Same sex marriage

dieuhautotbung

Nguyễn Diệu Hương
(dieuhautotbung)

Thành viên danh dự
Hi guys,
Nothing new. However, this is a hot topic in the United States right now, especially when the election is coming. In a recent survey, I had to talk about why we should support Gay marriage. My speech was pretty bad so it would be so helpful if you guys could write down your opinions. What are the reasons we should / should not support gay marriage?

Plus, the English club is kinda boring right now (sorry guys), hope this topic will raise some interesting arguments :D
 
U should make a connection with Roe vs Wade decision. I think it's more of an issue of State right vs. federal right.

Good luck :)
MA is the state for gays ....
 
I do not like gays or les, but I see no reason in objecting that kind of mariage cause no one has the right to prevent the others from finding their own happiness.
 
dude, honestly i can't stand gays. . It's just gross to think about "it" ... lol ...
Yet I have no problem with lesbians at all. In fact it's fun to watch them "have fun"... lol... Oh man, chicks all seem so hot and kinky when they dance together ... lol ...
 
so although you have no bias against gay or lesbian, do you think it is essential that they have the right to get married? Perhaps there can exist love without marriage, rite? (;) just some suggestions for the arguments but I am totally pro gay marriage)
 
and plus, to anonymous poster :p , u r rite. It is federal law vs. state law. Surprisingly, both Bush and Kerry are against gay marriage.
 
Me no socioscientist, but I really don't think rooting against same-sex is all about same-sex marriage. Some of our young people here seem to think people in the US are against same-sex marriage because it is "gay" and "gross" and such. Ehh, my guess is there are probably some people who think that way. But the underlying issue is marriage rights and benefits, right?

Now, Bush is saying (according to what I remember listening to his debate) he wants the US as a nation to stay as a nation, ie as one composed of traditional families of heterosexual couples. I guess he's saying that a country full of kids with two moms or two dads can't really have a strong cultural foundation, or is just messed up. (because these kids would probably endup gay too.) Now, gay man don't fight wars well, cuz to fight war, you gotta have some chick (besides your family of course) waitin' for ya at home. If your gay, you keep falling in love with your comrades and your targets become confusing... so he's making some sense there.

Kerry says what? I dunno, didn't pay attention. His reasons are usually vague.

But never mind what they are saying. Economically (as if I know anything about economics) same-sex marriage right will cost the government, thus the economy big time (government has to spend money to give services to these ppl).

If same-sex marriage is allowed, then the number of weddings would rise, I suppose? Then as people have more license, they recieve more rights that belong to traditionally legal wedded couples. That means they uh can get more loans, lower mortage rates, less tax maybe? I'm not sure but you're supposed to do research on this right? But I'm sure they get somthing. 'Well, if these same-sex people can't get married and they can't get all these rights that normal people get, then the gov doesn't have to spend so much money on 'em.

So yeah, I think it's more about the people's benefit v. the gov's benefit.
And I'd like to add that I'm fine with lesbians, very fine indeeed. But gays are just not acceptable. Because I like to see one thing but not a nother, and because I'm a bastard. =D
 
economically, it is beneficial to legalize gay marriage. that is part of the reason why ma is the first state to do so. gay couple are theoritically wealthier than others because they don't have to spend money on little kids. for women, they don't have to stay home during pregnancy. therefore, they can contribute more to the society. ma hopes to atract all wealthy gay couples by giving them the rights to get marrried. (hehe.. i am going on a strike against capitalism here :D it is fun!)
 
Wait... so are you saying that gays make more money and contribute more as married couples than as singles? That's not so obvious to me. Single gays make just as much money, if not more, as married gays do. In fact, shouldn't gay make more money living by themselves than living with another person, having to take care of some adopted kids, squabbling and such?

Let's suppose gays make a fixed amount of money, single or married, would you agree that singles contribute more since they don't eat up any of the benefits traditionally given to legally married US citizens?
 
Trần Anh Dũng đã viết:
Me no socioscientist, but I really don't think rooting against same-sex is all about same-sex marriage. Some of our young people here seem to think people in the US are against same-sex marriage because it is "gay" and "gross" and such. Ehh, my guess is there are probably some people who think that way. But the underlying issue is marriage rights and benefits, right?

Now, Bush is saying (according to what I remember listening to his debate) he wants the US as a nation to stay as a nation, ie as one composed of traditional families of heterosexual couples. I guess he's saying that a country full of kids with two moms or two dads can't really have a strong cultural foundation, or is just messed up. (because these kids would probably endup gay too.) Now, gay man don't fight wars well, cuz to fight war, you gotta have some chick (besides your family of course) waitin' for ya at home. If your gay, you keep falling in love with your comrades and your targets become confusing... so he's making some sense there.

Kerry says what? I dunno, didn't pay attention. His reasons are usually vague.

But never mind what they are saying. Economically (as if I know anything about economics) same-sex marriage right will cost the government, thus the economy big time (government has to spend money to give services to these ppl).

