Homework Help

Should homosexuals be able to marry?Should homosexuals be able to marry?

user profile pic

granny54 | Student, College Freshman | (Level 1) Valedictorian

Posted February 11, 2012 at 3:34 PM via web

dislike 5 like
Should homosexuals be able to marry?

Should homosexuals be able to marry?

44 Answers | Add Yours

user profile pic

Ashley Kannan | Middle School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted February 11, 2012 at 9:09 PM (Answer #2)

dislike 0 like

I am not sure you will be able to gain anything in way of consensus with this particular question.  It is a challenge, to say the least, to bring the issue up, and to see certainty is near impossible.  I think that same- sex marriage should be allowed.  I am convinced by the idea that marriage is not something that is defined by gender.  The argument that same- sex marriage ruins the institution is something of which I am not entirely convinced.  I think that the advent of no- fault divorce is more destructive to marriage than homosexuals being able to marry.  I think that this is something that sticks in my mind.  I think that the greater enfranchisement of gay and lesbian individuals is something that would have to include same- sex marriage.  Certainly, this is an element that was present in the recent California court decision that ruled the law prohibiting same- sex marriage is unconstitutional.  On a more elemental level, I think that this question comes down to the idea of whether or not one sees homosexuality as a design of a human being, something chemical in the brain or something of choice.  If one buys into the former, I think that it becomes a logical extension to make the argument that marriage should be denied.

user profile pic

jameepeyton | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) eNoter

Posted February 12, 2012 at 3:17 AM (Answer #3)

dislike 0 like

I must agree to the majority of this answer; that homosexuals should be allowed to marry.  Although I do disagree with the idea that marriage should be denied if it was discovered that homosexuality was by choice. Of course, while the pure concept of choice of sexuality can be argued extensively, I do not believe this should factor in any legal determination of marriage. 

As a society we are constantly dissecting people and looking for the reasoning behind their lifestyles and behaviors.  While this can warrant some reasoning for good cause, we can also take it to an unnecessary level.  To discover why a rapist attacks, can be good cause for concern and research.  Discovering whether or not this is due to chemicals in the brain, or by choice can determine if we have the ability to prevent rape from occurring.  

The dissecting of the homosexual lifestyle I find to be without good cause.  Marriage by law simply means couples are recognized and have the ability to obtain certain benefits given to other married couples.  This can not be confused with religious marriage.  In our country, we have a variety of religions and not all of them are linked to Christianity.  However, this is the basis for the arguement against same sex marriage.   

On the scientific side, there is no just cause for attempting to interpret same sex marriage.  There is no victim in a same sex relationship.  Whether it be by choice or by science, it remains harmless.  For decades, even centuries same sex tendencies have been hidden by fear and choice; yet there has never been an investigation as to why a homosexual would choose to hide their sexuality.

For these reasons I agree that homosexuals should be allowed the right to marry in our country.  This would allow the same rights and benefit to these couples as to heterosexual couples.

user profile pic

pohnpei397 | College Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted February 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM (Answer #4)

dislike 0 like

Personally, I believe that they should be allowed to marry.  However, I have a hard time with the idea that this is an equal protection issue.  In other words, I think that people probably have the right to make laws prohibiting gay marriage even though I would not vote for such a law.  My reason for this is that there is no way to objectively draw the line when it comes to marriage.  If two men have the right to marry, why doesn't a man have the right to have two wives?  And I say this as someone who believes in gay marriage.  I just don't see how to objectively say "we can't draw the line between hetero and gay marriage, but we can draw it between gay marriage and polygamy."

user profile pic

enotechris | College Teacher | (Level 2) Senior Educator

Posted February 12, 2012 at 11:40 AM (Answer #5)

dislike 0 like

This is not a question of "allowing the Right" of a certain group to marry; they have the Right, period.  Any law forbidding the exercise of a Right best have compelling reasons why it restricts the freedom of individuals.  In this case, there is no reason, except other's homophobia.  Regardless if there are laws forbidding the practice, homosexual liaisons will continue, as they always have, despite what the "moral majority" may wish.

user profile pic

rrteacher | College Teacher | (Level 1) Educator Emeritus

Posted February 12, 2012 at 1:00 PM (Answer #6)

dislike 0 like

With respect to the "where do we draw the line" argument, we draw the line at a marriage involving equal, mutually consenting partners who derive equal benefits from the union. This is patently not the case with polygamy.

