I Am Interested in Knowing that if You believe Marriage is Between a Man and a Woman?

Would You Support Civil Unions?


Why or Why not? I really would like to hear the pros and cons.





Our Constitution provides life, liberty and the persuit of happiness.


We also have it written there shall be separation of church and state.





****Please No Religious Answers.I Am Interested in Knowing that if You believe Marriage is Between a Man and a Woman?
I believe that marriage is between a Man and a Woman. It has its foundation in religion and it is harder to defend without bringing religion into the picture. However, marriage has been under attack by lots of people making it easier to get divorced and easier for a man to avoid his responsibilities to his family (that is wife and children).


The easy manner in which people get divorced has created a whole new poor class or at least lower middle class. That is the single mother raising and supporting children.


Our laws were written with certain expectations and based upon certain suppositions. Recently, an issue came up in VA courts where by a Lesbian lover was able to win custody of a child which she had no genetic relationship to. While the biological mother and her family were left out. AND, VA does not have same sex marriage!


I do believe that if two people of any gender for any reason want to throw their lots in together, they should not be prohibited from doing that. In fact, I do not believe that any state in the union forbids or even restricts this arrangement. There may be some lack of ability to name someone beneficiary to an insurance policy, but I doubt it. More likely, naming a person of the same sex who is not a blood relative to be included on a person's health care policy is about the only instance I could imagine which could not be handled with something like a durable power of attorney.


If it takes a law to enable this, then that is ok. If someone wants to call that a Civil Union, that is ok as well. Having a Gay marriage and just calling it a Civil Union doesn't really cut it. We do not need the divorce courts tied up by Gays and Lesbians trying to sort out their splitting up.I Am Interested in Knowing that if You believe Marriage is Between a Man and a Woman?
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.


I do not have a problem with civil unions. I believe a life-time partner should recieve benifets from their partner.
%26lt;Yes%26gt;It's against nature%26gt;No civil unions%26gt;Opens to many other issues%26gt;2 wives etc%26gt;
I'm not for it or against it. For me I cannot separate the religious aspect from this debate because that is the only reason I have an opinion. This is an issue between two consenting adults. Therefore this is a decision that is made between an individual and his or her God! That is unlike abortion were one of the primary players in the issues has no choice! Civil Unions or Marriage it doesn't matter because what Adam and Steve do has no affect on me and there is no decision that is forced on anyone effected.
Relationships (marriage) between men and women has a natural outcome in most cases (a baby). This is not physically possible for 2 men or 2 wormen unless they adopt. Otherwise it isn't natural and doesn't occur in nature
YES!





To allow otherwise would lead to a weakened society.
I support gay marriage completely. As far as civil unions go, it may have to be a necessary first step. The reason it's only a first step is that if we separate marriage and civil unions, we will once again have to learn the lesson that ';separate but equal'; doesn't work in this country. Which will lead eventually to full out marriage with no delineation between the two.





I find it interesting that those who oppose gay marriage don't like to talk about Massachusetts. They've had gay marriage there for years now. God hasn't struck them down in anger, there's been no decline in the number of straight marriages, there isn't a movement afoot to legalize marriage to multiple partners or animals, and life goes on as usual for the residents of that state. All the slippery slope arguments fail when MA is pointed out. That state will end up being a model for the eventual legalization of gay marriage, as it disproves every weak point the anti gay marriage folks have been touting all these years.
Yes it is.If we allow anything else to be, where would we stop? would be ok to marry your brother? your sister? your favorite cat or dog? somethings need to left sacred and traditional marriage if on the top of my list.
The thought of one of two men in a wedding dress is unappealing, but they should be allowed to be a couple if they want to, have each other on their insurance and leave possessions to each other upon death.
I believe the general purpose of marriage is to produce and raise kids according to mother nature's ways.
Ah, separation of state and church, now there's a dream...





I can't begin to imagine how one becomes as self-righteous as to deny the union of two people in marriage. There's so many mini me Gods in this world, isn't there?





Heterosexual Christians don't have a claim on love and commitment, and they don't have a greater claim to the love of God either. If you are a religious person then being married in Church is highly important and should be the prerogative of all religious people.





