Do u accept g@y marriage?

My view is right here

I support it, no problem. I figure marriage should be based strictly off religion (like it initially was) so that if your religion is down with it you can get married.

As far as the state is concerned, people should be able to join civil unions and the like, unrelated to the religious marriage. The legal bonds should not be related to the religious bonds.

Yes.

Marriage is about love.

I don't except and support gay marriage what so ever.NYCKing87

Aren't superheroes, at least in part, a reflection of male homoeroticism?

Hell no, Im against it.

You know a thread is dead when it winds down with "yes" and "no" answers.YourChaosIsntMe

I really don't care if its legal or not. I really feel that it is no business of mine to decide whether or not people can get married.

They can do what ever they want, dose not bother me at all......

Yes, I believe in equality for all U.S. citizens.yoshi-lnex

Yea. Except I believe in the equality of every living thing on the earth.

And don't one of your amendments have something to do with free speach?

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]Yes, I believe in equality for all U.S. citizens.CoreyNT

Yea. Except I believe in the equality of every living thing on the earth.

And don't one of your amendments have something to do with free speach?

[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

Actually, homosexuality has been the main enabler of AIDs. That is fact.

Trashface

That is because of the different acts and the amount of acts they perform, which gives them a highly increased risk. The people involved all agreed upon performing them anyway. What is your point exactly?

So by your logic, because, for example, there is an increased crime rate among blacks, black people harm society? *hopes you won't agree*

Yeah. How would it affect me in anyway?Wasdie

You'll get AIDS.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Yeah. How would it affect me in anyway?Silvarach

You'll get AIDS.

[QUOTE="Silvarach"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]Yeah. How would it affect me in anyway?Bourbons3

You'll get AIDS.

Must be a new fad.

No, I don't accept it.Dreams-Visions

Anyway. I don't accept marriage of any sex, but if one opposite sexes are allowed to marry then so should same sexes.

Otherwise the United States would be nothing more than a huge contradiction, which it already has been for a very long time.

Yes I do.

If they love each other and want to proove to everybody else that they love each other then good for them.

Accept, and support.

Beyond that... I have still yet to hear one solid reason why the law should be oppose to it.

And for the record... for anyone thinking of using the morality card, morality does not equal the law.

The Gov. cant let them marry. It would show that the Gov. is taking a pro gay anti Christian Ect Ect, stance. Its like if the Gov. all of a sudden said that Christmas was a holiday for muffins and peanut butter.

No, I do NOT accept it. It is sinful, immoral, sick, and perverted. Marriage is only between one MAN and one WOMAN. Anything else is immoral, sick, perverted, and an abomination to God.

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]These issues are supposed to be left up to individual states. California citizens said no, but the court showed complete inconsideration. What's next, the "right" for more than 2 people to marry? Marriage was a religious institution anyway. It's not so much that they want marriage, but more of a statement. Trashface

I never stated that one religious owned it, but just that it was insituted by religion. These people care nothing about that aspect of it. They are trying to make a statement. This is not about race. The definition of marriage never stated that it could only be for people of the same race. It was created, however, for a man and a woman.

It is interesting to note that every civilization that's ever accepted this had been wiped out...America, I believe, if it keeps this up, will be added to the list, as well.
Also, in the Bible, the cities Sodom and Gommorrah were destroyed greatly in part because of things like this.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]These issues are supposed to be left up to individual states. California citizens said no, but the court showed complete inconsideration. What's next, the "right" for more than 2 people to marry? Marriage was a religious institution anyway. It's not so much that they want marriage, but more of a statement. yoshi-lnex

I never stated that one religious owned it, but just that it was insituted by religion. These people care nothing about that aspect of it. They are trying to make a statement. This is not about race. The definition of marriage never stated that it could only be for people of the same race. It was created, however, for a man and a woman.

Next its going to be okay to marry animals, then children. Its gotta stop somewhere.

[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

Actually, homosexuality has been the main enabler of AIDs. That is fact.

Trashface

That is because of the different acts and the amount of acts they perform, which gives them a highly increased risk. The people involved all agreed upon performing them anyway. What is your point exactly?

It is interesting to note that every civilization that's ever accepted this had been wiped out...America, I believe, if it keeps this up, will be added to the list, as well.
Also, in the Bible, the cities Sodom and Gommorrah were destroyed greatly in part because of things like this.

Crushmaster

Ah yes I'm sure it was the major reason those civilizations aren't around any more...

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]These issues are supposed to be left up to individual states. California citizens said no, but the court showed complete inconsideration. What's next, the "right" for more than 2 people to marry? Marriage was a religious institution anyway. It's not so much that they want marriage, but more of a statement. SylentButDeadly

I never stated that one religious owned it, but just that it was insituted by religion. These people care nothing about that aspect of it. They are trying to make a statement. This is not about race. The definition of marriage never stated that it could only be for people of the same race. It was created, however, for a man and a woman.

Next its going to be okay to marry animals, then children. Its gotta stop somewhere.

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

Actually, homosexuality has been the main enabler of AIDs. That is fact.

yoshi-lnex

That is because of the different acts and the amount of acts they perform, which gives them a highly increased risk. The people involved all agreed upon performing them anyway. What is your point exactly?

[QUOTE="Crushmaster"]

It is interesting to note that every civilization that's ever accepted this had been wiped out...America, I believe, if it keeps this up, will be added to the list, as well.
Also, in the Bible, the cities Sodom and Gommorrah were destroyed greatly in part because of things like this.

MindFreeze

Ah yes I'm sure it was the major reason those civilizations aren't around any more...

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"]These issues are supposed to be left up to individual states. California citizens said no, but the court showed complete inconsideration. What's next, the "right" for more than 2 people to marry? Marriage was a religious institution anyway. It's not so much that they want marriage, but more of a statement. SylentButDeadly

I never stated that one religious owned it, but just that it was insituted by religion. These people care nothing about that aspect of it. They are trying to make a statement. This is not about race. The definition of marriage never stated that it could only be for people of the same race. It was created, however, for a man and a woman.

Next its going to be okay to marry animals, then children. Its gotta stop somewhere.

Are you kidding me? First of all, we are animals, so animals are already getting married. But what I think you mean is animals other than humans. Since when are homosexuals not human? They are able to love another human (of the same sex in this case) and decide they want to get married like any other human. How can you even logically see that as an outcome? Gay marriage has been allowed for a while in my country (the Netherlands.) Anyone here who doesn't have a screwed up head would never do the things you think would come next.