Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
The tide of marriage for same-sex couples has ebbed and flowed over the last decade with no end in sight. Because marriage sits squarely at the intersection of religion, law and society, the discussion around same-sex couples’ inclusion into the institution of marriage has been one of the most complex and hotly contested topics in America.
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Americans Reject Gay Marriage
- From FRC
By Family Research Council - Defending Faith, Family and Freedom
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Opinion does not matter
While most of Americans may not want to permit homosexuals to marry, The United States is not about the majority opinion. The government itself is designed as a mechanism to ensure equality - not to propagate inequality through the tyranny of the majority. It may not always work that way but it is the whole purpose of checks and balances.
- sumwatt July 24, 2008 9:53AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Selective reasoning
This “debate” is about defending what those who have taken the “YES” position believe to be an indefensible prejudice: Not allowing consenting adults to marry whom they choose is derived from traditionally entrenched prejudicial beliefs about homosexuality. The FRC’s argument here is that as this prejudice is held generally, it is justifiable. If they are committed to the position that “great numbers represent justification” then, would they similarly react to polls in the 80’s that showed an overwhelming disapproval of making “spousal rape” a crime (i.e., wives are the property of husbands)? Or polls throughout the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s that approved of “Jim Crow” and racial separation? On this line of reasoning, these policies are seemingly justifiable. If not, the FRC is engaging in selective reasoning and should be criticized as such.
- Alex M
August 26, 2008 2:51PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Polls aren't accurate
During an episode of "Penn & Teller's BullSh*t", Penn & Teller interviewed a "pollster" named Frank Luntz who gathered info for Fox News. He admitted that his job was to ask the questions in a way that he gets the "right answer". He (Luntz) even got a guy to say that he doesn't mind spending money on education and healthcare for illegal immigrants, but also that the government is spending too much money on them. (video can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4 )
Who is to say that the (relatively) few people in the poll can represent the views of 300+ million people? A
- NCHammer326 September 3, 2008 8:19PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes, and once...
The majority of Chinese citizens thought foot binding made a beautiful foot, and women accepted the corset.
That it's currently a societal norm means little to nothing on its being "good."
- sharky
September 24, 2008 10:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why is it Americans decision
Most of Americans don’t want to legalize gay marriage, but how does that affect all that oppose it? If gay couples want to get married, why is it up to the whole world to decide whether or not they can? To all opposing and opposite-sex couples; why should you get to be happily married to the one you love and same- sex couples are denied the right in most states? Whether or not you think “being gay is wrong” doesn’t matter. There will still be gay couples so why not let them live life as happily as you are.
- skittles
February 5, 2009 9:17AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Americans make choices for America.
I see what you’re saying, but if we legalize gay rights then they will be living among us, and influencing the minds of our children in a negative way. So in the end it is in the hands of the Americans. I hate to say it but when a couple is gay they are just experimenting and playing house. Do you honestly think that those marriages’ will last? Then that will effect and children that might have been involved between that couple.
- cjobeth10
February 5, 2009 2:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Research?
According to many studies (including a fairly recent one performed by Jennifer L. Wainright, Stephen T. Russell, and Charlotte J. Patterson), revealed that children in same-sex families were no more likely to be predisposed to gay, lesbian, or bisexual lifestyles than their opposite-sex family counterparts.
Please do your research before making such claims.
- QuinceyQuick
February 6, 2009 11:42AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Here's some research for you....
"A large and growing body of scientific evidence indicates that the intact, married family is best for children." Thats part of an article from the family research council for you to read its really good here the URL...Enjoy.
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IF04G01
- cjobeth10
February 9, 2009 2:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Divorce, not sexes.
Oh, you're right! Here, let me parse up the articles for you.
Kyle Pruett, Fatherneed (Broadway Books, 2001) 204.
Elizabeth Marquardt, The Moral and Spiritual Lives of Children of Divorce. Forthcoming.
Ellis, Bruce J., et al., "Does Father Absence Place Daughters at Special Risk for Early Sexual Activity and Teenage Pregnancy?" Child Development, 74:801-821.
David Popenoe, Life Without Father (Boston: Harvard University Press, 1999).
Eleanor MacCoby, The Two Sexes: Growing Up Apart, Coming Together (Boston: Harvard, 1998).
Steven Rhoads, Taking Sex Differences Seriously (Encounter Books, 2004).
Hey, would you look at that?! Most of the articles are talking about the -absence- of a parent! Maybe it's -divorces- that cause psychological problems, not lacking a parent of one gender or the other.
- QuinceyQuick
February 9, 2009 3:07PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Let me break it down for you...
Obviously you did not read the points of this article right...
1. Children hunger for their biological parents.
2. Children need fathers.
3. Children need mothers.
4. Evidence on parenting by same-sex couples is inadequate.
5. Evidence suggests children raised by homosexuals are more likely to experience gender and sexual disorders.
6. Same-sex "marriage" would undercut the norm of sexual fidelity within marriage.
7. Same-sex "marriage" would further isolate marriage from its procreative purpose.
8. Same-sex "marriage" would further diminish the expectation of paternal commitment.
9. Marriages thrive when spouses specialize in gender-typical roles.
10. Women and marriage domesticate men.
once agian heres the URL if you would like to look into the details of the points...
