The Student Room Group

Should Gay Couples Be Allowed To Marry??????

Scroll to see replies

Why should they be allowed? Marriage is designed for a man and a women to commit themselves to each other. Never mind getting married, the idea of same sex relationships is absurd in my opinion - it's unnatural, immoral and just plainly wrong! There must be someone else on this site who agrees...
Original post by Lewis :D
lovely post :smile:


Thank you :biggrin:
Yep. This world needs more love.
Reply 63
Original post by Mikey73
Thank you :biggrin:



I + repped your original post :smile:
Reply 64
Original post by Sgt.Incontro
If you find the issue of how children will be affected as a result of gay marriage NOT important, I have nothing more to say.


Oh, it's very important. But it is a distinct issue, thoroughly dealt with elsewhere.

Arguing over gay parenting in a thread on gay marriage is a red herring.
Reply 65
Original post by leedsmad94
Why should they be allowed? Marriage is designed for a man and a women to commit themselves to each other. Never mind getting married, the idea of same sex relationships is absurd in my opinion - it's unnatural, immoral and just plainly wrong! There must be someone else on this site who agrees...


Totally agree
Reply 66
Original post by leedsmad94
Why should they be allowed? Marriage is designed for a man and a women to commit themselves to each other. Never mind getting married, the idea of same sex relationships is absurd in my opinion - it's unnatural, immoral and just plainly wrong! There must be someone else on this site who agrees...


Original post by osman2790
Totally agree


Why? I don't mean the marriage thing, I mean the "same sex relationships are absurd" thing.

It's natural in the sense that it's been observed in hundreds of different species, including humans where same sex relationships can be found in all cultures past and present where anyone has bothered to look. Morality is somewhat perspective oriented, but certainly the prevailing secular standards such as the harm principle lead to no issue. Just plainly wrong isn't really an argument, unless it's one of personal taste.

So what's absurd about two people engaging in a romantic relationship?
I don't know err

should straight couples not allowed to be married?
Reply 68
I don't like gay marriage.
Original post by mmmpie
Why? I don't mean the marriage thing, I mean the "same sex relationships are absurd" thing.

It's natural in the sense that it's been observed in hundreds of different species, including humans where same sex relationships can be found in all cultures past and present where anyone has bothered to look. Morality is somewhat perspective oriented, but certainly the prevailing secular standards such as the harm principle lead to no issue. Just plainly wrong isn't really an argument, unless it's one of personal taste.

So what's absurd about two people engaging in a romantic relationship?


It's subjective really, to me, being gay is just unthinkable. It's hard to put into words, it just feels wrong!

People should be free to have sex with who they like, but have a legal relationship with someone of the same sex just doesn't seem right to me.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 70
Well why should only straight people suffer divorce? :P
Original post by DYKWIA
I don't like gays


Fix'd.



You don't need to pretend we all know your a homophobe.
Original post by DYKWIA
I don't like gay marriage.


Neither do I.

Original post by leedsmad94
Why should they be allowed? Marriage is designed for a man and a women to commit themselves to each other. Never mind getting married, the idea of same sex relationships is absurd in my opinion - it's unnatural, immoral and just plainly wrong! There must be someone else on this site who agrees...


I have been emphasizing these points for the past few months, yet people seem to think they know better, and that gay marriage will create absolutely ZERO social/family problems.

DYKWIA
I don't like gay marriage.


Original post by Jordenfruitbat
Fix'd.

You don't need to pretend we all know your a homophobe.


There is no need to insult people/call names, simply because you don't agree with his opinion.
Original post by Sgt.Incontro
Neither do I.



I have been emphasizing these points for the past few months, yet people seem to think they know better, and that gay marriage will create absolutely ZERO social/family problems.





There is no need to insult people/call names, simply because you don't agree with his opinion.


