That's right, and you all know it.

You guys want ownership of a word. That's just not going to happen. And allowing gay people to marry each other is not going to change your life.

Merriam-Webster Definition of MARRIAGE

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage

1
a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock
c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2
: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3
: an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross>

Dictionary.com definition of marriage

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage
1.
a.
the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.
b.
a similar institution involving partners of the same gender: gay marriage. Antonyms: separation.
2.
the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage. Synonyms: matrimony. Antonyms: single life, bachelorhood, spinsterhood, singleness; separation.
3.
the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two people to live as a married couple, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage. Synonyms: nuptials, marriage ceremony, wedding. Antonyms: divorce, annulment.
4.
a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage.
5.
any close or intimate association or union: the marriage of words and music in a hit song. Synonyms: blend, merger, unity, oneness; alliance, confederation. Antonyms: separation, division, disunion, schism.

How does legalizing same-sex marriage redefine the definition of marriage?...

and it won't change my life if they leave it like it is, either... whats your point?

As a Swede, this is a curious thread to read. Gays are seen here as somewhat peculiar, but other than that we don't really think about it, and it's hard to imagine why so many people would care what goes on in someone else's private life.

Personally, I find the thought of two men doing it gross.
However, I don't see the slightest reason to deny it to the people that enjoy it, much like I don't hate people for liking food that I find gross (despite the odd accusation of 'You like oysters? YOU MONSTER!'), and I find it peculiar that anyone would.

Rhode Island's Sodomy Law

Rhode Island outlaws consensual sexual acts between adults with Criminal Code 11-10-1, Abominable and detestable crime against nature. Fellatio is considered to be an abominable and detestable crime against nature in Rhode Island.
[State v. Levitt, 118 R.I. 32, 371 A.2d 596 (1977)]

This law is not considered to be unconstitutional because of vagueness or denial of constitutional right to privacy.
[State v. Gibbons, 418 A.2d 830 (R.I. 1980)]

Rhode Island courts have decided that unmarried adults do not have the right to privacy when engaging in private unnatural copulation.
[State v. Santos, 413 A.2d 58 (R.I. 1980)]

The penalty for a successful conviction of the "abominable and detestable crime against nature" is imprisonment not exceeding twenty (20) years nor less than seven (7) years.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently, Butt Sex is now legal in Delaware.

Either? Good for you for admitting your life won't be changed if they're allowed to marry. And you know exactly what my point was. Don't play dumb.

Folks, clearly an impasse has been reached in this debate. So, perhaps it would be best just to let this thread die.

NO.
You must stay here and ENTERTAIN ME with your strange arguments.

But seriously(ish) - I would like to know how exactly people that are so against something like homosexuals marrying are thinking. I'm open to any viewpoints, and would like to hear everyone's feelings on the matter.

What I've gathered so far is that some feel that traditional values are being upset, and that their own marriage is soiled by other people of the same gender marrying?

dumb? still not sure what your point is, but no matter how you try to twist things around, my stance on gay marriage will never change... i'll vote no every chance i get, just because you people are telling me what i should/shouldn't think... maybe when the gays calm down and quit telling me i have no choice, then i'll ease up... but i will vote no every time just for that reason...

nothing wrong with the way things are now, so why change it? gays over here seem to be demanding that the non gays accept and embrace gays, and i don't work well with demands...

Some people don't agree with homosexuality and feel that they should not be able to have the same rights. They won't admit that allowing same sex marriage won't affect their lives.

That's actually a pretty damn compelling reason, a relatable one, even. Maybe not the best when the stakes are people being treated as second class citizens, but who can honestly say they've never been stubborn when you'd think the stakes were more important.
People telling you what to think and do is annoying as all hell.


I don't know if nothing is wrong with it, I mean, you gotta put yourself in their position, right?

Constantly being scared of being found out as liking something most don't, being treated like a freak or like you're worth less than others because of something you can't really help, and on top of this you won't get to marry the one you love that loves you back.

I mean, to me, it seems like something that just shouldn't be happening to anyone in a supposedly first world country unless they've actively tried to hurt someone else.

I totally hear you on the issue with people demanding things from you, though.


Maybe they feel that it will?
Or that not voting against it means they support something they really, really don't care for?

I'm just guessing here, trying to see both sides of the issue.
Human emotions aren't usually logical.

Did you think the same when interracial marriages aren't allowed? That things were fine and didn't need to change?

keep it on topic... isn't that what you told msharmony? this thread is about gays, not interracial...

One would think reading this thread that all laws have been around since yearone

Let's cut to the chase.

Some people are opposed to sex between two members of the same gender because their faiths teach that such behavior is sinful.

Meanwhile, other people have no objection to sex between two members of the same gender because those people don't conform to the teachings of any faith.

Now, just as it would be wrong to try to force a person to accept the teachings of another person's faith, it would be equally wrong to try to force a person to deny the teachings of that person's faith.

I do not know how this particular topic is being handled in other nations, but in the USA, it is unconstitutional to let any religious teaching dictate what is and isn't permissible in civil law.

Personally, I am opposed to any attempt to use a civil government to enforce the teachings of any particular faith. A civil law against certain behavior needs to be based on something that is reasonable and logical to all parties, including atheists and agnostics.

At the same time, I am opposed to any attempt to suppress freedom of religion. People of all faiths should be free to proclaim whatever their faiths teach.

Except the issues she brought up didn't compare. Wanting interracial marriages outlawed absolutely compares to this. You keep not answering questions, moe. I can only guess why that is.

I agree that dismissing the earlier posts comparing it to pedophiles on the ground of it being off topic seemed strange. Although the comparison did not seem entirely accurate - a major difference between homosexuals and pedophiles being that pedophiles usually target unwilling or confused children, hurting them, as opposed to consensual lovers wanting to commit to eachother - it did seem pretty on-topic.

He has a decent point though, is this that much different from when interracial couples wanted to marry?

Those are some excellent arguments, though I'm not sure if you're arguing in favor or against gay marriage, or if you're arguing your right to express dislike for it - which I absolutely sagree with, as long as you don't treat other people worse for it.