Yes. (and why)
No. (and why)
Love IS love right? Who are you to stop a mother and her son from marrying? Who are you to prevent a middle aged man and a 3 years old boy or girl from marrying? Who are you to stop a man and his 100 girlfriends from marrying? Who are you to stop a person and their dog from marrying? Who are you to stop a person and their guitar from marrying? After all Love IS love right? Love trumps everything else right? So should that mean these poor people who dearly and sincerely love each other should marry. By this logic, of course it does. (pun intended!)
I'm against the idea of all these types of marriages, but what is now the definition of marriage now because of these new "Gay Marriages" the standard for marriage in the sense of government has been hugely diminished.
There are two institutions for marriage I consider: Religious and Legal. I don't usually consider the latter marriage, I consider it a contract. So, if it is a contract I don't see any reason why the terms of the contract cannot be changed. Most notably to include more than two people, i.e., polygamy. However, because it is a contract it requires a few things such as an age requirement and for the person to be legally capable. So, of the things mentioned in the poll question, only incest would be one that could be considered. ||As for marriage as a religious institution - anything could be possible, it entirely depends on the religion.
Absolutely, because according to the LGBT movement's idiotic "Love is Love" catchphrase, all forms of perversion disguised as "love" must be respected and valued.
love who/what you love, as long as there is consent,
I hate the concept of "legal". Screw society and its made-up crooked laws. Who the hell does the collective think they are telling anyone what they can or can't do? People need to mind their own business!
Incest: no because it is proved that this is a direct cause of birth defects Pedophilia: no because a child is under the age of consent may not b aware of what they are consenting to. Bestiality: A animal does not have the same since of morals as humans do and cannot consent. Inanimate: although you can have intercourse with a object that object cannot consent to being married.
Some form of marriages should be legal but pedophilia is a definite no! I agree with some of things like bestiality and I guess incest cause I guess love is love but pedophilia is not love and never will be. Kids are to young to make decisions on who they love and influencing them at a young age can pose some serious threats and issues to the kids mind and health. Personally all pedophiles should be lined up against a wall and executed in my opinion for targeting innocent children. Like I said I agree with most of this polls ideas but I had to vote NO due to the fact that Pedophilia was involved It is sick and unjust. Anyone who is attracted to children needs to be reformed if not then the noose waits for them.
Stupid question because these other things are not in the same realm as gay marriage. How childish and reprehensible can you idiots be on this "debate" site? You act like Fox news wanna be pundits. Grow the hell up.
Well let's see, gay marriage is just two people consenting to be in a relationship. Incest on the other hand is not only questionable ethically, it also will lead to degenerate offspring. Kids are too young to be engages in sexual relationships, which throws pedophilia out of the window, and animals can't consent. Even if animals could consent, bestiality is just plain out ridiculous. Inanimate object marriages on the other hand are plain stupidity.
No, the only sane people will fight against the degeneracy and homosexual marriage is no exception, so it will be weed out soon or later. Believe it or not, polygamists are using homosexual marriage as an example to support the practice of polygamy. It's basically, "It's all about "consent", bah, bah, so it's fine". Guess what, people? The consent without the weight of ethics, morals, and responsibility is not good enough!
This is moronic. Gay marriage isn't the same as incest, pedophilia and bestiality.
While I said no the question, I am still all for gay marriage. I support incest but I only said no because I don't agree with the other things. Otherwise, this is one of the most ignorant questions I've ever stumbled upon.
This is a stupid question. Gay marriage is in a completely different spectrum compared to incest, pedophilia, ect. These things are illegal for a reason, you know?
Incest is illegal to prevent inbreeding. Pedophilia is illegal because CHILDREN CANNOT GIVE KNOWING CONSENT! Beastiality is illegal because ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE ANY CONSENT! And I realize this also applies to the animals, but you cannot marry something that cannot say I do, so marrying an object is simply nonsensical.
gay marriage shouldn't even be legal. its evil. all those types of marriage listed are evil.
How dare you compare gay marriage to things like beastiality
Two adults can consent. Animals and children cannot consent.
Marriage is about family not love. A couple gets married to show that the husband is the owner of the wife and his children. If the man & woman find that they no longer love each other, then the marriage forces them to stay together.
Gay marriage is nothing like incenst, pedophilia, or bestiality. Being gay just means youre attracted to people of the same gender. Thats nothing like being intimate with a family member, a young child, or an animal.
No you idiot. Stop being a smart ass and educate yourself on the subject
So many different issues here and none of them have anything to do with gay marriage.
Absolutely not, all of it is against the law of God
There is no correlation between any of these things. A gay person is still a human. Gay marriage isn't between members of the same family (in most cases, that is) so that rules incest out. If a person is in "love" with an animal, it's safe to say they're joking, have a mental disorder, or have found their way to the weird side of tumblr. Humans have different morals than animals and the comparison shouldn't be made - so that rules bestiality out. Also, inanimate objects? Same logic as with bestiality, the object can't consent, can't sign marriage papers, and you'd have to be pretty messed up to want to engage in a relationship with it. So to conclude, the comparison between gay marriage and these three things should not be made.
No, we have tk draw the line somewhere. THIS is where we draw the line. I hate people who use this argument. That's like saying "So since weed is legal should we start legalling cocaine and heroin." It's just taking something we legalized and taking it to an extreme. Same sex marriage should be legal. No more, no less.
No. Some things are just nasty and not right. You can only go so far with this equality and everything’s legal crap.