Should the US Constitution ban gay marriage?

I live in S.F so this is kind of hitting close to home. I’m just curious what everyone thinks about this? This is a pretty big deal if you think about it.

What do you think?

banning gay marriages is more of a religious belief, and church and state arent supposed to come together so I dont believe they should put it in the constitution.

nope.

if gay people want to get married, let them. i don't care.

If the US Constitution doesn't ban gay marriages, do you know what will happen? Hundreds of thousands of "straight" couples will suddenly be running around looking for new gay partners. By opening gay marriages, people will lose their minds, not knowing anymore if they are gay or straight. :rolleyes:

Banning gay marriages is such a primitive way of thinking. One would hope that our society could have evolved into a more passionate and understanding one, but of course it has not. It's telling a select group of people (a minority) what they can and cannot do. You can be gay, you just cannot be a legal couple. It's on par with, you can be black, but you have to sit at the back of the bus.

It also has a lot of religious undertones to it. I for one am not religious. I do however sit on the fence with religion. I cannot simply allow faith to convince me of a higher power, but the world is a mysterious place, and it would be foolish to me to rule out any explanation when there are no solid answers. That being said, I find it insulting to have religion pushed on me. It shouldn't be in schools, nor should the leader of a country be pushing it. It not only insults non-religious people, it greater insults other religions. So to say that homosexuality is wrong from a religious aspect and thus ban it is totally an illegitamate excuse for me. Aren't our sins supposed to be forgiven? Or are gays inherently not religious? There are more "religious" people in this world commiting far greater sins then two people of the same sex sharing a bond. This is a bit of a tangent, but I didn't want to miss the point that the bible says that it is wrong.

Who is the US Constitution to tell a couple they cannot be together anyways? When nearly 50% of marriages end up in divorce, maybe we do need to try something new. To say we are protecting families and children from gay marriage is absurd. Broken homes are everywhere. Families are more disfunctional then ever. Maybe two men or two women would provide a more stable/loving environment. Who knows? It surely is just assumed that it wouldn't.

And as for the whole "sex" issue. Well, that's what it comes down to really. People think the sexual aspect is what is wrong. Seeing two gay people being normal, loving adults is one thing. But it is automatically assumed that once in the bedroom, they are immoral, nasty perverted freaks. Well, let me tell you. What goes on in the privacy of a bedroom is no ones business, I don't care what any piece of paper says. Some of us have done some things heterosexually that probably would have resulted in an arrest in some states/countries. But that is our business, and no one elses.

Couldnt really have put it much better myself Spectra, well reasoned. It's pretty devisive to bring the state into it, if I were the goverment I would worry more about handgun laws than gay marriage.

cheers, hermit - but, hold on - one thing at a time! :D

back to the gay thing...

This might be disguised as a prejudice issue. Sure, that's a given, but one thing people may not know:

This is about money.

Greedy, old-fashioned, conservative, frightened, christian legislators only pass laws when money is involved. Period. Once you realize that, lawmaking in America starts to make a lot more sense.

the fact is - this gay marriage thing opens up a big can of worms - INSURANCE. More marriages mean more beneficiaries. Period. Insurance lobbyists are funding this one, folks. The real question is this: why shouldn't gay people receive benefits? Maybe because of the AIDS epidemic in the gay communtiy? The price of prescription drugs comes into the picture. Adoption issues come into the picture for gay couples whom may want to have families. Straight people will have to pay more for insurance, so that creates anger & fear. Fear creates BANNING things.

My opinion: Once these closed-minded legislators (many of whom have never met a gay couple) realize that they probably have a gay uncle, or a child who has been living in fear in the closet for a lifetime - these laws will be accepted, like they are in San Francisco. Maybe then we can focus on real issues like guns, education, environment, defense and our country's future in general, instead of putting up a smokescreen for our legislators (who really ought to be worrying about real issues - instead of where someone likes to put their weenie).

Well look at the countries that already have gay marriage... Nobody sees the point in getting married at all, so the whole idea of marriage has been underminded.

There should just be an amendment that they should all live in San Francisco.

"There should just be an amendment that they should all live in San Francisco".
*EDIT*
...sounds like something my grandpa would say. Regardless, you're entitled to your opinion. I apologize if my comments were offensive earlier. I edited it just in case.

I can't decide if the ClearChannel ruling is Nazi Facism, or wiping one's ass with the first amendment... can anyone help me with that?

I didn't see them, but if they were attacking me then I didn't miss anything.

I have the right to my opinion just like everyone else. No one has to like or agree with my opinion just as much as I don't have to like or agree with anyone else's. And frankly, I was being quite nice about it, considering what I would like to have said.