Amazon.com Widgets
  • And why not?

    Every human should have the freedom to choose what sexuality they are

    i feel that being gay is similar to the old persecution of the Jews and Christians and has no place in today's world. Also similar is the old white person shunned for marrying a black person that existed nearly 100 years ago

    homosexuality is comment place in nature so i really don't see why it should be different in humans.

  • And why not?

    Every human should have the freedom to choose what sexuality they are

    i feel that being gay is similar to the old persecution of the Jews and Christians and has no place in today's world. Also similar is the old white person shunned for marrying a black person that existed nearly 100 years ago

    homosexuality is comment place in nature so i really don't see why it should be different in humans.

  • Yes, it's a matter of human rights.

    Opponents of legalizing homosexual marriage like to say that marriage has "always" been defined as a union between one man and one woman. This just isn't true. Officially recognized homosexual unions were commonplace in ancient Greece, Rome and Mesopotamia. It was also recognized in China as early as the Zhou Dynasty (1046–256 BCE).

  • There is no real, logical argument against it!

    Straight marriage = Two consenting adults. One piece of paper. Two rings. Lots of love.

    Gay marriage = Two consenting adults. One piece of paper. Two rings. Lots of love.

    The ONLY difference is what genitalia the couples have. How does that change anything about the marriage? It changes the way in which they have sex, yeah, but that should only matter to the people having sex. It's none of anyone else's business.

    The only arguments that anyone has against gay marriage are religious ones, and as FAR as I know (I'm not american), wasn't America founded on SEPARATION of church and state? Leaving such arguments as invalid.

  • Yes it should

    There changing the definition of marriage in the dictionary so that is proof that the world is changing. Everyone has the right to live there own life and I don't think the goverment should be aloud to stop that. It shouldn't just be Pennsylvania it should be the entire world unbanning gay marriage.

  • Bad Precedents Already Set

    It is sad to see that states, through many court decisions (not even legislative ones) have lifted bans on gay marriage.
    While everyone should have and nearly has equal rights under the law, one must also consider the structure of society. Gay marriage negatively affects family structures and is biologically discredited.

    First off, their is a special connection mothers and fathers have with their children, different relationships, that gay relationships fail to offer for their adopted children. Mothers know their children on a maternal level, as the child and the mother have shared the same body for 9 months. Along with the mother knowing the mannerisms of the child, it is the maternal instinct that differentiates mothers from other care givers. For example, in nature, it is the mother animal's role to protect and raise the child. This crucial role of the "mother" in families is not present in gay families.

    Moreover, from a biological standpoint, the goal of organisms is to survive and reproduce. The very reason life is here, and will continue to be here, is because of biological reproduction. This simple aspect of life cannot be fulfilled through gay relationships. And how come humans are the only gay organisms, out of the billions of forms of life? I understand that there are some species that do not necessarily identify with one biological gender, but that is for reproductive purposes. The question that should be debated more is the origin of gayness.

    Anyway, this position does not mean that gays should be lesser members of society. In America, and as Americans, the basic protection under the law that all Americans receive. Yet, from a societal standpoint, such marriages should not be recognized.

  • I'm not intolerant, I simply disagree

    Marriage has always previously been defined as a lifelong union between one man and one woman. The original purpose of marriage was to procreate in a healthy, loving environment which is optimal for raising the next generation. Deviating from that standard isn't just selfish, but it's also disgraceful, immoral, and unproductive to society as a whole. It reduces the level of Humanity to that of an animal by admitting that we cannot have control over our own impulses, where is the pride or dignity in that?

    No matter how much one might wish to change the meaning of marriage (much like some would like to change the meaning of Christmas or Thanksgiving) you cannot change fundamental cornerstones in society without severely harming the society as we know it. The following quote makes a great analogy to those who believe that the definition of marriage can be subject to change:

    “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”

    -Abraham Lincoln

  • I'm not intolerant, I simply disagree

    Marriage has always previously been defined as a lifelong union between one man and one woman. The original purpose of marriage was to procreate in a healthy, loving environment which is optimal for raising the next generation. Deviating from that standard isn't just selfish, but it's also disgraceful, immoral, and unproductive to society as a whole. It reduces the level of Humanity to that of an animal by admitting that we cannot have control over our own impulses, where is the pride or dignity in that?

    No matter how much one might wish to change the meaning of marriage (much like some would like to change the meaning of Christmas or Thanksgiving) you cannot change fundamental cornerstones in society without severely harming the society as we know it. The following quote makes a great analogy to those who believe that the definition of marriage can be subject to change:

    “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”

    -Abraham Lincoln


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.