The reasons for opposing gay marriage

It's not natural! Nature has designed a male and a female to be together, hence only a man and a woman can have children. Not men and men or women and women. Sorry gay people but I find this whole concept rather disgusting. However I know some really friendly gay men, they are really nice people, but I just can't seem to understand why they choose a man instead of a woman to be with *shivers*

Because they're behind the Zeitgeist?

Honestly, the opponents of Gay marriage will look back on themselves in 20 years time and cringe in embarrassment. Remember, people used to make a passionate defense of racial segregation!

It's a disgusting attitude, but sadly too many people have it. And they're like "oh, why would you choose someone of the same sex, ooh it's weird and wrong" - I don't like tattoos and wine but I don't cast it off as wrong! It ain't difficult to realise that people are different and can love whoever they want. If you're too small minded to understand or accept why/how someone could feel a certain way, then it doesn't make them wrong or inferior - it makes you small minded.

Also, more common arguments I hear: "Marriage is between a man and a woman" - only as defined by the Bible which no-one now follows anyway, or there'd be no sex before marriage and we'd all be going to church too.
"Marriage is for the creation of children" - don't see old or infertile couples being banned from marrying.

I totally agree with this. I don't find the concept disgusting though as they don't really choose to be gay and it's like a norm that I see everyday. But yeah I do think its supposed to be men and women. Its just the tradition in me.

And to the person that compared this to race, its sooooooo not the same thing!

If being gay was natural then they would be able to have children naturally.

Well there is a problem, because the 'people who don't understand' are not just ignorant and then don't do anything about it, a lot of the time they're actively arguing for the denial of certain rights for gay people.
And what difference does it make to you if there's a debate about homosexuality on the 'Debate and Current Affairs' section of the forum? Just stay out of it if you don't think it's an issue.

FYI I do think it's an issue, which is why I posted I think you misinterpreted my point.
I'm just saying "don't try to teach those who cannot be taught" eg you can't teach a goat to play call of duty can you?

Well, he probably should have worded it differently but he didn't say that every homosexual would be a good parent, just that homosexuals who are parents and likely to have certain characteristics that will make them better parents.

I'd be inclined to disagree, then. Heterosexuals who are good parents and homosexuals who are good parents, I would argue, have similar qualities which are attained in separation from sexuality.

Similarly, homosexuals who are bad parents and heterosexuals who are bad parents gain bad attributes not from to whom they are attracted, but from reasons quite separate.

All I'm saying is yes, let homosexuals be parents (there is no argument against denying them this right), but we must be cautious to label a homosexual couple with a child superior to heterosexuals based on gayness alone; there must remain the categories of 'bad parent' and 'good parent', into which anybody of any sexual preference can fall.

I totally agree with this. I don't find the concept disgusting though as they don't really choose to be gay and it's like a norm that I see everyday. But yeah I do think its supposed to be men and women. Its just the tradition in me. If being gay was natural then they would be able to have children naturally.



This is sooooo not the same thing!!! How can you compare the two!?

Do you not think that this book should keep up with what's become socially acceptable since it was written?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

I don't think they're superior, I think they are as good as good heterosexual parents (distinction between me and the other person I guess).
Although there are attributes that you can have as a straight person or a gay person, I do think there are certain attributes that you're more likely to have being a gay parent - such as having to jump through hoops to get kids so therefore would be more dedicated. This doesn't just apply to gay parents, just that it's more likely to have happened to a gay couple with children (unless one of them just had sex with the opposite sex), and then this is also more likely to make them better parents. I think a higher percentage of homosexual parents (those who already have kids) are good parents (you can still get good and bad homosexual parents but if - made up - the rate of bad parents in the general population was 15%, it would be lower in homosexual parenting environments for example), and that's all I'm getting at.

Well it should, but unfortunately some people believe this book to be the word of God. And I doubt they'd accept social change over the word of God.

High time someone said it. Yes, I see your point about homosexual parents having to do more to 'earn' their children, but I would like us to remember that this scale of 'good' and 'bad' is abstract; there is no reliable way to measure how well someone parents. I do think the majority of gay couples would make fine parents, but the same is true of non-gay couples.

Whether or not the rate of 'bad parents' (probably only measurable through the relative lives of their children when grown up) is lower in homosexual people is speculation. If, in the future, there comes out a statistic with a significantly different value of 'good' parents being more likely in homosexual couples, I shall submit to your claim.

Until then, however, I think we should assume both gay and straight parents have the same capacity to become good parents, which means, chiefly, allowing gay people both to marry and to enter the adoption process.

High time someone said it. Yes, I see your point about homosexual parents having to do more to 'earn' their children, but I would like us to remember that this scale of 'good' and 'bad' is abstract; there is no reliable way to measure how well someone parents. I do think the majority of gay couples would make fine parents, but the same is true of non-gay couples.

Whether or not the rate of 'bad parents' (probably only measurable through the relative lives of their children when grown up) is lower in homosexual people is speculation. If, in the future, there comes out a statistic with a significantly different value of 'good' parents being more likely in homosexual couples, I shall submit to your claim.

Until then, however, I think we should assume both gay and straight parents have the same capacity to become good parents, which means, chiefly, allowing gay people both to marry and to enter the adoption process.

But yeah I do think its supposed to be men and women. Its just the tradition in me.

I struggle to see the importance of Marriage though? it brings nothing apart from stately benefits which should have been removed anyway? on top of this marriage is mainly a religious bonding, should the person performing the marriage have a choice rather than the government which is independent of these institutions? the people comparing this to racial abuse really need to get a grip though, you cannot compare what gays are going through now to what the blacks went through before...

It's not natural! Nature has designed a male and a female to be together, hence only a man and a woman can have children. Not men and men or women and womem

Sorry gay people but I find this whole concept rather disgusting. However I know some really friendly gay men, they are really nice people, but I just can't seem to understand why they choose a man instead of a woman to be with *shivers*