definitions. Particularly when the ';new'; definition of man woman unions will in fact simply be the exact same thing it always was. But thanks to semantics having caused much duress, stress and futilely wasted energy.
Clearly you could change the terms of your question or restate it such a way to attempt to rebuke the simple logic above, however it will not refute the fact that male/female unions are different than same sex unions - and therefore, strictly categorically speaking, will be it's own unique entity.
Can you argue against legalizing same-sex marriage without using religion?
Yes. It should not be legalized, because this would an infringement of our First Amendment rights.
';Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.';
The bottom line is that marriage, is and always has been an establishment of religion, therefore government should have NEVER gotten involved in it. The Constitution grants them no authority in this matter. Marriage should have been left up to the church. If the state wants to offer contractual unions that offer special benefits, they should do so through civil unions, not by redefining marriage. Mark my words, if laws are passed that legalize gay marriage, it won't be long before priests are being thrown in jail for hate crimes or discrimination when they refuse to marry gays. Make no mistake, this debate is about freedom of religion, not gay rights.
According to your logic, probably not (but you have a preconceived acceptable answer, don't you?)
Marriage is a religious ceremony and therefore should not be recognized by the state. That means that ';married'; should not be a legal status.
If you give benefits for one religious ceremony, where does it end? I've been Baptized, should I get a tax break? Of course not. Why then, should it be any different if I get married?
Thumbs down all you want; I'm just advocating separation of church and state.
Wow. more people than I thought want the government to decide our religion for us.
I can argue FOR same sex marriage using religion.
I can also argue FOR it using legal grounds.
I can also argue FOR it using my own personal experience growing up with gay role models.
There are many political issues where I could agree with some points of the other side (abortion comes to mind), but there is no question in my mind about supporting gay marriage.
the only problem is with Definition.
the combination of both gay and straight sex terms being used as as a single term will cause errors, due to the fact that too many loop holes will form through laws.
the definition and creation of separate terms for both sects would be ideal as it would make aspects easier for people, employers and judges to define on a more accurate basis.
the term marriage could become misleading if not used in the right context. if people are fine with being gay and being married they can attain to a term that has the same meaning but lowers the confusion.
mostly people tend to get aggreivated about the terms. so a change in terms, like, civil union etc. will give more accurate information on the circumstances of the relationship but still hold with few exceptions the same lawfull right as marriage.
change the term everyones happy.
mostly.
lol - they will marry for the benefits.
What is preventing me from marrying one of my male friends for his benefits. He has a very sweet insurance package.
They cannot have children - I was told I couldn't have children when I was 15, does that mean I should not have issued a marriage licenses?
American Tradition - now there is a stretch. At one time it was tradition to kill natives, keep slaves and burn witches.
There is no reason outside of religion that could be easily refuted, outside of the fact that survivor benefits will be a drain on social security. However if you twist that bad boy around, it actually support gay marriage since survivor benefits are a legal entitlement granted by secular government and protected under the bill of rights. Which means that there cannot be any exclusionary language.
Yup. Thousands of people will marry their best friends for the insurance, tax and medical benefits. They are worth thousands of dollars a year.
And it isnt my morality, it is everyone elses'. Marriage is marriage and not gay marriage because society thinks marriage is special and should be celebrated. If we thought gay relationships were special we would have a ceremony for them.
the only reason anyone can ever come up with is websters dictionary and legalities, the former being a dumb reason and legalities, well, people play with the system all the time anyway so why dont we just let the homosexuals have the right to marry.
you know, if all of the homophobes would just acknowledge that we exist and deserve the right to a peaceful life with the same privilage as them, then they wont have to hear from us!
isnt that great? they can just go back behind their cutain and that would be it
well the original term of marraige is a union of two ppl, a man and a woman, so if you have two men or two women what is that supposed to be called? no matter what, to me, it can never be called a marraige so why try to do it? just my opinion. also if kids were to come about in this so called marraige, they would be messed up! this should not be legal.
Tradition. When we legalize this, it will never end. It will be group marriage after that.
';Love is love, blah, blah...'; I certainly love my dog and my guinea pig. Soon I'll be able them marry him too, huh?
When I was a kid, I used to say ';I love ice cream,'; and my brother would say ';Then why don't you marry it?'; Well soon that will be a reality and it is SICK.
Gay couples will adopt or artifically have children. Who will think that they should be homos. Soon the whole world will be a big orgy or a lot of gays... there will be no reproduction.
We currently separate male and female bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Well, we might as well quit cause it's really cool to be gay now.
Gays, and I'm not trying to be hurtful, but they tend to be ';loose.'; Gays are MUCH more likely to have HIV/AIDS. If it weren't for them, we KNOW there would not be AIDS. Some gay guy had sex with an ANIMAL. It only will spread disease.
That's only a little, by the way.
what's the big deal? gay couples have the same rights as heterosexual couples. they can make a will and leave property, wealth, etc to their partner same as any other couple. in addition there is special consideration based on sexual preference when it comes to 'hate crime' laws that give preferential treatment to gays in a crime. and guess what else? gays aren't being denied rights that straight people have. i can't marry someone of the same sex either. it is an issue that applies to everyone, not just gays.
weren't we brainwashed to think that the gay culture is separate and distinct from the straight lifestyle? but now they want to be like us? i just don't get it. live your lives. you're not being oppressed.
%26lt;republican
I think that same-sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples.
But the term marriage is reserved for religious couples.
And if the term marriage is so sought after, then religion will always be involved.
I support lesbians and gays all the way. not because I fell like they need it but because I want women to stay the fu*k away from men.
they screw up our lives and make our lives a living hell.
the more lesbians the better. so they can stay the hell away from men.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0xoKiH8J鈥?/a>
To me it is about them trying to change the definition of a word that already has and has had a definition for many years now. What gives them the right to just go around changing definitions of words to suit them? I mean really. It's kind of cocky of them. (no pun intended)
yes - why ruin your life? You can simply walk away from your crazy partner now. Why get married and let them take half? I agree with your comments on reducing breeding. We do have too many people now and not enough resources to sustain them.
Can you define the word marriage in a historic sense without using the word religion.
It's a biblical term.
My problem with gay marriage has nothing to do with religion as I am an atheist, my problem with gay marriage is that it diminishes gender roles in society.
marriage is EXCLUSIVELY a religious institution....the left uses gay marriage to attack churches(white churches)...because they were rejected by their families,and by proxy,the church...
There is no explicit constitutional right to homosexual unions, nor is there an explicit ban on them. This makes them entirely a state matter per the 10th Amendment.
Yes. Marriage generates a father and mother, the best combination of nurtureres to raise children.
Government shouldn't be marrying people at all and therefore shouldn't increase the number of circumstances under which they do.
It' s impossible to do so. The whole issue is sexist. Why can every female citizen marry a man, but I can't? Just because I have a couple different parts?
To use a famous quote.... ';YES WE CAN!';
Government operates on the system of popular vote. If the populous does not want gay marriages then it should not be recognized. Simple as that.... Are we done here yet?
No because marriage is a religious rite. Civil unions are not.
I asked a similar Q and the problem revolved around the word marriage and what it means
Lets see ,if I want to raise German shepards , should I get two males or two females . ( by today's mind set I guess it makes no difference
Yes. Men and women belong together. That is how babies are made. When two women or two men can make a baby you let me know and i'll vote to legalize gay marriage
Children need a male and female figure in the home to balance. Not a butch and a fairy
Perflexed...you are AAAAWWWEESOMMMMEE!!!! Kudos!!!
I'm all for legalizing it. But some would say that changing our 'American Tradition' of always having a man and a women together would just be unethical. That's about all I can pull outta my bum.
Has it occurred to any conservatives that marriage is about commitment, not gender combinations?
I thought you all wanted MORE stable households and LESS promiscuity, more sex WITHIN marriage and less WITHOUT. Then why are you trying to stop people from committing, stabilizing and being monogamous?Has it occurred to any conservatives that marriage is about commitment, not gender combinations?
They also want fewer abortions. How many same sex couples have you heard of going for an abortion?Has it occurred to any conservatives that marriage is about commitment, not gender combinations?
