May
30
I have nothing against gay people, nor do i know why other people wouldn’t let them get married. I am writing an english paper on a law i would like to see enforced in my area and i chose gay marriage. What are some logical, statistical, and emotional reasons why gay marriage should be allowed?
Thanks!
Facebook comments:
Because consenting adults should be able to marry the one they love, obviously.
In america we are suppose to be equal, right now we aren’t.
Insurance reasons, Equal rights for all. I am personally against it. But, if two dudes are in love, committed to eachother, that should be their right.
There is no need for any reasons. They should be able to marry the one they love. Period
Because love of any kind should be celibrated…
Top it off that marriage is NOT only done by Christians and the fact that the US is NOT a Christian Nation (no matter how often they scream that it is) and marriage is a LEGAL CONTRACT.
What you do before your god is none of my business but what two people do before the state when they form a legal union has nothing to do with church or god.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Tripoli.htm
The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense founded on the Christian religion
Many Religious Right activists have attempted to rewrite history by asserting that the United States government derived from Christian foundations, that our Founding Fathers originally aimed for a Christian nation. This idea simply does not hold to the historical evidence.
Of course many Americans did practice Christianity, but so also did many believe in deistic philosophy. Indeed, most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism and Freemasonry tenets rather than to Christianity.
The Declaration of Independence:
Many Christian’s who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as “proof” of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. (You may notice that some Christians avoid the Constitution, with its absence of God.)
However, the Declaration of Independence does not represent any law of the United States. It came before the establishment of our lawful government (the Constitution). The Declaration aimed at announcing the separation of America from Great Britain and it listed the various grievances with them. The Declaration includes the words, “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.” The grievances against Great Britain no longer hold today, and we have more than thirteen states.
Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets and believers, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. It represents a historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our government.
Of course the Declaration stands as a great political document. Its author aimed at a future government designed and upheld by people and not based on a superstitious god or religious monarchy. It observed that all men “are created equal” meaning that we all get born with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” Please note that the Declaration says nothing about our rights secured by Christianity. It bears repeating: “Governments are instituted among men.”
The pursuit of happiness does not mean a guarantee of happiness, only that we have the freedom to pursue it. Our Law of the Land incorporates this freedom of pursuit in the Constitution. We can believe or not believe as we wish. We may succeed or fail in our pursuit, but our Constitution (and not the Declaration) protects our unalienable rights in our attempt at happiness.
Moreover, the mentioning of God in the Declaration does not describe the personal God of Christianity. Thomas Jefferson who held deist beliefs, wrote the majority of the Declaration. The Declaration describes “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” This nature’s view of God agrees with deist philosophy and might even appeal to those of pantheistical beliefs, but any attempt to use the Declaration as a support for Christianity will fail for this reason alone.
The Treaty of Tripoli:
Unlike most governments of the past, the American Founding Fathers set up a government divorced from any religion. Their establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves of its origin; they knew this as a ubiquitous unspoken given. However, as the United States delved into international affairs, few foreign nations knew about the intentions of the U.S. For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the U.S. goverenment to a foreign nation. Officially called the “Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary,” most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states:
“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” [bold text, mine]
The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington’s last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Joel Barlow wrote the original English version of the treaty, including Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.
So here we have a clear admission by the United States in 1797 that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. Unlike the Declaration of Independence, this treaty represented U.S. law as all U.S. Treaties do (see the Constitution, Article VI, Sect.2: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”) [Bold text, mine]
Although the Treaty of Tripoli under agreement only lasted a few years and no longer has legal status, it clearly represented the feelings of our Founding Fathers at the beginning of the American government.
Robert Boston, “Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church & State, “Prometheus Books, 1993, pp. 78-79
Morton Borden, “Jews, Turks and Infidels,” Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1984)
Charles I. Bevans, “Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America 1776-1949,” Vol. II, [ICCN 70600742 // x763]
Merrill D. Peterson, “Thomas Jefferson Writings,” The Library of America, 1984
Hunter Miller, ed., “Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America,” Vol. 2, Documents 1-40: 1776-1818, United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1931
Paul F. Boller, Jr., “George Washington & Religion,” Southern Methodist University Press: Dallas, 1963, pp. 87-88
George Seldes, “The Great Quotations,” Pocket Books, New York, 1967, p. 145
James Woodress, “A Yankee’s Odyssey, the Life of Joel Barlow,” J.P. Lippincott Co., 1958
Encyclopedia sources:
Common law: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 6, “William Benton, Publisher, 1969
Declaration of Independence: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.
