So When Did YOU Come Around on Same-Sex Marriage?

[3Gsandme]

I don't think I was ever against it. I can't come up with a time when I was bothered by gay people or their relationships or their hope to marry the people they loved. I remember watching Pedro get married on The Real World in the mid-90's. It didn't bother me then and it doesn't bother me now. I'm more socially liberal as 40-something than I ever was as s younger person.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Marriage has been defined traditionally as the joining of a husband and wife, but has now been amended. I think it would have been a decent compromise for those against it based on it being called something other than marriage but with the same rights and privileges. A lot of those opposed to same gender marriage would agree to this. Some benefit for both sides. I have spoken of this to some of my gay friends (yes I have gay friends), and they agree it would have been acceptable.
Some of you close minded individuals will argue to no end against anything but total acceptance by everyone, but let's face it, people have different beliefs.

What's the need of having two different terms when the conditions are identical? Separate but equal, never is.
Same-sex marriage affects nobody except the couple and their families. Anyone who doesn't believe in same-sex marriage can simply not marry someone of the same sex. Voila!

 

[Handbag Lady]

I can't remember ever being against it. I was raised in a religion-free home so I wonder if that has anything to do with it?

 

[NHdisneylover]

I have a huge amount of respect for those of you who were able to examine your beliefs, grow and change for the better.

I've never been against same sex marriage and, for as long as I have been politically active at all, I have campaigned for rights for all. The first time I really recall getting involved politically was as a college Freshman campaigning hard against prop 2 in Colorado (we failed, but we tried). Back then ,I thought I had no dog in this fight, other than, you know, being human and wanting people to be treated right and a handful of not all that close friends who weren't straight.

Now I have so many great friends and a most wonderful daughter who saw sweeping reform that really affects them on Friday and I am so happy i have been a part of the long haul of this fight--from "way back in anceint times" (as my teens say) when we wore upside down pink triangles instead of rainbows LOL

 

[kmb584]

There was never a "coming around" for me. I've always held the belief that if should be legal, recognized, and accepted. Love is love.

 

[rickybobby]

Why do you believe that? I'm interested to hear your reasoning. And if you have any proof.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-orders-colorado-bakery-cater-sex-weddings/story?id=21136505
This.

 

[rickybobby]

What's the need of having two different terms when the conditions are identical? Separate but equal, never is.
Same-*** marriage affects nobody except the couple and their families. Anyone who doesn't believe in same-*** marriage can simply not marry someone of the same ***. Voila!

You see it from the perspective of someone who thinks it is completely acceptable. Put yourself in the shoes of those who do not believe in it for religious religions (of which I am not). The best way to make something acceptable is to convince everyone to go along. It is called, I say again, compromise. Separate but equal can work, if the conditions are the same. You cannot convince me otherwise.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I think some things may be on the horizon such as taking away tax exempt status for churches that refuse to offer same gender ceremonies. Private companies already are being fined for refusing to participate in ceremonies for them.

Why do you believe that? I'm interested to hear your reasoning. And if you have any proof.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-orders-colorado-bakery-cater-***-weddings/story?id=21136505
This.

You were asked to provide examples of private companies being forced to partipate in wedding ceremonies (per your words). The baker was not made to participate in ANY ceremony. The baker did not attend and i doubt he was invited.

He was forced to not be discriminatory in who he sold his products to--no different than forcing store owners to sell to people of all races and not have "white only" policies or signs.

Yes, if you offer a product or service to the general public you may not discriminate and refuse to offer it to an entire class of people A Christian bookstore cannot refuse to sell their books to Muslims (even if those buyers will use readings from those books at a Muslim wedding ceremony), a kosher deli cannot refuse to sell sandwiches to Christians (even if they want those sandwiches for snacks at a Christian wedding), racist hotel owners cannot refuse rent rooms to people of mixed races (even of they are staying in the area for a bi-racial wedding) and homophobic bakeries cannot refuse to sell their cakes to queer people (even if the cake is going to be used at a gay wedding).

