What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized?

What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized?

The terrible truth about what will happen if gay marriage is legalized in America. Hopefully this pie chart will clear up any confusion about the outcomes of legalizing gay marriage in America!

Email

177
From The PBH NetworkHot On The Web
  1. That pie chart is hilarious. Great way to start my Tuesday. Thanks!

  2. TheReviewer says:

    Come on, everyone knows terrorists are behind the gay rights movement.

  3. Billy Bob Thursday says:

    Great! Now make a chart about what will happen if people are allowed to marry their sister, or a horse, or a car, or a hundred women, or a fictional character!

    Then make one about the incredible, end-of-humanity-and-then-some nastiness that would occur if none of those are allowed!

    • Slimm says:

      Right, because that is the same. Dumb @ss.

    • Anonymous says:

      The thing is, is that you are wrong on both fronts:

      1. No one wants to or needs to marry siblings or inhuman things. What you fear is them boning those things, which I guarantee won’t be stopped with or without marriage. Gays want marriage because not only do they love their partners and deserve it, but also because there are certain legal rights that marriage provides. If you are on life support, I doubt your car is going to evoke power of attorney.

      2. The end-of-humanity-and-then-some nastiness that would occur is that feeling that you get when you love somebody more than anything else in the world, and you are treated like a second-class citizen for it. I’m sure you’ve been in love with a girl, and now imagine that people are telling you that despite your love, you are not allowed to express that. Yeah. End of the world and then some is right.

      • anon. says:

        this is such an iffy subject but at the same time.. you could argue people who want to marry there sisters really think they love there sisters and if society deicided to show people dating their sisters in tv all the time and make us believe its normal then we would thing they deserve rights too wouldn’t we?
        however i don’t want to tell anyone what to do i know that a man and woman are meant to be together (thats why we fit together like a puzzle literally) sex is not just meant for fun and pleasure its meant to add to the population and only a man and woman can do that. But at the same time even though i personally believe that go ahead and marry who you want and be happy we all sin at some point its your own choice

        • jesus your saviour says:

          Bonobos, who’s DNA is 98% the same as humans have been seen practicing homosexuality so I believe that says its perfectly natural. They are our ancestors not a clump of mud that god breathed into like you probably think because a book tells you.

          • Anthropology Major says:

            Actually, Bonobos aren’t our ancestors, not in the way people think but they do have a form of relationship to us. And there is something else that people should know about Bonobos: they are one of the least aggressive primates in the animal kingdom. Their moto really should be “make love, not war” because they often times resolve disputes with sex more than fighting and aggression. We could learn a lot from them, to be perfectly honest. Unless you’re a conservative Christian who believes that people are better than any other living thing on the planet…oh, wait, I mean heterosexual people.
            As far as “sinning” goes (to a another posters comment,) it’s a God-based/monotheistic concept. Many religions don’t recognize most of the crap they do as “sins” and there are thousands of cultures out there that differ from the “American culture” (I use that term loosely) with completely different beliefs about love, marriage, union, and gender rolls, which is why religion and politics should stay completely on their respective sides of the spectrum. Funny how we think our culture is the “right” one and the only one that matters. Land of the free my @ss.

          • Man of Common Sense says:

            Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide are very similar from a molecular structure too, but one will kill you, quickly. Your logic with primates fails.

            • Anonymous says:

              Actually, an excess of either will kill you. Not sure what that means for your argument, but I think it means you can shove it 🙂

            • Xela says:

              Actually his logic with primates prevails. Your argument is a false analogy (a type of logical fallacy); we are talking about non-human primates, not elemental gases. These two are completely different subject matters.

            • Biology says:

              Actually his logic is pretty valid..
              If you’d paid attention in high school, you’d know that most parts (close to 95%) of DNA/gene code are ‘building blocks’ which are the same for ALL living creatures – e.g. insects, fish, humans etc.. Does this mean we are 95% the same as fish? Go ahead and say we may as well live underwater, or fly..

          • ChrisH says:

            Well. yeah. But that 2% is awfully important. We share 50% of our DNA with bananas, but that’s no reason to say they are half-human. And Bonobos fling their faeces at things they don’t like which tends to be discouraged in humans. The argument that ‘animals do it, so it’s natural’ is valid, but just ’cause it’s natural doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea. Your argument is invalid from start to end – and I’m not even opposed to homosexuality!

        • John says:

          “Sex is ment to add to the population”? So in that case; we have two kids and don’t intend to have any more – should we stop having sex then?

            • Pope Snarky says:

              Hail Eris!

              Isn’t it too bad that *your word* != LAW?

              Snarky

            • Anonymous says:

              NO!
              Sex is not used just for children. Sex is to show affection, to reproduce and because it is pleasurable. To have sex for the sole sake of having children is wrong because you are using the other person. Sex should be able to produce offspring but it is NOT the sole cause. That is wrong. Sex should be for its own sake i.e to fulfill all its goals.

        • Anon.2 says:

          The problem with Gay Marriage is that once the law is made, it opens the door for lawyers to further exploit more laws regarding marriage. “This man loves his daughter! This man loves all 5 of those people! This man loves that animal!”

          Where money can be made, lawyers will follow…

          • Anonymous says:

            people had sex with their siblings in the bible. that book is messed up.

          • Anonymous says:

            Then solve the issue and dissolve all marriage. No Marriage, No Divorce, no commitment, no problems, right?

          • Anonymous says:

            But by that logic no one should be allowed to marry because it apparently is a slippery slope to any kind of marriage.

          • Scarlett says:

            Say, for instance, this does happen. Gay marriage is legalized and lawyers start to “further” exploit marriage laws.

            Who gives a shit? If a daughter loves her dad back that much (and is 18) I honestly don’t care if they get married or not.
            Polygamy? There are already many polygamist families even here, in the United States. There’s shows about them! And once you see the wives’ perspectives on it all, you’re happy for them. You learn about what they go through, including getting ridiculed for being in such a family, even though they all love their husband AND care for each other and each others kids.

            As for animals, I kind of have to draw the line there. Lawyers will not be able to manipulate the laws to include inter-species marriage. Or it is highly unlikely because a cat isn’t going to be able to do anything with the legal rights that come with marriage. (Which, in the end, is all that homosexuals want. )

          • Rachel says:

            …and your point?

            As long as the union involves consenting adults, why does it matter to you who they are or how many there are?

            We – as a society – are against incest and polygamy because of social stigmas. I don’t have sexual attraction to my family members, just like I don’t have sexual attraction to members of the same sex, but who am I to tell anyone else how they can’t feel?

            Granted, there may be some genetic mutations if a father/daughter procreate, but that I will leave up to doctors. Otherwise, stay out of people’s bedrooms unless a child or an non-consenting party is involved.

          • Anonymous says:

            But you’re not really arguing against gay marriage. Just things it MAY lead to. If you’re just shutting the door now in order to stop other unrelated things from happening down the road, then we should have shut the door at interracial marriage. Or marriage period. Instead of shutting the door at gay marriage to stop the other things you don’t want, decide what you don’t want and shut the door there.

        • Anonymous says:

          Men and Women do populate this Earth, but what about those couples that are infertile? They cannot have children, but we allow them the right to marry because of their love for one another. Until we deny these people that right, then the argument of procreation cannot be used for anti gay marriage purposes.

          This graph is nothing more than a tounge and cheek joke to point out that gay marriage has no real damaging affect.

          • Anonymous says:

            Great response!!!

          • Well, it logically follows. . . says:

            I’m for prohibiting marriage among infertile couples, senior citizens past child-bearing age, any couple involving a man who can’t get an erection (unless they contractually agree to undergo artificial insemination using his sperm) and any couple that opts not to have children. I’m also for nullifying any marriages in which the couple goes through any prolonged period (which the government can define) without sex. After all, according to one commenter “i know that a man and woman are meant to be together (thats why we fit together like a puzzle literally).” So if you aren’t putting your “puzzle pieces” together, then you aren’t fulfilling the purpose of marriage. If we let that kind of craziness continue, well, it’s just wrong.

            • Warface363 says:

              Soooo… you’re saying that we should act like other animals, where we have sex with a female, get her all preggers, then when we stop having sex/kids , you part ways, and soon after hook up with another female have even more sex with, and do the same thing, no problem? i’d jump on that train! sounds like us guys get the better part of that deal.

            • Anonymous says:

              Seems that you have so many strict expectations from humanity.
              Be careful to not fall into one of your prohibitions. Life gives you surprises and you never know how you will end until you are in the shoes of those people.

        • My2Cents says:

          WRONG ANSWER!
          First of all, with more than 6 billion people on the planet and many, many of them suffering severe poverty I hardley believe that procreation is of ANY significant importance what so ever. That is an antiquated dogma from a belief system that is not even relevant to where we are in time and space.
          Second, IF we were going to accept your premis…even for the sake of argument… I will go you one step farther and say THIS:
          If marriage (and sex) are meant for the sake of procreation and we are going to prevent gays marrying because they can not naturally procreate (which, by the way, is debatable because there are such things as invetro and surregacy, etc) then we MUST forbid heterosexual couples who are infertile and can not procreate naturally, from marrying. That makes sense, doesn’t it??
          And one more thing. There are many, many gay couples who want desperately to raise children in their loving homes and do you know what they do? They ADOPT the babies that your daughter and her heterosexual lover created out of fun and not love and commitment! They take these unwanted, beautiful babies and LOVE and NURTURE them. They want what so many haughty-taughty hetero’s take horribly for granted and just throw away.
          Look at Anthropology Major’s note. You, my friend, like many others are trapped inside your own world view. It’s a very limited and unfulfilling place to be. Step out, take a look at the rest of the world… you’ll see!

          • philip says:

            The only way to frame an argument against gay marriage is through religion. Your comment suggests banning infertile couples from marrying, which the Catholic Church already does. The right to a civil marriage will not change any religious definition of the “institution” of marriage. The Catholic Church will still be allowed to ban gays, the elderly, infertile couples, the clergy and divorcees from their version of marriage, which was specifically designed to insure the continuation of the Church in the future (by raising good Catholic children).
            Civil marriage was partially modeled on the religious institution: there is a state interest in citizens raising the next generation. However, civil marriage is not only about raising children (which has nothing to do with the biological function of child-bearing). The state also has an interest in adults agreeing to take care of each other, thus shifting a societal burden off the general population.
            Within the realm of a society, governments have defined the nuclear family as the basic building block (as has the Church). By using this measurement, any governing body (be it religious, civic, or otherwise) reduces its own burden of care by allowing individuals to form this basic familial unit which, by definition, takes care of its own members.
            Religion and secular society run in parallel. The argument against gay marriage, as framed by religion, is valid inasmuch as the Church’s interest in marriage is very heavily burdened by the need for a new generation of congregants. Gay marriage, when framed by societal interest, will lessen the burden on all other individuals and family units within the society by reducing the number of individuals for whom said society is responsible. When those who subscribe to the religious argument against gay marriage are able to separate religious interest from secular societal interest (by realizing that any argument for gay marriage is not asking any church to change its definition of marriage) they inevitably realize the societal benefits of allowing gay marriage and are alleviated of the fear that their religious institution is being attacked.

