LetsSingIt the internet lyrics database
en
0

Same-Sex Marriages

Follow 2
Share
Add topic
Search
Masterful_Ally
0
Masterful_Ally | 26-09-2003 11:07
opinions?
2,201 to 2,225 of 2,230 comments
page 89 of 90
Joeyy
0
Joeyy | 12-05-2012 01:53
I'm not going to argue, because fools will be fools (if it's not obvious, I don't mean Lori or Lyrics_Lover), but I will add that a big reason some LGBT clubs/bars/groups are LGBT-only is because they want to create a safe environment. It's a lot more likely that an LGBT person will be attacked than a straight or cisgendered person will be (in an attack related to their identity or who they like), hence some places wanting to take extra care.
FleurDerLys
0
FleurDerLys | 12-05-2012 12:37
Blame society promiscuity. Before, people did not allow themselves to like it. But what about procreation? To do this, and people were created to bear children. And how is it that two men could get pregnant? m? Of course with the help of modern technology can do everything, but because children are the same, at best, and received what some mutants.But in any case - how many people have so many opinions.
Lyrics_Lover_11
0
Lyrics_Lover_11 | 12-05-2012 13:35
Two men couldn't get pregnant, but they could simply adopt. It wouldn't be procreation but there are tons of kids already brought into the world who would benefit from having two parents who love them, whether or not they are M/M or M/F. Children raised by parents who are the same gender/sex are no different than children raised in a "traditional" family, so that argument doesn't really make sense to me.
FleurDerLys
0
FleurDerLys | 12-05-2012 14:11
okay. Then let's imagine that in the future will be only same-sex families. Children reared in such families is also suppose to be gay ... hell, well, it's immoral! this should not be! And if everyone would adopt children, the lost function of a woman - to give birth, and men - to educate. the girl can not be completely candid with his father and son with math.Originally it was intended by the Creator that the family should consist of a father and mother. And we should not change anything. Well, at last understand it please. certainly does not forbid everything, but worth thinking about it, if we do not want the future to see on the streets kissing men. Would you like that your kids would have had same-sex families?
Lyrics_Lover_11
0
Lyrics_Lover_11 | 12-05-2012 14:23
Your argument makes NO sense. Not everyone would have same-sex families. Children who are raised by two gay parents don't turn out gay. In fact, they are probably more well-rounded than some other kids in "traditional" families, but I digress. Women wouldn't lose their function to give birth, what are you even talking about?

Guess what? Society changes. Views change. Homosexuality is completely natural and isn't something new, and it shouldn't affect who has the right to get married. What is so wrong about two men or two women kissing each other on the street? Because you don't want to take the time to explain to your children that not everyone is built the same way and that it's completely natural? I'm sorry I find you very ignorant. I honestly wouldn't mind. As long as they provide a happy, nurturing life for their kids, I wouldn't care if they married the same-sex or not.
FleurDerLys
0
FleurDerLys | 12-05-2012 15:16
My bad English does not allow me to convey to you what I mean. In fact of the matter that homosexuality has become commonplace. What's wrong with kissing men on the street? I'm not going to answer that question, okay? Especially since I have not claimed that remain only same-sex families and just'll assume. I think early yet to talk about my children and I am confident that I did not come across this prooblem. Because there is no homosexuality in Russia. And I'm happy. Yes, yes, I can ignorant, stupid can be, but I'm only 15 and I think that there will be time to consider this problem, and I think it is a problem. And yet one more example. The certificate of birth in Russia write Mom and Dad .... ...
As written in the same-sex families? Parent # 1, the parent number # 2? Yeah? But how to decide who's number one and number two who is? The child loves both parents equally, and then it turns out that he who gives more preference.But as I understand it to you this is not an argument. And yet, in my opinion the man is a protector and provider. It should look like a man, act like a man, think like a man. But what about the men look gay? Tight jeans, painted lips, I do not know, they look like women, not all but many.
FleurDerLys
0
FleurDerLys | 12-05-2012 15:17
I really only for the traditional family with a mom and dad?
loribobori
0
loribobori | 12-05-2012 15:53
i completely understand - what you know and believe in for you and for your life is a more traditional family. can you not see that for others, the feeling is just as strong and just as true in support of a more non-traditional family? what's right for you is not always what's right for others.

