pWould same-sex marriage undermine traditional marriage?

Next>

Results

73 %

No, it wouldn't.

27 %

Yes, it would.

@Nov '12 c 269 comments V 615 votes

Detailed Results Next Debate Vote Now

Activity Stmts Popular

615 Votes

13 hr
tomtheterrible endorsed JeffKrehelyK

v No, it wouldn't.
u

Tue
DanielMincin voted

v Yes, it would.
Tue
9MileTrucking voted

v No, it wouldn't.
Mon
LEC endorsed JeffKrehelyK

v No, it wouldn't.
May 20
Ashstop endorsed Neo_NtheMatrix

v Yes, it would.
May 20

mikev9359

v No, it wouldn't.

It may undermine traditional families, but I cannot see how it would undermine traditional marriages.

Post
May 20
vickomls voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 20
catmanii endorsed Truthinesss

v Yes, it would.
u

May 20
buckilaked voted

v Yes, it would.
u

May 19
Brogan voted

v Yes, it would.
u

May 19
DesignerLM voted

v Yes, it would.
May 18
QueenArc endorsed JeffKrehelyK

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 18
DonEros voted

v Yes, it would.
u

May 18

Rchilds40475

v No, it wouldn't.

Who cares? Let people be happy.

Post
u

May 18
DrSilicon voted

v Yes, it would.
May 17
Bill2E voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 16
Obsidion endorsed InfidelCowboy

v Yes, it would.
May 16
GodlessLiberal voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 16
Liam_npc voted

v Yes, it would.
May 15

DARSB

v No, it wouldn't.

The state with the lowest divorce rate is Massachusetts, which has also had marriage equality the longest.

Post
May 15
Randolf endorsed firebug27

v No, it wouldn't.
May 15
DanielZ endorsed firebug27

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 14
SlimElmo91 voted

v Yes, it would.
u

May 13
smbiz voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 13
Fyi1957 endorsed Chris

v No, it wouldn't.
May 12

darkknight8472

v No, it wouldn't.

Post
May 12
falco_alba endorsed JeffKrehelyK

v No, it wouldn't.
May 11
InjusticeSucks voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 11
RAEMM voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 11

oldsolder

v Yes, it would.

I'm about sick of this being forced on me and my family, marriage is between a man and a women.

r1 reply

Post
u

May 10

commonsense51

v Yes, it would.

Same sex marriage is absurd & goes against every natural norm to the human race. It is a purely political correct move that defies common sense. Gay marriage is just one symptom of a culture going down the drain. This anything goes, no fault culture is the death of normal marriage between a man & a woman. Our sitcoms lift up living together as the new norm. I feel so bad for our children. They will never know what a family is supposed to be.

Post
May 10
whatheheck voted

v No, it wouldn't.
May 10

AMSCountryboy

v No, it wouldn't.

How do you undermine somthing that has already become a giant joke. You got straight people getting married 2, 3, even 4 freaking times and this is a common thing.... yet gay folks are going to ruin marriage?

Post
u

May 9
LilliB voted

v Yes, it would.
May 9
Kevinjnelson voted

v Yes, it would.
May 9

Prime_Meridian

v No, it wouldn't.

1 Corinthians 13:13 "As it is, these remain: Faith, Hope and Love, the three of them; and the greatest of them is Love". Love is generous, and kind, and all encompassing. Love expresses itself in many forms, and who are we to limit the expression of something as beautiful as Love? When two people in Love are brave enough to declare it to the whole world, and commit to each other, ideally for life, why should they, as free human beings be denied that beautiful, generous, and selfless right? "Love is Heaven and Heaven is Love", Sir Walter Raleigh. "Over a heart at once so loving, and yet so distant in its ways, I've mourned my loss on moonlit evenings, much l...

Post
May 8
O_S_Thomas endorsed JeffKrehelyK

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 8
Iceywarm voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 7
AchronMows voted

v No, it wouldn't.
May 7
foodbaby voted

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 7
anc713 endorsed InfidelCowboy

v Yes, it would.
u

May 7

URBS

v No, it wouldn't.

