greychins
02-02-2007, 05:39 AM
Hello, I was just reading the paper and the front page has an article on gay marriage. Long story short: a same-sex marriage ban was passed in Indiana.
The article link is http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702010433
What do you think? Should homosexual couples be allowed to marry? Do you agree with the reasons given in the article?
Here's my thoughts on the matter:
While I'm not gay, I still feel these people should have the same rights to get married as any of us. The state argues that by amending the constitution, they are protecting the sanctity of marriage. Where is the sanctity of marriage in the people who get married and divorced over and over? The state says that marriage will mean nothing if gays are allowed to marry. Well let me tell you something, marriage means nothing now! Look at how Britney Spears got married and had it annulled the next day. What does that say about the "sanctity of marriage"? And it is more than just her that does that, people do things like that all the time.
I personally think gays should be allowed to marry. The most recent article in the newspaper said "Marriage should never be defined to allow abhorrent behavior or perverted preference." How is that either one of those things? Abhorrent behavior? NO, it's two people who love each other. And preference? Well, I don't think being gay is really a preference, but even if it is, people's preferences differ, hence why they're called preferences. Who is the government to tell us what our preference should be?
What the government doesn't realize is that society is changing. The same way society changed from when women had no rights to now women having rights...society could change from only heterosexual couples getting married to ANY couples getting married. Course the government won't let that happen will they?
The article link is http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702010433
What do you think? Should homosexual couples be allowed to marry? Do you agree with the reasons given in the article?
Here's my thoughts on the matter:
While I'm not gay, I still feel these people should have the same rights to get married as any of us. The state argues that by amending the constitution, they are protecting the sanctity of marriage. Where is the sanctity of marriage in the people who get married and divorced over and over? The state says that marriage will mean nothing if gays are allowed to marry. Well let me tell you something, marriage means nothing now! Look at how Britney Spears got married and had it annulled the next day. What does that say about the "sanctity of marriage"? And it is more than just her that does that, people do things like that all the time.
I personally think gays should be allowed to marry. The most recent article in the newspaper said "Marriage should never be defined to allow abhorrent behavior or perverted preference." How is that either one of those things? Abhorrent behavior? NO, it's two people who love each other. And preference? Well, I don't think being gay is really a preference, but even if it is, people's preferences differ, hence why they're called preferences. Who is the government to tell us what our preference should be?
What the government doesn't realize is that society is changing. The same way society changed from when women had no rights to now women having rights...society could change from only heterosexual couples getting married to ANY couples getting married. Course the government won't let that happen will they?