my children were raised by two opposite sex parents until they were 10 and 11. then it was just me... their mom. does that make their lives somewhat less? to have only had a mother throughout their informative years? do you honestly believe that because i am a woman i am somehow less capable of being strong and protecting my children than a man would be? if you ask them both - they're both happy, well adjusted, compassionate and highly intelligent young adults now. and they both believe that their lives were made better by NOT being in a more traditional family.

i have a very good friend whose partnership has lasted longer than my traditional marriage did. they have a beautiful 5 year old boy. he's being raised by two beautiful, intelligent, compassionate and responsible women. i find it hard to believe that anyone could look at this beautiful boy and believe that he's being harmed or that he will grow to be a lesser person because he's not being raised in a "traditional" way.

so, i fully understand and accept your beliefs - and believe them to be true for you and yours. i hope that you would give the same compassionate and honest understanding for those who do not share your views. and that is the basis of this entire argument. the hopes that one day, all people will simply accept that others do not think and feel the same way and that simply because the majority feel one way, it does not give them the right to discriminate against the minority who feel otherwise.
FleurDerLys
0
FleurDerLys | 12-05-2012 16:28
Of course, I understand, I do not deny that same-sex couples can grow good kids. Also, I am confident that each held to his opinion. And persuade anyone that does not make sense. We are brought up differently and think differently, so such a society on the one hand, and it was good. In which countries that homosexuality is normal, where it is unusual.In Russia, attempts to sex minorities to become part of society have failed. Today, we are not prepared to accept this, for us it is not normal, and I think that's good.At the same time in America, for example, are all encouraged to open up clubs for gay men, gay parades are held.
tigerbee
0
tigerbee | 12-05-2012 21:51
All kids deserve both a mom and a dad whenever possible. Each of the two genders bring their own uniqueness to the child. The western world form of marriage came from Judeo-Christianity without Judeo-Christianity their would have been no marriage thus Judeo-Christianity should have a say regarding the institution of marriage. Please stop labelling people who simply disagree with homosexual marriage narrow minded because it's not true. What i mean by the western world is countrys such as England and the United States. In the United States whenever same sex marriage was allowed to be voted on the majority voted against it. Their is about 30 states in the USA which voted no to same sex marriage and is constitutionally amended.
Joeyy
0
Joeyy | 12-05-2012 21:57
The majority vote doesn't make something OK.

Please don't include the UK as having the same politics or old-fashioned, hypocritical beliefs as the US.
Lyrics_Lover_11
0
Lyrics_Lover_11 | 12-05-2012 22:28
All kids deserve parent(s) who are loving and nurturing towards them, regardless of sex and/or gender. I just find it difficult to understand why there are still people in the world so dead set against same-sex marriage, when it doesn't affect them personally in any way. I find that disgusting and most of the arguments against gay marriage are simply idiotic and nonsensical, in my opinion.
loribobori
0
loribobori | 13-05-2012 01:42
actually, so far no one has called anyone narrow-minded... so please, let me be the first to do so. your arguments are the definition of narrow-mindedness - "Lacking tolerance, breadth of view, or sympathy; petty." and personally, i take offense to your instance that my children somehow are less because they were raised with one woman rather than your extremely limited view of only one man and one woman.

judeo christianity can have all the say it wants to people who choose to marry in a judeo christian church or temple. but for people who choose to marry in a muslim mosque, or a shinto temple, or even for people who choose to forego religion altogether and marry in court... judeo christians should mind their beeswax. not to mention the fact that numerous christian churches are actually on the side of allowing same sex marriages, all this makes your argument... for lack of better words.... narrow-minded and small.

the majority of voting (joanna's right, majority vote does NOT mean majority of the country) americans are ignorant, petty and narrow-minded.... afraid that if they allow differing viewpoints to be recognized, that it will somehow make them less. makes me ashamed to be counted amongst them. but try to get any of them to answer two questions, and you'll get the same run-around that you've been dishing out.