And NONE of the above means that churches must marry any couple who does not meet the religious guidelines for what constitutes holy matrimony in that specific church.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

I was raised Catholic, going to church 6 days a week, and in Catholic school. Even then as a youngster I felt that affording gay people the right to live like anyone else should be done.

I am a logical person with critical thinking skills even at a young age. It is just who I am.

 

[Topper]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-orders-colorado-bakery-cater-***-weddings/story?id=21136505
This.

In his written decision, Spence ordered that Phillips "cease and desist from discriminating" against gay couples, or face financial penalties, and cited Colorado state law that prohibits businesses from refusing service based on race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

The baker broke the law.

This.

 

[BagOLaughs]

I've always believed that love is love. As long as its a) a human b) not a family member and c) of consenting age then you should be able to marry who ever you want. Girl, Boy, ethnic culture etc.

Even though I cannot understand why people are against it, I can appreciate why they have their views. However a same sex marriage shouldn't affect anyone else in a negative way so why is it illegal.

You know what is a more serious issue with marriage? Its not what sex the bride & groom are, its the amount of divorce. That's what is killing the values of marriage in my opinion.

 

[NHdisneylover]

You see it from the perspective of someone who thinks it is completely acceptable. Put yourself in the shoes of those who do not believe in it for religious religions (of which I am not). The best way to make something acceptable is to convince everyone to go along. It is called, I say again, compromise. Separate but equal can work, if the conditions are the same. You cannot convince me otherwise.

Well, okay then, you are dead set in your opinion. I am equally set in mine that "separate but equal " is a myth and it does not really work that way. We have seen that in our history and do not need to repeat it now (plus, the very valid reasoning upthread about the logistical and cost issues involved). If it truly provides 100% the same/equal status, then there is no need to have two different names and classes, which lends itself to inequalities coming up down the road even if by some miracle they are not there from the get go.
We see it here in Germany, which is sitll sadly behind hte times, and Civil Unions do not have the same adoption rules, tax laws, etc applied to them.

 

[kamik86]

I was never against it either... but I was also pretty young when the issue first came up in MA. My issue wasn't if same sex marriage should be legal it was however the issue that drove me even further from the church. I had been an alter server, in choir, helped teach religious ed classes, etc in high school but in 2004 when things really came to a head I was a senior in high school and the actions of the church and some of the priests and people that until then I had a lot of respect for made me question my beliefs. I pretty much have not attended church since I left high school.

The worst was the week where we had a gospel passage that was about forgiveness, tolerance, and accepting others. Then instead of the homily (where the priest is supposed to give a sermon about the gospel passage and relate it to everyday life of the congregation) he instead read a letter from the bishop about how we should all be calling and writing to our senators about the abomination of gay marriage.

 

[kamik86]

Well, okay then, you are dead set in your opinion. I am equally set in mine that "separate but equal " is a myth and it does not really work that way. We have seen that in our history and do not need to repeat it now (plus, the very valid reasoning upthread about the logistical and cost issues involved). If it truly provides 100% the same/equal status, then there is no need to have two different names and classes, which lends itself to inequalities coming up down the road even if by some miracle they are not there from the get go.
We see it here in Germany, which is sitll sadly behind hte times, and Civil Unions do not have the same adoption rules, tax laws, etc applied to them.

ONe thing I said in MA when this was first being debated is the only way the whole civil unions could work is if they redefined marriage to ONLY be a religous ceremony. Everything that was a civil marriage would now become a civil union. Even for those of opposite sexes.

So for example I would not be married. I would only have a civil union. I was not married in a church.
However someone that was religious would both have a civil union (for the legal benefits) and a marriage (for spiritual/religous reasons)

All laws would no longer apply to marriages but ONLY to civil unions.

That was the only way it could have worked. But honestly that would have had to have been how they did it from 2004. At this point it has clearly been shown to work in many areas (MA has been doing this for 11 years now... actually alot of people here with this news barely batted an eye... just said "ok cool whatever" and went about their day. Because same sex marriage has been reality for a really long time.)


