11 states vote on gay marriage

[MaxFisher]

This is one part of yesterday's election that has not been mentioned yet in FYM. (to my knowledge)

What are people's thoughts regarding all 11 states voting to add an amendment to ban gay marriage?

 

[DrTeeth]

Don't get me started

 

[Sherry Darling]

If you don't think gay marriage is okay...don't get married to someone of the same sex.

SD

PS Melon, if you're out there anywhere,

 

[BVS]

It's been mentioned and it's a sad day for America...one closer step to fundamentalism.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Don't get me started

That’s what I was going to say.

 

[BAW]

(that's how I feel about it)

 

[ShellBeThere]

I feel so mixed on this issue...I mean, I voted 'no' on the MI proposal and would vote "no" on any proposal to discriminate against people based on whom they love, but at the same time I feel like the state shouldn't be in the business of doing anything but creating legal arrangements between people anyway.
The State, and the states, should be giving us *all* civil unions, gay straight whatever, and "marriages" are for individual religious groups to confer.
to define marriage is just not any government's business, imho. I guess given that they play the game with heterosexual couples, it's only fair that they do it with homosexual couples, but what else can they legislate...that couples submit to 'therapy' sessions to try and save the 'union' before a divorce is granted, etc?
It's all crap, for a government to get into any aspect of a relationship but the legal aspects, and I surely would have no problem trading in marriage licenses for civil union licenses all around. prefer it actually.

that said, I think that at least some of the folks who voted in favor of reserving the term 'marriage' for a union between a man and a woman were making a semantic commitment and would still be for civil union, but maybe only some. I think if they are asked about whether gay couples should have this that and the other rights they might change their tune, but there is something that causes bristling when deep semantic commitments are challenged, and that might be getting touched off with that issue unfortunately.

 

[Liesje]

I voted 'no' on the MI proposal and would vote "no" on any proposal to discriminate against people based on whom they love

Same here, voted NO.

 

[Doozer61]

(that's how I feel about it)

me too, sister!

 

[pianorocker]

Tis a sad day for me. I thought more people understood how extreme Ohio's one was, but I was wrong.

 

[speedracer]

Face it, people don't want to give official sanction or tax breaks to gay couples, threesomes, unmarried cohabiting couples, or incestuous couples. The people have spoken.

(I say this as someone who would have voted to legalize gay marriage or some legal approximation thereof in my state, were it to be put to the vote.)

 

[The_Sweetest_Thing]

again minority groups are discriminated against. why do we feel continuously surprised even though deep down, we knew this would happen? why do we always hol dout some hope for the good of humanity??

 

[Anthony]

Yes, this is one particular result of the election that made me very sad.

Pathetic.

Ant.

 

[U2Traveller]

I don't know. It's such a hard issue.

I am LDS, and I believe being homosexual is a sin. BUT, most religious people are NOT bigots. I'm not a bigot, and I, in a way, think it's wrong that this issue was brought up. In a way, it makes me very sad.

This is also why I'm proud to be Utahn, because unlike all the other states, more Utahns voted for Bush than voted for this amendment. Therefore, it shows that many Utahns were thinking twice about this, uncomfortable with it, and still are, even the ones who voted for it. We don't think it was necessary or necessarily right.

I think a lot of people just didn't really know what to do. They knew it was important, but, really, didn't know how to go about it, whether to vote or not.

I know my mom asked me what I thought about it, if we should vote yes. We may believe homosexuality is a sin, but we are good people and are not bigots, and we really didn't know what this really implied. So, I think a lot of Utahns just went with what they believe, but malice is not in their hearts.

Still, it's not over. We'll get it all straightened out in the end.

 

[dandy]

there are so many pressing issues that deserve our attention, and this is not one of them. the state should stay out of people's private lives rather than discriminate against and exclude people who they deem to be *different*. we're all just human beings who want to find love and be happy, and the state has no business trying to regulate this.

 

[speedracer]

there are so many pressing issues that deserve our attention, and this is not one of them. the state should stay out of people's private lives rather than discriminate against and exclude people who they deem to be *different*. we're all just human beings who want to find love and be happy, and the state has no business trying to regulate this.

Isn't marriage entirely about the state paying special attention to people's private lives?

Your post belongs in the "repeal sodomy laws" thread, not in the "support gay marriage" thread.

 

[diamond]

I don't know. It's such a hard issue.

I am LDS, and I believe being homosexual is a sin. BUT, most religious people are NOT bigots. I'm not a bigot, and I, in a way, think it's wrong that this issue was brought up. In a way, it makes me very sad.

This is also why I'm proud to be Utahn, because unlike all the other states, more Utahns voted for Bush than voted for this amendment. Therefore, it shows that many Utahns were thinking twice about this, uncomfortable with it, and still are, even the ones who voted for it. We don't think it was necessary or necessarily right.

I think a lot of people just didn't really know what to do. They knew it was important, but, really, didn't know how to go about it, whether to vote or not.

I know my mom asked me what I thought about it, if we should vote yes. We may believe homosexuality is a sin, but we are good people and are not bigots, and we really didn't know what this really implied. So, I think a lot of Utahns just went with what they believe, but malice is not in their hearts.

Still, it's not over. We'll get it all straightened out in the end.

U2Traveller,
Maybe we can have a cup of coffee sometime together?

db9

 

[U2Traveller]

Isn't marriage entirely about the state paying special attention to people's private lives?

Your post belongs in the "repeal sodomy laws" thread, not in the "support gay marriage" thread.

True...the state is involved in straight marriages, too.

 

[dandy]

Isn't marriage entirely about the state paying special attention to people's private lives?

