Gay marriage - OK... What if... ?

Well said. I can certainly see yoru confusion over the issue and some of the points you raised are defniitely valid.

As for those closely related by blood marrying there are some potential consequences for offspring that do override the freedom to marry whomever we choose. Then again in the case of two sister or two brothers I suppose those possible problems won't arise so what the heck eh.

Multiple partners in a relationship also make for an interesting scenario. And again unless there is good medical reason to preclude that type of marriage/relationship, I suppose it to will be possible some day. The only downside I see comes from my observations of communes in the past where despite th efree love concept, two people can wind up deeper into each other than they are in the group and thus create problems for the interaction of the group as a hwole. Jealousies do arise and all to often they tend to split the group. So, what might wrok far better is a concept of a group of couples where each couple are a couple but they band together with like minded couples and form a society of their own making. But that woudl work even without the benefit of law changes.

Threesomes too while they happen and they can endure, often wind up with two of the three being more closely aligned with each other thus the third winds up out of the loop so to speak. While this in and of itself shoudl not be cause to deny a threesome the right of marriage it shoudl give pause to threesomes for threesomes to think carefully before they choose to commit to marriage.

But the bottom line is if two people truly love each other and want to live together as a couple then marriage itself becomes a ceremony to show that commitment; nothing more. And given the number of couples who divorce, I often think the whole intstitution of marriage might well be a plot by the legal profession to line their own pockets. But givewn that lawyers also marry and divorce as often as the rest of the population, I guess that one won't hold water.

Basically what is the most important is the feelings and desires of the people who want to be together and their understanding of

a relationship is all about and how to keep it alive and healthy and virile. If those who want it know what they are doign then it is their choice whether to marry or not. And it is not the perogative of a government bound by a constitution that purports to provide equality for all to deny them their choices.

So, to answer yoru confusion, find a partner, settle down to a happy vital relationship and thoroughly enjoy it and don;t let anyone detract from yoru happiness as individuals and as a couple. And if you and your partner choose to marry so be it. But if you want the relationship without formal ceremony, than have it that way as you choose. And if you happen to be in a relationship that involves more then 2 people and it works really well, then the more power to you.

VERY GOOD question. Most of the gays that want marriage is so they can get the same rights as a man and woman get for tax purposes. Personally If I love someone that's where I'm going to be regardless of the taxable reasons for marriage.

The biggest thing to look at might be that the propperty values in predominately gay neighborhoods is higher than other areas, the crime rate is lower making it safer for our children, and the tax rate is higher due to higher education and income in these areas. Thats what we should really look at.

The other thing that we should consider is what would truly happen, if every gay person of legal age to vote, were to actually vote, what kind of change could we make in today's world. Even if it's only 3% of the total voting population then that's 900,000+ people. In some states that more people than actually vote. So maybe we need to take a close look because the gays aren't going anywhere. We're here to stay.

I think the major point to be gleaned from this is that the definition of "marriage" is culturally defined. In our Western society there are civil laws defining what constitutes "marriage" and what is permissible and what not. But laws made by man can be changed by man. This has happened countless times throughout history. Slavery was once legal in this country but no longer is because the laws were changed. Other cultures throughout history and elsewhere in the world even today have different definitions of "marriage" and of what is acceptable within marriage.

Some cultures encourage more than two people being involved in a loving relationship, it is called a family. There are loving relationships with as many reasons as people involved related by blood or not. Sex is not always an indicator of how much love is present in a relationship, and not a perquisite as well. Marriage and sex are two different things, as well as love and family. The only rules that I hope get changed are the ones that at present deny the gay and lesbian community the same rights as straight community.

That's a good question, and you made a good point. Yes, I guess we would need to alter what marriage is to accept any couple/group of people that are in love. Someone posted and mentioned their dog. Then would we have to include patrons of beastiality if they really LOVED their animal? Well, I was a supporter of gay marriage, but the points you brought up make me wonder if that would really work. Maybe we should just get rid of the whole marriage thing. Half the people end up getting a divorce anyways.

The tribal law prohibits/excludes same-sex couple marriage Under the nation tribal statue marriage is not gender-neutral. It is meant to be between man and a woman. Tribal sovereignty statutes mandate that Native American marriages be recognized by states.

I had a great teacher my senior year of high school who loved to say "You should be able to have as many spouses as you can support.". I think I agree! For myself, I want to be monogamous- I'm a one-person kind of girl, and I'd like to have a marriage license, although it's not necessary for me to validate my commitment and connection to some person.

But I completely understand those who want to share their lives with two people or more, or two people who want to do so but happen to be closely related by blood. Here's what I think should happen:

The government is in place to protect contracts made between bodies, right? If you sign a legal contract, the taxes we all pay go to pay for the judicial courts who pursue action if you default on that agreement. Marriage is just another legal contract between you and another person. I believe that any person(s) should be able to make whatever arrangement they want and have the government honor and protect it, whether it's a romantic commitment between a group of people or whatever.

As for siblings, it might not be palatable to a lot of people, but there's nothing wrong with it. As long as they are both of age, I say that incestuous relationships can definitely occur, and they should be allowed to get married. The only prerequisite I'd put on that is that they have mandatory genetic testing done beforehand to inform them of the chances of having a child born with birth defects (as they occur higher as the products of incest). They can still have children if they want, but they need to know the risks beforehand. Other than that, let them live their lives.

That's just my opinion on the matter.

u cant give urself completely to more than 1 one person. it just does not make sense. that's what marriage is, giving urself to another person completely. im not sure i agree for the reason that im afraid marriage will then be okay for anyone to have and i dont agree with polygamy, or marrying a monkey..or ur mother.. cause im not trying to "hurt" marriage by wanting to have gay marriage, im trying to show people that marriage is really the promise two people make to love each other forever.. i dotn know, its rather confusing to me.

"Oh, if placed on that lofty watch-tower, you could gaze into the secret places--if you could open the closed doors of sleeping chambers and recall their dark recesses to the perception of sight--you would behold things done by immodest persons which no chaste eye could look upon; you would see what even to see is a crime; you would see what people embruted with the madness of vice deny that they have done, and yet hasten to do--men with frenzied lusts rushing upon men, doing things which afford no gratification even to those who do them." St. Cyprian of Carthage ("Letters" c. 250 A.D.)

You have some good points. I believe in gay marriage. But if gay marriage is allowed will someday polygomy be legal? Do I only believe in marriage between two people? I am not sure.