There is no reason why it should be legal everywhere. Not everyone believes in the same religion and if you persecute gay people because of your religion you are taking away their rights as humans.
Send a reply if you think you have a reason why it shouldn't be legal.
I get its not in the definition of marriage, but the definition of marriage was made back when gays were killed and beaten to death because of who they were. Things change, gay marriage should be legal to help people be with the one they love. Love is love, and we shouldnt stop them for wanting to be who they want to be with.
Gay marriage should be allowed because love needs to be expressed in some way. If man likes a women they get together, but just because a man likes a man or a women likes a women their love needs to be expressed their is no heretic, their is no sinner love is love that is it.
The state should not be able to force churches to perform ceremonies or condone unions. But marriage today is about the relationship between two people, not the family unit. It is a celebration of two people committing to each other, not a sacred union before god to make babies. That social change, and the distinction between Christian marriage and marriage marks a significant shift.
Yes, of course it should be legal. Love is love, and society is so messed up and prejudiced we need to start making a change. To make this illegal is tell people they can't be how they want to be, and is effectively excluding them - just as everyone is told in kindergarten not to do.
One point that opposition has been making is that same-sex marriage shouldn't be forced on societies who do not want it's legalization. To some extent, I agree. Currently, forcing the legalization of same-sex marriage in homophobic societies could be dangerous for the LGBT community in those areas. However, in an ideal society, I would say that if you're not the one who wants to be in a same-sex marriage, then you are not being affected. Even if you don't agree with same-sex marriage due to religious reasons, not everyone has the same opinion as you. So don't force your opinion on others.
Another point that opposition makes is that you can't redefine the word marriage, which is traditionally used for a union between one man and one woman. However, words change as people change. Language is a magnificent thing because it is always evolving. Words come and go change meaning and that is ok. Gay used to mean happy. Now it means homosexual. There is nothing wrong with language changing to reflect current culture.
Although I personally would want gay marriage to be legal everywhere, I don't think it would be safe right now. Homophobes would revolt, and LGBT people would be targeted and attacked.
So although not ALL parts of the world are ready now, eventually, when homophobic societies become more accepting of the LGBT community, then gay marriage should be legal everywhere. For now, it should only be legal in places where the majority of people want the legalization of gay marriage.
Why should you care is Dave and John, Jill and Jane, or whoever the heck is getting married? It's their life and you have no right to tell another human being who they can and cannot fall in love with. Marriage in the first place is not about it being a "man and women", it's a status symbol that allows two consenting parties to join together legally in all that they own both tangible and intangible. This includes the jointment of their financial assets and property, and the binding of one's heart and soul to another being, a statement saying that they have finished the search for a partner. It would make no sense to not allow homosexuals to get married, what do you expect them to do? Do you expect a man get married to a woman he does not love and then still pursue other relationships because he is not attracted to women and then be subjected to a relationship is essentially torture because his needs, emotionally, physically, and spiritually, are not being met. What is it you want, you have simple choices. Gay marriage, or adultery with the added bonus of a future divorce?
First off, why should it not be its not like anyone would get hurt if two people of the same sex got married. People get married two show how much they love and care for each other and I believe that everyone should be able to do that no matter what the gender of the person they love is.
To say that by allowing it is skewing what marriage is no longer a valid argument. Going by a religious (biblical) view, the only reason anyone should be getting divorced is because one party of the marriage has cheated or if it is a physical endangerment. Other than those reasons, there is NO VALID REASON ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE to get divorced, but why do so many people do it? If you want to promote this argument, you should not be getting divorced, and you should be living a life that lives according to the bible. That includes never getting drunk, no premarital sex, and staying with your partner for life. If you can't do all of those things, you have no right to deny people the right to love and marry who they wish.
To say that it's unnatural is not a valid argument either. Many animals in the animal kingdom actively practice homosexuality, including household dogs. If conscienceless animals are doing it, then why should we not be allowed to?
At the end of the day, it doesn't hurt anyone. What is marriage anyway? It's just a title. Let people love who they want because in the end, all people want is to be happy.
Gay Marridge should be legal because it's love. I really doesn't matter weather or not it does become legal anyways because if two people love one another they can still have an unofficail marrige and still love each other. To those who don't want it to be leagal eveywhere, it shouldn't matter what another person is doing in their life because one's nose should not be stuck in other people's bissness. Besides LGBT people aren't trying to convert you to them so niether should you try to prohibit or convert them to what you deam right. There is not point in complaining about something that one does not have power over, it's a waste of time, a waste of energy and as long as nothing interfears with your own personal life then there is no use dwelling on it. People will choose what they want to do and consequences will come there way if need be.
Also, you do not provide a method of enforcing this universal legalization of gay marriage. While you might consider the United Nations, it is important to remember that the United Nations, acting as a "global parliament," cannot impose laws on other nations, but merely "establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained" . In other words, without a method of enforcing this, there is no way to ensure that all sovereign states will legalize same-sex marriage.