            • Anonymous says:

              Ummmmm… false. The Catholic church DOES NOT ban infertile couples from marrying. I should know. I am Catholic, I study Catholicism, and I used to work for a Catholic church and I am still for gay marriage. Let me play devil’s advocate.
              The argument against gay marriage is NOT solely religious. It is also on moral grounds. Should a fifty year old man be allowed to marry an 11 year old girl? They love each other. Why not? Say she is even so mature for her age that she understands what love is. Then by that logic they should be able to get married. Correct? Say he’s a pedophile, and he only likes 10-12 year old girls. He loves her, she loves him. Wedding bells right? False. We need to stop thinking ‘they love each other, it should be ok’ that argument has gotten us nowhere! We need to stop fighting the church by saying ‘they hate gays’. Obviously no one has read the Catechism. You need to study the opposing side in battle, so study the opposing side in this debate as well! I charge everyone to LEARN!! Until then, our arguments will keep getting shot down and we wont be helping anyone.

          • Anonymous says:

            could not have said it better…bravo to you!!

            • Sylvia S says:

              There is no possible way an 11 year old girl can understand exactly what love is the way a 50 year old man does because she has had no other experience and probably hasn’t even had a first kiss yet. Of course someone only liking 10-12 year olds is wrong and shouldn’t marry the 11 year old because he doesn’t really love her if its on a timer. If however, they are together for 10 years somehow, and she is 21 or even older and decides she is ready for marriage and children and has grown up to be a real woman, why can’t she marry him as a 61 year old. Notice how in today’s society she would be considered a gold digger, except for those who know how in love they are.
              No one should get married after two years. Gay or straight or bi. And what about the gay people who have been together for 25 years and have adopted a child together and love each other, respect each other, and are loyal to each other? That’s more than what most people, including Catholics or whatever ridiculous religion someone chooses to be a part of, can say.
              I feel that if someone is willing to believe in a fairy tale to the extent of shoving it down other peoples throats then they should leave people who are in love alone to do as they please. It’s not your bed room therefore it doesn’t concern you what so ever! The world is over populated anyway. If you do believe in all that jazz then maybe look at it as gods will to make these people gay and reduce the planets population so that it has a greater chance of surviving because there will be less people around to kill and pollute it.

          • best arguement ever. and i would just like to say that all of the hetersexual people in this world are the ones having these homosexual people. so maybe if they stopped having sex and having children that end up falling in love with someone of the same sex they could stop worrying about homosexuals fighting for their right to be married and love these orphaned babies.

        • yea says:

          Too bad the united states is becomming over populated sweetie. way to go breeders.

        • Aaron Mcrotchout says:

          Planet earth has plenty of people, actually way too many. It doesnt matter if sex is meant for reproduction, gay marriage isnt gonna change that. People are gonna have sex whether they’re married or not, even if its not for reproduction and even sometimes with the same sex. its not a big deal. It would be a great thing if we could stop people from reproducing so much.

        • Anonymous says:

          you just pulled the words right out of my mouth 🙂

        • HF says:

          There’s possibly nothing that enrages me more than people referring to LOVE as “sin.”

      • DFD says:

        Your arguments are worthless

      • Anonymous says:

        Forget them, you’ve made the only decent point here. Where do we draw the line, could you not say the same thing about marrying your sister? But what if you love her?

        Just because you love someone, doesn’t make it right. They want to screw each other fine. Just do it in some dark hole and feel ashamed of it like you’re supposed to.

        • Sylvia S says:

          It’s not legal to marry or have sex with family anymore (royal families used to only marry family) because it is unhealthy for the offspring. It’s like having sex with someone but not telling them you have aids. Both of the family members have a recessive gene that is damaging or a health issue and when the child is born, it has a much higher chance of contracting that (life threatening) disease. That’s why people who own pure bread dogs have higher vet bills. It is a form of incest so they have more health issues than mutts. Why would someone want to bring a child into this world knowing they are giving it a horrible, difficult, co-dependent life?
          Gay people do not have that issue. If they choose they can adopt a child with mental disabilities or other health issues and care for it since that childs heterosexual parents refused to. They have caused no harm to this world ever! Let them love while you focus on your wars half way across the world!

      • Anonymous says:

        I have no idea why the government in the marriage business and legal rights are granted based on government recognized sexual relationships.

        Give any two mutually-dependent adults who live together long-term a tax break, power of attorney, etc. if they apply. I mean everyone: man/woman, man/man, woman/woman, elderly mother/adult child, brother/sister, roommates, etc.

        Want to get married? Do it is the church or whatever other religious organization you choose and keep the government (and special rights) out of it.

        • BelieverInFaith says:

          This is the best point on here! The goverment really only marries anyone for the money. If you want to marry, marry who you love! Yes the bible says its wrong, but we are all sinners (even if your not a believer). In my opion its strange for a male/male or female/female marraige, but atleast let them have some type of union. There is no reason for two people in love not to be able to have that, right?

          • anon. says:

            the bible doesn’t say anything wrong, you just might not like what it says because it does not make you as happy. but this life isn’t meant to just find pleasure.. we should be happy but we shouldn’t just do whatever the heck we want because it makes us feel good.

            • quote says:

              Just putting it out there,
              From the Bible, Ecclesiastes VIII 15
              “To eat, and to drink, and to be merry”
              Doesn’t this just imply that humans should just enjoy life? Eat good food, drink good whiskey (or wine or whatever floats your boat) and enjoy yourself, could also include sex. I have to say the only comments on here that I find agreeable are the devil’s advocate and the separation of religion and state. The laws that one benefits from marriage are important and should not be given to only heterosexuals.

              PS. Can we get off the topic of the 12 year old and the 50 year old? The pie chart refers to the consequences of a homosexual marriage within the US sadly isn’t true (not with that damned Westborro Baptist church around… Did they really try to through picket at a 9-year old’s funeral?)

      • Anonymous says:

        ANONYMOUS,
        YOU JUST SAID A MOUTH FULL!

    • ana says:

      I think all hes saying that “Its GOING to be just FINE PPL” if gay rights get legalized. Soo many ppl freak out about this topic as if its gana affect them somehow in the bad way. Where as all thats going to happen is “gay ppl will just get married” Like $hit. World isnt gana end. Grow up.

      • Anonymous says:

        lol what are you 12? either that or youre a moron.

      • jesus your saviour says:

        yeah. We have gay marriage here in Canada and our government hasn’t collapsed yet. its no big deal. I find it funny that america is so proud of freedom and such but yet its taking you guys this long to leagalize gay marrige. I’m pretty sure its leagl in alot of european countries aswell though im to play to look that up right now.

    • Anonymous says:

      I actually like your answer a lot Billy Bob!

      Hopefully I’m correct in saying that you’re belittling the pie chart, not the actual concept of homosexual marriage.

      As a statistician I can confirm that this is completely the wrong chart to be using.

      • Anonymous says:

        Statistics is the discipline that proves that every human on the planet has one testicle.

        Just sayin.

    • Anonymous says:

      You CAN marry your sister. If you’re male. And you can marry your brother, if you’re female. The major point everyone is missing is that marriage laws are discriminatory against gender, not sexual orientation. It’s comparable to women being unable to vote– not screwing a toaster.

    • Umm.. says:

      Let’s pretend for a second that what you suggest above is true, and that legalizing gay marriage would somehow open the door for people to marry family members/multiple people/animals/inanimate objects…I still don’t see how that would affect you personally, unless you’re afraid that if you were allowed to marry your car, you’d leave your wife for it or something.

      • just thinkin says:

        I think their main concern is the degeneration of a moral basis in America. Society changes, and definitions of the “norm” follow. Only sixty years ago, any suggestion of gay marriage would have been met with the same responses that I have seen in this thread- “Like that’ll ever happen, dumbass”. It’s ridiculous to think that allowing gay marriage won’t change our society. For better or for worse, time will only tell.

        The reason I am against homosexual copulation is because it IS purely pleasure driven. Heterosexual relations are for the continuation of our species. Under religious pretexts, heterosexual adulterers are condemned the same as homosexual. At the bottom line, I honestly believe that sex should only be for marriage, for the development of a family.

        • Pope Snarky says:

          Hail Eris!

          …Really? Nearly seven BILLION and counting isn’t enough of a cushion? Every sexual act has to be procreative, not merely for pleasure or as an expression of love? Guess that leaves out straight, post-menopausal women — they can never have sex again. Straight, infertile couples, too. Also, straight guys who get vasectomies. Turns sex itself into quite the hideous perversion, on top of everything, because it takes weeks, at minimum, to be sure, and a good six months to be really sure. That whole time, people have to be consciously thinking of procreation? That’s sick, and I’m not using vernacular.

          Snarky

        • Anonymous says:

          @ Just thinkin…Sorry that you and your hetero partner don’t have sex for pleasure, that is if she hasn’t left you for being a bore din the sac and a moron.

          Also you idea that gays somehow are to blame for societies degeneration of morals is pathetic. Like you said 60 years ago we couldn’t even talk about gays in public but somehow they are to blame? reaching a bit don’t ya think.

        • FR says:

          By that logic, priests are committing a sin by not creating successive generations due to their vow of celibacy. Not everyone in the world needs to procreate. Some people will spend their entire life not having sex and won’t get married. But that doesn’t mean that the human race is now endangered. The times have changed. The end-all be-all of a human being’s existence isn’t to reproduce. If I never had children I’m pretty sure the earth would keep on spinning and the human race would continue on as it was.

          • Anonymous says:

            thats why i’m a PROTESTant! No where in the bible does it say priest CAN’T marry! Now that’s against humanity!

        • kurisu7885 says:

          Hihgly publicized heterosexual marriages begin and end almost like clockwork , many of the biggest opponents of the legalization of homosexual marriage are more their second or later divorce, and somehow two guys boning is going to “threaten the morality of marriage”?

        • anon. says:

          i love your response you said what i tried to say beautifully

        • zzzrrr says:

          If that is the case, why were humans created to have sexual feelings? Why did GOD create us to have pleasure during sex? If women were not meant to have sex for their enjoyment why did God create them to have multiple orgasms? Think about it. Men, in religious leadership roles for hundreds of years have always been so intimidated by women and their sexuality that they try to control it with stupid rules like sex should only be for procreation, contraception is a sin, abstinence is the only form of contraception allowed, etc. (That is speaking from my experience with Catholicism.) It’s all about control.