When the entire country reaches that point I think that is when we have really won as a country on this topic. When just like rights for African American's children in school look puzzled at the idea that anyone was ever against this in the first place.


Edited to add that part of the reason this was dismissed as an idea is that many people didn't like the idea of taking away the word marriage. I meant something to them. So even those that weren't married religiously wanted to keep it and the same sex couples wanted to have that. I"m generally a more practical person and wording changes don't bother me at all, but I understand some get quite upset about these things. (similarly to how some are very adamant that you say things like "a student who is blind" instead of "a blind student". Doesn't make sense or any difference to me but I know it does for some and try to follow the practice to keep the peace.)

 

[Luv2Run]

I've never been against it. Growing up, I remember our church condemning homosexuals and same-gender marriages, but I didn't agree with those teachings, even then. My mother always taught us that love is love, and that's it. I don't involve myself with the affairs of others.

 

[Soldier's*Sweeties]

No offense to anyone here, but I think I'm a bit younger than many on these boards.

I really do think that my generation is more open than some before. I don't know very many people my age that have ever been against gay rights. Now my parents' and grandparents' generation... I know many. Some have come around, and some haven't.

Probably has something to do with my hippie parents and grandparents too

 

[cbellasmomma]

Okay flamers, come and get me.
I honestly don't understand why we could not offer the same benefits of marriage to same gender couples, but for the sake of compromise, call it a civil union rather than marriage.

In 1959 a Virginia judge upheld the conviction of Mr and Mrs Loving who were married unlawfully. He felt like it was a compromise that they were allowed to live together as God had intended us to be separated by WHOLE CONTINENTS.....

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

 

[okeydokey]

I was never against it, but I know a lot of people who are. In general though, the younger generation has very few hangups about gay marriage compared to past generations. My kids are in High School and are friends with many openly gay students at their schools and this is in a small, rural, Southern community.

Since more gay people are now living their authentic lives and are not afraid to do so, people who thought they didn't "know any gay people" now realize that they do. I think that this more than anything is changing things. It's easier to deny rights and dignity to a group of people you don't know than it is to deny rights and dignity to a niece, nephew, coworker or neighbor.

 

[Christine]

I was never against it, but I know a lot of people who are. In general though, the younger generation has very few hangups about gay marriage compared to past generations. My kids are in High School and are friends with many openly gay students at their schools and this is in a small, rural, Southern community.

Since more gay people are now living their authentic lives and are not afraid to do so, people who thought they didn't "know any gay people" now realize that they do. I think that this more than anything is changing things. It's easier to deny rights and dignity to a group of people you don't know than it is to deny rights and dignity to a niece, nephew, coworker or neighbor.

I think it changes a lot of the judgment involved, also, when you start *knowing* gay people. Many people who never thought they knew gay people, easily convinced themselves that this was a "lifestyle choice" and that they chose to be that way (sin). Once you have a family member that is openly gay and you watched that child grow up and you know he/she wasn't raised any differently than the rest of the family, you start to think...hmmm....this is how they are...this is how they were born...oh, and they are perfectly lovely individuals. Maybe this isn't a choice!

 

[Teresa Pitman]

If you decide to make marriage only something that is done by a religious leader, and civil unions done by government representatives, then you have to remember that some churches and religious organizations are happy to perform marriages for same-sex couples. So this won't really please the people opposed to same-sex marriages anyway.

There might be some people who are not enthusiastic about this now. I'm old enough to remember the horrible, terrifying screaming crowds of people protesting as that little African-American girl walked to the formerly all-white school. Who even thinks twice about black, white, Asian, etc. kids sitting next to each other in school these days? People get used to it.

We've had same-sex marriage in Canada for a decade now. I'm a journalist: sometimes a man I am interviewing will mention his wife, sometimes he'll mention his husband. It's just not a big deal.