Internet sites:
By Ed & Michael Buckner: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_buckner/quotations.html
The Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians: http://www.borndigital.com/founders.htm
Treaty of Tripoli from the American State Papers, Senate, 5th Congress, 1st Session Foreign Relations: Volume 2, Page 18, Page 19
Marriage is for two people who love and care about each other and it should not matter if they are 1 man and 1 woman or a couple of the same sex, love is love and should be treated equal.
so they can get some benefits and be allow to visit in hospital
Before anyone jumps to conclusions, I’m straight. But I believe that the discrimination against LGBT is horrible and should come to an end.
I don’t understand why anyone would want to get married, gay or straight, but I guess some people love each other enough to do it.
Gay marriage should be legal because straights have the right to marry, even though more than half of marriages end in divorce. In addition, it’s not right to let one group come into union, while ignoring the wants and needs of another group.
LGBTs don’t choose to be the way they are any more than us heterosexuals do.
1) My girlfriend is from Britain. Right now, she’s having issues with immigration laws that we’re trying to sort out so she doesn’t have to keep renewing her immigrant status. Had I been able to get married to her (which we agreed we’d start planning in December shortly after hearing the news about gay marriage being legal in CA) we wouldn’t be having this problem right now. She’d be in a solid place, and we’d be firmly together in something that would be stronger than just a civil union (which isn’t equal to marriage, despite the bullcrap they tell you). We’re not there because some bastards had to stick their noses into other people’s love lives, and that’s not okay with me. That costs us money, it costs my family money, and it makes our lives hell where we could have been happier.
2) The argument used for Prop 8 and other stupid crap like it was, “marriage is only between one man and one woman”. The argument is based on pro-creative ideas, and it was suggested under this argument that gay marriage was a threat to “the positive growth of humanity”. Never mind that they allow infertile couples to marry.
3) The other argument hey run to when their pro-creation fort blows down is the whole, “The Bible says homosexuality is a sin” thing. Aside from the fact that this country was built on the basis of “We the People”, and not “We the straight, white, conservative Christian/Mormon people”, consider the other fact that not everyone believes in the Bible. And since we are all supposed to be MATURE adults, I should think it would be nice if we all RESPECTED each others rights to have our OWN PERSONAL LIVES THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH NOSY BIBLE THUMPERS.
4) This whole deal against same-sex marriage is just like the ’60s and the segregation issue. Why? Because we are being denied the right to pursuit of happiness by not being allowed to have the same rights as freaking straight people, JUST LIKE the African-Americans back in the dark days of American Civil Rights. Marriage is, in the sense of being bonded to a loving partner, a form of happiness. And we have a right to pursue it. People will say, “No. No, denying gay couples the right to marry is not the same as the discrimination against blacks. Homosexuality is not a skin color”. That – like everything else the anti-everythings say – is tosh. Religion isn’t a skin color, either. Maybe we should deny religious people the right to marry on that reasoning.
5) “I’m married.” “I’m civil-unioned.” Feels different, doesn’t it? Just because forms of discrimination may not show up in the frontward sense doesn’t mean those forms can’t work underground. The elephant in the room that nobody talks about or does anything about.
6) Proposition 8 and its filthy creed are a violation of both the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America. Look them up and read them. There is no basis for this madness that denies people like us the right to marry.
When you are married, a hospital won’t deny you visitation because you are not a legal relative.
When you are married, the government won’t tax the one who is left living with an inheritance tax that could cost them their home.
When you are married, you are legally recognized as a couple and granted 1,049 benefits, rights, and privileges.
You are visit in the following site and see the best reason.
http://www.shaadi-direct.com
You will be this site is very useful and workable.
No one has the right to impose laws to people about who they should love or not love..for love is unto itself a higher law.
if it’s okay please answer my poll “who’s the hottest lesbian celebrity”:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtamvdU7n9hlYCxIwnt0eU7sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20090213081336AAHTABX
Thanks!
because love shouldnt be limited to only a man and a women. it should be between two people who love eachother and want to spend the rest of their lives together. arent some things we say about america that there is “liberty and justice for all” or tht “all men are created equal” ? thats obviously not true if they want to eliminate the right for same-sex couples to marry. people fist fought for african americans to have the same rights as caucasians. then we fought for women to have the same rights as men, and now its time that we realized that the people in our LGBTQ community have the right to marry whoever they want to no matter what their genders are. People who love each other so much, want to make it official and legal, have a wedding, and celebrate with their loved ones. They love each other, just like straight people do, and deserve to be married the same way. so they arent just trying to eliminate the right for same sex couples to marry, but really to eliminate the right of people who love eachother.
i am a strong beliver that same sex couples should be allowed to marry, not just because i myself am a bisexual girl in a relationship with another girl who i am absolutly in love with, but because i am a person. a human. and naturally humans are compassionate and caring. i care about other peopel. i think people are all equal no matter what they look like, what they act like, who they are, how rich they are, or who they choose to fall in love with. everyone is the same, and everyone deserves to be treated the same.