        • Interstateplates says:

          If that’s so, why did god give woman a clitoris?

          What part does that play in reproduction? (don’t try the “to make her want to reproduce” crap – since woman is biblically supposed to ‘honor and obey’ her husband, rape would work just as well)

    • Mr. Bill says:

      Just because you are the result of your father having sex with his sister is no reason to come down on everyone else.

      btw – moron!

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually in Japan people marry pillows, nintendo ds, fictional characters and blow up dolls. This is just a Fact.

    • Rey says:

      OK, then let the cousin-f***ers and horse-lovers and polygamists and car fetishists struggle for a couple centuries to gain acceptance in society to the point where only a small minority opposed their behavior, and then they can have the same civil rights. Of course, cousin sex and polygamy are actually on a downward trend of societal acceptance, as they were sanctioned in biblical times as completely natural and have become more taboo, as opposed to homosexuality, which was formerly seen as unnatural, but is now pretty readily accepted. So, the short answer is, yes you may continue to schtupp your horse or your sister or your car, but you gotta fight for your right to marry them.

    • m says:

      lol good one ya stupid fuck

    • Anonymous says:

      Maybe you need a graph that shows the difference between equal rights and being dumb

    • Anonymous says:

      I wish I could punch you in the mouth right now, you ignorant prick!

    • Anonygrl says:

      I fear, Billy Bob Thursday, that if people are allowed to marry their sisters, it will result in more unfortunates like you; unfortunate people who seem obsessed with being allowed to marry their pets, inanimate objects or other non-consenting/non-adults. Frankly, however, if you wish to marry your lawn furniture or Jesus. I wish you all the best. I will hazard a guess that the chances of one hundred women wanting to marry you is rather small.

      However, since none of that has anything to do with marriage equality, it really doesn’t matter in this discussion.

    • Nope says:

      You are so wrong its not even funny. Giving rights to 2 people who love eachother will not allow incest or marrying a dog or a toaster. Nor will it cause the world to explode and humanity to end – if anything it will make people happy because they will finally be given their basic rights that MORONS like you have denied to them for some incomprehensible reason.

  4. HmmThatsOdd says:

    You do realize that, on occasion, above this graph is a Michelle Bachman ad on preserving traditional marriage.

  5. Steven E. Radd says:

    This thing is still an issue? I think myself and the rest of the intellectual half of the nation agrees that this should have, and in all truth of the matter could have been solved, even 20 years ago. The same morons keep resurrecting or resurfacing every time a civil liberties issue comes around. It’s the 21st century and yet people are still opposed to/afraid of gay marriage and for all the wrong reasons, granted, there’s no such thing as a good reason to be opposed to it. You say “god says” and I reiterate “no such thing as a good reason…”

    The only “reason” was for the purpose of the reproduction and survival of a warring nation, or clan I should say, thousands of years ago. Since homosexuality generally doesn’t yield a life (which honestly is more of a problem solver these days) it’s kind of counter productive if you’re trying to get some sort of human mass production thing going on. So there, I’ve identified for you a certain cultural reason that’s been incorporated into a dogmatic text that no longer serves any purpose, if there ever was one to begin with.

    But I could go off on the god delusion for pages, and repeat myself, saying the same thing a thousand different ways, which ultimately is there is no such thing as a reason for the opposition of gay marriage.

    • Anthropology Major says:

      “which honestly is more of a problem solver these days” – brilliant! I agree with everything you’ve just said.

    • My2Cents says:

      Well said. Bravo!

    • UHHHH says:

      You do realize the dollar bills you spend daily clearly states “In God We Trust”??? hmm. Must just be some kind of joke the FreeMasons are playing on us…

      • Anonymous says:

        You do realize that the separation of church and state is in the First Amendment of the Constitution and many phrases involving God are now simply idioms, yes?

        • Bravely Anonymous says:

          You do realize that the First Amendment of the US Constitution does not have the separation of church and state in it?

          Perhaps you’re aware that the referent in the idioms to which you refer is creator of the universe, and the one to whom each of us will one day answer?

          And did you know that FreeMasons actually are not revenue neutral?

          • Simon says:

            You do realize the idea of “GOD” isn’t up to the most popular religion in the country. Saying “In God we trust” could be referring to anyones God. The idea of one whole nation believing in one religion is ridiculous, not everyone will believe there will be doubters and people who over commit to the ideas passed down in a book. A book written by humans , not God him/her-self .

            The other question is why do you bother wasting your time harping on issues that don’t effect you directly. A man and a man get married or a woman and a woman fully commit to each other and are happy is always better then a man and a women getting married though the wish the could be with someone of the same sex. Or do they deserve to be alone for the rest of their lives? do you intend to “Cure” them? their not sick, their everyday people like you and me, who cares if they get married and adopt thats one less child in an orphanage one less child who grows up without childhood.

            No one deserves that, God said to love thy neighbor. He never said it mattered if they’re straight

          • Icerian says:

            The god mentioned in idioms is referancing to the fact that while we DO claim freedom of religion in the first amendment, that has not always been the case. And religious persecution is raised in us, just as much as gender, ethnic, or social standing gets persecuted.

            This is the 21st century. We are supposed to be smarter than our ancestors. Have we scientifically proving the existance of any god or goddess from any religion? No. So you are basing your statement on faith in your god. The fact that you are trying to force other people to share your mindset is rediculous.

            As to gay marriage rights? Just give them the rights. Who is it going to hurt? Not me. If they are happy, let them friggin be happy.

    • Tom says:

      The other main thing to add to your argument is that gays aren’t going to go “Oh, we can’t get married, looks like I should find a woman and procreate with her!”. – And gays that do plan on adopting or utilizing surrogacy are probably going to do so irrespective of whether they can get married. Not only does gay marriage not limit procreation, but banning gay marriage doesn’t benefit procreation either.

      And that’s only if procreation is considered desirable, which it pretty much isn’t. Yeah. Anti-marriage arguments generally fail hard.

  6. bleunt says:

    “If you allow gay marriage then you need to allow marrying your sister, your dog, a table and seven other people.”

    OK. Yeah. Go for it. Let people marry whoever or whatever they want. As many times as they want. I don’t see how this is an argument. Especially the polygami argument. OF COURSE polygami should be legal.

    • Word Nerd says:

      I would go for polyamory more than polygami because polygami is one guy with multiple wives and polyamory is multiple people with multiple loves. Makes it fair for the girls. 🙂

      • letemmarryandstfu says:

        not only more fair, but sounds more fun too

        • Anonymous says:

          oh yeah and lets teach the little ones commitment is bogus…….. FREE LOVE!

          hippys are GONE for a reason you simpletons!

      • Colleen- behavioural biologist says:

        Well actually, polygamy just means many gametes so it can be one male many females (polygyny) or one female many males (polyandry)

  7. Anonymous says:

    Imagine if you were born into a gay family, how the child would go through school with constant bullying. Who would want to be born into a family with two gay parents? You would be bullied your whole life. Not fair on the next generation. Should never be legal.

    • Anthropology Major says:

      It would only be a problem if the society remains blind and ignorant and too self-righteous. I know a lot of people who come from same-sex parents and they weren’t teased or treated any other way than those of heterosexual parents so your statement is a load of uneducated crap.

      • Anonymous says:

        Yes!
        Guess what? I am a Chrisan — albiet a liberal one – and I support Gay Marriage! Jesus came to Earth to love and serve, and then redeem; nuff said

        • Anonymous says:

          Then your not a believer.

          • HmmThatsOdd says:

            Actually, s/he is. Belief is internal, not external. Whether or not your definition of your religion accepts her is really the crux of your statement. Even according to your book of everything, all it takes is belief: ” That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” -Romans 10:9 . This sentiment is expressed throughout the Bible.

            • nontheist says:

              I’m gonna agree with anon on this one. Varying beliefs in deities? fine, that’s great. Believe what you want. Jesus loves everyone, true. But Jesus also loves those who end up in hell. If you subscribe to a particular religion than those are your beliefs. If you belief in something that completely contradicts what the bible says than you are either a bad christian and are probably going to go to your hell as you won’t repent for your beliefs or you should just accept the fact that your not really a christian at all. Move on from the title. Just be a person a believes in an afterlife and an all-loving deity and vote to legalize gay marriage.

            • Anonymous too says:

              Anon. has accused the above if being a nonbeliever. That is incorrect, owing to the very nature of belief. You’re also assuming a single flavor of Christianity – just one? Baptists, Southern Baptists? Catholics, Seventh-Day Adventists? Lutherans? Presbyterians? Each has different viewpoints yet each is considered a Christian religion. Even the most fervent evangelicals have disagreements between sects. Really, all of this is immaterial anyway. Church and state are separate for a reason, and the so-called moral ground on which the opposition stands is simply phobia and bigotry in disguise.

            • Anonymous says:

              oh shit? im going to hell because i voted for gay marriage? will you pray for me?

          • drklassen says:

            Jesus never said anything about gays.

            • Bravely Anonymous says:

              Jesus did talk about the genders involved in marriage. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and father…”

              No, wait, he said, “Therefore a man shall leave his mother and mother…”

              No, no, that’s not it.

              “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his husband…”

              Oops, let’s try again.

              “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

              Check out http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Matthew+19%3A3-9 for the full context.

              Oh, and Jesus did talk about Sodom, the place where the men of the town attempted homosexual rape of visitors (Luke 10). In that context, he said that final judgment against Sodom would be lighter than judgment against those towns in Israel who rejected the teaching of his disciples.

              And Jesus’ closest disciples agreed that, for gentile Christians, they would be exempt from following the laws of Moses, except for laws relating to sexual behavior (which would include such matters as fornication, adultery, same-gendered sex, beastiality, etc.), and ingesting the blood of animals (a prohibition dating back to Noah).

              So the modern saw that “Jesus had nothing to say about homosexual marriage” on the above and many other grounds avoids paying attention to Biblical teachings.

            • Christian-and-for-gay-marriage says:

              And Jesus wouldn’t have approved of heterosexual gang rape, either, so how relevant is either one to the discussion of gay marriage?

              I am a Christian because Jesus is my Lord and Savior. Any other so-called “requirements” of being Christian are just ways for some people to divide Christians into separate “classes,” which is not God’s will for us (in my humble opinion).

          • Grammar! says:

            “you’re”

          • kurisu7885 says:

            And I’m pretty sure your god is pretty annoyed that you keep thinking you know what he thinks.

          • Anonymous says:

            And you are? Tell me, what makes you so much more able and worthy to pass judgment on others? You give other Christians like me a bad name. I’m ashamed to call myself the same religion as you. Jesus loves you with all his soul and if he can do that with someone as closed minded and judgmental as you are I’m sure he can do it for two people who have the same gender who are just trying to have a life together, for better or for worse.

