"Marriages" between people of the same sex?

TalkingPoint · Post by **TalkingPoint** » February 2nd, 2006, 4:32 am

Should "marriages" between people of the same sex be permitted?

What do YOU think?

passionate · Post by **passionate** » February 6th, 2006, 9:24 am

good question :D

ronke · Post by **ronke** » February 9th, 2006, 10:01 am

Marriage from the same sex should not be allowed, In the first instance is not Godly .This should not be legalise in any nation.

ahmedtaha · Post by **ahmedtaha** » February 9th, 2006, 10:20 am

of coursre not ,in my own point of view i think the marrige concept is much bigger than just making sex , letus ask why people married? the answer would be :-
firstly : to reserve the humanity this a bilogical answer
secondy : to make sex
may be there is another answers but the logical question will be : what life going to be if every body married from his/her sex??

qlqllu · Post by **qlqllu** » February 11th, 2006, 2:33 am

in my opinion,it should be legal.

alsalam · Post by **alsalam** » February 16th, 2006, 5:33 pm

In my opinion, it must not be legal

Lac · Post by **Lac** » February 20th, 2006, 1:54 am

No, it's completely unacceptable. It's so dangerous to your normal life in terms of scientifically and morally.

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 20th, 2006, 9:28 am

Lac wrote:No, it's completely unacceptable. It's so dangerous to your normal life in terms of scientifically and morally.

Please, explain!

bravo · Post by **bravo** » February 20th, 2006, 12:31 pm

I believe that gay marriages must be legalized. It’s their constitutional and human right to create a union with beloved one. Why should they pay for heterosexual conservatism and discomfort? By the way, being married has nothing to do with having sex, it’s a desire to be with someone you love and to spend your lives together!!![/b]

TearHere · Post by **TearHere** » February 21st, 2006, 1:23 am

TP wrote:Should "marriages" between people of the same sex be permitted?

i think it's a case-by-case basis.. Like, here in our country, it's not legal, thus it's not permitetd.. possibly because of our religion.. while in other countries, it is acceptable.. the question of whether it should be permitted or not varies from one person to another, a culture to another, a country to another.. in my opinion, whatever it is other people opt.. respect them, we must..

Lac · Post by **Lac** » February 21st, 2006, 9:07 am

To my personal view, its's entirely uncacceptable in any society.
The term "marriage" is often defined as the combination between two opposite sex. It means that it claims two different elements modified or complemented together for having the following consequences. Talking about "marriage", one frequently thinks about love, delivery, family, duty etc...
I am suspicious of a real love in the marrage of the same sex. Do they have anything offered together? Do they come with each other through a real love ? Of course they themselves - gay, lesbians- might have lots of reasons to explain their actions as well as the meaning of "real love".
No bad consequences have been found scientifically from marriage of the same sex. It's just regarded as something unusual in a morden society. But some developed countires approved it officially, and people looks tolerant towards such couples involved. Sex story is a quite private thing and which way to choose in marriage is also private.
Actually, why we forbid such unnatural marriage legally and constitutionally ? It might be contradictory to our current views but how can we know in future or a few more years ?
Marriage of the same sex brings no notion of "husband", "wife","dad" "mother", "kids", "uncle", "aunt". It seems to upset all of ordinary conception that has often been recognized as common standard for a happy family.
The topic given by Lenny TRAN is quite wide, not limited and commented in just few messages. The problem is that we should not condemn it as anything horrible like many asian countries have. It is neccessary to have an appropriate resolution to it rather than expressing morally disapprovals against it.

Lac

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 21st, 2006, 4:05 pm

TearHere wrote:
TP wrote:Should "marriages" between people of the same sex be permitted?
i think it's a case-by-case basis.. Like, here in our country, it's not legal, thus it's not permitetd.. possibly because of our religion..

I'm glad you've brough this up. This is something I'm not too fond of religions. They make too many rules under the name of God. "Oh, you can't do this; you can't do that! If you do, you'll be damned." And the Church has too much power because 'they' say only them can ask for salvation from God, and you must speak through them. I mean, is God really that busy that he, himself, can't save every single soul directly? I thought he was omnipotent.........

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 21st, 2006, 4:18 pm

Lac wrote: To my personal view, its's entirely uncacceptable in any society.
The term "marriage" is often defined as the combination between two opposite sex. It means that it claims two different elements modified or complemented together for having the following consequences. Talking about "marriage", one frequently thinks about love, delivery, family, duty etc...

We, humans, like to define things. We like to name everything on this Earth. Even one human to another we must have name for each other. We can't go around saying "hey you!" We think it's confusing and blah blah blah... It's the same for marriage. We made the word; we defined it ourselves. If we could do something like this, we could change it any way we want. Therefore, to what I see marriage can define in any way we want as long as we feel pleased within ourselves. There is no right and wrong definition for marriage. The wrong definition only happens when someone accuses someone else to be out of the norms.