I see no compelling reason why same-sex marriages should not be legally recognized.

user profile pic

belarafon | High School Teacher | (Level 2) Educator Emeritus

Posted February 12, 2012 at 1:47 PM (Answer #7)

dislike 0 like

#5, I don't think we can casually attribute all opposition to homosexuality to homophobia. Many religions have the same attitudes towards homosexuality that they have to any non-hetero-type relationship. It's not a matter of fear or loathing, but of an ingrained belief that the act -- and therefore the person -- is sinful. Many religious people do not care about the lifestyles of others, but they see the government acquisition of "marriage" -- which has historically been a religious institution -- as encroaching on their religious freedoms.

The problem I have with religious objections is that they always equate "legal marriage" with "religious marriage." The document stating that two people are legally married has nothing to do with religion, and as long as the First Amendment holds, could not be used to force a religion to recognize it as "religiously binding." If people stopped equating the two, there would be little problem; a couple could marry by law, and not expect all religions to recognize it, and others could marry by religion only, disregarding the legal document or accepting it as they chose.

user profile pic

accessteacher | High School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted February 12, 2012 at 4:41 PM (Answer #8)

dislike 0 like

This depends a lot on your thoughts about a number of different issues including matters such as equality. There are some that argue marriage, as primarily a religious institution, should only be between a man and a woman. This is why many places now have a civil partnership for homosexual couples rather than a marriage.

user profile pic

justaguide | College Teacher | (Level 2) Distinguished Educator

Posted February 12, 2012 at 6:17 PM (Answer #9)

dislike 0 like

The absence of a legal right to marry among homosexuals does not benefit anyone. A religious group putting forth the argument that legalizing homosexual marriage would make more people adopt a homosexual lifestyle would be totally incorrect. I am not concerned with the reasons why all people do not adopt a heterosexual lifestyle and whether it is natural or not because it does not have to do anything with the legalization of homosexual marriage.

Homosexual marriage should be made a legally binding institution to allow everyone to have access to the accompanying benefits of marriage.

user profile pic

brettd | High School Teacher | (Level 2) Educator Emeritus

Posted February 13, 2012 at 3:18 AM (Answer #10)

dislike 0 like
I agree with marriage equality for homosexuals in the United States. I think it is both a 1st and a 14th Amendment issue. Gays are ctiizens, and we should never, either through legislation or policy, legalize discrimination against other citizens because of their identity. I thiink, in 50 years, we'll look back at this debate like we look back at segregation and the Civil Rights Movement now. And, I'd like to add, "Go Washington State!" My home state just became the 7th in the nation to legalize same sex marriage.
user profile pic

e-martin | High School Teacher | (Level 1) Educator Emeritus

Posted February 13, 2012 at 7:47 AM (Answer #11)

dislike 0 like

Marriage for everyone seems to be in keeping with the American ideal of self-determination.

We pride ourselves on sharing/defending the rights of the individual in the US (and the West more generally). To be consistent in our values, there seems no choice but to allow everyone equal access to the legal institution of marriage, regardless of whether we call it "marriage" or civil union.

This can be seen as a question of justice, not a question of religious views. And, as we share one system of justice and do not share a single religion by national mandate or consensus, it makes sense to see this issue as a legal one.

user profile pic

qejtzuk | High School Teacher | (Level 2) Adjunct Educator

Posted February 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM (Answer #14)

dislike 0 like

I'm always amazed at how passionate people are about this issue--but that's probably because it doesn't affect me personally. It's my privilege to ignore it. Everything I say about it starts with that understanding.