      • My2Cents says:

        Right ON!

    • Pam-cakes says:

      Children of poor parents also go through school with constant bullying. People of different races are frequently bullied through school.

      Should those people not be allowed to marry or have children? What a stupid arguement.

      I’m Christian, I’m republican, and I’m for gay marriage.

      • Appreciative says:

        Thank you for that. Being republican should have absolutely nothing to do with the “issue” of gay marriage. More voices like yours should be prominent in decision-making.

    • HmmThatsOdd says:

      Kids with straight parents are bullied as it is. Bullying is an internal mechanism, not external; that can’t be fixed by trying to make all kids conform to an arbitrary standard of in order to maximize their avoidance of social conflict. Also, props on blaming the victim.

      • Proud to be Bi says:

        Thank you HmmThatsOdd.
        I don’t know why people toss out the ‘bully’ card when it comes to non-hetero couples raising children. The only way to eliminate bullying from a child’s life – is to eliminate bullying from a child’s life. If we simply urge children to ‘conform’ and be like everyone else so they can avoid bullying – then we’re perpetuating the problem. Eliminating bullying, and prejudices of all kinds, takes many different steps to achieve it – but one main step, is simply acceptance. Everyone on this planet is an individual, and should be allowed to be proud of their individuality. Continuing to point out ‘differences’ like it’s a bad thing, will continue to make it a bad thing.

        And for those who are going to take up the argument that pedophiles, incestuous relationships, bestiality, and the like, are just ‘individuals’ – just stop before you make yourself sound like an idiot…. There’s no comparison between two consenting adults – and fornicating with farm animals or children….

        • Pope Snarky says:

          Hail Eris!

          I find that the people most likely to make “slippery slope” arguments about SSM, of the pederasty/bestiality/etc., variety, tend not to grasp that what makes rape “rape” is the issue of consent. IOW, they sound like idiots for damn good reason.

          Snarky

    • CB says:

      Along with Anthropology Major who has a very true statement if we keep allowing them to not have children together (which btw they already do marriage doesn’t stop that) then it will keep being a “tabboo” thing…by allowing it an accepting it as normal on a legal level it will slowly make its way down till it is as acceptable as a bikini. Because once upon a time that too was a crazy liberal thing to do. And yes I know that is a terrible analogy but try to look past that to the general idea 🙂

    • Steven E. Radd says:

      First of all, “born into a gay family,” get back to me when you’ve figured out how to do and I mean in the most literal of ways. Second, I would let a gay couple adopt a child almost always over a hetero couple. Which couple is more prone to teach the child tolerance and how to handle the ugly world and being yourself and true to yourself? If you think the hetero couple will then you’re full of shit and a hypocrite. And number three: it’s the 21st century. Kids today are a little bit more mature now that the issue with gay marriage has been around long enough. They are generally more open to people who are “different” than them and I even think they shun the bullies. If the kid goes to a Christian school then he/she will be harassed for having gay parents but what parent, gay or straight, in their right minds would send a child to one of those?

      • anon says:

        yeah, two women can get artificially inseminated even though they’re lesbians and a child can be born there.

        steven e radd is a moron!!!!

    • anonymous says:

      I would have rather been born to gay parents than the abusive ones that I had.

      • Anonymous says:

        I agree,and its heterosexuals who interfere with children,and most homosexuals are born to straight parents haha!If 10% of the population have always been born gay,then maybe its nature at work.
        Gay people have the right to love,marriage and divorce as everyone else,lol.

        • Fallacies says:

          Don’t necessarily have a problem with gay marriage I just can’t stand pointless arguments on either side. Obviously most homosexuals are born to straight parents, because most parents are straight in the first place. Also, “nature at work” could be easily argued, as could your use of “always been.” I’m not saying that it doesn’t occur, but homosexuality is clearly a biological disadvantage if one argues they “were born that way,” and an evolutionary disadvantage any other angle one views it from. If you concede that there are gay members of society who act straight in an act of conformity, then you must also concede that there are straight members of society acting gay in an act of nonconformity. And to all those who say that procreation is a problem and/or that our population is “full,” do realize that the worlds’ population, however large, is only the size of generations, not numbers of people. As in, if procreation stopped all together it would take exactly the same amount of time to eliminate 20 people as it would 10 billion if they had the same disparity of generations, so both arguments are illogical. I will spare attacking the problems on the other side of the coin as most of the people commenting on here already took care of those. My only point with this rant is that, yes, usually heterosexual people are the ones repressing the gay community, but bi-sexual individuals have to come off their pedestal at times, too. It should be realized that across the board on ALL species of animals, males go with females. Yes, I realize that some species ENGAGE in homosexual sex, but there is no species where this is the dominant practice, even including plants. So not only does this make that argument ignorant, it sums up my point that you have to realize that same-sex marriage is opposite direction of billions of years of life on Earth, so excuse some people for being a little old-fashioned, and having trouble transitioning into the 21st century where different is the new word for normal. All that aside, I respect the comedic aspect of the pie chart. Kudos!

    • Matt says:

      There is actually a great video on this very topic that you should watch and it’s a better response than I could ever come up with:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q

      It’s a kid who was born of two gay parents advocating for gay rights. I don’t think that you would be bullied your whole life. I, for one, am half Japanese, half Jewish. I look like neither, more of just like a tan caucasian. But what happens is, they look at me, and don’t know that I am a mix of two of the most hated and racially oppressed races of the past hundred years. And no one knows. Sure, if they went to my house, my dad is obviously Jewish and my mom is obviously Japanese. I’m also atheist, which has been polled as the least trusted minority in America, right under muslims and mexicans. But I never got teased at school for that because it’s impossible to tell just from looking at me, just like it’s impossible to tell if a kid has two homosexual parents.

      What is happening here, is you have hatred towards homosexuals, but you also like to think of yourself as a good person. You recognize that hatred is bad. So you turn your argument from one of hatred to one of feigned and ignorant benevolence.

    • Anonymous says:

      What a bs message that has been passed on for ages….just substitute the social “taboo” (socioeconomic status, religion, race, etc). When I was younger, my parents said that they wouldn’t want me to marry a black man and have kids because the kids would be bullied. This message was from my dad (white) and my mom (asian)….what did they think they were creating from their own mix?!? By the way, I was NOT bullied.

      Maybe you should speak up more against bullying rather than against gay marriage and families.

    • Anonymous says:

      And what if you were born into a family with a single parent, a drug addicted parent, or a parent in jail? What if you were born into a family where your father molested you? What if you were born into poverty? Or what if your parents simply didn’t have enough money to buy you those sweet Nike’s that all the other kids had and everyone bullied you because you had to wear hand me down clothes that didn’t fit you growing up. Turns out life’s not fair. But a lot of that shit is survivable. And guess what – NO ONE gets to choose what kind of family they are born into. I’m sure the kids raised by a loving gay or lesbian couple are sure going to be a lot better off than some other kids out there.

    • Anonymous says:

      hey stupid ass, gay couples would adopt. if it was me id rather have 2 gay parents then no parents…

    • thagrateful1 says:

      The only reason children would be bullied is because of ignorant ass people like you. Don’t you think that if we raise our children to live and let live and not judge, then the condemnation of gay people would cease to exist. I would much rather be raised in a loving gay home than a hateful heterosexual one. This debate is so stupid that I can’t believe it’s even a debate! The only reason people judge others so harshly is because they don’t want to take the time to see how f#*%d up they themselves really are! Grow-up MORONS!!!!!

    • gods son says:

      did you go to school at all, or are you totally ignorant. children don’t need a reason to bully each other. maybe white people and black people shouldn’t marry either. the children will bully the half breed. maybe it should be a law that fat kids cant go to school because they will be bullied, or kids with glasses.
      try to pull your head out of your ass and try to think about someone other than your self

    • whothehellcares says:

      If you’re worried about children that are raised by gays being bullied, then we should outlaw red hair too. and braces. and being fat. and being different.

      Let ’em marry. Who honestly cares if they go to hell (if that’s what you believe), it’s not your problem.

    • kurisu7885 says:

      That would only happen so long as certain parents keep teaching their kids it’s ok to bully certain people.

      It was those parents who did their best to kill anti-bullying laws by the way

    • Anonymous says:

      Maybe you should stop bullying the kids then.

    • Anonymous says:

      Really? That might be true, but do you know why? It’s because our society still holds a stigma against gay people, but that stigma is slowly fading and one day it won’t matter. A few generations from now, having gay parents won’t matter for a kid. But if we listen to arguments like yours…that stigma might never completely go away.

      I bet when interracial marriage became legal, mixed kids were made fun of at school as well. Would you have used that as an argument too? Do you still think that shouldn’t have happened? Do you think mixed kids today still get made fun of for having one black parent and one white one, for example? (I’ve never seen that happen.)

  8. You are sooo progressive says:

    What does one wear to a bath house wedding ceremony? Do I sit on the groom side or the groom side? Will the “flower girl” be performing show tunes at the reception? Will the ring bearer present the rings on a silk pillow or from a personal appendage? Who should perform the ceremony, Liza Minelli or Bette Midler? Will the cake be fabulous?

    • God knows all says:

      A Tastefule robe. The groom side. Only if you’re lucky. A Silk Pillow. Liza Minelli. And yes.

      • You are sooo progressive says:

        Liza, huh. We’re gonna need more punch.

        • Anonymous says:

          @You are sooo progressive
          Even your name confuses me. What exactly are you arguing? Somehow every comment on here, for or against gay marriage, has been mature enough to be about the possible outcomes of such a legalization. Or at least spouted some bible verse or other personal belief. Yours is the only comment which ridicules the wedding itself, with a few random gay stereotypes thrown into the mix. Why are you here?
          As for “God knows all”… nice work, that was funny 🙂

  9. Hopeful says:

    People on BOTH sides, we are talking about a civil rights issue here. People should not attack Christianity and the existence of God just because they are “arguing for gay marriage”. Do you think that is going to make the LARGE amount of Christians in this country re-think their position? No, it is going to make them certain that they are right in thinking that supporters of gay marriage are trying to destroy everything they believe in.
    It makes sense that homosexuality was an issue in the Old Testament because, like others have said, the Israeli people needed to populate. Besides, from an evolutionary standpoint, sex IS for procreation. A species cannot continue without it. We are just lucky that we are evolved enough to posses the executive function to make sex into something “more”.
    So, all I’m trying to say here is… if you want to give someone rights that they deserve, don’t do it by belittling another group. Yes, there are Christians that are hateful about homosexuality, but that is not the majority. All that is going to help push the gay rights movement forward is sincerity and creating more love and acceptance in our country. If it is not clear by the discussion on here alone, BOTH sides of the argument are being intolerant. That is our whole problem.

