Well thought out, concise, and to the point. I love it.

I would like to point out something as well. As a few people seem to have taken offence to your opinion here.

In the 1960's I do beleive, it was agaist the law in some states for blacks and whites to marry. A couple was actually banashed from their state for marrying. When they tried to fight for their right, they were met with many of the same arguments that gays are faceing now. That it isn't natural, that it isn't normal, that God doesn't want it to happen, that it would result in the downfall of family life and values as we know it.

If a interracial couple were to be denied marrage right now, the world would start screaming about the fairness. If a gay couple got married right now, the would would be screaming about it not being right.

In 70 years, we are still no less enlightened...how sad.

Kon-

"Well if the whole homonal imbalance explanation is true then homosexuality is not normal. And saying that its your opinion is crap, is having a third arm normal when everyone else you see has two? (hopefully this doesn't give the wrong impression)"

Also, studying maths at a university level is not normal. Building your own furniture is not normal. Using a particular brand of shampoo is not normal. Does that mean that all of these should be outlawed?

Good essay, however.

Well written and very clear and concise. You said what had to be said to make your point and not a word more, really well done. Your point about projection is interesting, there have been a few studies done on this and while I don't know how extensive they were from what I've read of them they backed your statement. One of the researchers was Henry Adams from the University of Georgia, just in case you want to dig around for more on the topic.

Remember, wether right or wrong. Freud's theory was just that. A theory. I always find it anoying when people take theories as fact. Like evolution. Anyways. I would recomend that you check out . would also be interested in knowing how homosexuality is natural.

spreadin the light...

"First and foremost, there is nothing unconstitutional about gay marriage."

Their is also nothing constitutional about it. Marriage is not apart of the constitution.

"the state can’t touch that part of it. However, when two people get married, a name gets changed and with it, an entire series of legal and completely secular things happen. The person usually has to change the beneficiaries on their financial accounts (401k’s, IRA’s, etc…) and if anything like a house is bought it’s considered both of the spouses’ property."

Civil Unions, anyone? Yes they don't offer ALL the same rights as traditional marriage but if there was a push to reform what unions cover rather then pushing to change a religious term's definition, gays would have their tax benefits and no hard feelings by those who are worried about what marriage means.

"Another phrase people like to use is “it’s not normal”. What is normal? The definition of “normal” is adhering to a common standard, pattern, level or type. All normal really is, is what somebody is used to and sees most often."

Well if the whole homonal imbalance explanation is true then homosexuality is not normal. And saying that its your opinion is crap, is having a third arm normal when everyone else you see has two? (hopefully this doesn't give the wrong impression)

" Speaking of the economy, it would probably help it. Think of all the money people put into ceremonies and receptions. They pay for catering, gowns, tuxedoes, the space to have the ceremonies and receptions, the invitations. The list goes on and on. If anything, gay marriage would probably help the economy."

Thats a reach.

"And for all you homophobes out there, consider this"

I hope your not saying anyone against gay marriage is a homophobe. You can be against gay marriage and find nothing wrong with if others want to be gay.

Savage

"After all, marriage isn’t present in or produced by nature."

some people would argue that it is. swans mate for life, even if they don't have a ceremony (we assume).

"And for all you homophobes out there, consider this."

i really don't think that there are too many people out there who fit under that label. in fact, a lot of people who are against gay marriage (sadly) think they are doing the world (and homosexuals) a service.

i agree with your point, but perhaps this could have been a bit longer?

Wow. MAP, you rock. I totally agree. It's not as if I'd even be bothered about the issue but there is all these legal things about being able to claim on charities if a partner dies (like, for instance, did you know that gay partners of people that died in the twin towers are not allowed to claim any benefits off the charities set up to help the families? That's really messed up), or setting up financial accounts, like you said.

And the whole "marriage itself is not natural" was really funny. The next homophobe I come across, I'll email this to them.

Especially the closet gay bit.

OM

PS on the laws, I think the state shouldn't have any say in that either. Why the hell should the goverment care, I ask you? Keep the hell out of our own business!

Look I do agree with you on majority of points you make there. The fact that homosexuals are no different from any other person is true, and I'm not trying to contradict that. All I have to say is this: Marriage was made for man and woman; and is a ritual for any straight person. Much like religion, where one religion will not disagree with most others. They merely accept this is the way that do it.

I'm not trying to seperate the straight from the gay. We are all human. I just thought it's not an aspect many people has pondered upon.

gangster-dolly

I enjoyed the opinion and must say that it's much more refined than my own opinion. I liked how you included the fact about it being "Natural". That isn't an arguement I see very often.

That and the theory you ended with were very persuading. Thanks for reviewing my essay!

You hit upon one thing in the article - the government shouldn't recongnize any marriage. The governemnt shouldn't be defining who gets married. It's your decision. If you need something a little permanent, then sign a contract. You don't need a slip of paper from the government to tell you that you're married. It solves everyone's problems, and reduces the size of the governemnt. Perfect.

To the guy who mentioned sodomy laws: those laws are unconstituitional and should be repealed. My own state has one, and I'm going to violate it one day just for the hell of it. Anyway, it would be obvious that if you had gay marriage you would repeal those authoritarian anti-american laws.

Wow, you really do have good ideas and views on this issue. I myself am a bi, I have a friend that is also, and I've been looking up on positives of gay marrige. I recently read an essay that my older sister wrote deplecting on the views of gay marrige and why it should be legal. It was very good, I can email a copy of it to you if you would like.

Although there may not be as many now, most states in the Union have/have had so called Sodomy laws which ban certain sex acts between both man/women, man/man and including anal intercourse. Making gay marriage legal would contradict long-established state and local laws that forbid Sodomy.

You have a lot of good ideas, many I never even came close to thinking of. But your eassy didn't really have any connections and seemed kind of jumbled, so your argument was weakened a bit.

Dude, are you sure I didn't write this? I swear you took the ideas straight from my head. The part about helping the economy because of all the ceremonies and whatnot, that was like directly from my head I swear.

100% agree with you, been saying that for a long time. The government should have no say in it, no one should, it should just be legal. There is NO reason to be illegal, AT ALL. None. So I dont know why its such a big debate, obviously it should be legal, no question.