The issue does powerfully demonstrate the limits of a pluralistic society: if we accept a diversity of worldviews, then on what basis do we decide moral questions? It's easy to find common ground to outlaw murder, sexual assault, burglary, etc. But once we start dealing with slightly subtler questions, the variety of faith traditions makes consensus incredibly difficult.

Above all, I wish we could have a culture of mutual trust and respect--and then move on to issues that affect us all directly. To me (a heterosexual--again, I understand my perspective is privileged) it's incredible that we spend so much energy (and generate so much ill will) on topics like this when we could be addressing poverty, war, hunger, or our own broken political system.

user profile pic

wanderista | Student, Grade 11 | (Level 2) Valedictorian

Posted February 17, 2012 at 6:05 PM (Answer #22)

dislike 0 like

I believe that homosexuals should have the right to legally bond, but not marry. The Christians do not believe in homosexual relationships, and people have to respect their beliefs.

However, I do not like the idea of homosexuals having children, or having the ability to adopt children, although I do not feel as if I have the right to say that they can or can't have kids.

user profile pic

rice33 | (Level 1) eNoter

Posted February 19, 2012 at 10:10 AM (Answer #24)

dislike 0 like

The best opinion of majority of qualified psychiatrists, psychologists, and sociologists is that homosexuality is a natural state present in a fairly constant  minority throughout the world.   It is not a "lifesyle", nor can it be "learned".  

This said, our gay and lesbian relatives and friends should be entitled to the same rights as other citizens, including marriage.   

Of course, if you claim it is a "sin", and quote Leviticus, then please be consistent and advocate stoning them to death.   If you don't want to bless their commitent to one another in your church -- "fine"--let them find an Open and Affirming one which will.

By the way, I am straight (but not narrow).

user profile pic

katieannoakley | Student, Grade 9 | (Level 1) eNoter

Posted February 20, 2012 at 6:25 AM (Answer #26)

dislike 0 like

Honestly it goes off of what you believe in (religion wise) but I'm a Christian and I think that God made us boy and girl for a reason.  Its like a puzzle that's just the way its supposed to be.  So no I don't think it's right.  I'm sorry if I offended anyone but this is my opinion.

user profile pic

prishi12 | High School Teacher | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted February 21, 2012 at 9:03 PM (Answer #29)

dislike 0 like

This is a debatable question and opinion may vary from one person to another. The relationship of homosexuals was never as highlighted as it is in this age and the need to make a socially acceptable setup for it, just like that of a man-woman wedlock has evolved lately.

Marriage as an institution came into picture as a result of ever-growing need of an individual (physical and mental) on the individual of opposite sex. As a socially accepted institution, it is a formal umbrella to the relationship of man and woman. Having said this, it is also a man-made setup and has evolved out of human needs.

At a human level, homo-sexuals have the right to freedom of any kind just like any straight individual and should be allowed the right to dream and marry. 

user profile pic

chavda211 | Student | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 2, 2012 at 5:10 AM (Answer #31)

dislike 0 like

Personally, I believe that homosexuals should be able to marry because at the end of the day it is their life and they should have complete control over it. Also if being with someone who is the same gender as them, makes them happy then surely it doesn't matter?

user profile pic

wanderista | Student, Grade 11 | (Level 2) Valedictorian

Posted March 3, 2012 at 6:56 PM (Answer #32)

dislike 0 like

Chavda211 (post 31), you raise a substantial point. It is their life, and they should be able to do what they want to. However, do you think it's a little unfair for the children that they may have as they do not have both gender influences (instead of a mother and father, they've only got a father and father or mother and mother)? I still stand on what I said earlier that homosexuals should have the rights to legally bond by law, but not have the opportunity to adopt or raise children.

user profile pic

siret | Student, Grade 9 | (Level 1) Honors

Posted March 7, 2012 at 10:11 PM (Answer #33)

dislike 0 like

No they should not, the reason is simple:same sex marriages are against the system of nature and if we go against nature our world is likely to end.

user profile pic

vilarix | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 3) eNoter

Posted March 9, 2012 at 3:31 PM (Answer #34)

dislike 0 like

No they should not, the reason is simple:same sex marriages are against the system of nature and if we go against nature our world is likely to end.