It has no effect on traditional marriage. Marriage should be a religious thing and the secular part should be civil unions for all.

Post
u

u

May 7
DaQuietOne endorsed Slybronco

v No, it wouldn't.
u

May 7

fraps

v No, it wouldn't.

If I understand the word traditional, traditional marriage is polygamous marriage. Polygamy has been practiced for most of human history until only a couple of thousand years ago when a small cult decided to make monogamy part of its program. That cult, Christianity, eventually grew extremely powerful, especially in Europe, and forced monogamy on the people that lived in countries they controlled. Even today much of the world practices polygamy, especially Muslims. The choice one person makes, monogamous or polygamous does not undermine anything. The overriding principle is voluntary mutual agreement between consenting adults should not be interfered with by th...

Post
May 7
mmej endorsed Neo_NtheMatrix

v Yes, it would.
May 6
melliebellie voted

v No, it wouldn't.
May 6
SgtNFury voted

v Yes, it would.
u

May 6

MaxPain

v No, it wouldn't.

Yes it would if your a redneck Uneducated Bubba, So called Conservative bagger

r1 reply

Post
o

o

May 4
GvtMule endorsed ir0nw0lfe

v Yes, it would.
May 4
NoAmnestyEVER voted

v Yes, it would.

May 20

mikev9359

v No, it wouldn't.

It may undermine traditional families, but I cannot see how it would undermine traditional marriages.

Post
u

May 18

Rchilds40475

v No, it wouldn't.

Who cares? Let people be happy.

Post
May 15

DARSB

v No, it wouldn't.

The state with the lowest divorce rate is Massachusetts, which has also had marriage equality the longest.

Post
May 12

darkknight8472

v No, it wouldn't.

Post
u

May 11

oldsolder

v Yes, it would.

I'm about sick of this being forced on me and my family, marriage is between a man and a women.

r1 reply

Post
May 12

darkknight8472

no body is forcing you to do anything. and who is to say what marriage is

B2

Post @darkknight8472
u

May 10

commonsense51

v Yes, it would.

Same sex marriage is absurd & goes against every natural norm to the human race. It is a purely political correct move that defies common sense. Gay marriage is just one symptom of a culture going down the drain. This anything goes, no fault culture is the death of normal marriage between a man & a woman. Our sitcoms lift up living together as the new norm. I feel so bad for our children. They will never know what a family is supposed to be.

Post
May 10

AMSCountryboy

v No, it wouldn't.

How do you undermine somthing that has already become a giant joke. You got straight people getting married 2, 3, even 4 freaking times and this is a common thing.... yet gay folks are going to ruin marriage?

Post
May 9

Prime_Meridian

v No, it wouldn't.

1 Corinthians 13:13 "As it is, these remain: Faith, Hope and Love, the three of them; and the greatest of them is Love". Love is generous, and kind, and all encompassing. Love expresses itself in many forms, and who are we to limit the expression of something as beautiful as Love? When two people in Love are brave enough to declare it to the whole world, and commit to each other, ideally for life, why should they, as free human beings be denied that beautiful, generous, and selfless right? "Love is Heaven and Heaven is Love", Sir Walter Raleigh. "Over a heart at once so loving, and yet so distant in its ways, I've mourned my loss on moonlit evenings, much l...

Post
u

May 7

URBS

v No, it wouldn't.

It has no effect on traditional marriage. Marriage should be a religious thing and the secular part should be civil unions for all.

Post
u

May 7

fraps

v No, it wouldn't.

If I understand the word traditional, traditional marriage is polygamous marriage. Polygamy has been practiced for most of human history until only a couple of thousand years ago when a small cult decided to make monogamy part of its program. That cult, Christianity, eventually grew extremely powerful, especially in Europe, and forced monogamy on the people that lived in countries they controlled. Even today much of the world practices polygamy, especially Muslims. The choice one person makes, monogamous or polygamous does not undermine anything. The overriding principle is voluntary mutual agreement between consenting adults should not be interfered with by th...