Lac wrote:I am suspicious of a real love in the marrage of the same sex. Do they have anything offered together? Do they come with each other through a real love ? Of course they themselves - gay, lesbians- might have lots of reasons to explain their actions as well as the meaning of "real love".

How can you doubt something is not real when you know nothing about it? And how can you doubt their real love when you know nothing about what real love is? If you did know what real love was, you wouldn't say it this way.

Lac wrote:No bad consequences have been found scientifically from marriage of the same sex. It's just regarded as something unusual in a morden society.

No, the uptight people think it's unnatural.

Lac wrote:But some developed countires approved it officially, and people looks tolerant towards such couples involved. Sex story is a quite private thing and which way to choose in marriage is also private.

Well, if this is the case then why are we butting in something that is private?

Lac wrote:It is neccessary to have an appropriate resolution to it rather than expressing morally disapprovals against it.

Lac

Exactly! Give them what they want is an appropriate solution. It's just a piece of paper, but to some people it's an acceptance of people around them that their relationship is legal. They are committed to each other. And when people look at them, they see a partnership, not just a single person without being tied down for something.

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 21st, 2006, 4:31 pm

thanaa wrote: In addition, unless we find a certain difination for whar marriage is ,we will get endless options; for instance, if someone wants to marry his sister, mother, father or even his dog why should not he be able?

If we throw morals away for this case, we're still left with the health. Do you think your child would become normal if you were married to your dad, sister, mother, brother, or even closed cousins? Of course not. We have proofs that genetic diseases and heredity is the reason why we know it's wrong to marry our closed ones. Besides, how could one marry their parents? Have homosexual people tried to marry their parents?

About the dog part, well, in the States there was one teenager who raped a dog. The dog died two after the rape because of internal bleeding. It was not even a sexual contact. It was animal cruelty. How could someone do something like this to an animal we treated as friends?

Rui · Post by **Rui** » February 21st, 2006, 6:14 pm

my god, LennyeTran... i must say that i agree 100% with what you have been saying on this thread, therefore my opinion its completely irrelevant here because i would be just repeating your words

, i would like just to add that when we talk about religion laws we are ruin everything of the best we have in our lives, that is do what they want us to do and not what make us feel well, so... and im sure god only wants to see people love each other without wars and respect everyone thoughts its the only way to get there, but this is an old speech, when we look to tv we can see that the reality its not like that at all, final thought and more related to the thread... if you love someone and want to be with her ot him, for me its completely no sense try to decide if what you are doing its correct or not.

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 21st, 2006, 9:39 pm

Rui wrote:and im sure god only wants to see people love each other without wars and respect everyone thoughts its the only way to get there, but this is an old speech, when we look to tv we can see that the reality its not like that at all, final thought and more related to the thread... if you love someone and want to be with her ot him, for me its completely no sense try to decide if what you are doing its correct or not.

Thank you for your support, Rui. I know gay people, therefore, I feel a need to defend for what they wish to have that would harm no other people.

And the bold parts, EXACTLY!

Lac · Post by **Lac** » February 22nd, 2006, 8:35 am

We, humans, like to define things. We like to name everything on this Earth. Even one human to another we must have name for each other. We can't go around saying "hey you!" We think it's confusing and blah blah blah... It's the same for marriage. We made the word; we defined it ourselves. If we could do something like this, we could change it any way we want. Therefore, to what I see marriage can define in any way we want as long as we feel pleased within ourselves. There is no right and wrong definition for marriage. The wrong definition only happens when someone accuses someone else to be out of the norms.

Things always must have a name. If it has no name what would we call it ? Definintion of a name might be objectively or subjectively meaning that could be right to this man but wrong to another. You may define anything you like if you want to be out of the common conventionality. Of course I can define "marriage" to my personal understanding that is contrary to others' thought. Definition gives you nothing except the fact that it proves you to be right or wrong in the logic manner.

I am suspicious of a real love in the marrage of the same sex. Do they have anything offered together? Do they come with each other through a real love ? Of course they themselves - gay, lesbians- might have lots of reasons to explain their actions as well as the meaning of "real love". [/quote]
How can you doubt something is not real when you know nothing about it? And how can you doubt their real love when you know nothing about what real love is? If you did know what real love was, you wouldn't say it this way.

i doubt so i am willing to question . It's the logic. I am unware of something, or more exactly, suspicious of something so i need more information about that. There's also one thing to be noted is that before putting a question, one must have a preconception related to the matter involved. You do know what the real love is so you ask how it could be understood in any other way.

Lac wrote:No bad consequences have been found scientifically from marriage of the same sex. It's just regarded as something unusual in a morden society.

No, the uptight people think it's unnatural.