Marriages have nothing to do with nature. Two homosexuals who are not married will not have children (but if they were married as well), and this is against nature.

What you are saying is that homosexuality is against nature, not homosexual marriages.

 

To answer the original question, I think gay marriage should me allowed, and in church too.

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM (Answer #35)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

user profile pic

vilarix | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 3) eNoter

Posted March 10, 2012 at 1:03 PM (Answer #36)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

They don't have to, but they can if they want. There are no laws in human affinity, only in marriage, so no transgressions are possible by being homosexual. Allowing gay marriage won't increase the number of gay people (but it will surely increase their visibility which could be interpreted as the same thing).

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 11, 2012 at 5:06 AM (Answer #37)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

They don't have to, but they can if they want. There are no laws in human affinity, only in marriage, so no transgressions are possible by being homosexual. Allowing gay marriage won't increase the number of gay people (but it will surely increase their visibility which could be interpreted as the same thing).

Well you don't understand..., its not right man..man going on to man...Women are there for a reason you know... seek pleasure with them..

user profile pic

vilarix | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 3) eNoter

Posted March 12, 2012 at 6:03 AM (Answer #38)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

They don't have to, but they can if they want. There are no laws in human affinity, only in marriage, so no transgressions are possible by being homosexual. Allowing gay marriage won't increase the number of gay people (but it will surely increase their visibility which could be interpreted as the same thing).

Well you don't understand..., its not right man..man going on to man...Women are there for a reason you know... seek pleasure with them..

 

What do you mean it's not right?

Some men can find more pleasure with other men than with women, so why would they go on to women?

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 13, 2012 at 3:15 AM (Answer #39)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

They don't have to, but they can if they want. There are no laws in human affinity, only in marriage, so no transgressions are possible by being homosexual. Allowing gay marriage won't increase the number of gay people (but it will surely increase their visibility which could be interpreted as the same thing).

Well you don't understand..., its not right man..man going on to man...Women are there for a reason you know... seek pleasure with them..

 

What do you mean it's not right?

Some men can find more pleasure with other men than with women, so why would they go on to women?

Yh its not right..you dont get it.. what do you mean more pleasure... those men who lust/find pleasure with men are transgressors.. so you are saying that men mounting men is clean and pure??? ew... disgusting really...men going onto women vice versa is the best..and the right way for a clean and pure relationship..

user profile pic

vilarix | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 3) eNoter

Posted March 14, 2012 at 5:04 AM (Answer #40)

dislike 0 like

no!...Women are there for a reason.. go on to them... why do u have to become transgressors....???... Man+Women= Pure Marriage

They don't have to, but they can if they want. There are no laws in human affinity, only in marriage, so no transgressions are possible by being homosexual. Allowing gay marriage won't increase the number of gay people (but it will surely increase their visibility which could be interpreted as the same thing).

Well you don't understand..., its not right man..man going on to man...Women are there for a reason you know... seek pleasure with them..

 

What do you mean it's not right?

Some men can find more pleasure with other men than with women, so why would they go on to women?

Yh its not right..you dont get it.. what do you mean more pleasure... those men who lust/find pleasure with men are transgressors.. so you are saying that men mounting men is clean and pure??? ew... disgusting really...men going onto women vice versa is the best..and the right way for a clean and pure relationship..

 

Why would they want a clean and pure relationship if it does not satisfy them? Why should everyone have a clean and pure relationship?

 

Nothing can force them to it.

