Op 26 Juni 2015 bepaalde de Amerikaanse Hoge Raad dat het weigeren van huwelijksvergunningen de clausules over een eerlijk proces en gelijke bescherming uit het veertiende amendement van de Grondwet van de Verenigde Staten schendt. Door deze beslissing werd het homohuwelijk in alle staten van de VS gelegaliseerd.
@8KMNTSG4 jaar4Y
Ja, behalve in staten waar de meerderheid conservatief is
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
In termen van gelijke rechten en persoonlijke vrijheden: hoe belangrijk is het voor u dat alle paren, ongeacht hun geslacht, het recht hebben om te trouwen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Als het homohuwelijk van een vriend of familielid niet direct gevolgen zou hebben voor uw leven, zou u er dan tegen zijn, en op welke gronden?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Waarom denk je dat sommige mensen diep getroffen worden door de huwelijksrechten van anderen die ze niet persoonlijk kennen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Verandert de wettigheid van een huwelijk de waarde van de liefde en toewijding tussen twee mensen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Wat betekent gelijkheid in het huwelijk voor u, en waarom denkt u dat dit zo’n cruciaal vraagstuk in de samenleving is geworden?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Welke invloed heeft de juridische validatie van elke liefdevolle relatie op het sociale weefsel van onze gemeenschappen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Moet de overheid zeggenschap hebben over wie met wie mag trouwen, of is dat een persoonlijke vrijheid?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Kan de erkenning van liefde tussen twee volwassenen uw persoonlijke leven beïnvloeden; zo ja, hoe?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Stel je voor dat je je perfecte partner vindt, maar de regels van de maatschappij verhinderen dat je trouwt; welke emoties roept dat op?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hoe zou jij je voelen als je op basis van een wet niet zou mogen trouwen met de persoon van wie je houdt?
@2J3ZBRJ4 jaar4Y
No form of government should have any involvement in marriage.
@2J3YKT44 jaar4Y
The marriage laws should be "equal" to traditional marriages and divorce decrements which include court decisions such as alimony, fornication, etc.
@2J3WQZQ4 jaar4Y
Explain to me, other than someone making a buck, why you need a religious ceremony and a law to validate how you feel about someone.
@2J3W9CL3 jaar3Y
As long as it's named something else! We call a man a man and a woman a woman so that we know the difference, since marriage is traditionally defined as a man and woman so same sex unions should be defined by a word that describes that! Give them the same rights, benefits, and consequences.
@2J3PGFK4 jaar4Y
Who the hell cares. Why don't we talk about the economy instead???
@2J38PTZ3 jaar3Y
Yes, but marriages are hetero-normative and perpetuate sexism and homophobia.
@2J37K58Republikein4 jaar4Y
No, allow civil unions and increase what civil unions mean and rights within civil unions. Marriage by definition is between man and women because there is a natural way to create offspring, however difficult or easy that may be for each individual marriage. Churches should always remain separate from government, which means they are to be allowed to refuse marriages per their choice. They currently do that with traditional man and women marriages when they feel there is not enough preparation among other reasons. So that should be continued, a church is a following of people not just a building to be admired.
@2J2NLJRRepublikein3 jaar3Y
For me marriage has to do with my faith. I think the Government should stay out of marriage and provide family benefits in place of marriage benefits. For someone to be denied access to their loved ones because they are not married is wrong.
@2J2NDXF3 jaar3Y
Marriage should be a solely religious ceremony and non-religious people should not be married, but have a civil union and a church should have the right to marry, or deny marriage, to whom they choose.
@2J2BZ5N3 jaar3Y
The government has absolutely no business telling anyone who they should or should not marry.
That is legislating someones religious views, and is absolutely contrary to the separation of church and state, as well as an infringement on individual rights.
@2J26NMK4 jaar4Y
Yes- but do not force a church to offer license. Patrons are free to choose churches to hold ceremony as they please. Also, condemn the use of artificial insemination for same sex couples. Children have an inherent right to have a father and mother care for them.
@2J26JM63 jaar3Y
Yes, it's wrong, and no it's not. It's not right for people to bash it constantly when they say it's a sin in the bible. There are thousands of sins but they continue to only bash this particular one. Then LGBT we get it equal rights, but you can't shove this down other people's throats, the hardcore Christians aren't going to accept unless you show the many standpoints not just have pride days and celebrations. Both sides are wrong, but both are right, so I'm a both
@2HZFBC43 jaar3Y
Each state should be able to make their own choice. For example, it is fine if Alabama bans it, while New York makes it legal.
@2HZCG2K4 jaar4Y
I do not support it because I am a Christian, but for the same reason I do not and will not keep anyone from having a same sex marriage. It would be wrong for me to hate someone for it. I do not agree with it, however.