Evidence, please ?

Sex story is a quite private thing and which way to choose in marriage is also private. [/quote]
Well, if this is the case then why are we butting in something that is private?

Oh, you know, nothing private is without being argued and discussed ?

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 22nd, 2006, 11:34 am

Lac wrote: Things always must have a name. If it has no name what would we call it ? Definintion of a name might be objectively or subjectively meaning that could be right to this man but wrong to another. You may define anything you like if you want to be out of the common conventionality. Of course I can define "marriage" to my personal understanding that is contrary to others' thought. Definition gives you nothing except the fact that it proves you to be right or wrong in the logic manner.

Why must things have a name? If I don't feel like to name things I like, I won't, right?

Lac wrote:i doubt so i am willing to question . It's the logic. I am unware of something, or more exactly, suspicious of something so i need more information about that. There's also one thing to be noted is that before putting a question, one must have a preconception related to the matter involved. You do know what the real love is so you ask how it could be understood in any other way.

There is no other way for real love. If it's real love, it's real love. The moment you question about real love, that's the moment you show you know nothing about it. Real love doesn't exist in just between a man and a woman. It's love. It could happen to everyone and to anything. It's because it doesn't happen between a man and a woman, it doesn't count as real love?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

Lac wrote:Evidence, please ?

The Church has been trying to condemn it. They even go further saying it's against what God created on this Earth blah blah blah. Need more information?

Lac wrote:Oh, you know, nothing private is without being argued and discussed ?

If it's PRIVATE, it should be argued and discussed by peole who are in the case. Not you, me, or anyone else who is not involved. That's what privacy means.

TearHere · Post by **TearHere** » February 23rd, 2006, 9:21 am

LennyeTran wrote: ..I mean, is God really that busy that he, himself, can't save every single soul directly? I thought he was omnipotent.........

may i ask what your religion is?..if you don't mind..see,. you believe in whatever you believe in, i believe in mine, i've realized this just recently.. people of different religions do not really get to agree with each other.. i mean, that's why i've been preventing from talking about what i believe in because it will just lead me to persuading you to believe me, and i don't want to do that because i'm pretty sure that you are also convinced with what you believe in.. if we try to discuss, it'd be endless..i bet.. plus, i find it hard to put into words the thoughts that i really mean..

bottomline.. it's respect.. i think i know how you feel, i would also sometimes wonder why, say, reincarnation, a Hindu belief, is believed to be true by some people and all that..(not really related

to this topic,..just mentioning..)...

nevertheless, i still stick to my opinion..

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » February 23rd, 2006, 2:45 pm

TearHere wrote: reincarnation, a Hindu belief, is believed to be true by some people and all that..(not really related to this topic,..just mentioning..)...

nevertheless, i still stick to my opinion..

From what I see, read, and learn about history of religions, the Church forbids the idea of reincarnation because it's a dangerous idea. If one believed in that idea, that person would no longer believe in the Church; the Church would no longer have the power over people.

Reincarnation means humans could come back from one life after another to pay for his karma and to perfect himself. Karma and dogma are two things would tight a human into reincarnation. Therefore, if one didn't do anything good in his previous life, he could come back again as someone or something to repay the debt he owed. After that, he would get to move on being something else.

If this is the case, people wouldn't need salvation from the Church. People would be in direct with God and their own faith. They don't have to go through the Church, talk to the priests, etc. to ask for forgiveness. And the whole idea of Jesus as savior, the Judgment Day, etc. would fall. See, it is a really dangerous idea for the Church.

For the future of the Church and Christianity reincarnation and other things have to be forbbiden. If they can't get a benefit from something, it wouldn't be allowed. Same thing for homosexuals. Who knows what Jesus or God would think, right? Christians said Jesus died for ALL sins, which means including heterosexuals AND homosexuals. However, there are maybe many things that I don't know why the Church go against the idea of God is all loving and caring for humankind to forbid their marriages. And I'm gonna find out....

Norshan · Post by **Norshan** » March 1st, 2006, 12:35 pm

ofcourse it should not be allowed at all and even to think about it !! first of all coz it is not allowed in any religion and god has a wisdom to allow or not allow things even if we don"t know why it is allowed or not!! and when we think about it..it is something strange !! coz everything in our life is male and female..animals,plants,humans..there is a balance in our life so why we wanna destroy it !!

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » March 1st, 2006, 4:17 pm

Norshan wrote:ofcourse it should not be allowed at all and even to think about it !! first of all coz it is not allowed in any religion and god has a wisdom to allow or not allow things even if we don"t know why it is allowed or not!! and when we think about it..it is something strange !! coz everything in our life is male and female..animals,plants,humans..there is a balance in our life so why we wanna destroy it !!

So, you think that there's no sexual orientation of one species to another species of the same sex happening animals? :?