I don't think many conservatives actually have many gay friends, or see how they live, so they don't see their relationships are just as natural as hetero relationships. Instead they're fed prejudice from the pulpit and spew slogans (Not Adam %26amp; Steve, being a very hackneyed one.)
The argument that marriage is for procreation leaves out everyone who doesn't choose to have children or are infertile and know so before marriage.
Also, the ';definition'; argument doesn't hold water, because language and meanings change as people and societies change. Also, it is possible for a religious community to have a different definition for something than whatever is the LEGAL definition. For instance, some religious communities call and embryo a baby.
The fact is there is the only argument they have against gay marriage is based in their religious beliefs. There is no evidence to support that gay marriage would be ';bad'; for society.
So if I COMMIT to marrying a ten year old child, that's OK because I've COMMITTED to it?
What if COMMIT to marrying a dog?
Marriage was created by God when He joined Adam and Eve. Funny how you want to believe THAT part of the Bible, but not the parts that state homosexuality is wrong, lol.
Friend, you cannot argue with these people, as you can see from some of the ';brilliant'; answer above...
No matter what you say, no matter how much logic you throw at them, you will NEVER be able to get through to them. Humans are naturally stubborn, and when you add in religion as a factor, you have a VERY stubborn and egotistical person.
I know it's annoying the way they think....but you can't do anything about it (well you could, but it wouldn't be very pretty haha).
Just relax. They are losing. And they will continue to lose. So there is nothing to fear. =)
That is too sane an argument for the insane to compute. Marriage is a legal partnership for property rights, nothing more. :)
Practicing shaman... quantum physics rocks.
Considering the domestic violence rates among hetero couples it appears that marriage is about who is stronger and more angry.
They don't want to give the tax break.
They are the tax break.
Not exactly true even though craftily stated.
Marriage is a lifetime commitment between one man and one woman and that is not your neighbours wife.
You are trying to promote homosexual relationships and that is not in the meaning of marriage either in the bible or in general. Our forefathers did not establish marriage to be between two of the same gender. Marriage since the beginning of time has always been between two of opposite gender. The lawyers and ACLU and other bleeding hearts are trying to change that and may succeed in the near future; but that will still not make it morally right. It wil only be Politically correct.
When you take your car and start using peanut butter in the carburetor, and ginger ale in the gas tank, and dishwasher in the crank case where the oil belongs, then you can tell me about how messing up the design specs will not harm anything!
Marriage is God's design. You're putting your fist up in God's face (spiritually speaking), and telling God that He doesn't know what He's doing! You're blatantly mocking God and rebelling against God! Please explain to me how THAT is a good thing!
God is the one who designed marriage. And I, for one, will NOT take sides against God! If YOU want to, do so with your eyes wide open, and know and understand that God WILL judge you for your rebellion! (';Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is the same as idol worship'; according to the Bible.)
Sorry, but people who try to fight the Almighty only end up losing.
But if that is what you want to do, don't whine or complain about the eternal consequences.
(And before you make any foolish statements about me, I do NOT hate homosexuals, and I am NOT afraid of them. My disagreement should NOT be misconstrued as either hate OR fear!)
Marriage is about starting a family!!.....So same sex marriage doesn`t make sence...gay people can have their relationships but.....No one can change the definition of marriage.....if it were like that...then why not have a marriage made out of 3 people....like those 3somes...
Doesn`t make sense cuz that aint the meaning of mariage!
Marriage is about neither of these things.
It is strictly a religious concept, and absolutely meaningless outside of religion.
Therefore, religion sets its parameters.
http://rabbijaffe.today.com/
gay sex is a sin, marriage is suppose to be between man and woman
part of that commitment is procreation of the species. hello mcfly!!!
wrong
HAS IT OCCURRED TO YOU THAT THE DEF ISNT GOING TO CHANGE CUZ GOD ALREADY DEFINED IT??? wrong board
They also want fewer abortions. How many same sex couples have you heard of going for an abortion?Has it occurred to any conservatives that marriage is about commitment, not gender combinations?
I don't think many conservatives actually have many gay friends, or see how they live, so they don't see their relationships are just as natural as hetero relationships. Instead they're fed prejudice from the pulpit and spew slogans (Not Adam %26amp; Steve, being a very hackneyed one.)
The argument that marriage is for procreation leaves out everyone who doesn't choose to have children or are infertile and know so before marriage.
Also, the ';definition'; argument doesn't hold water, because language and meanings change as people and societies change. Also, it is possible for a religious community to have a different definition for something than whatever is the LEGAL definition. For instance, some religious communities call and embryo a baby.
The fact is there is the only argument they have against gay marriage is based in their religious beliefs. There is no evidence to support that gay marriage would be ';bad'; for society.
So if I COMMIT to marrying a ten year old child, that's OK because I've COMMITTED to it?
What if COMMIT to marrying a dog?
Marriage was created by God when He joined Adam and Eve. Funny how you want to believe THAT part of the Bible, but not the parts that state homosexuality is wrong, lol.
Friend, you cannot argue with these people, as you can see from some of the ';brilliant'; answer above...
No matter what you say, no matter how much logic you throw at them, you will NEVER be able to get through to them. Humans are naturally stubborn, and when you add in religion as a factor, you have a VERY stubborn and egotistical person.
I know it's annoying the way they think....but you can't do anything about it (well you could, but it wouldn't be very pretty haha).
Just relax. They are losing. And they will continue to lose. So there is nothing to fear. =)
That is too sane an argument for the insane to compute. Marriage is a legal partnership for property rights, nothing more. :)
Practicing shaman... quantum physics rocks.
Considering the domestic violence rates among hetero couples it appears that marriage is about who is stronger and more angry.
They don't want to give the tax break.
They are the tax break.
Not exactly true even though craftily stated.
Marriage is a lifetime commitment between one man and one woman and that is not your neighbours wife.
You are trying to promote homosexual relationships and that is not in the meaning of marriage either in the bible or in general. Our forefathers did not establish marriage to be between two of the same gender. Marriage since the beginning of time has always been between two of opposite gender. The lawyers and ACLU and other bleeding hearts are trying to change that and may succeed in the near future; but that will still not make it morally right. It wil only be Politically correct.
When you take your car and start using peanut butter in the carburetor, and ginger ale in the gas tank, and dishwasher in the crank case where the oil belongs, then you can tell me about how messing up the design specs will not harm anything!
Marriage is God's design. You're putting your fist up in God's face (spiritually speaking), and telling God that He doesn't know what He's doing! You're blatantly mocking God and rebelling against God! Please explain to me how THAT is a good thing!
God is the one who designed marriage. And I, for one, will NOT take sides against God! If YOU want to, do so with your eyes wide open, and know and understand that God WILL judge you for your rebellion! (';Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is the same as idol worship'; according to the Bible.)
Sorry, but people who try to fight the Almighty only end up losing.
But if that is what you want to do, don't whine or complain about the eternal consequences.
(And before you make any foolish statements about me, I do NOT hate homosexuals, and I am NOT afraid of them. My disagreement should NOT be misconstrued as either hate OR fear!)
Marriage is about starting a family!!.....So same sex marriage doesn`t make sence...gay people can have their relationships but.....No one can change the definition of marriage.....if it were like that...then why not have a marriage made out of 3 people....like those 3somes...
Doesn`t make sense cuz that aint the meaning of mariage!
Marriage is about neither of these things.
It is strictly a religious concept, and absolutely meaningless outside of religion.
Therefore, religion sets its parameters.
http://rabbijaffe.today.com/
gay sex is a sin, marriage is suppose to be between man and woman
part of that commitment is procreation of the species. hello mcfly!!!
wrong
HAS IT OCCURRED TO YOU THAT THE DEF ISNT GOING TO CHANGE CUZ GOD ALREADY DEFINED IT??? wrong board
Are dreams and goals importened to a marriage?
Can one person have dreams and the other not and get along?
