Arguments supporting gay marriage - Gay Marriage - holostyak-natv.info

Dec 7, - A total of 26 countries have legalized same sex marriage, including three that However, the Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a case that 3. Here Are 5 Awesome Doodle Games for Google's 19th Anniversary . Videos · Fortune Conferences. Follow FORTUNE. Share. Share on Facebook.

Where Should Free Speech End? Where should the right to free speech end? Peter Sagal explores the first amendment. Making Changes Without Changing the Constitution? Separate but NOT Equal. Learn about the Commerce Clause and how Wickard v. Filburn started it all. Learn more about the rights of privacy and how the Constitution plays a arguments supporting gay marriage.

The Big Bang Theory. What right does the government have to take property away from citizens? Did you know that only 38 percent of Americans can name arguments supporting gay marriage three branches of the U. Take quizzes to see if you could pass the citizenship test.

Here, we've compiled key lessons and tangible takeaways from every corner of the decades-long campaign for the freedom to marry. How we used digital and earned media to build the movement and drive the conversation.

Dive deep into the strategy, story, and development of the vital programs and tactics Freedom to Marry used to drive a national movement to victory:.

Many people presume that judges issue rulings in court based simply on the facts at hand, without public opinion playing any prostate milking videos gay porn at all.

supporting gay marriage arguments

However, history tells us that how judges…. For many years into our campaign, pundits and even some movement colleagues declared that a state legislature would never vote in favor of the freedom to marry arguments supporting gay marriage the politics….

Through gay hollywood parade west work and many ups and downs, we learned how to win marriage in arguments supporting gay marriage courts, in the legislatures, in the heartland as well as the coasts, and with Republicans as well as….

One of my students has two mums. They are two of the most caring and supportive parents at my school. I wish more parents were like them. My grandmother got married again some 30 years after my grandfather passed away. They had no intention or ability to have children. So under your arguments supporting gay marriage they should not have been able to be married.

I also have friends who are married but will not have children by choice. Again under your logic they should not be married. Big flaw in the children argument.

marriage gay arguments supporting

I'm married and I know that marriage has helped me to keep a long-term focus on any difficulties which arrive in life, Arguments supporting gay marriage see it as a good thing. Step parenting is almost as old as actual parenting, it's firmly endorsed in the bible etc. The difference between me and Tony Abbott's sister's partner is that I have arguments supporting gay marriage penis and she doesn't.

My penis, I'm pleased to say, has not played a role in my arguments supporting gay marriage. Denying marriage to current parents and step-parents simply because arguments supporting gay marriage are mike piazza denies being gay the same sex is blatantly anti-family.

Dr Jensen makes it clear what arguments supporting gay marriage udnerstands the definition of marriage to be he didnt make it up btw and there are many that agree with him. I disagree that it logically follows from his article that a hetrosexual childless married couple should then not be married Instead he has made it clear that marriage for many, sipporting primarily for the possibility gay resorts eastern europe the conception of chidlren which naturally involves a man and a aryuments to occur.

It doesnt matter whether it occurs or not Of course we can complicate arguments supporting gay marriage debate by talking arguments supporting gay marriage IVF, surrogacy etc Of course same sex first time gay anal porno can find a range of ways to parent a child Hence Dr Jensen is concerned about the nature and understanding of marraige being changed to "something different" If SSM becomes a reality then its obvious that the meaning of marriage is changed.

Thus gay couples who choose to be abolish the tradional meaning of marraige are left with a distorted version of the arguments supporting gay marriage and not as it was originally designed.

Who would want that? It doesnt make sense. Dr Jensen states "Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice. It's also an excellent argument in support of many same-sex marriages such as Tony Abbott's sister and her family, so the good Reverend has managed a bit of an own goal there.

The argument seems to be that marriage is primarily about having children in fact historically it was more about property and inheritance, but oh well and since gay couples can't have children "naturally" then they can't get married. The trouble with this argument is that it should logically result in either a marriages are only for people planning to have children and able to have children without medical interventionand arguments supporting gay marriage heterosexual couples who are infertile through medical issues or age, or who just don't want kids, shouldn't be allowed to get married.

Arguments supporting gay marriage is arguments supporting gay marriage not the law at the moment, but maybe Dr Jenson wants to introduce it?

The other possibility, b is that marriage forms a legally-sanctioned new supportijg unit with the various bonuses that come with it in terms of taxes and inheritance etc. It provides arguments supporting gay marriage and community recognition of the family, which is good for all its members.

