How does gay marriage affect you?

This question is meant for the people who claim that gays getting married has negative effects on other people. I want to know exactly how it effects people. Anyone who posts that it it makes them uncomfortable or offends them will be ignored, since not being offended or made uncomfortable is not a right.

 

It has no affect on anyone. <<< Mod Edit: Flamebaiting >>>

 

I was going to say that it effects me because by being not allowed it means that there are people in my society who have freedom to live their lives as they see fit (with other consenting adults) denied to them and if it's denied to them then it means that none of us are really safe from having our rights denied to us, but since your question is slightly different to what I thought I guess I won't type this.

 

How does it affect you? You're straight, I assume? Aren't you people always saying that if it doesn't affect you, you shouldn't have an opinion on it?

 

You can have an opinion on it. But the question is clear.

How gay marriage can affect you?

The other points in this thread does't fit.

 

I'm using the same point. If you're not gay, it doesn't affect you. So if you're straight and you're asking me how gay marriage affects me, I can simply mirror that question back to you and it's just as valid.

 

I may have to go to a couple of extra weddings.

 

This thread will not be popular, its one thing to talk out of the side of your face and rant about how much gays want to destroy our way of life (including apple pie), but to actually specify what those issues will be area bit more difficult.

Its easier to just use the same (*)(*)(*)(*) arguments over and over and over until you can convince yourself that they really are out to destroy your way of life.

 

Tax breaks and governmental entitlements arent "rights" either.

 

Regardless of what they are, they should not be denied homosexual people. If you can prove that they should, then you actually have something to say. Otherwise, you just disagree with those who oppose you, and that is understandable (although it doesn't necessarily define reality).

 

you can't give tax breaks based upon how one has sex. If you are for fixing th tax code then I'm with you. If you are for changing who can be added to health insurance policies, as long as you are willing to pay, again I'm with you.

If you want to allow a person to will or donate some portion of their SS benefit then I'm with you again. None of those things has anything to do with whether you diddle Joan or John.

The problem with "gay rights" is that you are trying to segregate a small % of the population (1.7% according to gay times) based upon a specific sexual act.

 

Voted 3 Times Against it (Including Prop H8te) only to have my Majority vote not counted .

 

Doesn't really affect me, except for the fire and brimstone reigning down from heaven.

 

Stop being ridiculous; "marriage" is about more than "how one has sex".

It's that kind of bigoted-ignorance, which reminds me of monkeys flinging poop.

 

Well, you can't do anything about that; can you?

 

Gator, you cannot vote-away people's rights.

 

Right, that takes Activist Judges .

 

Im very supportive of male gay marriages. Many of them are good looking high income earners. This reduces my fellow potential competitior for good looking girlfriend/wife. I can only imagine my life as the emperor if I am the only straight man left in the world!

 

Increasing your chances of dating isnt a valid use of government tax breaks and governmental entitlements.

 

did you bother to read the rest of my post? Segregating 1.7% of the population because they engage in sex differently than 98.3% of the population is just silly.

Make rules which are easy to follow. Tax laws should be constant for all people. We should not make special rules because 2 women have sex with each other

 

What about gay couples that can't have sex? They do exist just like straight couples in the same position.

 

are they petting, exchanging tongue etc?

 

In the case of one couple I know they are at least kissing but one has no sensation below the neck, so what specific (your choice of word) sexual act are they engaging in which other disabled couples aren't?

 

so it still is about sex. Did they get together before "no sensation" ?

it comes down to the sexual act. If Joe diddles Joan then they are heterosexual.

If Joe diddles John then homosexual.

The definition is real clear and easy to follow.

 

true, however, when there are special rules because a man and a woman have sex with each other, you can't deny 2 women who have sex with each other those same rights.