Also what if the other person that does not have dreams resents the other persons dreams?Are dreams and goals importened to a marriage?
if one person has a dream and the other doesnt have and just get along. i think thats still a good thing.. at least at that thing, both of you will have the same goals and dreams for you life..
and if other other person does not have dreams to resent the others dream, i think the one who has a dream would just be supportive to the other one who doesnt have a dream..
then, dream the same dreams and work for the same goals.. thats a good thing and i think it will produce good bonding and great understanding... :DAre dreams and goals importened to a marriage?
if you don't have dreams and goals in marriage (yet alone life) why bother even getting out of bed. goals push us and keep the hope alive in us.and in marriage, it should be a must. I was married and she didn't really believe allot in goals and was kinda blah to the whole idea.it took its toll on me, its nice to wake up every morning and shoot for the stars, single or not. my dreams and goals keep the passion of life in my heart.
just a thought
cheers
Of course you can import your dreams and goals into a marriage...it will work out as long as the other spouse supports the decision
Whether you have dreams of your own or not, a good spouse is always supportive of the others dreams and goals.
Also what if the other person that does not have dreams resents the other persons dreams?Are dreams and goals importened to a marriage?
if one person has a dream and the other doesnt have and just get along. i think thats still a good thing.. at least at that thing, both of you will have the same goals and dreams for you life..
and if other other person does not have dreams to resent the others dream, i think the one who has a dream would just be supportive to the other one who doesnt have a dream..
then, dream the same dreams and work for the same goals.. thats a good thing and i think it will produce good bonding and great understanding... :DAre dreams and goals importened to a marriage?
if you don't have dreams and goals in marriage (yet alone life) why bother even getting out of bed. goals push us and keep the hope alive in us.and in marriage, it should be a must. I was married and she didn't really believe allot in goals and was kinda blah to the whole idea.it took its toll on me, its nice to wake up every morning and shoot for the stars, single or not. my dreams and goals keep the passion of life in my heart.
just a thought
cheers
Of course you can import your dreams and goals into a marriage...it will work out as long as the other spouse supports the decision
Whether you have dreams of your own or not, a good spouse is always supportive of the others dreams and goals.
I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
The television commercial by the National Organization for Marriage says
';There is a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong.';
Will I need a marriage counselor to save my marriage?
Will I lose my job due to gay marriage?
I am frightened for my marriage, what can I do?I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
It will be difficult. You will be tested as you have never been tested before. The first step is to seek a community that will help you pass this test, nay trial, of same sex faith, hope, ardor and commitment.
Follow these simple steps:
1. Reach for your check book;
2. Ascertain your outstanding current balance;
3. Write a check for that amount and make it payable to the ';National Organization for Marriage,'; or simply ';GNOME.';
4. Mail the check in a envelope that is properly addressed with a sufficient amount of postage;
5. If it will help, the National Organization for Marriage will accept plastic to fund its efforts to save your job and marriage, but not necessarily in that order;
6. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept food stamps, assignments of unemployment benefit checks, Section 8 vouchers, CDOs, CDSs, mortgage-backed securities or other OTC financial derivatives.
A representative of GNOME named Newt will be in touch with you post-payment to help you develop an individualized plan to save your job or your marriage in accordance with God's will. The plan will be as simple or comprehensive as our circumstances and your donation permit.
We are frightened for your marriage too. That is why you need to pick up the phone and dial 1-800-NEWT-GNOME today. Don't delay. The sanctity of your heterosexual marriage may depend upon it.I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
Don't worry. Marriage between man and woman is always gonna be the only true marriage. Anything else is just a sick, deranged, liberal farce.
Best batten down the hatches and weather the storm. Keep away from poufs who will try to trick you into doing what you shouldn't.
I just don't understand people's fascination with other people's bedrooms and relationships............I dont get it
Please tell me! How hard is it just to let people live thier own lives?
This one is not as good as the last spoof.
';There is a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong.';
Will I need a marriage counselor to save my marriage?
Will I lose my job due to gay marriage?
I am frightened for my marriage, what can I do?I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
It will be difficult. You will be tested as you have never been tested before. The first step is to seek a community that will help you pass this test, nay trial, of same sex faith, hope, ardor and commitment.
Follow these simple steps:
1. Reach for your check book;
2. Ascertain your outstanding current balance;
3. Write a check for that amount and make it payable to the ';National Organization for Marriage,'; or simply ';GNOME.';
4. Mail the check in a envelope that is properly addressed with a sufficient amount of postage;
5. If it will help, the National Organization for Marriage will accept plastic to fund its efforts to save your job and marriage, but not necessarily in that order;
6. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept food stamps, assignments of unemployment benefit checks, Section 8 vouchers, CDOs, CDSs, mortgage-backed securities or other OTC financial derivatives.
A representative of GNOME named Newt will be in touch with you post-payment to help you develop an individualized plan to save your job or your marriage in accordance with God's will. The plan will be as simple or comprehensive as our circumstances and your donation permit.
We are frightened for your marriage too. That is why you need to pick up the phone and dial 1-800-NEWT-GNOME today. Don't delay. The sanctity of your heterosexual marriage may depend upon it.I am afraid of Gay Marriage, what will happen to my marriage?
Don't worry. Marriage between man and woman is always gonna be the only true marriage. Anything else is just a sick, deranged, liberal farce.
Best batten down the hatches and weather the storm. Keep away from poufs who will try to trick you into doing what you shouldn't.
I just don't understand people's fascination with other people's bedrooms and relationships............I dont get it
Please tell me! How hard is it just to let people live thier own lives?
This one is not as good as the last spoof.
If civil unions had identical rights to marriage, would that make both sides of the debate happy?
The anti-gay marriage crowd gets to keep the definition of a word.
%26amp;
The pro-gay marriage crowd gets all the legal and financial benefits of marriage.
Everybody is happy right?If civil unions had identical rights to marriage, would that make both sides of the debate happy?
No, because civil unions would still be perceived as second class.
Here is the best solution. The government renames all marriages as civil unions in the eyes of the government. So legally, and for government purposes, they would only be known as civil unions and not as marriages.
Only churches and religious institutions would be able to use the word marriage. And the word marriage would cease to have legal meaning. Only religious meaning.
So if you got married at the county courthouse, it wouldn't be a marriage, it would be a civil union, regardless of if it was same sex or man-woman.
';Marriage licenses'; would be re-named as civil union licenses.
Only if you got married at a church or other religious institution would it be called a marriage. If any given church didn't want to do same sex marriages, they wouldn't have to.
This way, everyone has a civil union, and only those who opt for church based religious unions would be able to say they are married.If civil unions had identical rights to marriage, would that make both sides of the debate happy?
No, it wouldn't make either side happy. One side wants complete rights, the other wants none, some are in the middle. Actually, marriage has no right to be included in any legal discretion. There is supposed to be a separation of church and state and marriage is a religious institution.
Works for me and is what I have said all along
%26amp;
The pro-gay marriage crowd gets all the legal and financial benefits of marriage.
Everybody is happy right?If civil unions had identical rights to marriage, would that make both sides of the debate happy?
No, because civil unions would still be perceived as second class.
Here is the best solution. The government renames all marriages as civil unions in the eyes of the government. So legally, and for government purposes, they would only be known as civil unions and not as marriages.
Only churches and religious institutions would be able to use the word marriage. And the word marriage would cease to have legal meaning. Only religious meaning.
So if you got married at the county courthouse, it wouldn't be a marriage, it would be a civil union, regardless of if it was same sex or man-woman.
';Marriage licenses'; would be re-named as civil union licenses.
Only if you got married at a church or other religious institution would it be called a marriage. If any given church didn't want to do same sex marriages, they wouldn't have to.
This way, everyone has a civil union, and only those who opt for church based religious unions would be able to say they are married.If civil unions had identical rights to marriage, would that make both sides of the debate happy?
No, it wouldn't make either side happy. One side wants complete rights, the other wants none, some are in the middle. Actually, marriage has no right to be included in any legal discretion. There is supposed to be a separation of church and state and marriage is a religious institution.
Works for me and is what I have said all along
Is it wrong to pressure someone with marriage?
If you can't love them, really love them unless you have some type of security so you know they're not gonna break up with you and your going to get hurt. Last time i almost killed myself. But if you know they love you, and have every intention on being with you for a long long time and just randomly hate marriage (for you twilight readers, like bella and how it made no sence why she wouldn't marry him...)
Is it wrong to pressure them, then?Is it wrong to pressure someone with marriage?
It's not constructive to ';pressure'; someone into something they are uncomfortable with. A constructive way to go about the situation is discuss your respective views and talk about how they can be reconciled.