Your post belongs in the "repeal sodomy laws" thread, not in the "support gay marriage" thread.

i don't see how you can have one without the other--repealing sodomy laws is directly related to supporting gay marriage (in my opinion at least). that's not what i was getting at, though.

maybe i wasn't clear enough in my first post, so let me try this again. i strongly support gay marriage, and i think it's a huge step backwards that these 11 states voted to ban it. gay people are human beings, many of whom fall in love and want to live as a family unit, to be entitled to the same benefits as other *socially/religously/legally/etc. accepted* married couples. i have no problem with this concept. denying gay couples the right to marry is discrimination--it's saying that these relationships aren't legitimate or worthy of equal respect (based on the fact that homosexuality is *abnormal*, immoral, contributing to the deingration of society, etc. etc.) and i don't think this is the state's business.

i guess my real beef is with the antiquated definition of marriage that people cling so tightly to. more and more relationships fall outside the scope of this definition and i think it's time we reconsider the concepts of 'marriage' and 'family unit'.

 

[U2Traveller]

i don't see how you can have one without the other--repealing sodomy laws is directly related to supporting gay marriage (in my opinion at least). that's not what i was getting at, though.

maybe i wasn't clear enough in my first post, so let me try this again. i strongly support gay marriage, and i think it's a huge step backwards that these 11 states voted to ban it. gay people are human beings, many of whom fall in love and want to live as a family unit, to be entitled to the same benefits as other *socially/religously/legally/etc. accepted* married couples. i have no problem with this concept. denying gay couples the right to marry is discrimination--it's saying that these relationships aren't legitimate or worthy of equal respect (based on the fact that homosexuality is *abnormal*, immoral, contributing to the deingration of society, etc. etc.) and i don't think this is the state's business.

i guess my real beef is with the antiquated definition of marriage that people cling so tightly to. more and more relationships fall outside the scope of this definition and i think it's time we reconsider the concepts of 'marriage' and 'family unit'.

I'm sorry...but some people who are NOT bigots think about what God wants. If he came out and said, yeah, homosexuality is fine...believe me, this would not be an issue. Some religious people would lose their religion, but that's their problem, and yes, those few truly are bigots.

 

[deep]

bigots think about what God wants.

we can agree

 

[U2Traveller]

we can agree

I didn't say that and you know it.

That is bigoted to say that religious people are all bigots. That's not true. I bet you that if God told religious people that homosexuality is alright, some would definitely spurn God (because they ARE bigots), but many would say, alright. And I think many would be relieved.

Where would I fall into that mix? I'd be relieved that the issue was over, and I'd have no prob if it was OK.

 

[deep]

any one can say God said this or that

to support THEIR agenda.


The bigots did in concerning "race relations"

Islamist use this argument.

 

[nbcrusader]

This is why Christians should stick to the Bible instead of vague statements based about "God".

 

[tackleberry]

Can someone enlighten me on what the bible says about homosexuality? What did Jesus say about homosexuality? I don't recall him ever saying anything negative about it, or saying it was a sin. I am just curious to know the facts.

 

[nbcrusader]

Depends on if you only want to read the "red letters" or the whole thing.

The issue really isn't about what God says - you can't argue with Him.

The issue is what are you going to do about it. Demonizing homosexuality is a cheap (and wrong) way of ignoring your own sins.

 

[Se7en]

i think it's interesting how people (esp. fundamental christians) take from the torah what is useful for their current agenda and discard the rest.

i mean, let's look at leviticus shall we?

A man who lies with a man...shall be put to death, their blood is upon themselves. (Leviticus 20:13)

so obviously most sane people wouldn't accept the slaughter of homosexuals; we'll just leave the death part out but keep the moral principle. we can just ostricize them rather than lynch them. pay no mind to the fact that jesus never once mentioned homosexuality in his ministry (despite the title "christian"). i'm pretty sure he stuck to love and brotherhood.

why don't christians adhere to all of the laws of moses if they insist on maintaining that homosexuality is evil? you can't pick and choose which laws are still applicable and leave the rest out because they are inconvenient. where's the consistency in that?

 

[speedracer]

Everyone should read this article by Jonah Goldberg. Right now.

http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg070103.asp

 

[saltwaterkiss26]

I don't particularly care for politics. I never really get involved. (I find this forum rather frightening sometimes. ) But this... this... Ugh.

Ridiculous. Awful. Ugh.

And what's up with marriage vs. civil union? I mean, my dad's was raised Christian and my mom was raised a Jew. They didn't have a religious ceremony at their wedding, for obvious reasons. Does that mean I'm a child of a civil union? Are my parents not married?? Explain this to me.

I have trouble dealing with people who oppose gay marriage. Sorry. I'll shut up. Huh, Imagine's on the radio. And the world will live as one? Keep dreaming, John. It doesn't look like it's happening any time soon.

 

[U2Traveller]

I follow a very good religion, VERY upstanding, and we believe homosexuality is wrong. It's not based on some agenda or what we pick and choose to believe. We are not bigots. We also think polygamy is wrong because we have been told it is taken away from the earth again. It's totally up to God. Yes, some people DO get revelation. Some people ARE led by prophecy. We are. We have prophets and God DOES lead His church through them.

We are NOT bigots. We are very good people. I have nothing against homosexual people. They still can live as they choose and we don't bother them.

Many here are highly uncomfortable with that having been on the ballot. Frankly, I don't see why it was, why it was necessary, and frankly, it sort of pisses me off, and I'm LDS. The other side just didn't get their argument out there good enough, and I don't know why they didn't try.