    • Anonymous says:

      Thank you for saying that Hopeful!
      As a Christian myself, I am hurt when other Christians attack anyone. That isn’t right, no matter what you believe and since it gets attention, it paints a picture of Christians and it is a bad representation. The whole basis of Christianity is that Jesus died for our sins to save us. Everyone. Meaning… gasp! WE ARE ALL SINNERS! The dang Christians too! Let those without sin cast the first stone and all that. We are NOT supposed to condemn or judge other people in any way, shape or form. (AND, ahem, if you are a person that is straight, how in the world would you know what it is like to live life as a gay person?) But I digress…
      I love that you mention that BOTH sides are being intolerant, that is something that is rarely mentioned but I find to happen very often.
      My thinking is this: How can Christians expect non-Christians to conform to a Christian idealogy? “Play by my rules, even though you aren’t even playing the same game.” Makes no sense to me, at all. If the arguement comes back to the idea that Christians should teach non-Christians about God, well, telling people that they are wrong certainly isn’t the way to do it. In fact, we are told in scripture to share the good news of Jesus and to leave the rest of it between God and that one person.

      • Anonymous says:

        And I’d like to add, I thought the chart was really funny.

      • Anonybus says:

        I’d just like to give you assloads of kudos for bringing some scripture quotes into the mix that I’m surprised haven’t come around already. You make a great point.

    • Matt says:

      I understand what you’re saying, but it’s a bit different. Christians are a majority, whereas homosexuals are a minority. If you are born white, male, christian, etc. then you just got every advantage you could have from birth. You will never be teased because of your race, and the only time when you will become offended is when someone brings up science in a way that attacks your beliefs. And here’s the difference, when an atheist or pro-choice or pro-homosexual marriage person “attacks religion” it’s from a political standpoint. When a Christian attacks gays it’s everything from calling them the f word to knifing them after school. Christians don’t have to live in constant fear. The difference is the level of persecution.

      • Generalize much? says:

        You may be jumping the gun a little when you claim that a white, Christian “will never be teased because of [his or her] race, and the only time [he or she] will become offended is when someone brings up science in a way that attacks [his or her] beliefs.”
        I mean, how does that make any sense at all? Do you have empirical evidence or even some sort of anecdote to support that white people and Christians are NEVER teased? EVER? Not even once? They are NEVER offended? By anything?

        • agreed says:

          what about all the fat white kids…? or the white Christian males with glasses or a lisp….? or kids with boogers on their face….? what about poor white trash? Please don’t forget about all those kids who NEVER get picked on….

          • Pope Snarky says:

            Hail Eris!

            Nope, sorry, white kids don’t get picked on JUST FOR BEING WHITE. They get picked on for lots of other reasons, but, in North America and Western Europe, at minimum, not more than about once or twice on the “race” issue, following which the bully usually finds himself getting ganged up on by a bunch of older white kids. Where bullying is “racial”, and on whites, you can bloody well bet the racists will show up to give their opinion.

            Snarky

            • Anonybus says:

              I disagree, there are plenty of places you can be harassed for being white. Living in good ol’ diggity Detroit has shown me that. Everyone wants to hate on everyone else. The reason is immaterial.

            • Anonymous says:

              Actually, I have been given a racial slur directed at the fact that I am white. Only once, and in general probably not as common as the other way around, but in the area I grew up–a relatively tolerant and modern high school–it happened to me. There is a little bit of counter-racism going on (I’m black, you’re white, that means I get to look down on you just because I can). If I’d given her a racial slur of the same degree of nastiness, I would have been suspended. As is was, she only got a “settle down” from the teacher.

              That being said, it was a very minor issue, and I’m not trying to make a big deal of it–just letting you know that it DOES occasionally happen.

              And like the guy who also replied to this says: some people just want to hate and will find any excuse to do it.

      • whitey says:

        Actually, I WAS picked on for my skin color. I’m white. I went to a predominantly white school. They called me “Ghost” because I was so pale. So, I think you need to rethink your argument.

        And PS, I turned out fine. Great, in fact.

    • Pope Snarky says:

      Hail Eris!

      The fact of the matter is, Xians have no viewpoint on SSM, regardless of what they may believe, unless they want one for themselves, happen to support it for their friends and/or family, or just for people in general. The rest of them don’t have to have one, if they’d rather not. “Opposing” it is rather like opposing the existence of Saturn — there’s nothing they can do about it, and the louder their opposition, the more paranoid and imbecilic they appear. Countries which have legal SSM will not stop existing just because (most of) the US doesn’t recognise it, and sooner or later, once SSM is legalised in most countries, the US will have to follow suit as well, or become a pariah just like one of the few others (such as, oh, Iran — that one’ll hold out for a long time). Xian hysteria will ultimately have no force or effect.

      Snarky

    • Anonymous says:

      Well stop using Christianity to deny people their right to marry and people won’t attack it. It is that easy.
      From a real life standpoint sex is fun fun fun! It was made that way so we will want to do it, consequently producing children to continue the species. Do you think the cavemen rationalize sex the only way to perpetuate the species, no they like it! It was fun so they did it… A lot.

  10. G truth says:

    Gays can’t procreate which would the only way they could keep the genes going in nature, so something is obliviously wrong unless you would say that people who were gay before it was “cool” or accepted as it is now had heterosexual lives and reproduced. I personally think it has something to do with the chemicals, toxins and radiation that we have been exposed to over the last 50-75 years. Its got hormones all out of whack. Coming from a straight person, I thinks its weird that people would be this way in the face of nature. I really don’t care how someone else decides to live though, so go for it.

    • Anonymous says:

      Really? You think homosexuality is a ’50-75′ year old phenomena? What rock have you been living under? They say Shakespeare was gay, at the very least he was bisexual. Was that in the last 50-75 years?

      And what of the caveman they just found that they think was homosexual? I’m hearing figures anywhere from 5,000 years old to 10,000 years old.

      It just blows my mind that you feel it’s a ‘new’ thing and that it’s because of ‘chemicals, toxins, and radiation’ when there has been recorded homosexuals/bisexuals throughout history.

      • Anonymous says:

        How do you tell if a caveman was gay?

        • anon says:

          What?! “50-75” years?! That is historically inaccurate. one of the widest known examples of homosexuality is the Spartans, who routinely slept with each other in order to strengthen their unit cohesion so that in battle they would fight with more intensity because they were defending themselves and their lovers. They also had wives and kids and guess what…the wives would fuck each other too. The fact is the word “homosexuality” is fairly new in the scope of history, and it has a lot of negativity attached to it.

          • Fallacies says:

            The referencing of words for homosexuality are as old as the practice itself, I think what you mean is that the negative connotation is relatively new.

        • Anonymous says:

          He speaks with a lisp duh.

        • Anonymous says:

          not bad, cause he’s a CAVEMAN lol

    • anonymous says:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals

      Sorry man, I respect both sides of this argument, but you are an idiot.

    • Gay Jeans says:

      Uht-oh…. I think I might have gay jeans…..

    • Wow... says:

      Have you ever read anything at all about ancient Greeks, or perhaps watched the history channel if you’re too dumb too read? Homosexuality was very much around then. Young boys were sold to men as sex slaves. Which wasn’t anything new then either, I’m sure. Please, if you are gonna comment on something as politically huge as this, pull your head out of your hind end and do a little research.

      Or perhaps you were under the impression that those things only happened less than 75 years ago…

    • Anonymous says:

      G Truth is “obliviously wrong” – certainly seems oblivious to all the evidence
      🙂

    • thagrateful says:

      I bet gay people think you’re weird

    • kurisu7885 says:

      Apologies for saying this but that sounds like just a re-iteration of the same tired “homosexuality is a disease” crap we keep hearing.

  11. CB says:

    My only issue is that schools should teach kids about gay sex. I recently did a project on a sexual health clinic who had complaints because someone mentioned anal sex. When let’s face it. That is a reality for gay kids. So no I don’t think schools will start PROMOTING gay sex but I do think it is an important topic to touch on.

    • anonymous says:

      A reality for gay kids? Really? Anal sex is absolutely..*ahem* had by the straights. If you think it’s not, you’re a) just burying your head in the sand b) really boring in bed. I’m just sayin’.

    • Anonymous says:

      I thought about this too. As a sexual health educator in high schools though, I usually just present different contraceptives and how they can be used, without discussing gender. I only bring up how two same-bodied people can have sexual interactions if the kids ask it themselves, because I don’t want to bring opinions into a classroom where we should really just be discussing how to keep ourselves safe, happy, and healthy.

    • ANal!!! says:

      I feel like it’s really pretty self-explanatory.

  12. You are sooo progressive says:

    What about indigenous transgendered peoples? Should they be allowed to marry Mother Earth? Think about the beauty of the ceremony with a holy shaman presiding and the costumes and native festival dances. How can we consider ourselves moral (right wing haters) and yet deny these wonderful people? Ever think of that?

  13. misti says:

    thank you for the laugh. see how simple life can be. lol.

  14. Chalz says:

    Did anyone else the the “Stand with Michele Bachmann to Defend Traditional Marriage” advertisement right above this graph?

  15. Landiva says:

    This is wonderful XD

  16. Unmarried hetero w/o children says:

    I love the chart, though there should be a small slice representing the extra fodder divorce laywers would get for completely shredding broken reltionships. I personally don’t care which consenting adult someone rubs his/her naughty bits against and don’t see why anyone else should. The odd part about this debate is that Bachman and many other conservatives feel that government doesn’t have a place in regulating worker safety, healthcare access or pollution, but who we love and how we form a family is a federal issue.

  17. Pete says:

    I’m against gay marriage because it will lead to gay divorce and that will just be bitchy! (Jimmy Carr)

  18. Anonymous says:

    suck one!

  19. Anonymous says:

    Marriage should be between consenting adults, just like sex. The gender and number of adults involved in the union should be up to the individuals involved. It’s nobody else’s business and has no bearing on anyone else’s life. Animals don’t have the ability to understand what marriage is or even to communicate if they want to get married or not, so that argument makes no sense at all. Religious arguments don’t apply to general populations and so don’t make sense either – religion is an individual belief and individual choice. I don’t expect everyone to live life by my rules – that would be incredibly arrogant and narrow minded.

  20. Peaches says:

    As Joe Haldeman wrote in The Forever War, “homosexuality…it’s the one sure method of birth control.”
    Admittedly he followed this up by having the main character say a sperm bank deposit and vasectomy works pretty well.