On the one hand, marriage is not a guarantee that this person is not going to break up with you; plenty of marriages end in divorce. Whether you're married or not, anytime you love someone, you're taking a risk - a huge risk; there's no way around it. If you don't want to get hurt, don't get involved in a relationship - period.
That said, there are reasons why you might want to be married - be it legal, social or emotional reasons. If your partner is against marriage *in principle*, which is what it sounds like from your description, it won't do you any good to ';pressure'; him/her to abandon their principles - just as you feel strongly about marriage being desirable, they probably feel just as strongly that it is undesirable. It has more to do with emotion than with reason, so rational arguments are unlikely to have any effect. You *can* try and reason with the person, but you have to formulate for yourself what your plan of action is going to be if this person sticks to their guns. Are you willing to stay in the relationship even if marriage is not in the picture? Or would you choose to walk away? You need to proceed with this decision in mind.Is it wrong to pressure someone with marriage?
I wish you the best. Don't think of it as ';threatening'; to leave - you simply need to be honest about your needs, and be clear that if your needs are not being met, you will be looking for a person who can meet them. Hope things will work out for you.
Marriage is no guarantee of life long love, nothing is. It takes TWO and your's sounds a little clingy and one-sided. I wouldn't pressure ANY man my dear, it'll backfire at some point and why would you do it anyway? -That is, IF, you're secure within yourself. When children are involved, sometimes its a different story and marriage becomes more important due to providing security/name/support to a child. Yet still, you can't ';pressure'; some one to love you or be with you if they don't want too...and sure, any thing can happen along the way to change the course of that love, for better or the worse.
You want a guarantee and there is none...we all take our chance(s) in this life with others...and we hope our love lasts and act accordingly.
Under no circumstances should any woman who has any element of self-esteem and autonomy force another into a relationship because they are afraid...
Sincerely,
Grace
Yes it is wrong to pressure someone to marry you. Where is your pride? You don't want anyone to think that your that desperate. Being married isn't that great. It's a lot of hard word and takes two people who both have mutual respect for one another. If you look desperate how can he have any respect for you. Try acting like you don't care. Show your independence. Nobody wants somebody that is going to be an emotional dependent wreck. If you continue using the tactics your using you will lose him for good.
Not necessarily, if you want to be married and have that license. If things are good and have been for along, long time there is not a whole lot of difference between an extended relationship and marriage. Is it just because they are scared of the word marriage or commitment?
yes because you can't guarantee that your marriage won't end, which it probably will if you pressured them into it in the first place. If someone truly loves you, let the cards fall where they may. Marriage isn't the end all be all.
wow... sounds like you have a LOT of security issues...
don't pressure him into marrying you, i think you need counseling if you're trying to kill yourself.
i honestly wouldn't get married if i were this paranoid, it doesn't seem like it'll work out right... good luck
It is never okay to pressure marriage on someone. Even if you get married, that is still know guarantee. It seems that you have some insecurity issues that you need to deal with.
Marriage is tough enough anyway but to put pressure on anybody you are setting yourself up for a failed situation.
You should seek help from a professional person and take their advise
accordingly.
Mildred is my leader
No successful marriage is borne from coercion, and marriage is not a cure for some personal ill, either. It's more sacred than that.
NEVER pressure someone to marry you. If he/she loves you it will come naturally. You are the prize.
You need some counseling.. There is NO guarantees in life even if you do get married.
Yeah it's wrongacne scars
Is it wrong to pressure them, then?Is it wrong to pressure someone with marriage?
It's not constructive to ';pressure'; someone into something they are uncomfortable with. A constructive way to go about the situation is discuss your respective views and talk about how they can be reconciled.
On the one hand, marriage is not a guarantee that this person is not going to break up with you; plenty of marriages end in divorce. Whether you're married or not, anytime you love someone, you're taking a risk - a huge risk; there's no way around it. If you don't want to get hurt, don't get involved in a relationship - period.
That said, there are reasons why you might want to be married - be it legal, social or emotional reasons. If your partner is against marriage *in principle*, which is what it sounds like from your description, it won't do you any good to ';pressure'; him/her to abandon their principles - just as you feel strongly about marriage being desirable, they probably feel just as strongly that it is undesirable. It has more to do with emotion than with reason, so rational arguments are unlikely to have any effect. You *can* try and reason with the person, but you have to formulate for yourself what your plan of action is going to be if this person sticks to their guns. Are you willing to stay in the relationship even if marriage is not in the picture? Or would you choose to walk away? You need to proceed with this decision in mind.Is it wrong to pressure someone with marriage?
I wish you the best. Don't think of it as ';threatening'; to leave - you simply need to be honest about your needs, and be clear that if your needs are not being met, you will be looking for a person who can meet them. Hope things will work out for you.
Report Abuse
Marriage is no guarantee of life long love, nothing is. It takes TWO and your's sounds a little clingy and one-sided. I wouldn't pressure ANY man my dear, it'll backfire at some point and why would you do it anyway? -That is, IF, you're secure within yourself. When children are involved, sometimes its a different story and marriage becomes more important due to providing security/name/support to a child. Yet still, you can't ';pressure'; some one to love you or be with you if they don't want too...and sure, any thing can happen along the way to change the course of that love, for better or the worse.
You want a guarantee and there is none...we all take our chance(s) in this life with others...and we hope our love lasts and act accordingly.
Under no circumstances should any woman who has any element of self-esteem and autonomy force another into a relationship because they are afraid...
Sincerely,
Grace
Yes it is wrong to pressure someone to marry you. Where is your pride? You don't want anyone to think that your that desperate. Being married isn't that great. It's a lot of hard word and takes two people who both have mutual respect for one another. If you look desperate how can he have any respect for you. Try acting like you don't care. Show your independence. Nobody wants somebody that is going to be an emotional dependent wreck. If you continue using the tactics your using you will lose him for good.
Not necessarily, if you want to be married and have that license. If things are good and have been for along, long time there is not a whole lot of difference between an extended relationship and marriage. Is it just because they are scared of the word marriage or commitment?
yes because you can't guarantee that your marriage won't end, which it probably will if you pressured them into it in the first place. If someone truly loves you, let the cards fall where they may. Marriage isn't the end all be all.
wow... sounds like you have a LOT of security issues...
don't pressure him into marrying you, i think you need counseling if you're trying to kill yourself.
i honestly wouldn't get married if i were this paranoid, it doesn't seem like it'll work out right... good luck
It is never okay to pressure marriage on someone. Even if you get married, that is still know guarantee. It seems that you have some insecurity issues that you need to deal with.
Marriage is tough enough anyway but to put pressure on anybody you are setting yourself up for a failed situation.
You should seek help from a professional person and take their advise
accordingly.
Mildred is my leader
No successful marriage is borne from coercion, and marriage is not a cure for some personal ill, either. It's more sacred than that.
NEVER pressure someone to marry you. If he/she loves you it will come naturally. You are the prize.
You need some counseling.. There is NO guarantees in life even if you do get married.
Yeah it's wrong
Is it good to experiment sex before marriage ?
Many of my friends advise me to have sex atleast once before marriage so that when time comes to do real show, you won't fail.
Atleast you know how to works...so you can bring more pleasure
Any recommendations? I am getting married in Feb... My fiancee is in India but I can give a try locally.Is it good to experiment sex before marriage ?
My Dear friend,.u must be a Indian,correct,.because most of the Indians will be virgin till they marry,.,see think about your girl she will be virgin and waiting for u,.if she goes to someone else for experience before marriage what u will think,.,same she will think and feel if she comes to know about what u r thinking to do now,.don't hurt u r girl,.friend will make u pure and impure too at the same time,..see u don't need to be so experienced to handle a virgin girl who also doesn't knew anything about it in real,.if u wish to know more about sex buy some books like kama-sutra,.or watch lots of educational porn videos till feb,.don't get u r self spoiled,.u can hide everything from u r loved once,.but u cant hide truth from God,.if u don't believe god,.believe in love.,.believe in u r family how they trust u,.how she trust u,.don't break u r truly appearance,.,see if u r lover is a experienced and matured girl who slept with many then there is a logic u may think about experience,.she trust u,.she is virgin,.,waiting for u,.,see her heart,..cut the friend who suggested u this,..he is anti - Christ,..call her everyday,.have lots of fun with her,.be a good person,..and be loyal to her till u die,.don't worry there is nothing than love in bed which a women wants,.even if u r innocent who doesn't know what is sex,..even who doesn't know the meaning of sex,..girls doesn't want there partners to be experienced,.all they love is pure love,..and affection,,.if u win that,..she will be so patient and allow u to experiment her body so u can learn lots of practicals and become a expert within month,.she will do what ever u ask coz,she is u r wife,.love her,.
by the way,.best wishes for u r life,.!!Is it good to experiment sex before marriage ?