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 16, 2012 at 3:24 AM (Answer #41)

dislike 0 like
common sense..well if semen enters another mans back side...liklihood is that he will get Aids, other diseases etc, Women are there for a reason.. so that men can seek pleasure with them vice versa..,But those who do such are transgressors...
user profile pic

philyoung21 | Student, Grade 9 | eNotes Newbie

Posted March 21, 2012 at 1:20 AM (Answer #42)

dislike 0 like
In reply to #1:
user profile pic

balpreet | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Honors

Posted March 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM (Answer #43)

dislike 0 like

Your ans has two diff. ans from two diff aspects,,,,,science & human rights......

If we seee from the science or evolution point of view they must not be allowed to marry as this is against nature,,they are not genetically programmed for it,,any continuation of such thing will be futile.

However from human rights view ans is -yes.

user profile pic

foxandfiddle | Student, Grade 9 | (Level 2) eNoter

Posted March 23, 2012 at 5:47 AM (Answer #44)

dislike 0 like

yes

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | (Level 3) Valedictorian

Posted March 24, 2012 at 10:28 PM (Answer #45)

dislike 0 like
common sense..well if semen enters another mans back side...liklihood is that he will get Aids, other diseases etc, Women are there for a reason.. so that men can seek pleasure with them vice versa..,But those who do such are transgressors...

Are you God? Are you The President of the World? If other people want to live and love each other, who are you to stand between them and say 'No! I say it is not right!?!" Who gave you the authority to make other peoples' moral judgements for them? If you do not want to choose a gay lifestyle, fine, don't. Nobody is forcing you. But your opinion that homosexuals are 'transgressors' is nonsense. What have they transgressed? And what moral or ethical authority do you have to condemn other people who have not caused any harm?

 

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 25, 2012 at 1:05 AM (Answer #46)

dislike 0 like
common sense..well if semen enters another mans back side...liklihood is that he will get Aids, other diseases etc, Women are there for a reason.. so that men can seek pleasure with them vice versa..,But those who do such are transgressors...

Are you God? Are you The President of the World? If other people want to live and love each other, who are you to stand between them and say 'No! I say it is not right!?!" Who gave you the authority to make other peoples' moral judgements for them? If you do not want to choose a gay lifestyle, fine, don't. Nobody is forcing you. But your opinion that homosexuals are 'transgressors' is nonsense. What have they transgressed? And what moral or ethical authority do you have to condemn other people who have not caused any harm?

 

Have you lost the plot??..Are you even human??,you just don't read properly... what i'm saying...God created females for a reason....Men should show go on to them vice versa etc..one should make the right choice..WHAT YOU WAFFLING ON...NO ONE GAVE ME THE AUTHORITY!!!.., im saying men+women=clean relationship...You should don't read properly so called 'expert'

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | (Level 3) Valedictorian

Posted March 25, 2012 at 9:27 AM (Answer #47)

dislike 0 like
common sense..well if semen enters another mans back side...liklihood is that he will get Aids, other diseases etc, Women are there for a reason.. so that men can seek pleasure with them vice versa..,But those who do such are transgressors...

Are you God? Are you The President of the World? If other people want to live and love each other, who are you to stand between them and say 'No! I say it is not right!?!" Who gave you the authority to make other peoples' moral judgements for them? If you do not want to choose a gay lifestyle, fine, don't. Nobody is forcing you. But your opinion that homosexuals are 'transgressors' is nonsense. What have they transgressed? And what moral or ethical authority do you have to condemn other people who have not caused any harm?

 

Have you lost the plot??..Are you even human??,you just don't read properly... what i'm saying...God created females for a reason....Men should show go on to them vice versa etc..one should make the right choice..WHAT YOU WAFFLING ON...NO ONE GAVE ME THE AUTHORITY!!!.., im saying men+women=clean relationship...You should don't read properly so called 'expert'

Don't worry, Alilion, I have not lost the plot.

But it is only your opinion that God created women to serve men's sexual needs, and that men should 'go on to them'. You have absolutely no proof of your claim and many of us think you are wrong. Not everyone wants your religious definition of sexual roles. Which is why I asked you why you think you have the authority to speak for the choices of others. Your religious beliefs are YOUR religious beliefs. They are not mine and I do not want them. Your posts implied that you believe your religious beliefs should apply to the whole of society, which is why I asked you where you get your authority for such a position. And, unless you are God, you still haven't given me a satisfactory answer.