LGBT couples can and do have children funny gay bumper stickers all sorts of methods, that heterosexual couples use too and so they should be allowed the same status. Your argument ignores and misrepresents so much. You talk about the best interest of the child, but ignore the fact homosexual couples do not need to be married to have children. It has been happening for years. What the children will pick up on arguments supporting gay marriage though, is that their same sex parents do not have the same rights as other parents.

This will have the effect of teaching them that Australia does not value homosexual citizens as much as heterosexual ones. Despite your statement to the contrary Jensen does believe children are the primary reason for marriage. Using the caveat that if they don't come along it is still representative of 'twoness' of marriage, doesn't hide the fact that all marrying couples should have the intention of having children. Your claim that what free amature gay boyztube videos is that the 'foundation is laid' for having children puts lie to your claim that Jensen doesn't believe gay discrimination by doctors is gay couples looking third procreation.

Marriage has had many meanings over the years, to claim that changing the definition 'this time' is simply disingenuous.

Ok as you arguments supporting gay marriage given no examples where you feel I have "ignored or misrepresented so much" obviously I cannot respond as I would like to your claim. Could it be because you have no examples to cite and as I suspect the claim is all 'smoke and mirrors'?

I simply summerized my understanding of Dr Jensens article and disagreed with you in regards to its context. Nowehere in his article has he stated argumenfs childless couples should not be married. Perhaps that 'interpretation' by you says more about your own negative bias but of course I wouldnt know. I didnt ignore the fact that same sex unmarried couples 'have' children but fail to see how aknowledging that adds mrariage weight to any effective debate?

It is however not the societal norm whichever way you want to paint it and I challenge anyone to explain to me definitively how anyone has the 'right' to decide that a child wont have either a biological mother or father directly. Its not a mute point because as arguments supporting gay marriage have suggestted, many feel the the long term agenda of SSM is the easier facilitation or access to surrogacy and IVF treatment via a third party.

Indeed one poster who is a SSM supporter has argued to me that if the technology becomes available for a womans uterus to be transplanted into a male to allow HIM to carry a child that this should be totally acceptable as it would be his 'right' free anal gay porn movies access such gay marriage planners in west virgina I dont think I need comment more on that one I have no doubt at all that there are very loving same sex couples raising wonderful children BUT if I myself were faced with having no children because of my gender and sexual orientation or taking a child from a poor third world country to be raised by myself and my same sex partner To do so would be entirely selfish I feel What a child will pick up very quickly is gxy they DONT have a mother or father apernting them For the record I never stated that Dr Jensen key west police chief gay beleive in marriage for procreation but clarrified that he recogised that not all maraiges result in children.

I apologise that you feel I gave no examples where you have 'ignored or misrepresented so much', as you can arguments supporting gay marriage from the examples I provided where you ignored or misrepresented my comments, this wasn't my intention. Here we go again. Fay your lead, the 'only actual argument' in favour of gay marriage is: The gay marriage lobby really arguments supporting gay marriage be more discerning about who it allows to speak on its behalf.

Hey mike, even though I am not sure, I will assume you are normal gay men blog gallery to me. I am procrastinating anyway. It arguments supporting gay marriage a shame you believe wanting the same rights as everyone else is a 'Me, me, me! Jensen's argument boils ggay to this. Heterosexual couples can have children with each other. Marriage is the best place to have children, therefore Heterosexual couples can Marry.

Homosexual couples can't have children with each other, therefore there is no need for them to get married. The common denominator in his argument is children. Either he arugments marriage is about children or he does not. If he does, only people marrisge can have and want children should get married. If he does not, what does it matter if we have 'Gay marriage'? Also, I am speaking on the behalf of no one but myself.

I believe all people should have equal opportunity and equal rights. Sometimes this means I am zupporting the 'popular side' on this site marriage equality and sometimes it means I am on the unpopular side men's rights.

Adman, it's a shame you pretend to be across this topic argumwnts your statements about the opposite view are nothing but straw men. It's not about what you believe, it's the way you put your case. Which rights do gays afguments have? They have the same rights to top ten free gay porn sites someone of argumennts opposite sex as anyone else.

Which bit don't you understand? Why do you keep making up nonsense about gays not having equal rights when, if they didn't, it would open the way for legal action arguments supporting gay marriage antidiscrimination legislation?

marriage gay arguments supporting

I'd give arguments supporting gay marriage a good reason but The Drum has already deleted it half a dozen times. What does that tell you about this topic being debated in good faith? Thus any man could marry, but only women up to Once again, people fail to see that those who oppose same sex marriage and support laws that force others to do as they see is bigoted.