Only foolish people talk so. Your friends are very bad %26amp; irresponsible people who so advise you. It is illegal %26amp; immoral to do so. If you study about that well, you will never fail. Good friends teach properly in civilised manner to their friends who are going to get married instead of badly advising. If you do so, after wedding ceremony, when you see your wife at first night, the real love, affection, attraction, interest, excitement %26amp; craze for that while doing that with your wife will be missing %26amp; the real deep intimacy with her will NOT be existing. You will not be a happy %26amp; deep loving partner afterwards too. Psychological %26amp; emotional effect on her will be very bad. While sleeping with you at mid night, some times on some day, you will talk about that experience %26amp; she will listen %26amp; know that. Everyone talks of one's past while sleeping on which has has no control at all. This is God made thing. You cannot prevent. Imagine, if it happens to you, your wife comes to know of that %26amp; how she is very much shattered after that. Never commit any such mistake at all.
Read a good sex manual available in the market. Search on Google about ';Sex techniques'; %26amp; read some of them well.
Life is an experiment ... so is art of sex also.... but isnt that a good feeling that u both experiment things together once u r married... these things will strengthen your relationship and u both will come to know each other as a person and waht u want in bed..... and marriage is not all about sex. its about how u feel for the relation and the person u are with and once that is smooth everythng is smooth.
Sex is an art and art is learnt everyday u can learn it and can keep learning till the time u die.
n ppl who give this crap that b4 marriage u shud have sex so when u get married u can satisfy her/him is total BS.
so dont bother bot experimenting it with som1 b4 marriage and if u r experimenting it with som1, tell her also to do the same. so that u both can compare each other while the first time u r doing it together. and if u blv in criticsm go ahead but dont 4get to tell her the samething
You have waited this long... what is the rush? Your fiance loves you for who you are and you should not have to prove yourself in bed to keep your life partner. Sex is a learning experience. No one is a pro the first time and it is so much more special and meaningful to be able to say that that person is the only one that you have given yourself to. You will have no guilt or regrets. I think that you would be happier if you wait for marriage. And, just as an extra note, you will have no basis of comparison if your partner is terrible in bed! But seriously, relationships are about communication and figuring out what works for both of you. Just wait! You won't be sorry!
Noooo! if you are a virgin and your engaged don't find a guy for a quickie just because you think you need some experience. for one that is cheating. and two you being a virgin means that if you wait for your man and marriage that you will be a perfect fit for him because he will be the only man who has had you. and if you want tips on how to make your first time better and to please him go to a novelty store and buy a book on the kama sutra read it and use your new knowledge to blow his mind.
Answer is simple. BIG NO
because you will not like your would be wife to have sex with any man.
Lady not only needs sex but she needs love, affaction, security and recognition. She needs good fore play to have real mood. Casual sex with any lady will not be satisfying for you rather it will be disgusting for you as sex needs cool calm mind and good environment with committed partner.
theoretical knowledge is enough to work and start life with ur partner,some times many experience persons fail on first night be cos reasons r more on diff rent condition,so Tnve practical sex so that u will be safe from excessess %26amp; keep ur partner also safe,happy life leas only on understanding of u %26amp; ur partner not sex don't ,go in hurry try %26amp; see my opinion u will b happy in ur life.
It is not fair on your part to take some advise on such important issue which may a reason to feel guilty when you will heart that your fiance has the same experience.......
Yes if you feel that you require some experience on such issue
You go ahead and share it with others as well as your . . . . .
Well you can but I don't think you should consider this as a show. Its not a timebound activity. With continual practise after marriage, you anyway know how it works.
You may consult a gynaecologist and get some does and don'ts or I can help you if you so wish.
It bothered my husband that I had slept with someone else before our relationship.
Everyone is an individual. What works for one person might not work the another. So even if you do gain some experience now, who says that it will work for your husband in the bedroom.
He might be expecting you to be a shy virgin. Men get off on the whole Virginity thing. It's important.
I used to think so, but now I don't really know.
I think it is a good idea to learn what you like and get some 'practice' before you settle down with the same person for the rest of your life (ideally). However, I had experience before my husband, knew what good sex was, and then was stuck with a man who was awful in bed.
It could go either way. Do whatever feels right for you!
Sex before marriage is bad, bad, bad!! It's better fail that do it before you marriage. Okay? It will be more, um, let say wonderful, if you do it first time with your partner, after marriage. Congratulations on your marriage.
No u shudnt cheat ur wife..u know the relation bonds up slowly as and when u explore each otehr for the first time...if u give it a try locally u will not be that much interested in S## for the first time with ur wife...what will u do if somehow ur wife gets to know it from u only...just imagine the loss
im not muslim. but if you have a close relationship with someone, then why not ? sex is too taboo in some religions. its a perfectly natural thing to happen, and its not dirty nor sinful if you have genuine feelings for the person you are sleeping with.
No. do not do it
First, that would be cheating since you are already engaged and it is wrong
Two, it is an awesome thing to have only had this experience with the person you marry, it is a bond that cannot be broken
My advice: No, don't cheat just to get some sexual experience. However, read some books about it. You mention your fiance is in India, surely you have heard of the Kama Sutra.
Well, yes its good to experiment before marriage, so that you know you are compatible in bed before you commit, but jesus, don't cheat on your fiancee!!
Yes, you may test her before marriage. I think before taking her responsibility you should know that whether you are able to give her satisfaction or not.
Do reading of greate people regarding marriage and how to sattisfy your partenar experiment may spoil your life
Rather not. It does depend on your values though. Definitely not on a local although i think you're joking. Your first time will be amazing because it'll be with your life partner, the last thing you will be thinking about is technique
You will be spoiling a great Honeymoon ahead,
not only for your own self but also for your fiancee.
hell yeah as long as the person u are experimenting it with is your partner and not some other hussy.
dont cheat.
answer mine please:
http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
So you will cheat on your fiance just to have some experience????!!!!!
Either wait until you are married or have sex with Fiance when you see him.
NO! Wait til you get married. It's only 2 months away! Don't cheat. That's not right.
ok for me youll have to wait. see if she says yes first you dont want to surprise her with that. it will just be wierd for her
yes ! no experiment. do it for your enjoyment.
Are you a spinner who is used to use the used ball ?
Yes ..have the dish..
i don't think you should go for experimentation.
ya sure
Sex and marriage are 2 different items.
Atleast you know how to works...so you can bring more pleasure
Any recommendations? I am getting married in Feb... My fiancee is in India but I can give a try locally.Is it good to experiment sex before marriage ?
My Dear friend,.u must be a Indian,correct,.because most of the Indians will be virgin till they marry,.,see think about your girl she will be virgin and waiting for u,.if she goes to someone else for experience before marriage what u will think,.,same she will think and feel if she comes to know about what u r thinking to do now,.don't hurt u r girl,.friend will make u pure and impure too at the same time,..see u don't need to be so experienced to handle a virgin girl who also doesn't knew anything about it in real,.if u wish to know more about sex buy some books like kama-sutra,.or watch lots of educational porn videos till feb,.don't get u r self spoiled,.u can hide everything from u r loved once,.but u cant hide truth from God,.if u don't believe god,.believe in love.,.believe in u r family how they trust u,.how she trust u,.don't break u r truly appearance,.,see if u r lover is a experienced and matured girl who slept with many then there is a logic u may think about experience,.she trust u,.she is virgin,.,waiting for u,.,see her heart,..cut the friend who suggested u this,..he is anti - Christ,..call her everyday,.have lots of fun with her,.be a good person,..and be loyal to her till u die,.don't worry there is nothing than love in bed which a women wants,.even if u r innocent who doesn't know what is sex,..even who doesn't know the meaning of sex,..girls doesn't want there partners to be experienced,.all they love is pure love,..and affection,,.if u win that,..she will be so patient and allow u to experiment her body so u can learn lots of practicals and become a expert within month,.she will do what ever u ask coz,she is u r wife,.love her,.
by the way,.best wishes for u r life,.!!Is it good to experiment sex before marriage ?