Post
u

May 6

MaxPain

v No, it wouldn't.

Yes it would if your a redneck Uneducated Bubba, So called Conservative bagger

r1 reply

Post
u

May 18

Rchilds40475

Hey now, I'm southern and educated. I'm also a Republican and I voted no on this. We are not all like that.

Post @Rchilds40475
u

May 4

BossTweed

v No, it wouldn't.

Yawn

Post
May 3

scotta

v Yes, it would.

Sorry this is just not natural.

Post
May 3

harold_lloyd

v No, it wouldn't.

Not for me...

Post
u

Apr 29

treedcat25

v No, it wouldn't.

If some gay married couple down the street undermine your marriage simply by being married, perhaps you should've given more thought to your own relationship.

Post
u

Apr 29

4PeteSake

v No, it wouldn't.

Utter nonsense!

Post
u

Apr 29

Litdes

v No, it wouldn't.

Not in the slightest.

Post
u

Apr 28

plainlogic

v Yes, it would.

By allowing this; it's just a mini step like so many mini steps Government has taken to get to this point we're in now. They're so small, people say " as long as no one bothers anybody, what harm can it do". How 'bout thinking outside the box? You know, saying hell on TV or in the movies was once taboo, now look at what you have; all because of the small step. C'mon, when is the light going to come on?

r27 replies

Post
May 9

Holliekat

How would gay marriage undermine traditional marriage? If two people love each other and want to marry they should be able to. That is traditional marriage. Gender shouldn't be an issue when people are in love. Who someone chooses to marry really isn't any of your business now is it?

Post @Holliekat
u

May 10

plainlogic

@Holliekat No that's true, you can say the same thing about necrophilia, doesn't hurt anyone and at least one loves the other. If you take Religion out of it, everything is fair game, no one would have to pick and choose what ever lifestyle they feel is right for them. It seems we will never have a morally straight world. All people are skewed in one form or the other, it's up to the individual to pick the right path.

Post @plainlogic
May 10

Holliekat

@plainlogic You can not compare gay marriage to necrophilia that makes zero sense. Religion should not dictate who is allowed to marry and who isn't. Every deserves equal rights. Our constitution says all men are created equal not, all men are created equal except homosexuals. You do NOT deny someone equal rights just because it goes against your religion.

Post @Holliekat
u

May 10

plainlogic

@Holliekat By brining necrophilia into it, it's equating the moral issue. If enough necrophiliacs were to band together that would be a viable constituency, well, you'd see them protesting to make it legal. As I have said in previous posts, just a mini step, gets you what you have today. Just fact! Yes the Constitution does say "All Men are credited equal"; it's the individual right of each person to accept the responsibility of their actions whether it's in the norm or not according to society. I do understand nature plays tricks, sometimes cruel tricks, we're not talking about that I'm sure. What we're talking about is choice of actions. Oh, I take it your'e...

Post @plainlogic
May 10

Holliekat

@plainlogic Sorry but no comparing the two will not work in this situation. There isn't a prior group of people allowed to engage in necrophilia and they're deny another group the right to do so. However straight couples have the right to marry and ARE denying that right to the gay community. Everyone is entitled to equal rights, it's unconstitutional to say everyone can have equal rights unless they're gay. That's like telling African Americans they can't marry because of their skin color. Either every American citizen should have the right to marry or no one should. There is no middle ground. If homosexuality is against someone's religion they don't have to support g...

Post @Holliekat
View all 27 replies >
Apr 27

Ryuo

v No, it wouldn't.

Nope, I'm not going to leave my wife and marry another man because it is now legal. Maybe gay marriage will strengthen my straight marriage, because I'll enjoy seeing other people suffer from the extra paperwork and higher taxes.