 

user profile pic

alilion | Student, Undergraduate | (Level 1) Salutatorian

Posted March 25, 2012 at 4:54 PM (Answer #48)

dislike 0 like

i dont think your even human....u dont read well so called 'expert'...im not saying people should listen to me...IM JUST SAYING....to me thats the right way...others have their own opinion and thats them.. your a very rude person too..., im not claiming to have authorty neither to have High Power....weirdo....seriously 'expert' read before you type.....people don't have to listen to me!!! this is why this is called a 'discussion', i have one opinion, so do others....why you being a little girl for...im just saying men to women vice versa is clean but people have their own opinions...im not asking people to listen to me...they can do what the hell they want....i dont care... im just trying to make one understand....if they dont want to listen thats them im not begging them to listen, they either listen or not...thats totally up to them... one day the person will find out......but until then do what hell you like... and mr 'expert' watch what you say...

user profile pic

wogboy1 | Student, Undergraduate | eNotes Newbie

Posted March 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM (Answer #49)

dislike 0 like

It all depends on the society we choose to live in. Ever since religion came about homosexualty has been deeply frowned upon and shunned as a sin. If we really do live in a christian, islamic or jewish society then yes, same sex marriage should not be allowed no questions asked that is if our society decides follow all aspects of the particular religion. In this period of time however it has become very norm to see couples of the same sex socialising with each other that if they were to be seen 50 years ago they would have been ostracised in an overt manner. Our contemporary world is more than accepting towards homosexuality and theres no reason as to why same sex marriage is seen as debatable topic, but like i mentioned at the beginning, it depends on the society we choose to live in. 

user profile pic

alexb2 | eNotes Employee

Posted March 28, 2012 at 8:34 AM (Answer #51)

dislike 0 like

Because all of the primary arguments against gay marriage are religious in nature, I think that the issue boils down to the separation of church and state. If specific churches do not want to perform marriages between people of the sex, that should be their decision. The flip side would also be true-- if two people of the same sex wish to get married by the state, and not by their church, the government should not stand in their way. 

People who do not like gay marriages are free to not attend them and to join churches that refuse to perform them.

user profile pic

elekzy | Student, Grade 11 | (Level 1) Valedictorian

Posted March 28, 2012 at 10:24 AM (Answer #52)

dislike 0 like

This depends a lot on your thoughts about a number of different issues including matters such as equality. There are some that argue marriage, as primarily a religious institution, should only be between a man and a woman. This is why many places now have a civil partnership for homosexual couples rather than a marriage.

I agree with you!!

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | (Level 3) Valedictorian

Posted March 29, 2012 at 3:45 AM (Answer #53)

dislike 0 like

i dont think your even human....u dont read well so called 'expert'...im not saying people should listen to me...IM JUST SAYING....to me thats the right way...others have their own opinion and thats them.. your a very rude person too..., im not claiming to have authorty neither to have High Power....weirdo....seriously 'expert' read before you type.....people don't have to listen to me!!! this is why this is called a 'discussion', i have one opinion, so do others....why you being a little girl for...im just saying men to women vice versa is clean but people have their own opinions...im not asking people to listen to me...they can do what the hell they want....i dont care... im just trying to make one understand....if they dont want to listen thats them im not begging them to listen, they either listen or not...thats totally up to them... one day the person will find out......but until then do what hell you like... and mr 'expert' watch what you say...

Fine, that's allright then. Until your most recent post you had posted a lot of very offensive comments about homosexuals but you had not mentioned whether you believed they had the right to choose or not. Now you have stated they are free to choose. Fine. As you said, this is a discussion, and in discussions it helps if you state your position clearly.

As for your views that homosexuals are 'disgusting', 'not right', 'transgressors' etc, please remember that if you feel it is ok to use such terms against a group in society that you don't like, then you cannot expect any less in return.