TearHere · Post by **TearHere** » March 2nd, 2006, 7:42 am

Norshan wrote:ofcourse it should not be allowed at all and even to think about it !! first of all coz it is not allowed in any religion and god has a wisdom to allow or not allow things even if we don"t know why it is allowed or not!! and when we think about it..it is something strange !! coz everything in our life is male and female..animals,plants,humans..there is a balance in our life so why we wanna destroy it !!

hi there... you said that it is not allowed in any religion.. i'm just wondering if you had any basis?.. see.. i have read an article about homosexuality.. and it says.. Not all world religions have a problem with homosexuality; many sects of Buddhism, for example, celebrate gay relationships freely and would like to have the authority to make them legal marriages.. ( http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm )..

..i've been contemplating on this homosexuality issue recently having read the pro's side..

LennyeTran wrote: Christians said Jesus died for ALL sins, which means including heterosexuals AND homosexuals. However, there are maybe many things that I don't know why the Church go against the idea of God is all loving and caring for humankind to forbid their marriages. And I'm gonna find out....

right..i'm a christian. and like you, i'm finding out things a step at a time. what's nice about talking about this homosexuality issue is that, we get to open our minds to different views of different peoples. my religion and ethics teacher and I are gonna meet next monday, and this issue is very timely because we are talking about this issues... i'll see what i would be learning.. anyhow, i appreciate your views, it has really helped me in weighing things... and by the way, i also have gay friends, and i respect them too..

until next time.

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » March 2nd, 2006, 8:02 am

TearHere wrote:
hi there... you said that it is not allowed in any religion.. i'm just wondering if you had any basis?.. see.. i have read an article about homosexuality.. and it says.. Not all world religions have a problem with homosexuality; many sects of Buddhism, for example, celebrate gay relationships freely and would like to have the authority to make them legal marriages.. ( http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm )..

..i've been contemplating on this homosexuality issue recently having read the pro's side..

Have you ever come across to read this article yet, tearhere? I think it's pretty interesting to open an accurate view for the Buddhists about this issue and how a Buddhist should react upon this problem, you know.

http://www.buddhanet.net/homosexu.htm

TearHere · Post by **TearHere** » March 2nd, 2006, 8:35 am

LennyeTran wrote:
TearHere wrote: Have you ever come across to read this article yet, tearhere? I think it's pretty interesting to open an accurate view for the Buddhists about this issue and how a Buddhist should react upon this problem, you know.

http://www.buddhanet.net/homosexu.htm

thanks. it really helped. about the accuracy, i acknowledge my mistake of not finding really precise articles. next will be better, more accurate.

have a nice day.

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » March 2nd, 2006, 8:42 am

TearHere wrote: thanks. it really helped. about the accuracy, i acknowledge my mistake of not finding really precise articles. next will be better, more accurate.

have a nice day.

What I meant by accurate was that even within Buddhists, we still have our differences about this view. Most people in my family think this is a sin although we are Buddhists. And a lot of Buddhists in Vietnam I know think the same way. I think it's a part of the culture we're raised in that leads them to this point. To me, they've gone against what a real Buddhist should think and react. Therefore, it's nice to me to have this article from Buddhist site for Buddhists. It's more convincing.

Norshan · Post by **Norshan** » March 3rd, 2006, 9:03 am

So, you think that there's no sexual orientation of one species to another species of the same sex happening animals? :?[/quote]
ofcourse there is not between the same sex !!

may i know how old are you lennytran?

Norshan · Post by **Norshan** » March 3rd, 2006, 9:38 am

Hi TearHere..do you think an article is a basis ?! from where this article? my religion is islam..and it is not allowed in islam..ofcourse i've basis from quraan..and m sure that it is not allowed in christian!! try to search in the oppesite side for this issue..and then i wanna know your opinion plz..

MissLT · Post by **MissLT** » March 3rd, 2006, 10:11 am

Norshan wrote: ofcourse there is not between the same sex !!
may i know how old are you lennytran?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... nimal.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_an ... l_behavior

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

And what does my age have anything to do with this topic, I may ask?

Norshan · Post by **Norshan** » March 3rd, 2006, 12:17 pm

Hi LennyeTran..nothing i just wanted to know if you r studying in school or in uni. or may be working..thats it !!
never mind if you don't wanna tell me your age..no problem..
what do you think about your question to me?

EnglishClub ESL Forums

"Marriages" between people of the same sex?

"Marriages" between people of the same sex?

married the same sex

Re: married the same sex

Re: "Marriages" between people of the same sex?

Marriage of the same sex

Re: "Marriages" between people of the same sex?

Re: Marriage of the same sex

Re: Marriage of the same sex

Re: Marriage of the same sex

Re: "Marriages" between people of the same sex?

Re: "Marriages" between people of the same sex?