If same-sex marriage is allowed, then the number of weddings would rise, I suppose? Then as people have more license, they recieve more rights that belong to traditionally legal wedded couples. That means they uh can get more loans, lower mortage rates, less tax maybe? I'm not sure but you're supposed to do research on this right? But I'm sure they get somthing. 'Well, if these same-sex people can't get married and they can't get all these rights that normal people get, then the gov doesn't have to spend so much money on 'em.

So yeah, I think it's more about the people's benefit v. the gov's benefit.
And I'd like to add that I'm fine with lesbians, very fine indeeed. But gays are just not acceptable. Because I like to see one thing but not a nother, and because I'm a bastard. =D
Nhấn để mở rộng...

Assume that a growing trend of same-sex marriage would cost the govt. a heck a lot of money like your aforementioned argument. SO WHAT? Do gay/les pay income tax? No doubt. Do gay/les pay all sorts of maintenance fees? Of course. Do they pay VAT? Absolutely. Do gay/les work and contribute to the economy? YES. Why do gay/les couples not deserve getting benefit payments from the government if they work and pay tax as much as as everyone else does? I can't see why not simply because it's the government's moral and practical obligation to fulfill its goddamned job.

Anyhow, given the humble size of homosexual population in the US, the absence of solid evidence as to whether kids raised by gay/les parents will eventually become homosexuals and millions of other factors, I personally think same-sex marriage is not about tangible aspects like economic benefits so much as it is about our traditional way of perceiving marriage itself and sexuality. Hence, it would not be too much of an exaggeration to suggest that how far and how fast the same-sex marriage trend can go largely depend upon the process of our rethinking on social constructions like marriage, sexuality and gender.
 
Upon pondering your counterargument in the first paragraph of your above post, Khoa, I found that our arguments are not on the same ground. Of course, as individuals, gays or non-gay pay the same contribution to this country and deserve the same benefits. But my argument was that gays as married couples are not the same as people who are traditionally wedded, thus it is a question whether they should receive the same benefits from the government. The simple logic is if same-sex marriage is allowed, then there would be a sudden rise in the number of legally married couple, resulting in the gov feeling the pressure to take care of the situation.

I'm not taking stand on either side for reasons I've aforementioned (I like lesbians but not gays,) so my post, if evident to you at all, should hopefully be objective. Well, I try to be funny, so when I said something about kids with homo moms or dads will endup homo, I was kidding. No I did not even think of looking up numbers to prove that statement. =P

So gay-married couples benefits v. gov benefits can be one of the issues Hương can talk about is what I'm saying. Since you've shifted the focus onto moral issues, let's go about that...

Morally, I'm against gay marriage. It's a pretty biased opinion, but I know I'm not alone. Imagine how you would feel if a bunch of gay guys in Viet Nam ask the goverment to let them couples get married and have families and go out on streets holding hands, hugging, kissing, holding adopted babies... That'd be just messed up. Again, the foundation of the family will be turned upside down. In gay families there is no distinct parternity or maternity. They aren't even like devorced families. Having two moms or two dads is just to much for a kid to bear.

Now, one might question, what if one of the dads acts like a feminine mom or one of the moms acts like a masculine dad, that'd be good enough? Gee, you know, maybe it is, I don't know, gotta think more. This is something.
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
I also don't like gay marriage. Like what Dung said, its weird to see men or women kissing or hugging on the street. Its so... u know, immoral. However, I agree that everyone should be happy, so why dont we let them marry each other?

This is such a controversial issue and I really have to admit that I hvnt figured out which side I am favor of.

Keep discussing

<phaminhang>
p.s: sorry, i was lazy to log in
 
Some one told me that the increase in the number of gay marriage can dismantle human kind( as fewer and fewer children would be born).
And what I learnt in biology in Viet Nam is that sex between homosexual couple causes the expansion of H.I.V ( I am very skeptical of that)
But Yah, the point is that: I kind of against gay marriage.

Men do you know that it takes a lot of job for homosexual couples to have sex....
 
I agree with Dung that kids of homosexual couples have high possibility of becoming gay.
\
family is the first and most important agent of socialization for every one

Watching his/ her parents "do stuff" day by day causes the kid to form wrong conception that it is more natural to fall for a same sex person than an opposite person

I oppose the idea of letting homosexual couples to adopt kids
 
guys, I think you should all be more sensical and take into consideration what school Huong is going to... I mean she can't stage a fight against gay-marriage in general and lesbianism in particular there... she'd get raped by fellow students for chris sake... hehehe.
Anyway, I'm going there in 'bout an hour. Huong, if you need help, just holla out loud. I shall be more than willing to take you back to the place of "MEN." Keep in mind that although "Smith is not a girl school without men. It is a women's college without boys!" the women in that college very often times wander across a vast region in search of the "boys" it so severely lacks.... or do they :-? :mrgreen:
 