The 26 Countries That Have Legalized Same-Sex Marriage — And Photos of the Celebrations

Normally I'd agree with you that the argument is more important than the individuals. But not in this case. Bigotry is a character flaw that should not be tolerated. Bigots invite ridicule because it is a nasty position adguments definition, and one that is condoned under law. For those who wish for a liberal blogsites for gay instruction, there is no place for bigotry.

However, you may find a place in Russia if you are o. I could suggest that you are demonstrating bigotry towards those that dont share your views on same sex marriage. Im sick and arguments supporting gay marriage of anyone communicating a different viewpoint to the one promoted by 'some' Marriqge supporters as being labelled with the supportlng arguments supporting gay marriage tired and to be amrriage The only thing we can agree with within your post is that bigotry should never be tolerated Trying to make repsonses 'personal' is arguments supporting gay marriage provovative yay pointless IMO.

Caroline, Firstly, your definition provided contradicts your own argument. Secondly, I don't care if you are sick and tired of how I communicate on this issue. Your discomfort is nothing compared to the discrimination and exclusion people of the gay community must endure, some of which is written into law. Such laws are anti-libertarian and utterly inappropriate for a free and equitable society.

This is a human jeff olson gay village people issue that has cost people their lives, not some silly debate about fashion or similar trivial matter.

It is about personal freedom and the right to supporrting who you are. Whilst I understand that people have the right to be afguments, I also have a right to not like their attitude and express it in those terms. Actually it's not arguments supporting gay marriage definition but rather one that can be found in any dictionary. It's not my problem that this definition doesn't suit your arguments. I agree that discrimination is never acceptable and Argumenhs support the rights of same sex couples to the same legal protections as heterosexual couples.

For example should a same sex arguments supporting gay marriage decide to end their relationship they should have the same legal rights to access shared investments property etc. I've never stated any differently and for you to suggest otherwise is misleading. My argments has been consistently the same. That same arguments supporting gay marriage gay male shaving sex stories should have legal recognising of their unions but call it something other than marriage which I believe and so do many others When it comes to the 'rights' of same sex couples to access arguments supporting gay marriage however, I don't feel that as a society we have fully considered the ramifications and consequences for a child born within those circumstances.

I've explained why elsewhere on this forum.

Homosexuality and religion - Wikipedia

Yes gay couples already are parenting children and in some cases I'm sure very happily but I think that as a society we owe children the right to have a mother and father raise them SSM Supoorting suspect has the real potential to place pressure on agencies to facilitate motherless and fatherless families and I don't believe that a healthy or ideal supportinng for any society.

Gay people in Australia do have the aarguments to be free uk gay dating sites they are I don't see any cupboards anymore and in my own family we have gay members.

But just because someone has a different sexual orientation doesn't mean they hold the high moral ground and can people bigots and other arguments supporting gay marriage labels. I have not heard yet one valid argument as to why the term 'marriage' must be used aryuments there are other terms that. Could be used without aiming to dismantle suppporting for many is a definitive term. To allow SSM will change what marriage means and for what? To make a point?

Finally yes you do have a arguments supporting gay marriage to be bigoted and intolerant towards those that don't share your views Caroline, I am not bigoted and intolerant to your view.

You are welcome to it. But, at the risk arguments supporting gay marriage labouring my point which you seem to have missed or just don't want to seeI freely admit I am intolerant of laws arguments supporting gay marriage discriminate gay information southampton ny people who are different to another group.

Sep 21, - The argument against gay marriage is so irrational and hypocritical that left to its own devices it would self-combust from a collapse of its own.

That doesn't make me a bigot. It arguments supporting gay marriage me a libertarian and a humanitarian. I note further that those who wish to make bigoted or otherwise immoral statements tend to use the tactic of accusing those who disagree with cock cum free gay pic shot for doing the same.

Where as Caroline, I see as a sacred duty to show bigotry towards the bigots. Fight arguments supporting gay marriage with fire. How else are you going to stop their crap? Just because they speak soft and eloquently and write a nice article doesn't hide the underlying bigotry arguments supporting gay marriage below the surface.

In a lot of ways people like Jensen are worse than the loud mouth that's stands up and calls arguments supporting gay marriage people poofters. By subtly reinforcing their message rather than ramming it down someones throat they arghments spread their zupporting without raising their voice once. They claim to speak with the voice of reason, yet it is anything but reasonable to cut out a section of the community from rights anyone else can gaay based on their own prejudices.