Only foolish people talk so. Your friends are very bad %26amp; irresponsible people who so advise you. It is illegal %26amp; immoral to do so. If you study about that well, you will never fail. Good friends teach properly in civilised manner to their friends who are going to get married instead of badly advising. If you do so, after wedding ceremony, when you see your wife at first night, the real love, affection, attraction, interest, excitement %26amp; craze for that while doing that with your wife will be missing %26amp; the real deep intimacy with her will NOT be existing. You will not be a happy %26amp; deep loving partner afterwards too. Psychological %26amp; emotional effect on her will be very bad. While sleeping with you at mid night, some times on some day, you will talk about that experience %26amp; she will listen %26amp; know that. Everyone talks of one's past while sleeping on which has has no control at all. This is God made thing. You cannot prevent. Imagine, if it happens to you, your wife comes to know of that %26amp; how she is very much shattered after that. Never commit any such mistake at all.
Read a good sex manual available in the market. Search on Google about ';Sex techniques'; %26amp; read some of them well.
Life is an experiment ... so is art of sex also.... but isnt that a good feeling that u both experiment things together once u r married... these things will strengthen your relationship and u both will come to know each other as a person and waht u want in bed..... and marriage is not all about sex. its about how u feel for the relation and the person u are with and once that is smooth everythng is smooth.
Sex is an art and art is learnt everyday u can learn it and can keep learning till the time u die.
n ppl who give this crap that b4 marriage u shud have sex so when u get married u can satisfy her/him is total BS.
so dont bother bot experimenting it with som1 b4 marriage and if u r experimenting it with som1, tell her also to do the same. so that u both can compare each other while the first time u r doing it together. and if u blv in criticsm go ahead but dont 4get to tell her the samething
You have waited this long... what is the rush? Your fiance loves you for who you are and you should not have to prove yourself in bed to keep your life partner. Sex is a learning experience. No one is a pro the first time and it is so much more special and meaningful to be able to say that that person is the only one that you have given yourself to. You will have no guilt or regrets. I think that you would be happier if you wait for marriage. And, just as an extra note, you will have no basis of comparison if your partner is terrible in bed! But seriously, relationships are about communication and figuring out what works for both of you. Just wait! You won't be sorry!
Noooo! if you are a virgin and your engaged don't find a guy for a quickie just because you think you need some experience. for one that is cheating. and two you being a virgin means that if you wait for your man and marriage that you will be a perfect fit for him because he will be the only man who has had you. and if you want tips on how to make your first time better and to please him go to a novelty store and buy a book on the kama sutra read it and use your new knowledge to blow his mind.
Answer is simple. BIG NO
because you will not like your would be wife to have sex with any man.
Lady not only needs sex but she needs love, affaction, security and recognition. She needs good fore play to have real mood. Casual sex with any lady will not be satisfying for you rather it will be disgusting for you as sex needs cool calm mind and good environment with committed partner.
theoretical knowledge is enough to work and start life with ur partner,some times many experience persons fail on first night be cos reasons r more on diff rent condition,so Tnve practical sex so that u will be safe from excessess %26amp; keep ur partner also safe,happy life leas only on understanding of u %26amp; ur partner not sex don't ,go in hurry try %26amp; see my opinion u will b happy in ur life.
It is not fair on your part to take some advise on such important issue which may a reason to feel guilty when you will heart that your fiance has the same experience.......
Yes if you feel that you require some experience on such issue
You go ahead and share it with others as well as your . . . . .
Well you can but I don't think you should consider this as a show. Its not a timebound activity. With continual practise after marriage, you anyway know how it works.
You may consult a gynaecologist and get some does and don'ts or I can help you if you so wish.
It bothered my husband that I had slept with someone else before our relationship.
Everyone is an individual. What works for one person might not work the another. So even if you do gain some experience now, who says that it will work for your husband in the bedroom.
He might be expecting you to be a shy virgin. Men get off on the whole Virginity thing. It's important.
I used to think so, but now I don't really know.
I think it is a good idea to learn what you like and get some 'practice' before you settle down with the same person for the rest of your life (ideally). However, I had experience before my husband, knew what good sex was, and then was stuck with a man who was awful in bed.
It could go either way. Do whatever feels right for you!
Sex before marriage is bad, bad, bad!! It's better fail that do it before you marriage. Okay? It will be more, um, let say wonderful, if you do it first time with your partner, after marriage. Congratulations on your marriage.
No u shudnt cheat ur wife..u know the relation bonds up slowly as and when u explore each otehr for the first time...if u give it a try locally u will not be that much interested in S## for the first time with ur wife...what will u do if somehow ur wife gets to know it from u only...just imagine the loss
im not muslim. but if you have a close relationship with someone, then why not ? sex is too taboo in some religions. its a perfectly natural thing to happen, and its not dirty nor sinful if you have genuine feelings for the person you are sleeping with.
No. do not do it
First, that would be cheating since you are already engaged and it is wrong
Two, it is an awesome thing to have only had this experience with the person you marry, it is a bond that cannot be broken
My advice: No, don't cheat just to get some sexual experience. However, read some books about it. You mention your fiance is in India, surely you have heard of the Kama Sutra.
Well, yes its good to experiment before marriage, so that you know you are compatible in bed before you commit, but jesus, don't cheat on your fiancee!!
Yes, you may test her before marriage. I think before taking her responsibility you should know that whether you are able to give her satisfaction or not.
Do reading of greate people regarding marriage and how to sattisfy your partenar experiment may spoil your life
Rather not. It does depend on your values though. Definitely not on a local although i think you're joking. Your first time will be amazing because it'll be with your life partner, the last thing you will be thinking about is technique
You will be spoiling a great Honeymoon ahead,
not only for your own self but also for your fiancee.
hell yeah as long as the person u are experimenting it with is your partner and not some other hussy.
dont cheat.
answer mine please:
http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
So you will cheat on your fiance just to have some experience????!!!!!
Either wait until you are married or have sex with Fiance when you see him.
NO! Wait til you get married. It's only 2 months away! Don't cheat. That's not right.
ok for me youll have to wait. see if she says yes first you dont want to surprise her with that. it will just be wierd for her
yes ! no experiment. do it for your enjoyment.
Are you a spinner who is used to use the used ball ?
Yes ..have the dish..
i don't think you should go for experimentation.
ya sure
Sex and marriage are 2 different items.
What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
I just don't get it, why do people care what two other people want to do? What negative effect would it have on your life? Just wondering....I am straight and married and it would have no effect on me at all!What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing. I'm straight and married also and, frankly, I am offended that people who are in love and ready to commit who also happen to be gay don't have the same rights as I do.What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing.
If people would keep church and state separate there wouldn't be a problem. Because they dont, hence the problem
it's about making law to protect only a certain group of people.any legislation that is done this way is dangerous ground.
the idea of 'marriage' came from the church, and by using it, technically the government is not observing the separation of church and state. i heard someone give this solution, which i think is a pretty good one- let the churches have the 'marriages' and the government have the civil unions. as long as a wedding in a church would be recognized by the government, as they are now- only as a civil union, it would eliminate the issue. that way, each denomination or individual church would decide on same sex marriage.
nothing at all, but people's prejudices against gays and lesbians. really, if people think the validity of their own marriage is in danger if gay people marry eachother, then they should not be married.
There is nothing wrong with it. I love how arguement seems to be centering around somatics. Who cares what the religious definition of marriage is? Only those who are following that religion. The governemnt should not get involved with the definition and just allow everyone to get married. If the government allows the population to create laws based on religious preference (as it is trying to do with dictating who can be married) then it is violating the constitution which seperates church and state. There is an answer above that says that the constitution's demand for seperation means that marriage should be a institution based on religion and as such should be protected by allowing civil unions and not gay marriage. That is backwards. If we follow that thought then those argueing for this protection of the marriage institution by the government is asking the government to uphold one religion above all others...wait that seems to be happening with christianity in the US anyway...