Post
Apr 26

ST_Louie_Sue

v Yes, it would.

Silly rabbit, marriage is a man and a woman.

Post
R Load more comments...

Mar '12

JeffKrehely K

VP of LGBT Research at Center for American Progress

v No, it wouldn't.

Allowing gay couples to marry legally is the right, good, and smart thing to do. Right because it advances our nationâs bedrock commitment to individual liberty and equal treatment under the law. Good because it allows more people to make one of the most important commitments recognized in our society. And smart because it reflects the fundamental reality that gay couples exist in our nation and have families to take care of. Plus â believe it or not â straight couples will still get all the same marriage rights and benefits theyâve always had. Nothing will change for them.

B9

r3 replies

e94 endorsed

Post
May '12

firebug27

v No, it wouldn't.

Denying gays the right to marry is just as ridiculous as it was to deny black people equality, or not giving women equal rights, this country is supposed to follow the constitution not the holy bible.

B1

r4 replies

e19 endorsed

Post
May '12

Truthinesss

v Yes, it would.

Seeing as marriage is a religious term, and I don't know of any religion that would allow for two of the same sex to be married, gay couples will never be "married". Although, they should be able to be viewed as a union to the government just like every other couple.

B1

r4 replies

e18 endorsed

Post
May '12

InfidelCowboy

v Yes, it would.

What about polygamy? What about bestiality? Once the government begins defining marriage, it opens the door to the expansion of the term by having to redefine it. In redefining the term, the traditional word marriage, would lose its definition, one man, one woman. I thought Obama opened this up for public discussion to deflect his terrible presidency and increase the donations from the homosexual lobby.

B1

r1 reply

e9 endorsed

Post
u

Mar '12

Chris

v No, it wouldn't.

Clearly we don't need same sex marraige to screw up traditional marraige given divorce rates before this was an issue

r1 reply

e10 endorsed

Post
May '12

Neo_NtheMatrix

v Yes, it would.

I am personally, as is my wife and family, against gay marriage and civil unions. God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. I will be opposed to gay marriage as long as I am alive and will never support any candidate that stands for such an atrocity.

B2

r1 reply

e6 endorsed

Post
u

Mar '12

Slybronco

v No, it wouldn't.

I do not even begin to understand the question.

B1

e7 endorsed

Post
u

May '12

demonchild76

v No, it wouldn't.

One marriage does not affect the other. Just like if the couple next door has a terrible marriage, that doesn't affect the quality of your marriage. The issue is no one will separate the religious aspects of marriage from the legal. Gay people want the legal rights that go along with being married in the US. Most of us don't care about getting married in the church or anything associated with religion.

e7 endorsed

Post
o

May '12

ComeToJESUS777

v Yes, it would.

Traditional marriage was created by Jesus (God) and NOWHERE in that was "gays". He created Adam and Eve, NOT Adam and Adam. He also said "a man shall leave father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the twain shall be one", NOT "him and his husband shall be one". Therefore "gay" marriage doesn't even exist, except maybe on paper. Jesus (God) also called it an abomination and worthy of death. It is NOT ONLY wrong because of that, BUT it's ALSO physiologically wrong. A pole was not designed to fit into a pole, it was designed to fit into a hole. 'Nuff said.. "Gay" is the main reason Jesus (God) destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, and others. May JESUS have mercy on this "on...

B3

r6 replies

e2 endorsed

Post
May '12

Jlope

v Yes, it would.

Each person should be able to make their own choices, provided that they are not harming others. Our society as a collective, however, should not particularly encourage and endorse actions and lifestyle choices that make little sense and provide no real societal benefits or true personal fulfillment. While a person is free to explore themselves as most do in some way during their high-scool or college years, we really should encourage people to deal with their psychological issues, not embrace them. (In case you did not realize it, with biology and physiology ruled out, theres really nothing left except psychology). http://chastity.com/chastity-qa/homosexuality/homose...

B1

r5 replies

e4 endorsed

Post