Hoàng Long đã viết:
guys, I think you should all be more sensical and take into consideration what school Huong is going to... I mean she can't stage a fight against gay-marriage in general and lesbianism in particular there... she'd get raped by fellow students for chris sake... hehehe.
Anyway, I'm going there in 'bout an hour. Huong, if you need help, just holla out loud. I shall be more than willing to take you back to the place of "MEN." Keep in mind that although "Smith is not a girl school without men. It is a women's college without boys!" the women in that college very often times wander across a vast region in search of the "boys" it so severely lacks.... or do they :-? :mrgreen:
Nhấn để mở rộng...

no personal attack. [-(

There have been no statistics about kids of gay couples. I don't think they have the tendency to be gay. Actually, it may even work the opposite way. Again, we can't be sure about that.
Secondly, come back to what Hang said about "immoral", what do you think is moral? The conception of marriage has changed a lot throughout history. People of different religions, races, and social status used to be discriminated. It used to be impossible for a Jew to marry a Catholic girl. Now, we already eliminated that discrimination, what about gender? Why can't we expand the concept of marriage to assure that every single person be happy? Isn't this the ultimate goal of marriage?

Also, to anh Long: read my signature again, ;) It has various meanings.
 
Trần Anh Dũng đã viết:
Wait... so are you saying that gays make more money and contribute more as married couples than as singles? That's not so obvious to me. Single gays make just as much money, if not more, as married gays do. In fact, shouldn't gay make more money living by themselves than living with another person, having to take care of some adopted kids, squabbling and such?

Let's suppose gays make a fixed amount of money, single or married, would you agree that singles contribute more since they don't eat up any of the benefits traditionally given to legally married US citizens?
Nhấn để mở rộng...

you are right to an extent but what I am saying is, to allow gay marriage is a way to atract wealthy single gay people from other states. And this actually has happened. A lot of gay people have recently moved to MA and esp. Northampton.
 
Mr. Hoàng Long đã viết:
I mean she can't stage a fight against gay-marriage in general and lesbianism in particular there... she'd get raped by fellow students for chris sake... hehehe.
Nhấn để mở rộng...

That is not a cool thing to say man. Nope, not at all. Though it is pretty funny!! heh


Hương đã viết:
There have been no statistics about kids of gay couples. I don't think they have the tendency to be gay. Actually, it may even work the opposite way.
Nhấn để mở rộng...

Omg, tell this to the parents with gay kids. They'd be storming at ya asking for a hookup with a gay couple. Maybe by making their kids live with these gay couples, they'll cure their kids of gayness???
Just kidding though. No one noes.

About the trendy gay pilgrimage to MA, what you say, Hương, does make sense. I guess with gay families ready to spend lotsa cash and pay lotsa taxes, any state would be better off.

Or would they? I know this might sound amature, but on the social side of the issue, i'm guessing, having too many affluent gays in the area may cause some problems. I don't know how open-minded MA residents are, but I do know that not all of them are living as comfortably as they'd like. (I've been to Cambridge.) If it is obvious to people that there is a segment of the community that is "different," treated differently, and in general is living more comfortably than them, would some of them see these families as sands in their eyes? I know I'm poking people's bad side here, but it is practical. If anything like this happens, MA, I'm guessing, won't be in very good shape. Discrimination or stereotyping of diffrent kinds can take shape; tensions among groups can develop; kids hate gay people's kids at school, and such (my favorite ending catch now.)

But maybe not, I never know... MA people are pretty nice... Hope MA girls aren't **cough kewsme** I mean are **cough** as naughty as Mr. Long suggests though.
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
"There have been no statistics about kids of gay couples. I don't think they have the tendency to be gay. Actually, it may even work the opposite way. Again, we can't be sure about that."

Sorry Hương, I can not see how "it" may even work the opposite way.....

All children should have the rights to have both mother and father. I am not sure if a gay couple can give this for their adopted childen.

Btw, I have been always wondering why some people decided to be gay.I know in most gay couples do the same thing as heteroginous couple (I mean in evey gay couple, there are always a chick and a guy)

However, it is true that everyone should have the rights to get married to the one he /she loves
 
hi buddy,
real gay people don't decide to be gay. They struggle to be as normal as possible to fit in, but they just can't.
I live with lesbians around so I kinda understand them more. They are really nice people. They are kind and open minded. The only thing different is that they fall in love with girls. However, I have to clarify that a lot of lesbians are "temporary." They want to experience new things or just to have someone to take care of, to share some romantic moments or to have sex w/o consequences.
But for real gay people, (the people who seriously think about getting married), they have the rights to be recognized.

About the kids, I read an article with this title "Finally my moms can get married." The kid loves both her moms. In the constitution, kids have rights to live, to go to school, to be taken care of.. Nothing says about the right to have a father and a mother living in the same house. Sometimes, that's just impossible. Would you rather see a homeless kid or one living w/ a gay couple?
 
Bạn phải đăng nhập hoặc đăng ký để phản hồi tại đây.
Back
Bên trên