I wonder when the US is going to start following that whole seperation of Church and State requirement and stop upholding christianity above all other religions?
Nothing. It just seems that it is not a ';marriage.'; ';Civil Union'; makes more sense to me. I think people get annoyed that everyone else has to change what a marriage is just to suit some people.
I'm with you, I just don't know. I don't have a problem with it.
If its a government issue, its a state issue. Because its definitely not anywhere in the constitution for the us government to regulate it.
Neither is straight marriage for that matter, and somehow the government got its fingers inside that also.
*Why would one want to ban gay marriage, while there are horrendous things such as gay pride parades going on? How is a couple worse than that?
As a conservative (most people would call me a Goldwater conservative), I understand that this is not any business of the government. If you aren't violating the rights of another, the government has no business regulating your behavior.
Truthfully, the government should not be involved in the marriage business. It should be a contract situation. If two consenting adults wish to enter into a contract creating certain obligations, who are we to disagree?
Because some people actually believe in the Bible and the Constitution as it was written.. You people that want to say separation between Church and State have no clue what that means according to the Constitution...
I have no problem with people being gay, but when it crosses the line into the term marriage I have real problems with people crossing that line to make a point.. Marriage is an institution that means the love and bonding between Man and Woman.. If you allow this institution meaning to be cracked it only opens it up to the meaning that it's ok to call Man and Animal a marriage too.. If they want to be together then why not just use the term Union?? It's nothing but the liberals way to slap an institution in the face and take away the meaning of marriage.
Nothing is wrong with it. It should not be illegal.
I have a proposal; let's allow civil unions (with the same rights as marriage) without even considering the question of sexuality.
There might not be a huge call for people who are not even sleeping together to form a credit/social responsibility/important life decision type of alliance, but it could be useful to some.
Why do we even care who's sleeping with who?
(Wait a minute....I know the answer....It's that horrible human urge to say ';You're not allowed to do that, and you deserve to be treated like garbage for even trying';)
no there is a problem, in the bible it states that it is wrong. and it just doesnt seem right, does it? there wouldn't be all this trouble if man stayed with woman the way it is supposed to be and another thing! you cant seperate the bible from the constitution, guess who were christians and/or involved in some sort of church, our fonding fathers! people who signed and helped with the constitution and build our country for that matter were christians! they believed that homosexuality is wrong, i believe it is truly wrong
Nothing. I'm straight and married also and, frankly, I am offended that people who are in love and ready to commit who also happen to be gay don't have the same rights as I do.What is really so wrong with gay marriage/civil unions?
Nothing.
If people would keep church and state separate there wouldn't be a problem. Because they dont, hence the problem
it's about making law to protect only a certain group of people.any legislation that is done this way is dangerous ground.
the idea of 'marriage' came from the church, and by using it, technically the government is not observing the separation of church and state. i heard someone give this solution, which i think is a pretty good one- let the churches have the 'marriages' and the government have the civil unions. as long as a wedding in a church would be recognized by the government, as they are now- only as a civil union, it would eliminate the issue. that way, each denomination or individual church would decide on same sex marriage.
nothing at all, but people's prejudices against gays and lesbians. really, if people think the validity of their own marriage is in danger if gay people marry eachother, then they should not be married.
There is nothing wrong with it. I love how arguement seems to be centering around somatics. Who cares what the religious definition of marriage is? Only those who are following that religion. The governemnt should not get involved with the definition and just allow everyone to get married. If the government allows the population to create laws based on religious preference (as it is trying to do with dictating who can be married) then it is violating the constitution which seperates church and state. There is an answer above that says that the constitution's demand for seperation means that marriage should be a institution based on religion and as such should be protected by allowing civil unions and not gay marriage. That is backwards. If we follow that thought then those argueing for this protection of the marriage institution by the government is asking the government to uphold one religion above all others...wait that seems to be happening with christianity in the US anyway...
I wonder when the US is going to start following that whole seperation of Church and State requirement and stop upholding christianity above all other religions?
Nothing. It just seems that it is not a ';marriage.'; ';Civil Union'; makes more sense to me. I think people get annoyed that everyone else has to change what a marriage is just to suit some people.
I'm with you, I just don't know. I don't have a problem with it.
If its a government issue, its a state issue. Because its definitely not anywhere in the constitution for the us government to regulate it.
Neither is straight marriage for that matter, and somehow the government got its fingers inside that also.
*Why would one want to ban gay marriage, while there are horrendous things such as gay pride parades going on? How is a couple worse than that?
As a conservative (most people would call me a Goldwater conservative), I understand that this is not any business of the government. If you aren't violating the rights of another, the government has no business regulating your behavior.
Truthfully, the government should not be involved in the marriage business. It should be a contract situation. If two consenting adults wish to enter into a contract creating certain obligations, who are we to disagree?
Because some people actually believe in the Bible and the Constitution as it was written.. You people that want to say separation between Church and State have no clue what that means according to the Constitution...
I have no problem with people being gay, but when it crosses the line into the term marriage I have real problems with people crossing that line to make a point.. Marriage is an institution that means the love and bonding between Man and Woman.. If you allow this institution meaning to be cracked it only opens it up to the meaning that it's ok to call Man and Animal a marriage too.. If they want to be together then why not just use the term Union?? It's nothing but the liberals way to slap an institution in the face and take away the meaning of marriage.
Nothing is wrong with it. It should not be illegal.
I have a proposal; let's allow civil unions (with the same rights as marriage) without even considering the question of sexuality.
There might not be a huge call for people who are not even sleeping together to form a credit/social responsibility/important life decision type of alliance, but it could be useful to some.
Why do we even care who's sleeping with who?
(Wait a minute....I know the answer....It's that horrible human urge to say ';You're not allowed to do that, and you deserve to be treated like garbage for even trying';)
no there is a problem, in the bible it states that it is wrong. and it just doesnt seem right, does it? there wouldn't be all this trouble if man stayed with woman the way it is supposed to be and another thing! you cant seperate the bible from the constitution, guess who were christians and/or involved in some sort of church, our fonding fathers! people who signed and helped with the constitution and build our country for that matter were christians! they believed that homosexuality is wrong, i believe it is truly wrong
What is your full opinion on Gay Marriage?
Long answers are appreciated, and let's also have a civilized conversation shall we? Let's just all say our opinions in a few paragraphs, and our reasons why. I love to hear what others think.
Thanks!What is your full opinion on Gay Marriage?
This is how I answered a similar question. Normally I don't like to copy and paste but since I wrote the original answer anyway, I figure it's OK :-).
A marriage in the US is in a sense a legal contract. A couple obtains a marriage license and certain individuals, such as a member of the clergy or a judge, can then sign the license, legally joining the couple. That signing is usually preceded by a ceremony of some sort. It doesn't have to be religious. All is that required is that the couple affirm in front of a duly authorized party that they wish to be married. For the reasons I have stated the debate over gay marriage is a legal one, not a religious one.
Opponents of gay marriage want to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. Why stop there? Why not further define it as a union between people if child baring years? If they are going to make the argument that only ';traditional'; marriage should be allowed then shouldn't they acknowledge that ';traditional marriage'; included having children? If children become part of the definition then obviously gay couples don't meet the standard. But then again neither does any hetero couple who for any number of reasons is incapable if having children.
Something else that hasn't been defined is homosexual relationship. Aside from the obvious, on an emotional level, what is the difference between a gay couple and a straight couple? Who is qualified to say they aren't the same? And if they are the same, then what is the difference between a straight couple who cannot have kids and a gay couple wanting to get married? Why should only the straight couple have the right to have their relationship legally recognized?
I support gay marriage because I see no reason to oppose it. People of faith can oppose it on religious grounds but the government can't regulate it on those grounds.What is your full opinion on Gay Marriage?
Here's my thing.
I think marriage is an outdated concept personally. Marriage and civil unions should be two separate things, though. While I personally am against tax benefits for marriage and I am for VERY limited government intervention, I say this....As long as we have those benefits around anyway.......attach all the benefits to a civil union. Allow the religious institutions to decide whomever they decided to 'marry'. BUT, gay or straight, you would get benefits from the union, not the marriage.
Meaning, straight married couples would also have to apply for a 'civil union', if they wanted the perks.