they say that government and religion should not entertwine, and yet, it seems like they are. maybe that is only from my perspective and because i think religion is the cause of all homophobia and discrimination to every one in the LGBTQ comunity. especially the catholic religon. i was raised into a catholic family, and upon hearing their veiws on homosexuality, i chose to no longer be a catholic. if there is going to be a religon that tells you that having sexual relations with people of the same sex is wrong, its a stupid religon. and then when there are people who truly love God going to these chrches and are listening to all the things being said about how “God created adam and eve, not adam and steve”, then they are all being basically brainwashed into automattically thinking that homosexuality is sinful. they are wrong though. it is no more sinful than heterosexuality.
the government seems to have played into this thought of homosexuality being wrong, and are now trying to stop homosexualys from having meaningful, loving relationships.
unfortunatly, we have given the government the power to strip anyone and everyone of their rights. and when they choose to act upon it, all are vounerable. but as our government system also allows us, we have the right to change our government. this is “for the people by the people’, or so they say, because people of the LGBTQ community are people too, and yet they are having their rights taken away from them. i strongly belive that since we, as people, have the rights to change our government, fight against their ideas and rebel, we should. as people did to fight for african american rights, womens rights, and all oter civil rights, we have to do the same for all people in the LGBTQ community. the people who are evolved, intellegent and understanding of the fact how all people are the same no matter what their sexuality, they need to stand up and speak out strongly against the innequalities forced upon same-sex couples.
i hope others see this compelling issue the same way i do, and that thoes people too want to solve it. we can. we have the right to. as people, as americans, we can change things. so instead of acting upon how we are currently going through a financial crisis, realize that the issue of rights for same sex couples to marry are way more important.
I am going to give you some good advice from my late grandfather.
In order for you to make a sound decision on any topic learn everything there is to know about the given topic. You should be able to argue for either side of the argument so well that you can then make a true and fair appraisal and hence the correct choice.
Once you do this you will see just what all of us in the GLBT communities face. Discrimination and hate. To quote the poet/philosopher Kahlil Gibran:
Hate is a powerful weapon, had I been stronger I would not have need of so terrible a weapon!”
Remember the phrase; “All men are created equal”? These laws and constructs that block same sex marriage directly violate this premise.
Bright Blessings
Sharon
Because it violates the rights of the citizens of the United States to get married. Correct me if I am wrong, but i am pretty sure that the 9th amendment to the constitution states that just because certain rights are not mentioned in the constitution does not mean that they do not exist. Also, the 1st amendment gives citizens the right to petition the government and request (or demand) a change.
An example, A woman, (i forgot her name or where she is from) but if i am not mistaken, she sued the United States because she believed that her rights to get an abortion were being infringed. And guess what? She won.
Someone could do the same thing about gay marriage. If someone who lives in a state that does not allow gay marriage were to sue the state because their rights were being violated, i have a feeling the person/party would probably win.
That was the biggest reason. The other is because love knows no boundaries. Gay marriage doesn’t (or i should say it shouldn’t) bother anyone. Just keep living your own heterosexual lives. If gay marriage were allowed, the country would benefit financially. I cant help but to think of gay marriage like the end of slavery in the 1870′s. People will just have to learn to accept it, and live with it. More and more people are rallying up behind the “pro-gay-marriage” campaign. Pretty soon, despite what religious leaders say, gay marriage could possibly be legalized in the entire country as another amendment to the constituition.
One Word.. Love.
1776 “All men are created equal” this was said more than 20 years ago and STILL people are not equal. Now, i have no idea in banning people from marrying, but you have to ban ALL people from marrying, not just these people you don’t like.
14th amendment
“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Equal protection of the laws, now a married person gets certain benefits, inheritance laws, tax breaks and what not, basically preventing a legal citizen from marrying another willing legal citizen is unconstitutional, as long as tax benefits are given to one lot of people and not another lot.
The US govt was designed to keep out of people’s affairs. So why are they trying to interfere, why is it that the republicans who are supposed to be more anti-federalist are the ones trying to get the federal govt to stick their noses into people’s bedrooms???
Other reasons, this is my favourite. Do you think about your parents having sex? Probably not, unless there is something wrong with you, so why do people concern themselves with gay people having sex????
The religious argument for no gay marriage is just as funny. The whole point is Augustine decided that sex was bad, for some reason, and the christian faith therefore decided to make sure people only had sex for the purpose of having children. As gay couples can never have children through normal sex between one another, therefore they are procreating and this is wrong, apparently. So they cannot marry. I tell the christian churches to ban EVERY SINGLE PERSON who has ever had sex for any other reason other than for producing children from marrying, and see how the world goes about things then. That is fair.
But then the 1st amendment is the separation of church and state, should the state be imposing it’s religion upon the people? No. therefore marriage should be up to the people to decided, as long as it is done willingly.
Because the government has no business legislating love between two consenting adults.