@2HZC2CW3 jaar3Y
From a governmental stand point the term marriage should be changed to civil union for all couples. The term marriage is a religious invention anyway.
@2HZ3PTV3 jaar3Y
Yes, but I still feel a bit uneasy about this as small children may be exposed to public displays affection within the same sex, which I do not feel is natural, but understand, this is something you are born with. However, as the years pass, this will be considered 'normal' and this issue will be a thing of the past.
@2HYY4C63 jaar3Y
Marriage should be abolished - replaced with limited term co-habitation contracts
@2HYX3LP3 jaar3Y
Yes but call it something else to alleviate the fears of the religious nuts. I couldn't care less what others do in regard to their marriages and it does not threaten mine.
@2HYSG5P4 jaar4Y
Marriage was created to safeguard the human race, i.e. protect women and children. In the U.S. and other parts of the world it is used to control permissions and freedoms, i.e. taxes, property, and medical decisions. Therefore, marriage should not be religious or based on sex. It is a legal status therefore it should be based upon two people who decide they want to enter a legal relationship.
@2HYKBJH4 jaar4Y
Yes, it's not my right to say if someone could marry someone else that they love, regardless of sexual orientation.
@2HYC6C84 jaar4Y
Don't care, just don't be all up in my face about it and broadcast it everywhere. Just do what you want and go about your business.
@NB23F53 jaar3Y
They may get married but only receive "marriage" benefits if they have children.
@N946VJ4 jaar4Y
I couldn't care who marries whom, or what. All I ask is that if a gay couple get married, that they call it gay married to substantiate the difference. That way, if I say I am married, the person asking knows I am married to a woman. If I said I was gay married, they would know my partner was a male. That is all I would ask for. Fair enough.
@N828FM3 jaar3Y
Civil Unions for same-sex couples and heterosexual couples. Marriage is a religious sacrament. Separation of Church and State is well documented. The State should not be allowed to name one of its numerous licenses after a Christian sacrament. The Church is allowed to dictate who it will and will not provide a marriage ceremony. This should solve the whole thing. It's semantics.
@N4GVS74 jaar4Y
It shouldn't be called "marriage" because marriage from the very beginning was between a man and a woman. They should call it something else and they should be allowed to be together.
@N2P4J53 jaar3Y
For a workers party. For a workers government. For the right of gay, lesbian, bisexual, & transgender marriage - and divorce! For full democratic rights for GBLT people. Defend the 1st Amendment Jeffersonian-Madisonian separation of religion & state, including 1st & 14th Amendment equality before the law for GBLT people. For the 2nd Amendment right of armed self-defense by GBLT people against bigoted terrorism. For the arming of GBLT people in self-defense against bigoted terrorism.
@MSJG3Z4 jaar4Y
Individual decision, does not need a master to grant permission.
@MB9WMR4 jaar4Y
Call it a partnershjp, and give them rights - but DON'T call it marriage!
@MB7LK43 jaar3Y
It's not the role of government to define the term "marriage" for the people and their religions. There is no valid reason for the state to be involved in, or to regulate, adult consensual relationships that don't involve procreation. But it should have nothing to do with "banning" or refusing to allow anyone to define their relationship and the term they choose for it, however they, and their religion, defines it.
@M9QS3W4 jaar4Y
Clergy should not act as agents of the state in witnessing marriages. All unions gay and straight should be civil. If the couple wishes to have a religious ceremony subsequently then they can do so according to the rules of their house of worship.
@M9QBLM3 jaar3Y
Marriage should be seperated from the ritual, churches should not be required to marry everyone but, I believe it is financially a better decision to be inclusive of multiple no traditional types of relationships for marriages
@M9LP8R3 jaar3Y
I think that all marriages should be called marriages, but the churches could have sacremental marriages.
@M98THR3 jaar3Y
yes, Government has no business in this matter
@M87S2T3 jaar3Y
I don't need the state to sanction marriage. It's a religious institution.
@M84PP83 jaar3Y
Government should not be involved with this.
@M65JNB3 jaar3Y
Why is the government allowed to define relationships?
@M5ZSRY3 jaar3Y
Let the individuals, families, and churches to decide. Not the Federal government.
@M58RHB4 jaar4Y
I don't believe marriage as long as divorce is legal. The decision to remain committed to another is a second by second decision and the glamorization of marriage has corrupted youth to unrealistic expectations of married life. religion, and the law have failed to prove marriage as necessary or a natural phenomena. no legal perks should be given to those who decided to make this oath.
@M2PSK83 jaar3Y
Separate the religious and civil aspects of marriage. The government recognizes civil unions for all couples, gay or straight, then let the churches decide which ones they will recognize.
De historische activiteit van gebruikers die zich bezighouden met deze question .
Loading data...
Grafiek laden...
De politieke thema’s laden van gebruikers die zich met deze discussie hebben beziggehouden
Loading data...