I haven't fully thought this out. Just my current leanings.
I believe people should be able to love whoever they seek to love without other people being nosy and intruding on their private affairs. Marriage is not a heterosexual privilege, it does not belong to the church. The only people it belongs to are the couples who want to get married.
No, legalizing gay marriage will not put us on a slippery slope to letting people marry animals, because they've already legalized it in other places in the world and that hasn't happened. No, legalizing gay marriage will not force churches to marry same sex couples, that is ridiculous and an infringement of freedoms. No, the LGBT community isn't getting ';special rights';; there are 1,138 federal marriage benefits that we don't have. Yes, the Bible may in fact say things that condemn homosexuality, but it isn't my Bible. I'm an American. Why should a religious book that isn't my religious book tell me what to do?
The U.S. where I live is founded on the idea of freedom. The idea is freedoms should only be limited when they interfere with other people's freedoms. For that reason, I think the question needs to be: ';Why shouldn't gay people have the same rights as straight people?';, not ';Why should they be allowed....'; To date, I've heard no good reason.
Whether or not I or anyone else personally agrees or disagrees with it should not be the basis for people being allowed or not allowed to enjoy life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Gay marriage attacks the very institution of marriage that God has established since he breath in Adam's lungs and called him man. We humans challenge anything even our God with notions that he does not exist so we can live without having to see him face to face for our wrongs. To give in and allow Gay marriage is another reason for God to kick start the machine on Armageddon.
Well, I believe that everyone has a right to marry. Whether gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered (and any other sexual preference I missed). I think the religious people need to butt out of everyone's personal lifestyles. They say, it will ruin families!! Yea, my older sister's parents were straight, he cheated and knocked her up. Then they say, they shouldn't marry because they can't have kids. Well, then women who have hit menopause and sterile people shouldn't get married either. Basically that is saying,';If you can have kids, have them. You just don't have to take care of them. As long as you are procreating, there isn't a problem,';. Well, they might go to hell. Then let them deal with it. What do you care if other people go to a place that potentionally might not exist?? Another thing I don't get about this is.. 'Well they can get married they just have to CHOOSE to be straight,';. Now, why on earth would anyone wake-up one day and say,'; You know, I really feel like being discriminated against and not accepted for who I am and be called terrible names and having my family potentially hate me, so I think I'm going to be gay,';. It has been proven that it isn't a ';choice';. So, your precious 'god' created gay people. I don't see how other people have the right to tell other people..No, you aren't allowed to have the same happiness and benefits of a straight couple.
I don't understand why someone would want the government to get involved in their private lives by sanctifying marriage unless they were needing others' approval that it was correct. When you need others' approval, that doesn't make something correct, only approved.
I think civil unions are a fair compromise, if it will appease everybody so we can stop talking about this issue already. We have really jumped the shark with this.
I like ';Civil Unions';, but I don't care if it's ';Marriage'; Gay people LOVE too.
Sorry. Not up to a Full opinion today...you get only half.
dont care just another form of government document no value to anyone but the participants and their lawyers
Everyone should have equal rights.
It's not a marriage and it is a sin. Civilized people do not act like animals in heat.
';Gay Marriage';? That's an oxymoron!
Thanks!What is your full opinion on Gay Marriage?
This is how I answered a similar question. Normally I don't like to copy and paste but since I wrote the original answer anyway, I figure it's OK :-).
A marriage in the US is in a sense a legal contract. A couple obtains a marriage license and certain individuals, such as a member of the clergy or a judge, can then sign the license, legally joining the couple. That signing is usually preceded by a ceremony of some sort. It doesn't have to be religious. All is that required is that the couple affirm in front of a duly authorized party that they wish to be married. For the reasons I have stated the debate over gay marriage is a legal one, not a religious one.
Opponents of gay marriage want to define marriage as being between one man and one woman. Why stop there? Why not further define it as a union between people if child baring years? If they are going to make the argument that only ';traditional'; marriage should be allowed then shouldn't they acknowledge that ';traditional marriage'; included having children? If children become part of the definition then obviously gay couples don't meet the standard. But then again neither does any hetero couple who for any number of reasons is incapable if having children.
Something else that hasn't been defined is homosexual relationship. Aside from the obvious, on an emotional level, what is the difference between a gay couple and a straight couple? Who is qualified to say they aren't the same? And if they are the same, then what is the difference between a straight couple who cannot have kids and a gay couple wanting to get married? Why should only the straight couple have the right to have their relationship legally recognized?
I support gay marriage because I see no reason to oppose it. People of faith can oppose it on religious grounds but the government can't regulate it on those grounds.What is your full opinion on Gay Marriage?
Here's my thing.
I think marriage is an outdated concept personally. Marriage and civil unions should be two separate things, though. While I personally am against tax benefits for marriage and I am for VERY limited government intervention, I say this....As long as we have those benefits around anyway.......attach all the benefits to a civil union. Allow the religious institutions to decide whomever they decided to 'marry'. BUT, gay or straight, you would get benefits from the union, not the marriage.
Meaning, straight married couples would also have to apply for a 'civil union', if they wanted the perks.
I haven't fully thought this out. Just my current leanings.
I believe people should be able to love whoever they seek to love without other people being nosy and intruding on their private affairs. Marriage is not a heterosexual privilege, it does not belong to the church. The only people it belongs to are the couples who want to get married.
No, legalizing gay marriage will not put us on a slippery slope to letting people marry animals, because they've already legalized it in other places in the world and that hasn't happened. No, legalizing gay marriage will not force churches to marry same sex couples, that is ridiculous and an infringement of freedoms. No, the LGBT community isn't getting ';special rights';; there are 1,138 federal marriage benefits that we don't have. Yes, the Bible may in fact say things that condemn homosexuality, but it isn't my Bible. I'm an American. Why should a religious book that isn't my religious book tell me what to do?
The U.S. where I live is founded on the idea of freedom. The idea is freedoms should only be limited when they interfere with other people's freedoms. For that reason, I think the question needs to be: ';Why shouldn't gay people have the same rights as straight people?';, not ';Why should they be allowed....'; To date, I've heard no good reason.
Whether or not I or anyone else personally agrees or disagrees with it should not be the basis for people being allowed or not allowed to enjoy life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Gay marriage attacks the very institution of marriage that God has established since he breath in Adam's lungs and called him man. We humans challenge anything even our God with notions that he does not exist so we can live without having to see him face to face for our wrongs. To give in and allow Gay marriage is another reason for God to kick start the machine on Armageddon.
Well, I believe that everyone has a right to marry. Whether gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered (and any other sexual preference I missed). I think the religious people need to butt out of everyone's personal lifestyles. They say, it will ruin families!! Yea, my older sister's parents were straight, he cheated and knocked her up. Then they say, they shouldn't marry because they can't have kids. Well, then women who have hit menopause and sterile people shouldn't get married either. Basically that is saying,';If you can have kids, have them. You just don't have to take care of them. As long as you are procreating, there isn't a problem,';. Well, they might go to hell. Then let them deal with it. What do you care if other people go to a place that potentionally might not exist?? Another thing I don't get about this is.. 'Well they can get married they just have to CHOOSE to be straight,';. Now, why on earth would anyone wake-up one day and say,'; You know, I really feel like being discriminated against and not accepted for who I am and be called terrible names and having my family potentially hate me, so I think I'm going to be gay,';. It has been proven that it isn't a ';choice';. So, your precious 'god' created gay people. I don't see how other people have the right to tell other people..No, you aren't allowed to have the same happiness and benefits of a straight couple.
I don't understand why someone would want the government to get involved in their private lives by sanctifying marriage unless they were needing others' approval that it was correct. When you need others' approval, that doesn't make something correct, only approved.
I think civil unions are a fair compromise, if it will appease everybody so we can stop talking about this issue already. We have really jumped the shark with this.
I like ';Civil Unions';, but I don't care if it's ';Marriage'; Gay people LOVE too.
Sorry. Not up to a Full opinion today...you get only half.
dont care just another form of government document no value to anyone but the participants and their lawyers
Everyone should have equal rights.
It's not a marriage and it is a sin. Civilized people do not act like animals in heat.
';Gay Marriage';? That's an oxymoron!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)