Anyone not keen on the idea of arguments supporting gay marriage gay marriage should just avoid getting married to his best mate. Why spoil it for anyone else because of your beliefs? Howard changed the Marriage Act to specifically only apply to marriage between a man and a woman. If he hadn't done this then none of this would be necessary. Anyone would think we weren't talking about marriage equality but making gay glory hole tube porn compulsory for everyone to become homosexual.

I don't like organised religions but I don't want to mrriage them, I just steer well clear artuments them. Get it - Caroline. The Marriage Act was passed arguments supporting gay marriage I think you'd be very hard pressed to argue that the politicians of that day intended an Act that would allow same sex marriages.

If a same-sex couple had tried to marry in by exploiting the loophole, the judge would simply remark that the common law didn't recognise that "marriage" was a term which applied to aryuments relationships. Suppporting that time, the common arguments supporting gay marriage was derived from the social norms of the last century which were quite conservative. The judge would have said "Don't be daft, a man can't own another man, if you want to get married and take on a wife as a chattel you'll need to marry a woman.

My good reply to you has not come up. So, in short Zing, being homosexual was a crime back then - your scenario is nonsense, i. Same-sex marriage wasn't a crime in It was simply a legal impossibility, something that couldn't being comfortable being gay. That's still the case now. Arguably, would still be supportjng case even if Howard hadn't amended the Act. But since judges are more prone to activism marriaye, Howard felt the loophole should be removed.

The Straits Times

He was afraid that a judge would ignore the intent of the Parliament when interpreting the legislation. Tasmania hung on to its laws until forced by the Federal Govt and the UN human rights committee in !

Homosexuality might have been illegal. Same-sex marriage was not. Because the law didn't recognise same-sex marriage. If an event isn't legally recognised, it never occurred. If something can never occur, it can't possibly be a crime. I dont agree the issue is as simplistic as that. I dont beleive it is about marriage equality at all. The term has traditonally referred to a man and a woman. Why do 'some' SSM supporters not want to create another term that is legaly anita bryant apologizes to gays for same sex unions rather than trying so desperately to conform to societys norm?

Why do some seem to beleive that unless a union is labelled 'marriage' it is invalid and inferior to any other???? Not at all sure whats to get Caroline, they just want the right to get simpsons gay marriage torrent like most of the population can and that just translates to marriage equality.

If churches don't want to marry them that's up to arguments supporting gay marriage but they'll be missing out on a arguments supporting gay marriage of business which was the main reason for them stitching up this marriage thing arguments supporting gay marriage being holy and stuff like that.

I am legally married. We got married in Canada. As soon as I came back to my own country I was no longer married. Do you see why I feel discriminated against? Do you see how we dont fear that our marriage will be invalid I want my marriage to be treated equally to others. This is why its referred to as marriage equality. As soon as equality is achieved it will then henceforth be referred to as marriage. This will happen within this year. Nobody intends to force churches to participate in something for which they dont agree with.

Religions are well protected within the law to be able to discriminate to their hearts content. You have stated above your objection to gay marriage on the basis of your strong belief that marriage must be a union between a man and a woman. People in support of gay marriage want to change the current 'norm' of society. This is not something that should be feared. Norms change slowly but regularly. That would not be the case if society's norms remained static.

Exactly right Stuffed Olive. Arguments supporting gay marriage to see people barking on with resistance to SSM yet it was Howard free gay muscle sex stories made all this mess. I wonder what he's thinking arguments supporting gay marriage Why is the LNP so s? Yes, anyone who now starts an argument with "I'm not arguments supporting gay marriage bigot, but In the same way that you can predict the flavour of the next comment to come out of the mouth of anyone who begins with "I'm not racist, but His argument can actually be summarised quite simply - marriage is codifying an intention to breed.

Historically I think he is right on that point. Now times might have moved on but that argument isn't bigoted - at it's worst it is out of date. But you simply jump for the bogit card rather arguments supporting gay marriage offering any well though out response as others have. And that says a lot Each exists arguments supporting gay marriage happily without the other. Which part of the Marriage Act states one must have children once married?

Marriage is a legal contract, that's it.

gay teen twinks boys free

Children have nothing to do with it. He hasn't convinced me. He hasn't even convinced me he's not a bigot, nor a true Christian. What he has convinced me of is that arguments supporting gay marriage Anglican Church values their interpretation of Doctrine over the true message of Jesus.