- cjobeth10
February 11, 2009 9:17AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I don't care what the article says.
I care what sources the article cites. Any old article can make any old claim, but unless the sources they cite are relevant and compelling, the article is as good as Joe Schmoe's rantings about why the world will end in ten days.
Once again, I implore you to look at the titles of the references. You'll see that most of what's written in the article itself is just clever wordplay and misusing research to further one's own ends. The article might -tell- you that the research is against same-sex marriages, but in reality, the references are against divorce and single parents.
You can't build your argument off of research that is making a very different point. You can't pull research out of context and use it for your own ends. That's academic dishonesty.
- QuinceyQuick
February 11, 2009 10:16AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Children need PARENTS
Wait, what is this about women and marriage domesticating men?
Sexism at it's finest, ladies and gentlemen. Sorry, ladies, gentlemen, and wild, crazy, chaotic men who have not yet found a woman to tame them.
- quantummechanik
June 8, 2009 1:37AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The last dictator failed.
When people say that "gays" will be "living among us" it sounds like you're referring to aliens or some unknown life form. But the fact of the matter is, they are people. Living, breathing, human beings just like you and me. They will be “living among us” whether or not gay marriage is legalized. Gay couples are no more playing house than kids who marry young. A man can fall in love with a man just like a man can fall in love with a woman. And who says marriages between a gay couple won’t last? Now days, opposite-sex married couples are getting divorces left and right, what about their children? Should getting divorced be illegal because of that reason too? Other people are free to live their lives happily without the whole world scrutinizing who they fall in love with. Why should they get to dictate how those who are gay get to live? Gay people will always “be among us”. They’re not going anywhere. It’s not like they are a separate species that can be extinct. I say stop fighting and let them live.
- skittles
February 5, 2009 7:42PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Its all really a joke is it not?
I realize that and a lot of times there is a reason for people marring young and that is only because there is an unexpected pregnancy involved no that doesn’t make it right, but there are also laws on getting married to young. If we legalized gay marriage in the U.S. then people would think its ok and safe but there are so many negative effects such as STD’S I realize that there are STD’S in other places too but the risk of getting them is a lot higher when being in a gay sexual relationship. And do you really think its possible for someone to be bi-sexual. To me its just a disgusting joke that people are wanting to experiment with. And that’s wrong.
- cjobeth10
February 5, 2009 11:11PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why are STDs prevelant?
Well, the probable reason why male homosexual sex gives more STDs is that you have two factors involved: (1) penetration and (2) pregnancy.
As a male, you can't get pregnant, so there's no reason for most contraceptives. Similarly, STDs have more commonly passed from penetrator to penetratee (though I'll probably have to find a citation for that one).
As you said, it is "just a disgusting joke" -to you-. To some people, it's a perfectly acceptable lifestyle. How can we have your judgment be more valid than another person's judgment?
- QuinceyQuick
February 6, 2009 11:35AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Does disgusting equal morally wrong to you
I'm serious. I've never equated the two, and I'm asking how you came to that conclusion. I find a lot of things disgusting, and I find a lot of things morally wrong, but they usually do not overlap.
- quantummechanik
June 8, 2009 1:39AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Equal Protection Clause?
"It is irrelevant for equal protection review of statute that voters rather than a legislative body enacted the statute. Lee v. State of Or., D.Or.1995" U.S.C.A. Amend 14, Vol. 8
It doesn't matter who puts the laws in place. If the law violates Equal Protection Clause, it's unconstitutional. End of story.
- QuinceyQuick
February 13, 2009 12:30PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Old Statistics Don’t Prove Anything
Assessing the validity and bias in statistics is a tricky business, and to do it right would require a thorough examination of the study itself, which I certainly can’t do here. However, I can say that it is does not make for a good argument if you cite sources that are outdated. All of these polls cited here are from 2003-2004—if there hasn’t been a more recent poll, given the proposition out in California and the election, I’d be quite surprised—are over four years old and do not reflect the current political trends in the American public. Thus, the assertion that “Americans Reject Gay Marriage” is not adequately supported by evidence. Even if it was, why should that stop our advocacy? If we should make laws to allow gay marriage, then we will be doing so by a democratic process, an instrument of the will of the people.
- The Monk
February 16, 2009 8:33AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Accuracy?
First of all, people see what they want to see. Personally I have seen many polls on the gay marriage issue and the majority of those I've seen indicate that most Americans are in favor of some kind of gay marriage whether it be called a marriage or a civil union. This article is clearly biased toward only those poll results that are favorable to the FRC's side of the argument. The accuracy of polls is always unsure and I highly question the results of some of the polls listed in this argument. Second, whether or not most people agree with banning same sex marriage or not is essentially irrelevant. Majority does not necessarily rule in this country. The majority at one point thought that slavery was acceptable but that does not make it any more justifiable. Prejudice is prejudice regardless of how many people you get to back it up.
- me58
February 28, 2009 10:13PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
This sounds familiar...
Reminiscent of slavery? How about women 's right to vote ? People are naturally resistant to change because they worry about their way of life changing. How will a couple's life be changed if homosexuals are permitted to marry? Answer: their life will not change. People just need to understand that they are not being put in danger by allowing homosexuals to be married, just like they weren't hurt by allowing women to vote.
- Katherinebaird
January 24, 2010 4:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.