 

user profile pic

strawberryalchemist | Student, Grade 9 | eNotes Newbie

Posted April 3, 2012 at 3:06 AM (Answer #55)

dislike 0 like

Great question, i've been wanting to debate about this for a while, but never got the chance to. I am under the opinion that no matter what gender you are, and what gender you're into, love is love. It's not just a simple word you can define or explain, it's not as shallow as that. While I am under the category of confused about my own sexuality, I believe love shouldn't be limited to a girl and a guy. You can't help who you fall in love with, and I never did understand why a lot of people consider people of the same gender loving each other in that way taboo. We don't really judge people for being straight, I don't see why we should judge people for liking someone of the same gender as they are. So, yes, I believe they should marry. There's a saying that goes like this: "love knows no bounds."

user profile pic

amitsingh11582 | College Teacher | (Level 1) Honors

Posted April 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM (Answer #56)

dislike 0 like

Nature is our visible GOD. We all are children of our nature but willingly or unwillingly we are continuously destroying the beauty of nature to full fill our greed.

Nature has enough to fulfill our need but not greed. There are few restrictions which one has to follow to be a part of nature. Sex is determind by the Nature and homosexuallity is something prohibited by nature. 

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | (Level 3) Valedictorian

Posted April 6, 2012 at 6:07 AM (Answer #58)

dislike 0 like

Nature is our visible GOD. We all are children of our nature but willingly or unwillingly we are continuously destroying the beauty of nature to full fill our greed.

Nature has enough to fulfill our need but not greed. There are few restrictions which one has to follow to be a part of nature. Sex is determind by the Nature and homosexuallity is something prohibited by nature. 

Sex is determind by the Nature and homosexuallity is something prohibited by nature. - amitsingh

Dear Mr. Singh,

please forgive me for contradicting you, but I'm afraid you're simply wrong. Homosexual behaviour has been observed and documented in hundreds and hundreds of differents species from bed-bugs to elephants...

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

user profile pic

najm1947 | Elementary School Teacher | (Level 1) Valedictorian

Posted April 8, 2012 at 9:09 PM (Answer #59)

dislike 0 like

Very interesting discussion giving the point of view of the 'true believers' and those who do not fall in that category. For the true believers marriage is for the mutual satissfaction, companionship and keep the human race going - all three factors combined. Church being the custodian of religion should be involved in marriages of the opposite sex only. In the same sex marriages, continuity of the human race is ruled out.

Many posters are of the opinion that it is a matter of 'human-rights' and apart from the last factor, continuity of the human race, the rest is  achieved according to the homosexuals. So they can do whatever they like because after all who cares for the afterlife and many don't even believe in it. They may have a marriage or social relationship whatever they like to call it without involving church, synagogue, mosque or temple. Government may allow it if it does not care for the religion, though I think it will not be possible in a Muslim or Jewish state due to extreme public reaction. I also agree with an earlier poster that they should not be allowed to adopt children on the grounds of 'human-rights' of the children who will be deprived of 'mother' and 'father' of the opposite sex.

However as  Muslim, I would say that God is there to take account of all our deeds and the non-believers have the right to disagree with what I say. In the end everyone will know who was right.

user profile pic

bbehaghel | Student, Grade 11 | (Level 1) Valedictorian

Posted April 9, 2012 at 2:13 AM (Answer #60)

dislike 0 like

I don't think so.

 

user profile pic

bbehaghel | Student, Grade 11 | (Level 1) Valedictorian

Posted April 9, 2012 at 2:15 AM (Answer #61)

dislike 0 like

They should not be able to marry, and even less be able to have children.

user profile pic

lexi7619 | Student, Grade 10 | (Level 1) eNoter

Posted April 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM (Answer #63)

dislike 0 like

I do think so. In my oppinion you can't help who you fall in love with. Most people would probably disagree with me, but that is their oppinion. My aunt is that way and at first i thought it was sorta gross but now i see. She really loves her and no one can change that.

Join to answer this question

Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.

Join eNotes