As I'm gay myself, and although I would like this to happen, we shouldn't try to force ideas onto an unwilling society. This can cause severe retribution to preexisting same-sex couples in persecutory societies. In short, even if there was a way to enforce this, it could end up doing more harm than good in the long run.
Biologically in nature, we are supposed to marry the opposite sex, we must apply to what nature intended us to do. Marrying same-sex does not carry the same benefit of marrying the opposite sex. Being more than friends is fine, but in marriage it is not best. If the gay decided to own a child, the Children will lack what the "Mother provides,.A parent plays a huge role in their live. Male and female has major difference in physically, mentally. As the saying goes: No man's life is complete without a woman, and no woman's life is complete without a men. This is the correct, healthy relationship. True LOVE.
I know a gay person. It is named Ethan Mulgrew. I do not like him because he is gay. Gay people are gay. Ethan Mulgrew is taking Collin Anglese to prom, and that makes me not want to go. I do no want to be in the same room as gay people.
Ya'll are stupid if you say yes. The bible says its wrong. You don't see gayness in nature. Nature rejects it so should we. Side note: bisexual and transgender is also wrong because man should not try to control nature. Its in your dna to be the way you are, so stop messin' with it!
The god create you as a human with a nature .
Also we have man and woman you can do sex with any woman you want also the woman can do sex with any man she want
why you like men or woman who are from the same sex
the animals do not do like this and they are with out brain
and you are a human with brain and you want to do like this????
It is in my opinion that the government shouldn't be involved in marriage at all. However, when it is, we shouldn't force it everywhere and they shouldn't be forced to.
Marriage is traditionally defined by union between a woman and a man.
Primarily religious in nature, it is unreasonable for one to ask a Christian to support the union of two males or two females when the bible specifically forbids it.
For economic reasons, I wouldn't mind so much allowing homosexual couples to have the same legal rights as a married couple under the law, but under a different name.
Marriage isn't a right.
And I would much rather the government be uninvolved in marriage altogether.
Simple enough, I'd think.
Gay people are just like a Male and Female relationships. Except, it's a Male and Male. All countries have the right to have their own opinion (I believe that everyone has a voice) If you think about it you shouldn't see "Gay" or in fact LGBT for that matter. They should just be seen as any relationship. All together YES is my answer!
The government has no compelling interest in legalizing, promote, or subsidize same sex marriage just because of two or more human beings are in love in which so subjective and personal. Only natural marriage shall be allowed since it produces the next generation and continues the existing of humanity and the government has the compelling interest in interfering with marriage of man and woman since they are raising the next generation and are entitled for support and subsidy since their characteristic and biological traits has the ability procreate. Unlike same sex marriage were the same sex has no benefit to be given with the society. And because of the this ideology that same sex marriage should be allowed many people who opposed this are being persecuted and tormented by radical activist. Should the government give you additional privileges just because the two of are in love. If the problem is the adoption or estate in case that one the partner face death, it must be in a form of special contracts and agreement. Same sex couples who wants to legally adopt can also file for a tax exemption and benefits of that is the case. It is not that we discriminate gay people or for who they are. It is only the behavior that damages society and its very fabric. If the government will legalize same sex marriage just because of love and equality, it will just open more waves of evil and immoral practices. Such as incest marriage, polygamy and more. There will never be an equality. "The worst form of inequality is try to make things unequal, equal."
As far as the United States is concerned, Obergefell v Hodges is unconstitutional. The most obvious display of this unconstitutionality is its direct violation of the 10th Amendment, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since there are no articles or amendments in the Constitution that refer to marriage, the power to determine how marriage is defined resides with the states. Secondly, as my title suggests, the Supreme Court does not have the authority to act as a legislature. By ruling in favor of gay marriage, they effectively created a new law for the land. The sole purpose, however, of the Supreme Court is to interpret what is already written in the Constitution, and decide disputes that only come in direct disagreement or agreement with what is written there. There are also plenty of moral reasons for not allowing gay marriage (chiefly among them being that until approximately 20 years ago, the definition of marriage had been held constant before the first governments had even been set up), but moral dilemmas aside, it is still unconstitutional to federally impose gay marriage upon the states, and the citizens in which they reside.
If the law supports what the vast majority of people in the society don't agree, it can be a problem. For example, illegalizing gay marriage can be a problem for the state of which vast majority of its people want its legalization. I think it works in both ways. If majority of the people do not want the legalization, not only will it not be very effective (e.G. Gay people afraid of others recognizing them as a married gay couple), but the people can also be upset about the law and cause instability in the society. Agreeing gay marriage be legal everywhere means it should happen regardless of the objection of the people who are against it. A personal opinion: I wouldn't have anything against legalization of gay marriage in my state or my society, I just don't think it is right to force a society to legalize gay marriage.