  21. Anonymous says:

    In due time, all these things will happen. Humans will find a way to destroy ourselves and the earth.
    To except Gay Marriages is to except homo-sexual sex which has NO real purpose. 2 men or 2 women together can NOT make a child, so what is the point faking it? What causes society to think that this is OK behavior? How many so called Gays were child molested to the point where this kind of activity feels normal to them. Does that make it right? Sounds more like a mental disorder that should be treated with therapy and MEDs.
    Being a family as brothers or sisters does NOT mean they have to be biologically related but still bonded together. Without adoption or modern technology to artificial inseminate, there is NO way a Gay couple can have children. Does modern times change the real morals of society?
    The Gay community has been pushing their sex life down the throats of all of us on TV, internet, newspapers, work settings, and in public with every day life. We have very impressionable young people in this world that are being raised to believe they need to make a choice between being straight or being Gay. How can any of this be acceptable?

    • delusional says:

      I take issue with many of the things you’ve said….
      “homo-sexual sex which has NO real purpose”: How about pleasure and enjoyment? Maybe emotional bonding through physical expression…? How about intimacy with the one you love…? None of those work for ya…? Am I to believe you only fornicate for the purpose of procreation?
      & “what’s the point in faking it?”: There are no gay couples out there who think they are having sex to procreate. No one’s faking it – last I checked, only women having sex with men are doing the faking….

      ‘how many gays were molested’ – I don’t know the statistics on this, and neither does anyone else because a lot of sexual abuse goes unreported – whether you’re gay or straight. Most women raped by men don’t report – so we don’t have accurate stats on that either. But, being molested does not ‘make’ one gay – you can’t ‘catch gay’ from another gay.

      “Sounds more like a mental disorder that should be treated with therapy and MEDs.”: Sounds more like you need therapy, and meds, if medication is the route you choose to take. But, I don’t know of any meds that help cure ignorance…. Being attracted to someone is not a disease – it’s not something you can cure – and it’s really not anyone else’s business who I find attractive or who I desire to have sex with, so long as he or she is a consenting adult (have to include that, or I’ll hear the arguments about having sex with children and animals….).

      “Does modern times change the real morals of society?”: I’ll ignore your poor grammar – but to answer the question, yes. Society makes up ‘morality’ as we go along. So, as societies change – so does morality. It used to be immoral for women to wear pants. Or show their ankles in public. Should we start public stonings for anyone who doesn’t comply…?

      “The Gay community has been pushing their sex life down the throats of all of us”: This is absolutely false. Unless you’re buying gay porn – then you’re not seeing gay sex. The Hetero Community is STILL “pushing their sex life down the throats of all of us” by saying we’re all supposed to be just like them. News flash – most of the planet doesn’t operate like the Christian, right-wing, religious-zealots in this country. So get over yourself. Step outside that teeny little box you live in, and you’ll see there’s a WAY bigger world out there than the corner you’ve been staring at.

      “We have very impressionable young people in this world that are being raised to believe they need to make a choice between being straight or being Gay”: Nope – it’s not a choice. It’s simply who you are. Either you like boys, or you like girls, or you like both. I would like to be able to say now children are being raised to know they can and will be accepted for who they are, and they don’t have to hide ‘in the closet’ as many folks have done for many years to avoid prejudice and persecution. But then I get reminded that there are still a whole lot of you nut-jobs out there who think “all men are created equal” means “all men who are just like me, look like me, act like me, and think like me are created equal – the rest are garbage, deserve my disdain, and will go to hell” (which, another news flash – a whole lot of people don’t even believe in your ‘hell’).

      • Anon says:

        I agree with all your points, and it was well said. Although the whole political ideology based right wing statement is one i wouldn’t run around with seeing as America is currently under democratic rule which runs on liberal basis, but this is another issue all together.
        Most of all it seems as though everyone argues the points about gay marriage based solely out of fear of change, yet look at the social movements based on prejudice against african americans, women, etc. So everyone, you all scream you are rational people, why do you care so much about what happens between others, like pierre trudeau said (one of the greatest Canadian Prime Ministers) “The State has no right in the bedrooms of the people”.

        O by the way, i’m canadian and we haven’t fallen apart, or been taken over by zombies due to our gay marriage acceptance, and as for bullying, no one can see that you have too homosexual parents, your chances of getting bullied are higher based on having glasses or being overweight, so really the argument for “saving the children” is nullified

    • Learning is fun! says:

      “To except Gay Marriages is to except homo-sexual sex which has NO real purpose.”

      Oh dear God, learn to spell.

      Also, “no real purpose?” Have you even tried gay sex (awe-some!)? I’m sure that whenever you have sex, you’re thinking “makin’ a baby, makin’ a baby, doin’ God’s work, no pleasure here, just makin’ a baby, that’s what sex is for, dum de dur dur dum de dur dur de dum.”

      • Anonymous says:

        I suppose it’s possible that “except” wasn’t supposed to be “accept.”
        After all, if you exclude one from your views as to what is acceptable you probably do exclude the other.

    • thagrateful1 says:

      Ok, that’s just sad as hell! Thanks delusional, I couldn’t have said it better myself. Hmmmm-how can say this without being downright mean-ok I can’t so here goes: You’re more stupid than I originally thought. Well, not really because I originally thought you were that stupid!

    • …for the record, homosexuality is NOT a disease, and should not be treated as such – I’ve linked a fact sheet, courtesy of the American Psychological Association. While you are entitled to your opinions, it is important to make sure those opinions are educated.

  22. Nawel says:

    Hi. that chart is great. I took the liberty to translate it into spanish, will post at my Tumblr soon (I’ll put a link back to this page).
    Cheers

  23. antiquated social constructs says:

    When it all comes down to it, the act of marriage itself is a most ridiculous, sexist concept that was originally created for the amassing and preserving of wealth and property through bloodlines. It has nothing to do with love and everything in the world to do with capitalism and misogyny. To me, the problem is not whether marriage should be an act between man and woman or not. But rather, whether the law has any right to bind two people – heterosexual or not – together outside of the procreation of children. In other words, if you have a child together, you both have a legal obligation, and subsequent legal rights associated with the providing of care for that child, and one another in providing care for that child. Otherwise, the law has no right to step in to any of it! Have a ceremony, commit for life, but the law shouldn’t step in unless you have a child. Then no matter what – whether you split or not – that child is safe. If you take the legal aspect out of marriage, you take the legal restrictions non-married couples, gay or straight, now face. And the law is freed up to finally crack down on the bajillion of deadbeat dadsout there as well.

  24. Simon says:

    So the bible was written by humans, the same flaws, the same mistakes, ect

    the issue isn’t whether or not its right or not. Its if it effects you. if you personally don’t want a gay marriage i get that and feel free to get a straight marriage in any church or under whatever religion you wish. but for those of you who’s right to a happy and harmonious marriage have been denied i’m truly sorry. in many other countries it is accepted and even celebrated but in many states this has been denied and it’s quite a sad thing to see so many normal people like yourselves be discriminated against.

    If God wanted us to all act the same, and be 100% like him/her. Then He wouldn’t have bothered to have made us all so different

    Feel free to marry your sister or house, but it’s all personal preference. America was based on the idea of a free nation, one where no man or woman would be put down for their own beliefs or practices, guess it didn’t work out that way.

    • Anonymous says:

      A free nation under God.

      • Sociologist says:

        The problem is, though, that you CAN’T have a free country. Even here in the United States, we have hundreds of different cultures and subcultures that all conflict with each other in their personal beliefs. There is no such thing as an “American Culture”. I’m a Christian and personally I don’t agree with gay marriage, but I wouldn’t vote for it nor against it. It’s not our place to judge people, and if people want to do something and make their own decisions, it’s not our place to stop them from doing so.

    • You are sooo progressive says:

      So if my dad had been free to marry his sister, would I call her aunt mommy? Would he be my uncle daddy? And my siblings would also be my first cousins? And if I married the home I grew up in, my spouse would be my house. Yeah Simon, too bad it didn’t work out that way.

      • Pope Snarky says:

        Hail Eris!

        Well, do you live in Tennessee?

        Snarky

        • Simon says:

          Your taking it out of context, the sentence that states “too bad it didn’t work out that way” referred to the fact that it isn’t a truly free nation. where as the comment about being able to marry a house or your sister was a reference to all the people making accusations saying that gays being allowed to marry was as wrong as marrying a sibling.

          the second you assumed is where you messed up. instead of focusing on the entire message you pointed out a minor flaw in context, and possibly sentence structure. but i’m glad in the end you made a difference by pointing out my small mistakes

          Congrats on the the editing, now try and say something that will change someones life for the better. instead of your snarky comments 🙂

  25. Andy says:

    Actually, it should say “Gay people will get married and divorced just like everybody else”

    • Simon says:

      Yeah thats true, but it’s the fact that they deserve to make that call in the first place

    • Dave030966 says:

      Yep! Regardless of gender, it still counts picking the right person. Been divorced twice; I know!

  26. Anonymous says:

    does it really matter?

  27. Kyle says:

    Because the event-categories listed are not mutually exclusive/dependent on one another, a pie chart is an inadequate tool for displaying these measurements.

  28. kenneth1101 says:

    well there goes life as we know it

    • Anonymous says:

      Ha. What a constructive comment. You’re a thinking man, I can tell.

    • thagrateful1 says:

      I know you Jim from Texas! You are the moron who thinks he has all the answers for everyone else’s life…AND the only religion that works….AND more knowledge than anyone else….AND the key to success….AND anger to compensate for what you lack in other areas, ie. brains, looks, inner strength, etc. AND such an eloquent way with words! I’m so proud! (NOT)

      • HELL BOUND QUEER LOVER!
        Here in Texas we wouldn’t put up with your queer ass loving ways. Instead we would tie you to a burning cross, and make your gay lover watch as you burn just like you will when you go to Hell for the rest of eternity.
        much love (but not in the gay Nancy Boy way)
        Jim from Texas.

        BTW- it’s get-‘er-done, not get-him-done

        • kurisu7885 says:

          And then you rot in prison for murder.

          Let me guess, we all better mind our own business while you tell everyone else how to live?

  29. Anonymous says:

    Actually…..the terrorists wim

  30. PHJim says:

    Anonymous said,” Imagine if you were born into a gay family, how the child would go through school with constant bullying. Who would want to be born into a family with two gay parents? You would be bullied your whole life. Not fair on the next generation. Should never be legal.”

    You could use the same argument against letting minorities procreate or couples with big ears -“Your mom has big ears nyah nyah”
    Rather than prevent them from marrying, let’s educate our young.

  31. Emilio Dumphuque says:

    Shouldn’t there be something about “going into a public men’s room and seeing a man on his knees for a completely different reason: Proposing where they first met?”

  32. Anonymous says:

    God made adam and eve…not adam and steve

    • Mackenzie Penne says:

      Steve was also made by God.

    • Learning is fun! says:

      And made gay people, strangely enough (if you think God made anything).

    • FR says:

      So God must be imperfect then if He somehow let an infestation like homosexuals get past him? Either that, or He really did make homosexuality and isn’t going to send people to hell for trying to live their lives in a way that makes them happy.