It's not just his opinion on gay marriage, it's on everything related to gay people. He is a homophobe.I myself am happy with civil partnerships at the moment but would like gay marriage in the future maybe but am not bothered either way really.
Reply 74
Original post by Jordenfruitbat
Fix'd.
You don't need to pretend we all know your a homophobe.


I'm really not a homophobe. It's just that gays generally dislike me which leads to a mutual dislike, which only gets worse when they refuse to listen to me. I have no issue with what gays do in private.
Reply 75
Original post by DYKWIA
I'm really not a homophobe. It's just that gays generally dislike me which leads to a mutual dislike, which only gets worse when they refuse to listen to me. I have no issue with what gays do in private.


But you are a homophobe :lol:, if you weren't there would've been no need for you to PM me the other day trying to say you weren't a homophobe when you want to restrict the rights of gay people, and that's not just with regards to gay marriage, it's to do with our freedoms as people.
Reply 76
Original post by Lewis :D
But you are a homophobe :lol:, if you weren't there would've been no need for you to PM me the other day trying to say you weren't a homophobe when you want to restrict the rights of gay people, and that's not just with regards to gay marriage, it's to do with our freedoms as people.


Uh huh, do you think that gays should get more rights than everyone else just because you are a minority? Heck, because gays are outnumbered perhaps they should get 100x as many votes. That way it would be completely fair, especially for gays.
Reply 77
Original post by DYKWIA
Uh huh, do you think that gays should get more rights than everyone else just because you are a minority? Heck, because gays are outnumbered perhaps they should get 100x as many votes. That way it would be completely fair, especially for gays.


How would legalising gay marriage give people more rights than straight people? Straight people can marry who they like, right? So c'mon, how is that giving gay people special privileges?
Reply 78
I see no reason why anybody should interfere with two people (no matter what sexuality) and get in the way of their relationship if they love each other. It's not anybody else's business and doesn't affect them, so why do they care?
Reply 79
Original post by kerily
:love:

The word 'given' is not tremendously appreciated either. To be blunt, while there are straight people out there who are allies and have done a lot of work aiming for gay marriage, the majority of straight people have not 'given' non-straight people anything. Pretty much every advance in rights for LGBT+ people has been hard-won through protests and campaigns.

As for civil partnerships, they aren't identically equal to marriages. You can't call them a marriage, you can't always hold them in a religious place of worship (I honestly can't remember if some churches are allowed to hold them if they want to, or not - it was a proposed amendment and I can't remember if it went through) and if you go abroad, they often aren't recognised the same. To the extend that some people have had problems with being allowed to visit their civil partners while their partners were in hospital in other countries, because they weren't recognised as next of kin.

It annoys me beyond belief that straight people get to vote on whether I should be allowed to marry someone I love or not - and that they can then tell me that it doesn't matter, when they're not in the same situation themselves. I don't give a toss if people think it's unnecessary or a waste of money in legal fees or whatever. I want the right in law to marry someone who I'm in love with, and I think that's a perfectly reasonable request.


You're not imagining things, you'll be pleased to hear. :p: However, the law on this area is quite complicated.

The provision you're referring to is section 202 of the Equality Act 2010, which removes the ban on the use of religious buildings to register civil partnerships. However, this provision isn't yet in force.

This means that as the law stands, you have to draw a distinction between the three methods that we have of formalising relationships:

"Religious marriage" (my phrase) - marriages conducted by Church of England celebrants don't require registration afterwards; the "religious ceremony" is all that's needed for the couple to be recognised as legally married

Civil marriage - conducted between opposite-sex couples in an approved building (e.g. register office); no references to religion are allowed

Civil partnerships - conducted between same-sex couples in an approved building (e.g. register office); no references to religion are allowed



This means that when s.202 comes into force, it seems to have the rather odd effect of allowing civil partnerships to take place in religious venues, without the ceremonies themselves having...erm..."religious significance". In other words, this doesn't amount to some kind of "gay marriage", since the religious aspect is merely incidental (i.e. the building happens to be used as a place of worship).

Does that make sense? :lolwut:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending