Should marriage be constitutionally defined as between one man and one woman?

  • It's better this way

    - Civil unions should be put in place for sam-sex couples to give them the same rights as those of married couples
    - studies show that same-sex couples ON AVERAGE are worse parents
    - Having both a mother and a father bring more benefits. Mothers teach their kids certain good values and father their kids other good values
    - Humans have recognized marriage as being a union between a man and a woman for hundreds of years and they haven't been wrong
    - Billions of people in history couldn't have been wrong
    - We can't redifine marriage for everyone. That's not how it works

  • In my opinion...

    Gay marriage is wrong. It is defined as a man and a woman getting married not a man and a man or woman and a woman. It is just wrong. In the bible it talks about marriage and it says it is wrong. People are not born gay, they can choose if they like guys or they like girls. I think you all know that a man and a man or woman and a woman cannot make babies.

  • I do believe the United states should not define mairrage from the traditional track....

    Yes, the term for mairrage has been defined as part of religion for years, but I believe it is wrong for more reasons than one.
    1) It is simply bad for your health: Cannot go into complete depth in this, but it is rather obvious to anyone that an STD easily spreads amongst Gay couples having sexual interactions, and unless we want an epidemic on our hands, the government would be wise to keep gay mairrage unconstitutional to deter this, and the epidemic that could come and spread, iespecially if "bisexual" individuals tranfer the disease amongst straight individuals from the interaction they could have had with a same sex, infected individual.
    2) Moral Decline: Ever since the late 1960's, or perhaps the Great depression even, the US has been on a steady and growing rapid moral decline. If we allow free gay mairrage, it can only get worse, and redifining mairrage betrays what the constitution was based off of, Christian ideals and what our country was initailly based off of regardless. Amending this now would mean a change from the original America we know.
    3) To put it simply, we do not yet even know if people are bron gay. Until this is proven, I refuse to accept gay people as being "born this way" and I see it as merely a fad: Why else all the sudden has the movement gained all this greater momentum over the last 70 years? Therefore, if it just a "fad", then why just change the constitution for that?

    These are just my opinions and I hope not to insult anyone from these comments, and if I do, this is a debating site after all:P If you have any responses please feel free to post them and we may discuss this.

  • In The Beginning

    In the beginning marriage was based upon the agreement between man and woman. That is the way it has been and that is the way it should stay. Two men cant do anything for each other and two woman definitely cant (sexually). The bible says be fruitful and multiply and if everyone becomes gay how are we going to replenish the world.

  • Religion has nothing to do with this...

    Not everyone believes in your god, so just shut up about religion. By the way, I know Christian gays, too, you idiots. If you haven't noticed by now, the bible you so admire, is written by people spoken to by your god, which has been translated from a language NOBODY EVEN SPEAKS ANYMORE! We have no idea if it is correct or if it was translated too rough for the correct understanding.
    In fact, there is no lines in the bible clarifying no man can lay with another man. That line was translated incorrectly, it was stating pedophilia is against the bible's wishes. "No man shall lay with a child(boy)".

  • Yes it should be god did not create adam and steve he created adam and eve!

    Yes it should be, god did not create adam and steve, he created adam and eve!
    Two men or two women do not compliment each other the way one man and one women do. They re not anatomically or biologically compatible and cannot produce children. This was established by our god

  • Man and woman

    Society should not ratify the guilty conscience of gay couples. Marriage is for procreate-sex not recreate-sex. Societies that ratify the guilty conscience of its citizens will lead to the ratification of other unnatural acts such as incest. We need to wake up and stop the ruining of our society from immoral unions.

  • We are a moral nation.

    The United States of America has values. We can tolerate Homosexual individuals, but we have to preserve the family by defining marriage as a sacred union between a man and a woman. If 2 homosexuals wish to live together, we have no place to deny them that. In turn we cannot grant them a State recognized union in order to preserve the basic unit of society.

  • Marriage should be between two loving SOULS.

    What are we marrying? The body of the other person and not that thing that makes the other person truly wonderful as a loving soul? No one knows what a soul looks like. Do you really believe there are itty bitty man and woman souls in the afterlife. (does this mean that there are itty bitty department stores selling male clothes and female clothes for souls? NO, we should marry the other person's soul not their body. There is no direct quote in the Bible that says "marriage should be between a man and a woman".

  • The gender of the couple does not matter as long as they are in love

    The gender of the couple does not matter as long as they are in love. I do not believe people a born gay or born straight. I do not believe people are either gay or straight. I do not believe that people either fall in love with women or fall in love with men. I believe people fall in love with people. It happens depending on how we feel, who we meet and where we are in our lives.

  • Constitutionally no, religiously yes

    There is a separation between church and state for a reason, a good reason. I don't think marriage should be defined as between one man and one woman in the constitution, because that's unfair. As an American, you should be able to marry whoever you want, male or female, or whatever. But as a Christian, that's not okay. It's hard to say "I'm a Christian and I support the Bible, and I'm gay." That doesn't make sense and that's not right. But everyone should have the LEGAL opportunity to be wed to whomever they wish. The separation of church and state serves to protect the religious freedom of Americans and not turn this into religious persecution making us try and find new land to move to. So as a Christian, I say let people have same-sex marriages legally.

  • Unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - ( Declaration of Independence)


    I do not think any one has the right to say who can and cannot get married just because it's between two persons of the same sex.

    Do two people of the same sex that want to get married create in any way problems for society as a whole? No, they work, they learn, teach, love, laugh, and contribute to society just as a man & women that are married.

    Do they not have a right to happiness, Life, and Liberty? Yes they have a right! There are no "if", "and", or "buts" about it.

    Are we as a society better if we tell people what they can and can not do? No, no one should be forced to believe or do what others tell them simply because a large group of people believe that their beliefs are right.

    Should we be allowed to force our moral views on others? No, without a variety of moral views we as a society cannot question, change, grow if all of us believe in the same thing.

    Is it a crime for two people to love each other? No

    Should we use religion as a basis for making decisions or reason? This is opinion based. But I feel that if reason isn't used at all then it will lead to forcing people to believe in things they don't and/or do things they don't want/believe in doing.

    Anyone should be allowed to get married regardless if it's between a man & woman, woman & woman, man & man.

  • No legal concept should be influenced by religious doctrine.

    Law, noun: the principles and regulations established in a community by some authority and applicable to its people, whether in the form of legislation or of custom and policies recognized and enforced by judicial decision.

    If two consenting legal adults, whether male, female, queer, or something else entirely, want to go to the courthouse and have their relationship legally bound by the state, they should be able to do so, no questions asked. It is a matter between the two of them, their family, and their government.

    If your religion says marriage is between a man and a woman, fine. Your church does not have to perform homosexual marriages.

    However, YOUR RELIGION cannot dictate MY LAWS. Your RELIGION cannot decide that our GOVERNMENT can grant marriage to the heterosexual portion of our population but not the homosexual portion. That is discrimination, and that is against the United States Constitution.

  • No Consitutional Amendment neccessary

    Their are many different stances on the issue of gay marriage and how any proposed las would be carried out, but you cannot have a constitutional amendment for something that has nothing to do with a realistically permanent thing. Amendments are made to change and adapt the constitution, not preserve tradition.

  • Marriage should be for everyone.

    Back in the 50s or so, it was illegal for interracial couples to get married. We now see that as ridiculous...Because it was. It's exactly the same for same-sex couples who are not allowed to get married now, just because of something they happened to be born as. Hopefully, in the next twenty years or so, people will look back and realise it was stupid to keep same-sex marriages illegal.

    Of course, there are people who out there feel that allowing same-sex couples to get married will threaten the 'sanctity' of marriage. To be honest, there's no sanctity anyway. A straight couple who met six hours before and got drunk can get married. People who have been divorced six times or so can get married and divorced again any time they want. Yet a same-sex couple who are committed to each other and love each other aren't allowed. That's ridiculous. If anyone will appreciate marriage, it will be members of the LGBT community anyway; they fought for it after all, just for the right to be married to someone they love, despite all the backlash they've had to face.

    Same-sex marriage isn't immoral, and legalising it won't cause STD epidemics, children being corrupted (I don't know how common sense and basic equal human rights will corrupt children), moral declines, the apocalypse, or the next nuclear war. All it means is that same-sex couples will be able to get married and can do. That is all.

    It's hard to believe that people are just so terrified by that very concept. If you don't like same-sex marriage, just don't get married to someone of your sex. That's all there is to it.

  • Marriage shouldn't be defined as between a man and a woman

    In the US there is freedom of religion. The only reason supporters of traditional marriage can offer as to why gay marriage is wrong is that it is "against gods will". It may be against God's will but he gave us free will. By allowing the government to make certain sins illegal (gay marriage) we are no longer a democracy but a fascist country only supporting the beliefs of Christianity. Do you honestly think that God wants you to force someone not to sin? God wants us to love one another and that he is the only one who sits in the judgement chair. Stop hating, stop judging, stop forcing people to be something they are not.

  • Marriage for all

    Ok, here's the scenario
    You have a girlfriend. You love her so very much. You're in a relationship for 4 years and then you pop her the question and ask for her hand in marriage. She says yes, you get married, you live happily ever after.

    Lets change it up a bit.

    You have a boyfriend. You love him so very much. You're in a relationship for 4 years. You want too marry him but you can't because of the way the stupid government defines marriage.

    Being gay myself, and in a relationship, I find this too be a major hurdle in my relationship. It just isn't fair and I personally believe that it's a breach of freedom of choice

  • No. I believe gender should not come into play when the word marriage is involved.

    Marriage can be seen as either a religious concept, or not. It's common place that with a Christian marriage, anything beyond a man and a couple is considered wrong, due to the Bible's teachings. However, should this apply to the country's laws? I don't feel it should. Religion can be freely practiced, but marriage should simply be a legal binding of two consenting adults, gender aside.

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