      Take your pick. God is imperfect vs. God allows homosexuality.

    • Anonymous says:

      I’m a Christian and I still think this is a stupid argument.

      For one thing, if God decided He only wanted to start out with two people (and as a supporter of evolution I’m a little leery about taking this literally, but let’s run with it for now), He probably was better off picking two people who could make babies.

      To draw the line from this to saying homosexual couples are “unnatural” is a complete logical fallacy.

  33. Anonymous says:

    lol…it’s only natural for a man and woman to have sex to procreate. The few that says its natural for other species to do it; they only do it for fun. If you say that homo’s are born this way, then that’s just like saying they are born with a defect, like being mentally retarded. Granted, retards can get married… but who wants that, honestly?

    • Anonymous says:

      So you don’t want to get married. What’s that got to do with marriage for gays?

    • Learning is fun! says:

      “other species” …uh, are you suggesting that gay humans are a different species?

      “the few that says” …you mean “the few that say”, not “says”. Also, they’ve been known to do it because they love each other, like some (but clearly not all) heterosexuals.

      “homo’s” is possessive. You meant to use the plural “homos,” but if you have an extra two seconds you could write “gay people” or something a little more intelligent.

      I’m impressed you were able to use the clause “Granted, …” in your final sentence; good job!

      • Sociologist says:

        We’re here to discuss homosexuality not grammar.. I’m impressed that you used the argument that “they’ve been known to do it because they love each other…” that’s a great argument.. since we can prove it and have conclusive evidence that what they’re saying is the truth. How do we not know that they’re constructing a feeling of love in their mind due to some sort of childhood event or traumatic stress they’ve experienced? I told a girl I loved her one time cause I thought I did, and broke up with her after a week.

    • Sociologist says:

      I believe homosexuality is a mental disorder. Some research here recently showed that the thalamus (I think it’s the thalamus) of a homosexual man is smaller than the thalamus of a heterosexual man. If a mental disorder can be caused by certain biological problems, like a chemical imbalance or a size difference in the brain, then why wouldn’t this research also show that homosexuality is a mental disorder? Schizophrenia is characterized by chemical imbalances and gray matter is lost over time. Perhaps homosexuality is the same way. Not only could it be biological, but I also think that psychological and social factors help make up homosexuality as well.. In high school, I often saw an overweight or homely girl that couldn’t get a boyfriend turn lesbian. I’ve also seen guys with low self esteem that couldn’t get a girlfriend claim he’s gay. Homosexuality could as well be an aftermath from traumatic stress in one’s life. Now, what about the social consequences of proving homosexuality is biological? When we discover that homosexuality is in fact biological, how will that change everything? I think that by nature, scientists will classify it as a genetic disorder or a mental disorder, but that’s just my opinion.

      • Been there done that says:

        What you just said, about homosexuality being a disease, was refuted unanimously in 1973 by The American Psychiatric Association and has continued to be refuted by that Association. So no, I don’t think scientists are suddenly going to find out that homosexuality is a disease. Been there, done that.

      • Pope Snarky says:

        Hail Eris!

        I think that thinking “homosexuality is a mental disorder” is a mental disorder, since literally hundreds of species are known to engage in it. As there is no shortage of humans on this planet, propagation of the species goes out the window, too, as an excuse for homophobia (a fear of the gay inside). Don’t even bother citing ancient books of fairy tales. Basically, you have no leg to stand on.

        Snarky

      • Dave030966 says:

        So I guess Astro Zeneca, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, etc. are in research to produce a preventive pill?

    • Anonymous says:

      Do you know the type of people that don’t want gays to marry, the ones that arent happy with there own lives. I’m not against or for gay marriage cuz i dont care, both ways, what others do is isnt my problem, Im too busy enjoying my life with my wife and living each day to the fullest. how about you go find a good partner for yourself and live your life… I think the lack of good sex is why people are soo fucking up tight and dont want others to be happy….your the one with the brain defect

  34. Anonymous says:

    I wish someone would’ve taught me how to have gay sex in school… would’ve helped from having it so much to figure it out.

  35. Pooper says:

    And that’s the way the cookie crumbles

  36. […] submitted by volunteer editor Brandon W. Found onProseBeforeHos.com. Each week Jimmy Dore, Stefane Zamorano and guests get together to talk about comedy, and […]

  37. GoneFishing says:

    Why did the majority of Californians (a very liberal State) vote against homosexual marriage? Because the majority believes it is wrong and deviant behavior.

    I don’t care what you do behind closed doors. Just don’t expect me to accept open public display of your “choice”, and having to explain to my children what is wrong with this picture.

    Some of you writing here have asked a similar question. “Why do you bother wasting your time harping on issues that don’t effect you directly?”. You’re so lost in your justifications of the subject, that you can’t imagine how or why others may be directly effected. The same “tolerance” you demand from those not of your opinion, you lack yourselves. So instead, you attack religion and opinions that don’t conform to yours, sometimes being clearly vile about it. In short, YOU are intolerant.

    • Dave says:

      Because the Mormon church poured millions and millions into the state to make it so, and because people are idiots, by and large.

      California is NOT a very liberal state. Far from it. Remember a guy named Ronald Reagan? He was our governor a couple of times.

      • GoneFishing says:

        Where did you pick that about the Mormons out of the air? Completely baseless. Are you one of those conspiracy riders?

        If you don’t believe California is not liberal, then it’s you who are and can’t see the forest through the trees. The State is absolutely broke financially. Where does all the money go? Hand-outs to everybody who wants one, including (surely you’re not blind) all the illegal aliens. I grew up in California when Reagan was governor. He was also a democrat back then, until he wised up and changed his ways.

        • Umm.. says:

          Are you kidding about the Mormon thing? Mormons spent over $40 million campaigning for Prop 8. Google it. It’s not even remotely a conspiracy.

    • thagrateful1 says:

      GoneFishing,
      There is absolutely no way you can believe anything you just said! The only reason pro-choice can be seen as intolerant is because these are the people who have to spend their time defending themselves!

      • GoneFishing says:

        I’ll just reiterate. Those who demand tolerance of their opinions, seem to forget the same is true in the opposite direction. It’s not a one-way street. Thanks for tolerating my opinion ;-p

    • Anonymous says:

      @gonefishing… Pot. Kettle. Black.

    • kurisu7885 says:

      Because of the jerks who lied to get more votes to pass it

      “End the hate, vote prop 8” was one example I saw.

    • Comraderoger says:

      The majority should never be allowed to vote on the civil rights of the minority.

      I bet if a vote was put on the ballot outlawing Mormonism or Scientology, it would pass in many, many states. Would it be right? Of course not.

  38. Jules Manson says:

    If its on the ballot I will support it. I will never oppose it. But, I seriously think this is a bullshit issue. There are far more dire circumstances pressing on our liberties and pirating our wealth such as the Federal Reserve and the fiat monetary system. This is too important to gloss over for trivial things like this.

    Having said this, I believe the graph is genius. Great job expressing the message. It really hits the mark.

  39. DannyK says:

    There should be a small sliver of another color in that pie chart.
    “.001% People whose heads will explode thinking about the awful consequences.”

  40. […] came across this on this site and had to share. Feel free to show it to any confused […]

  41. Anonymous says:

    While I’m all for civil unions for all couples (gay or straight), I do think it warrants pointing out that pro-gay marriage people frequently cite hetero couples who either choose not to or cannot have children as reason marriage should not be limited only to men and women.

    What is being swept over is that those couples are the exception to the rule. Nature dictates that it takes a man and a woman to create and deliver a baby. Most hetero couples can and will create children together, but there are exceptions, either by choice or by circumstance.

    Together, two men cannot create and deliver a child that is biologically theirs, and together, two women cannot create and deliver child that is biologically theirs. There are NO exceptions.

    Love who you want to love and adopt some kids if you want, but I think marriage should be a rare thing and only for a man and a woman who want to create biological children together. Otherwise, civil unions for all.

    • Pope Snarky says:

      Hail Eris!

      Marriage started out an explicitly civil issue, one which eventually morphed into a pseudo-religious monstrosity. Civil marriages can be had at City Hall, without venturing near a church — though plenty of churches are open to holding wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. What (some) Xians find offensive is that there _are_ such churches, because it derails their justifications for being anti-SSM.

      Snarky

      • Jewaroo says:

        Basically, this is what I’m seeing on this board:

        Woo hoo! Funny chart!

        -Or-

        *Grumble Grumble* Being gay is wrong and they shouldn’t be allowed to get married because (insert nonsecial argument or alleged ‘evidence’)*Grumble Grumble*

        -Or-

        Snarky retort in regards to nonsensical homophobic argument.

        -Or-

        Long, well crafted, grammatically sound, and eloquent response to homophobic comments using data and whatnot, including people waving diplomas and degrees to show how much smarter they are than everyone else.

        Here’s what I have to say:
        Woo hoo! Funny chart 🙂
        Snarky comments for the win 🙂
        Thank you allies and those using big words to defend gay marriage 🙂

        ….You, yes, you. You know who you are…Get over yourself, and let me get married, damnit. Considering the fact that in a decent number of states, you CAN marry your siblings and cousins, I think me wanting to marry my ladyfriend won’t be contributing to inbreeding or the downfall of society.

        As far as God. I believe in God, and I believe God hates no one, and wants us all to get our crap together and stop hating on each other.

        • GoneFishing says:

          If you really believe in God, then you know same-sex ‘marriage’ is an abomination of His will. No one should be cowed into tolerance of deviant behavior. Apart from civil legislation, acceptance is not universal, and has nothing to do with a so-called (homo)phobia or irrational fear, but platitudes and attempts to force others to accept or tolerate that what is perverted.

          • kurisu7885 says:

            Who’s to say you’d be forced to accept or tolerate it?

            If you don’t accept or tolerate it fine, but the personal feelings of such people should never dictate things for the rest.

          • Comraderoger says:

            I don’t believe in God and I find you basing your life on some mythical sky king to be what’s really perverted.

            I don’t have to accept your beliefs, which can change, by the way, unlike your sexuality, so what’s your point?

    • Dave030966 says:

      And so many (religious right) people marriage is for procreation. Why is it that a couple male/female in their 60s allowed to marry? Nobody is expecting them to procreate.

      Personally, I have had a vasectomy. Can I never marry again? “But you’re a man, and she’s a woman, so it’s OK sayeth the lord”)
      Get your arguments straight and maybe then we’ll talk, fundies!

    • I recently read that an empty egg can be fertilized with two mens genes and dna, or two womens. It is already being worked on and likely will work sooner or later. Sad, isn’t it? That’s almost worse than abortion.