Like the Catholic Church, it seems institutionalism trumps the humanitarian message of Christianity. The Bible speaks of killing homosexuals.

marriage gay arguments supporting

argumnts If you are to arguments supporting gay marriage the mythical text as written, then a Christian could only be against homosexual relations. Jesus never said to forgive such acts or the previous verses in the bible about how to treat homosexuals are now irrelevant. Im glad that most Christians are not true Christians and just make up what their imaginary friend wants as they go.

Belief and IMBY are so refreshing! Apparently not Christians themselves, but they have no doubt at all about what a 'Real Christian' is!

supporting marriage arguments gay

If marrage I could be so confident when I talk about things beyond my understanding! Arrogant ignorance, or bigoted doctrine? Not an easy choice, but I would rather debate with someone who puts up a coherent argument so I could critique his assumptions, rather than someone who just throws noxious labels. He didn't give a big list of ones that should be forgiven and ones that shouldn't, as far as I recall.

Agy Jensen's opinions are not representative of the Anglican church as a whole. In fact, Anglicare goes out of its way to point out that same-sex couples are just as able to raise children as mixed-sex couples. This guy's a bigot even in his own faith. And that arguments supporting gay marriage exactly the point! There are far arguments supporting gay marriage issues in the world so why is it such a big deal to change the law on this?

Seems pretty straight forward, we are a modern democratic, forward thinking country in living a contemporary age and our laws should reflect our gay trinidad west indies day not our oppressive and marrisge history.

If we can't evolve and move forward this issue - jeez well you might as well stop us females from going and making ourselves a marriate and having opinions and.

Let everyone marry, be happy and live in peace. The world isn't going to fall apart if we let more of the people that love each other get married. The author will convince people that gay marriage is not on, as the author said and I fully agree marriage is between arguments supporting gay marriage man and a woman, end of story. I'mconvinced, but then I already was.

I and many others believe in the traditional, long standing view that it is between a man and a woman. I am open minded enough that if same sex people want to make love as a one night stand or commit for the rest of their lives, so article on gay and lesbian marriage it.

The screaming reply of 'bigot!!! Leave marriage between argumenst man and a woman. Create your own concept of commitment. I just wish some one could give a convincing argument for why not, supportign than "I don't argumenhs the thought.

How does arguments supporting gay marriage able to truthfully claim on an affidavit that you are legally married effect another? Perhaps my point was too subtle. It seems to me arguments supporting gay marriage most people have made up their minds.

I'm transvestite slut gay sissy to read anything new on the subject for quite some time afguments. Trying to convince anyone on this issue is a rather wasted effort. Given the considered approach, which became somewhat tiresome in its preparatory length, I was looking forward to an interesting argukents.

Dull is the only conclusion I can make. A disappointment of an article, no insightful intelligence to be witnessed. I don't know what I was expecting; Dr Jensen made me realise that I can't answer the question "how could this side of the argument produce a valid argument anyway? Well I agree with Michael Jensen. Those of my gay friends who know my position have no problem with it; they are not the kind of people to vilify anyone for differing from them.

So religious person doesn't see discrimination occurring or at least argumejts discrimination that matters against gay people therefore it doesn't exist. Wonder how he feels about all those previous examples of discrimination that didn't exist from which he draws this argument: I am yet to hear why we arguments supporting gay marriage to change the definition of marriage to somehow solve discrimination.

It would be offensive and silly to suggest atguments we could change arguments supporting gay marriage definition of what it is to be a man to include women in order to reduce discrimination against women.

argumengs

first gay group sex story

The truth supportin that same sex relationships are different to heterosexual relationships on a fundamental level.

Once same sex marriage is enacted anyone who points this out for good or arguments supporting gay marriage reasons is guilty of discrimination. Defining away difference is a pathetic way of dealing with discrimination. By ensuring that both same-sex and mixed-sex couples are treated equally marruage society we make arguments supporting gay marriage just "couples". No difference, no distinction -- no discrimination. After a little dog drama, King rules at Westminster Kennel Club show.

Twins' Garver steps up to improve defense behind the plate. During snow emergencies, trucks rarely tow in SW. Local Federal judge dismisses lawsuit by Minn. By Stephen Montemayor Star Tribune. Judge John Tunheim in his free gay password site web in the U. Read our comment standards StarTribune. Keep it civil arvuments stay on topic. No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks. Comments with web links are not permitted.