1. how does allowing same-sex marraige hurt the institution of marriage?
2. if the bible is your justification, why don't you follow all of the scripture?

see, i can ask those questions over and over and over... and not once will i get an answer. instead, i get 'it's wrong!' or 'it's not natural!' or 'children deserve a mom and a dad!'. but no response to any evidence to the contrary.

why is that? why does it matter to you what people who you will never meet or even lay eyes on do in the privacy of their own home? i think it's because you're afraid. and it's okay to be afraid, but it's not okay to take your fear out on others. it's not okay at all.
tigerbee
0
tigerbee | 13-06-2012 20:17
Naturalism, history, tradition and Spirituality all inform marriage is exclusively for a man and a woman!!. Read "A Declaration On Marriage" in the Essays section at www.williamgairdner.com. William D Gairdner is knowed as Canada's smartest blogger.
Lyrics_Lover_11
0
Lyrics_Lover_11 | 13-06-2012 21:11
I read that and I believe it's nonsense. Why does it matter if two people of the same sex/gender want to get married? It does NOT affect you. It does NOT change the definition of marriage.
HipHopIsMyLife
0
HipHopIsMyLife | 13-06-2012 23:47
As an athiest I have a view free from religious reasons why same sex people should or shouldnt be together. In my opinion they have as much right as anyone else and shouldnt be so harshly discriminated against.
Live and let live everyone, as after all it makes no difference to anyone other than the individuals themselves, so why does everyone else get involved and care so much?
bigred1
0
bigred1 | 31-07-2012 13:52
Loribobori I understand what you are saying. That bring said how can a decision that has been formed after considering pros and cone be narrow minded small... ? Wait Ohh it doesn't
Now answer.to question 1 week for years.in many if not almost all cultures and religions yes that's tight not.just religion culture also marriage is between a man and a woman and with all of this being said I.don't know what country you live in but I live in Australia where things are commonly.traditional. and marriage ie traditionally between man and woman .

Now about your comment about Americans that is a belittling in
correct statement .

Response to.question two can you explain what you mean by.why don't you follow all of.the scripture it is.not only.the bible that.is my.justification but also watching news and current affairs shows so there are other evididences

Pretty much calling me a homophobe week no I am not scared I have homosexual friends they are normal like everyone else and that's ok and even they agree with my arguement that there should be a legal binding between 2 men or 2 women but not call it a marriage.
bigred1
0
bigred1 | 31-07-2012 14:08
And also by saying hydro-christians should mind their own beeswax week we should discount the views of everyone because that is discrimination based.on the grounds of.religion which can also be classed as a form of persecution

What I also have to say is that yes a single sex family unity van raise a good child I should know from a child's point of view as it is just me my dad and brother since my mother has pasded away so no.just a single sex family.unit does not curb a child's learning or informative stage so there I agree with you there it is how I have been brought up with traditional family and now I understand what you are saying but still believe calling it marriage is changing the traditional meaning of marriage and that times are changing so
apologize If I offended you at all and will keep my beliefs and still argue for the.fun of it but last thing to say IMO one is perfect and I do follow the entire scripture from genesis to revelation and all books in between
Lyrics_Lover_11
0
Lyrics_Lover_11 | 31-07-2012 22:49
I still don't get why this is an issue. What's the big deal with the definition of marriage evolving to reflect the way society is now? Why does it matter if two people of the same gender/sex get married and spend their life together and raise a child? It shouldn't be an issue. It's none of your business, and it doesn't affect YOU or ME or SOCIETY negatively.
valdez
0
valdez | 31-07-2012 23:23
I'm sure it makes no difference, if there are 1 mother & 1 father / 2 mothers / 2 fathers, as long as they love each other a give love