Those who would prefer a civil union should be at liberty to proceed as they wish. The benefits of marriage/unions of same-sex couples should reflect those received by heterosexual couples.





It's time the land of the free got out of the bedroom and we all stopped defining people and determining their right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness based on their sexual orientation.
Homosexuals should leave things as they are, when discussions of this nature get started they lose!~!
absolutely not, its an abomination
A match made in heck. I didn't say hell, which might lead you to think I was giving you a religious answer!


I'm for other people getting married, and doing what they can to be happy, but leave me out!





PS No Gays allowed! God said....oops...nevermind.....I think gay relationships are wrong, and my brother, for real, is a homosexual!
It takes two to tango and by this it takes two healthy people to raise a child as it does not come with a hand book. So if you start with a man and man or a woman and a woman who have many issues. Just look at the left hero Rossie Odog. She has so many how can she be there for her children to become healthy if she is not.


And many men and woman who enter into it need to be ready as well but it is for a man and a woman.
I think gay people have the right to be happy. If that means marriage, I don't have a problem.


Why should we be able to determine if someone is in love enough to get married? Who cares if it's a man/man or man/woman, or woman/woman.


EVERYONE is entitled to happiness.
More than half of the males and females who live together don't make enough of a committment to get married. Why is it so important for homosexuals to have some sort of official status attached to their living together? What's the point? I support marriage between one man and one woman. Whatever else people want to do is their business.
i believe in marriage or commitment between 2 people who love each other


regardless of who they are ........
marriage should be between one man and one woman....since my reasons are religious I wont go any further
Yes, it's the only kind. As for claims by homosexuals they ';are born that way'; and deserve special ';rights';...it just goes to prove a defective gene is present and they NEED treatment.





If it's a chosen lifestyle, then they lose that on too. It makes it a mental disorder..say like being a pedophile or multiple personalities, and they should also get treatment for this.





NO to ';civil'; unions !
1 man 1 woman. what other kind is there





THE BILL OF RIGHTS


Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution


--------------------------------------鈥?br>

The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;





Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:








Amendment I


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


......................................鈥?br>

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness





It does not say keep religion out of government. it does say government cannot establish a state endorsed religion try reading it


link below
For me yes, I will only marry a woman. But for a gay guy, that might not appeal to him. I have no idea how a gay marriage could threaten me or weaken society even though the thought of gay sex is gross.
I don't support ';civil unions'; because I believe marriage is the joining of two people who love each other, regardless of gender.





Love is love. Who am I to judge?





Marriage should be an option for ALL couples. Shame on anyone who implies a same sex couple isn't entitled to the same respect and rights as everyone else.





**Edited to add**


Wow @ all the anti-homosexual answers in this thread. I hope none of you ever have a gay or lesbian child. Will you devalue them and love them less because they don't fit into your ';perfect'; social structure?
Marraige should only be between a man and a woman. Only those who have a problem understanding the language could think any different. The purpose of marraige is simple. It tames the males instinct to mate with numerous females. It, for lack of a better term civilizes the male. Marraige is a contract. it cuts both ways. The woman understands that she becomes for the purpose of sexual relations the sole partner of the man she marries. The man understands that he is not free to have sex with other women, must care for the children of his marraige and has the right to have sex with his wife. Civil unions are a back door attempt to cheapen marraige. Either people are married or they are not. You can no more be a little bit married as you can be a little bit pregnant. Read the first ammendment more carefully. It does not call for a seperation of church and state(that was writen into the soviet constitution) The first ammendment call for the state not to establish a state religion, nor interfer with the free practice of any religion by the people. Only leftist idiots think that a letter writn by T Jefferson to a clergyman denouncing the idea of a state religion creates in our laws a seperation of church and state. Don't think so, than why is every session of congress opened with a prayer?
I believe marriage is a commitment between two people, male female or same sex, that are in love. I do support Civil Unions. Only downside of it, is the Christian Conservative complaining. There is no reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to get married except religious reasons. Some Christians use the argument that gays getting married stops the life cycle because they can't reproduce kids. Well, a lesbian couple can have children and gay men can adopt. So, therefore there is NO valid reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to get married.