  42. […] prose before hoes This entry was posted in government, humans, infographics and tagged 100%, consequences, gay […]

  43. […] a related note, Prose Before Hos has put together “a handy graph [i.e., pie chart] for the confused,” outlining the […]

  44. Just a normal guy says:

    Why is it GAY marriage?
    When I woke up this morning, I didn’t GAY brush my teeth. I don’t start my GAY car or go for some GAY exercise every morning. It’s marriage, between two people that love each other. Calling it gay marriage just lets people think its something different.

    P.S- Don’t you think its funny that the people who are so homophobic are also in the westernized cultural groups that are stereotypically known for banging there sisters?

    • RAINdown BOWties says:

      It is something different. If there is such a fuss over changing the already set definition of marriage to something that includes homosexual relationships then it is by definition something different from normal marriage. It is not saying that gay people are not people, it is just stating that there is a difference between the definitions accepted by different sociological cultures on the subject. It is a point of distinction like 1% or 2% milk or hard, medium, or soft cheese.

    • Comraderoger says:

      Give it a period of time and the gay/same sex modifier will just fade away.

  45. Dave030966 says:

    I agree completely. If two people truly love each other and want a future together, regardless of gender, then I don’t see the slightest thing wrong with that. I know one gay couple that was together for more than 20 years, and both of my (legal) marriages didn’t get much past 3 years.

    And regardless what people say is in the bible (purposely lowercase) about homosexuality, you can always point to other chapters and/or verses that condone stoning disobedient kids, or putting to death anyone that works on the sabbath, or wearing clothing made from different materials., etc.

    The bible thumpers seem to pick and choose what works for them while ignoring the rest. If they ever TRULY read it, word-for-word, hopefully they would be appalled.

  46. An says:

    I’m a bit put out by the religious bashing thing, but I do understand why. I don’t understand why all catholics and christians are these people who visualize that all gay people are evil and shouldn’t have the same rights as others.

    As I recall, Jesus pretty much said for us to love all; enemies, other sinners, everyone and to try and forgive them as god has forgiven us.

    Hell it’s in the Lords Prayer “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us” Do you want god to not forgive you for your sins and send you straight to hell just because he doesn’t share your opinion? Because your intially telling him to treat you as you treat others…so why not forgive them, let others live their life as they want? There soul is between God and them, not you.

    In fact, if your that concerned, then prayer for their souls and that God forgives them and shows them salvation.

    Also, there is a chapter of religious script that was purposely left out of the Bible that actually preaches that woman should not procreate period with men; they should live a life of abstinence always and was preached by women who god favored. One of these woman was married and the other, who wasn’t, refused and they both didn’t practice sex. Because of this, they were both sentenced to death and yet were saved by God’s grace.

    The other disciples didn’t like these women and the church definitely didn’t like them because that would pretty much negate how they would increase the Christian religioun. If you don’t procreate other Christians, how can you expect to carry on?

    So it was removed and left out of the Bible…I just thought that would be an interesting tidbit on the idea that it’s wrong for people to marry because they can’t procreate. Though the bit seems to focus more on not having sex at all, they still are not procreating and one was married, and it wasn’t thought of as wrong.

    I have no problems with Gay-Marriage and have plenty of friends who are gay and I go to church and practice Christianity, and in my opinion, that means forgiving people of anything and everything and not holding them off as evil.

  47. ocarina_boy says:

    lol

  48. End To All says:

    What if you were killed by Hitler?

  49. […] data out there about gay marriage, in some ways, this pie chart from Prose Before Hos is really the only information worth […]

  50. Jeremy says:

    What would happen? The government’s long-time-coming conformity to the minority. This isn’t a perfect world, not everybody can be happy. Every decision is a chain reaction, and if the government meets the demands of every minority in America, the majorities will be upset meaning they won’t get reelected and things will be changed to how they were before. That is what would happen.

  51. food for thought says:

    in Canada gay marriage is legal and everything is fine

  52. Anonymous says:

    I love this. Its so true!!

  53. Nic says:

    We’ve had legal gay marriage in Canada for a few years now, and guess what? NOTHING horrible has happened! Nobody’s heterosexual relationship has been diminished or devalued. Nobody’s family has imploded. No children have been harmed or scarred for life. No churches have spontaneously combusted. No court of law has attempted to use the precedent to justify legal marriage of family members, farm animals, threesomes, or any other feared romantic configuration.

    This pie chart is completely accurate – so GTF over it, haters, and stop pretending your ill-conceived bigotry = legitimate rationale for denying the LGB community their civil and legal rights!

  54. Do you eat an extra bowl of stupid this morning?

  55. Sara Pearl says:

    Gay people will have the same rights as everyone else to be miserable and pay lawyers for messy divorces too. Why should Gay people miss out on all the fun.

  56. Alex [oh wait, was I supposed to put something more ambiguous] says:

    My 2 cents.
    I just wanted to leave this here.

  57. Joe says:

    I believe someone said that the only plausible way to argue against gay marriage is from a religious viewpoint. I completely agree, to those who say things will devolve into a cousin-copulating society, due to subsequent laws that will be passed, I pose this: If Canada and many other countries have been doing alright thus far, then are you really suggesting that, as Americans, we are of such low brow that we would find it appealing to marry our pets? If you care to argue yes, then I would suggest that perhaps we shouldn’t be allowed to procreate at all, for fear of passing on these beliefs.

    To the religious:
    Homosexuality is against your beliefs, congratulations. Please stop trying to shove your spiritual beliefs down others’ throats. If Gay people wish to marry, let them. I really don’t believe that there is a quota of people you must have “saved” from “sin” to get into heaven, if it does exist. I sincerely hope that you haven’t reduced moral maxims to a simple math equation, where there is only one right answer. I prefer to think of governing morals as essay questions, there are many right answers, some of which you may disagree with. I’ll buy that homosexuality is a sin when you show me some factual evidence, not the musing of a possibly non-existent 2000 year old magician.

  58. Anonymous says:

    Divorce lawyers will make more money….

  59. James says:

    Legalize them i will owe you all girls 😛

  60. JAG-O says:

    I have no idea why the government in the marriage business and legal rights are granted based on government recognized sexual relationships.

    Give any two mutually-dependent adults who live together long-term a tax break, power of attorney, etc. if they apply. I mean everyone: man/woman, man/man, woman/woman, elderly mother/adult child, brother/sister, roommates, etc.

    Want to get married? Do it is the church or whatever other religious organization you choose and keep the government (and special rights) out of it.

  61. Kevin says:

    Soo true. Just great!

  62. Stormwalker says:

    The issue isn’t whether or not Gays should marry, the problem at hand is a Words War.

    Yes, Religion has a major part in this, most specifically in the words Marriage and Wedding. These are Judeo-Christian terms. They should NEVER have been entered into the US Legal codes, but there were no “better” words at the time.

    The “Best” way to deal with this situation is to blanket nullify ALL Marriages. Every last one, legal right now or no. Re-write the Code for EVERYONE. Use the Legal definitions of Civil Union for any joining that brings two persons of whatever gender into a Civil Contract. Provide for them all social benefits currently in the system for Marriages and Weddings, just remove the terms. AND, remove ALL Legal wording and bindings from Churches. There is supposed to be a separation of Church and State, this is where we put our money where our mouthes are at. Remove the power to Join from the Clergy. Their right is to join two people in Holy Matrimony, NOT Legal Matrimony. A Preacher is NOT a Justice of the Peace.

    I know this is radical thinking, but I challenge you to sit back after reading this and think about it. Take a half hour or so to mull it over, and then respond.

    Namasta
    Stormwalker03@Gmail.com

  63. […] sleeve: Karate. Now he’s going to make everyone pay for the injustice that he has faced.2. What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized?We didn’t include an image because… well, we don’t want to give the secret away! […]

  64. […] 2. What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized? […]

  65. Anonymous says:

    wow, what a fine example of exactly what would happen! gay rights all the way people!!!!

    p.s. thanks for showing others the truth so that they can stop fearing what would happen lol

  66. Anonymous says:

    Marriages are a holy act.

    • kurisu7885 says:

      And what of couples of other religions or even no religion that get married?

    • Comraderoger says:

      Not they aren’t. One does not need any religious approval to become legally married.

  67. kurisu7885 says:

    All I’ll say is that it’s funny that some of the loudest opponents of homosexual marriage can’t seem to stay married themselves.

  68. Frank Black says:

    The goddam Republicans will lose another wedge issue to get the single-issue NASCAR idiot voter vote.

  69. […] 2. What Will Happen If Gay Marriage Is Legalized? […]

  70. Helen A. says:

    Ok, here’s my 2 cents and that’s about all it’s worth. I am a conservative christian, but I believe that this is a moral issue not a government one. Why in the world have we given our govt. SO much power that they can dictate who we marry, what we do with our bodies, our money, our lives… It is ridiculous to me to even argue the topic of marriage. As far as the world being over populated I would have to agree in part-we have far to many people with low IQ’s procreating. The movie Idiocracy is a bit over the top, but we really are heading in that direction. The number of learning disabled children has risen dramatically in the past 10 years, and no I don’t believe it is just because we test them more. Again though, not a government issue! I really don’t know of any benefit other than being able to cover your partner on your health insurance that will be gained by marriage, and that isn’t going to cost anyone but the couple in question. So, I guess what I’m saying is you are all acting like idiots, slamming one another, yammering on about primates, and gases if it doesn’t directly effect you-MYOB!! 🙂 Have a wonderful day.

    • Comraderoger says:

      Marriage is a civil institution; therefore, it is the responsibility of the government. People get married all the time without ever stepping foot in a church.

  71. Anonymous says:

    I;m not sure that most anti gay marriage buffoons would be able to comprehend that graph, better simplify it a bit grasshoppa

  72. […] |      Email This Post   |   2 Views   As we already proved in this handy pie chart on gay marraige, the world will not end if two people of the same sex are allowed to get married. The only thing […]

  73. […] by the awesome gay marriage pie chart, here is peta’s very own version! thanks peta for the vegan pie […]

  74. Anonymous says:

    The Defense of Marriage Act defines 1,138 benefits of marriage. It also defines marriage as one man and one woman.

    The fourteenth amendment says that we are guaranteed equal protection under the law.

    The first amendment says that no law shall be created that favors one religion over any other.

    Is this not enough?

    Don’t let Jesus be an excuse for bigotry.

  75. Not so sure about the 4th one. Just another reason why private schools > public schools.

  76. Sriously says:

    Not all gay people will get married, thats just unrealistic, my dad is gay and honestly I just know that gay people are given to a certain promiscuousness that marriage does not conventionally condone. That being said i think a lot of gay people would stay married but only the mature ones and not the ones that are just like every young dumb person in this world ready to give their life away to some stupid ritual from more than a thousand years ago. (Grow up you humans…gosh.)

  77. glen gentry says:

    if gay marraige is legalized the divorce rates will double.

1 2 3
Hot On The Web