I don't have a perfect family ...
loribobori
0
loribobori | 01-08-2012 17:52
bigred - i don't think you really do understand what i'm saying. but i get that a lot,

first, as an american, i'm fully within my rights to insist that in my view, all voting americans who vote to pass legislature that is discriminatory in nature are, in fact, small, ignorant and/or petty people. any human being, in my ever so humble opinion, who intentionally restricts the rights of a group of people who are not the same as them - using that difference as the sole justification for the restriction - well, i'm sorry, but that is the universally accepted definition of bigot (so i guess that's not really just my opinion!). and it's really not that far of a leap in logic to jump from bigot to ignorant. (that, however, is my opinion)

my point to the question "why don't you follow all of the scripture" is to point out the hypocrisy of picking and choosing which biblical laws to follow and attempt to enforce. by taking extremely strong stances on those biblical passages that don't affect you personally, then glossing over other "rules" that actually would affect your life, you weaken your argument drastically and you are stating that biblical rules don't all hold the same weight - and oddly, the rules that don't affect you personally actually hold more weight than the ones that do. (there may be a definition of 'hypocrisy' in that last sentence somewhere) so i'm glad to hear that you don't eat any type of shellfish or bacon and that you never ever ever wear clothes that are cotton-wool blends.

i find it hard to believe (not impossible, mind you, just really really difficult) that any homosexual out there would agree to forgo basic human rights that are liberally dished out to non-homosexuals. i remember reading about the civil rights movement here in the u.s. and how some whites would say things like "well, the black people really don't want to integrate – they want to keep with 'their own'". i'm sure in part that may have been true, as it was much safer at the time to stay within one's own circle – however, that did not mean that they were willingly giving up the same rights to a good education that was freely afforded to their white counterparts. please explain to me how this is any different. this whole "separate but equal" foolishness was proven impossible by the civil rights movement. so we're saying that homosexuals can have civil unions, but not marriage. explain to me how this is any different than putting signs over drinking fountains that say "whites only" – but it's okay because the fountain for "coloreds" is around the corner. separate, but equal. right?

what i don't get is why there's so much consternation over the use of a word. it's a word. it's not a biblical word – it's just a word. it's a word that means the joining of two or more things previously separate and making them one. why is it okay to reserve that word for only one group of people? better yet, why is it okay for the majority of people to say to the minority – that's my word and you can't use it? when i say things like 'that's an awesome marriage of asian and italian food' (which i don't think i'd actually say because that kinda sounds nasty), am i causing harm to heterosexual marriages? am i making a couple's marriage mean something less than it is? do i even have that power??

i've read how people against gay marriage are saying that allowing gay marriage will destroy the "institution of marriage". i don't get that. wouldn't divorce actually be a bigger "destroyer" of marriage? or how about adultery? why aren't we banning those if it's the "institution of marriage" that we're trying to "protect"? why (oh why!) are we spending so much time and effort trying to keep the big bad gays from getting married instead of working together to kill all the divorce lawyers?!

SAVE MARRIAGE! KILL A DIVORCE LAWYER!

and with that last inane shout-out to utter insanity, i'm out. hasta!
loribobori
0
loribobori | 01-08-2012 20:32
ugh. that should be 'legislation', not 'legislature'.

totally hate it when a perfectly insane and wordy rant is bungled by typos.
Rachel567899999
0
Rachel567899999 | 03-10-2013 17:04
People can have their own opinions. For me, personally though I'm a fan of opposite sex marriage and always will be. Live and let live.
Captain_Keeta
0
Captain_Keeta | 03-10-2013 19:57
I don't mind same sex marriage one bit.

I respect everyone.
FireWaterBurn6
0
FireWaterBurn6 | 06-10-2013 16:40
Lipstick lesbians should be free to grope each other and have public makeout session. They should be able to erotically massage each other and tongue wrestle without being harassed. I'm really fed up with the oppression.
guest
guest
POP OUT SAVE saving ...
Read more: