If you are opposed to gay marriage, it is just for religious reasons?

Also, should gays be allowed to adopt? Are there any other ';rights'; denied to gays that straight people have?





Please try and be productive in your answer!!





Thanks!If you are opposed to gay marriage, it is just for religious reasons?
If you're married and get sick, your spouse automatically can visit you and make medical decisions for you.





If you die, your assets automatically pass to your spouse.





If you cover your spouse on your insurance you don't pay taxes on that coverage as income, gay people do and they don't get any of those other benefits without shaky complex and expensive legal arrangements that may or may not hold up in court.





Gays are not asking for religious blessings. We are not asking for everyone to come to our weddings. We are not asking the government to force churches, mosques and synagogues to perform marriage rituals or even to allow us into their tax-exempt edifices. We are simply demanding equal protection under the laws of this nation as tax paying, voting, property owning citizens. I want no more or less protection than granted any heterosexual to control and distribute my holdings.If you are opposed to gay marriage, it is just for religious reasons?
Currently, the major basis of my opposition is that it is presented dishonestly.





It's presented as a matter of ';equality';.





The fact is that marriage is a status that confers various forms of special treatment. What those are and whether or not they are justifiable or fairly distributed is beside the point, marriage itself is an INequality.





The gay marriage proponents want that inequality extended to more people, but not ';all'; people. Single persons would still be denied the status, among others, including Widows who once enjoyed it. It will still be an inequality, even after they get what they are asking for.





Until they honestly admit that this is the case, I oppose them. Until they admit that they simply want the opportunity to enjoy the inequality, and present a case to justify their inclusion, I'm not interested in listening to BS about ';equality';.





Martin Luther King didn't ask merely for Blacks to be given equality with Whites. The civil rights movement included all races.





The gay marriage proponents need to acknowledge the fact that their proposal will still exclude some individuals from the institution of Marriage, which they can only do if they stop talking about ';equality';.





If it were really about ';equality';, they would be proposing ending the tangible benefits of the inequality. They aren't.
There are no valid reasons to deny gay marriage.





Marriage is a civil institution which allows spouses many rights that are not available to couples in domestic partnerships or civil unions. All people deserve to have the same government-protected rights whether they are in a life-long committed relationship with a man or a woman. Also, civil unions or domestic partnerships are not sufficient to ensure that people of all sexual orientations are guaranteed the same civil rights. The Supreme Court wisely decided that separate is inherently unequal, thus civil unions/domestic partnerships cannot be equal. The fact that they are separated is a badge of inferiority. Many religions recognize marriage as a religious institution in addition to a civil one. However, churches may choose which couples to marry. Also, straight couples are able to marry in a civil ceremony even if they are not religious. This is because the United States does not have a national religion; there is a separation of church and state.





Furthermore, allowing gay marriage protects families. It ensures that partners, who in some cases have lived commited to one another for decades, can visit one another in the hospital, make critical medical decisons, secure healthcare benefits and adoptions by gay couples would allow the children the same security as those children placed in the homes of straight couples.





For a more comprehensive list of the rights that are denied when gay marriage is denied: http://community.pflag.org/Page.aspx?pid鈥?/a>
I am not necessarily opposed to gay marriage. I am certainly more for it then I am against it. The one thing that has always bothered me was the whole ';separation of church and state';. It was always my understanding that marriage, as it is currently formed, originated from a specific religious institution. As such, I think the very specific brand of ';church'; marriage should not be able to be ';forced'; by anyone but that particular religions leaders.





I am atheist, so I am not personally affected one way or the other here. I certainly think that at the very LEAST there should be a 100% equal alternative, and why it cannot be called marriage is beyond me?





It's a hard line to walk. I was a bit of an optimist, and had hoped that major organized religions, specifically Christian/Catholic derivatives which are a the core of our domestic policies on this issue, would come around on their own. The new pope, however, has shattered any illusions I may have had about that. At this point, I think more social pressure needs to be put on these groups in order to keep the fight moving forward.





As far as adoption goes, why not? Gay people should have every chance to have a kid and screw it up that straight people have. Lord knows my straight parents did an excellent job of screwing my head up!
I am inclined to agree with daddio's take on both the definition of and purpose of marriage, and I believe that is where the sticking point lies.





Since we no longer live in the dark ages, I say change the legal terms and definitions regarding union of couples, and let the religious institutions hash out their own end of the issue.





I also agree with Holy Cow: gays pay taxes like everyone else in this country, why are their rights subject to regulation?
Just as a reply to the person who's user name is Wondering Why- it wasn't too long ago that it was considered ';unnatural'; and ';disgusting'; for blacks and white to marry. So just keep that in mind.





Gay marriage, straight marriage-- both consist of two people who love each other wanting to spend the rest of their lives together. When you compare the two, what you're really saying is, ';What makes my marriage- my love for this person- more valid, more moral than yours?';





For any person here who TRULY believes in an America which allows ALL people the right to life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (no matter what path that pursuit leads you down- granted that its not murder,lol), it should be clear that gay people have the right to marry. That it is illegal in some states is nothing less than a civil rights violation.
Of course, my faith is a huge part of my objection to gay marriage. God says in the Bible that is an abomination and he destroyed Sodom and Gammora (sp?) because of it. I do not believe gay people should be allowed to adopt. I do not hate gay people, I just disagree with their lifestyle. I believe everyone deserves respect and consideration. We are all human beings.
I find it to be very perverse and unnatural. I have God in mind in everything I do, and I know what He thinks about homosexuality. So yes, it is mostly for religious reasons. A smaller, but no less important reason, is that I've had to explain to my five year old son why some men kiss and hold hands. It's a shame that a small child has to witness such things.
I don't believe we should call it marriage! A union giving equal rights to partners is fine but we must understand this leaves the door open for people to claim there pets as spouses or any other creature. Marriage is a sanction for heterosexuals not homosexuals. A union of two people that legally bind them is different!
here's my take---marriage IS a PURELY religious idea in the first place, ESTABLISHED by religion FOR religious purposes. let CHURCHES sort this out. NO ONE has the ';right'; to effect their own ';choice'; upon them. especially some belligerent outcasts.








now if the government wants to promote ';unions'; of any kind, they should all be treated equal. that being said--child tax credits and the such---were invented to promote PROCREATION. something gay couples cannot do. and there is NOTHING normal ablout two daddies or two mommies--those would be some f'ed up adults later.








look i separated church and state for y'all.
I am opposed to it. And no they should not be allowed to raise children. People are not animals born with genetic memory on how to live their lives. They learn every thing from their parents. No matter how many times you tell me it would be OK, if you are a man you know that if you saw your father being gay and kissing other men that would f you up in a big way.
No it is due to the ridiculousness of the whole idea. Live together, have a domestic partnership if you wish but the whole idea of calling it ';marriage'; is ludicrous..





As for adoption I am fine with gay adoption as a last resort but feel a male/female couple is better suited to raise children..
I am shocked that this was struck down in California of all places and On a year that should have seen right wing BS take a backseat. I am sure that countrywide the results would be different. I hate to see bigotry of any kind. Being a 42 year old Black man I thought that I would never see bigotry win another battle in this society. As far as adoptions go, a good parent is often hard to find and the same people that would refuse a Woman's right to choose are the same ones that would deny an orphaned child the right of a loving home.





BTW I am a Married man with 4 beautiful children, My family and I are simply opposed to anyone shoving their personal beliefs down societies throat as a whole. That is against the whole beauty of America.
It is a religious reason for those against it.





Otherwise, those of us with a clear head can see that gay marriage and adoption would contribute to the state and economy in the form of capital!





Marriage licenses and money going to wedding facilities, etc... would be a cash cow!
No, i don't think they should be able to get married, not for religious reasons, but for the reason that i just don't think it's right. they should be able to have a union. yes i think they should be able to adopt.
There are a multitude of 'rights' that aren't actually 'rights'.





Forcing a deviant lifestyle down my throat is getting tiresome. It isn't an inborn tendancy. It's a chosen lifestyle.
The whole concept is unnatural and disgusting.
it is not for religion purposes,it opposes the constitution
Would you like to have 2 fathers or 2 mothers as your parents? There you go.
My wife %26amp; I both support gay marriage.





We don't care if someone else gets married, why should the government?