# data[].attributes.headline
Allen Weatherman/ I have a question (take 2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Allen Weatherman/ I have a question (take 2)

# data[].attributes.body
I know this is a touchy subject but I am representing a interracial topic. I was curious as what you think people will be more will to accept, interracial couples or same sex couples?

# data[].attributes.body
I know this a touchy

# data[].attributes.body
"Marriages are like fingerprints; each one is different and each one is beautiful." - Maggie Reyes

I like this quote because it is really powerful. Marriages are in fact like fingerprints, different and beautiful. It doesn't matter if it's a traditional marriage it's going to be different than another marriage because every couple is not the same. A marriage between two men or two women is still beautiful it shouldn't be looked as something bad. Not everyone is going to go the traditional route but that's what makes people unique.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture represents equality which is what gay marriage represents. No discrimination towards anyone. Everyone has the right to be happy and who you love shouldn't matter to others its your life and you can do what you want. NOTHING should stand between the love you and your partner share

# data[].attributes.body
-This article talks about why homosexual relationships don't satisfy real marriage .

-Marriage is about Gods design for a male and female to be paired to find the joys of intimate relationship

-Same sex partnerships are unstable, short lived, and very risky.

- 43% of homosexuals report having had more than 500 sexual partners over a lifetime, meaning partner relationships stay failing.

-Being in a homosexual relationship is the number one risk factor for contracting AIDS/HIV

-Every single gay adoption places a vulnerable child in a home with a missing mother or father

-What God has defined as marriage one can't change it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the Supreme Court contemplates imposing homosexual marriage on the entire nation, and as Americans think about public policy on marriage and the family, it's worth pausing for a moment to consider what the fundamental purposes of marriage are.

Unless we, and the Supreme Court, know what marriage is for, we won't know even how to think about the issue of homosexual "marriage."

As I have written before, there are three purposes for marriage: companionship, sex and children.

When God created Adam, he said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make him a helper suitable for him."

Marriage is not first of all about sex or children, it is about God's design for male and female to be in paired married relationships where they may know the joys of intimate relationship. Husband and wives are friends first, lovers second and parents third.

Abundant social research confirms that heterosexual married couples are happier and healthier, are more prosperous, and enjoy longer and more stable lives than their cohabiting or homosexual counterparts

In contrast, same-sex partnerships are notoriously unstable, short-lived and risky. Even "monogamous" same-sex couples in one Dutch study reported that they had an average of eight outside sexual partners a year. Forty-three percent of homosexuals report having had more than 500 sexual partners over the course of a lifetime. In other words, same-sex relationships characteristically fail to satisfy even the companionship purpose for this most sacred of relationships.

The second purpose for marriage is sex. "The two," God said, "shall become one flesh." Sex is God's idea. He invented it. He likes it. He created it for our enjoyment and pleasure as well as for procreation. It is perhaps the most powerful drive we experience.

Because of its power, members of a society need to know that there is a place where sexual expression is legitimate and will be endorsed by the rest of society. That place is marriage.

Our culture instinctively recognizes this. Even in Hollywood there is no scandal when a famous actor sleeps with his wife. It's when he sleeps with another man's wife that tongues begin to wag.

Harnessed and directed into the companionship that only a husband and a wife may enjoy, sexual expression becomes a powerful source not only of life but of connectedness, bonding and intimacy.

The only incentives a rational culture ought to offer, when it comes to sexuality, are incentives for men to marry women and to stay married once they do. Thus public policy should be directed at strengthening the institution of marriage by rewarding married couples with protections and privileges that are not awarded to any other kind of coupling.

While on a sadly superficial level, it may seem that homosexual couples may be able to fulfill the sexual purpose for marriage, the kind of sex in which they engage is inherently risky for human health and contrary to nature. The human body was not designed by the Creator (nor by evolution, if that's your view) for the kinds of uses to which it is put in homosexual encounters.

It is no wonder that there are a host of pathologies associated with homosexual sex, not the least of which are AIDS and a frightening cluster of sexually transmitted diseases. According to the CDC, homosexual sex remains the number one risk factor for contracting HIV/AIDS. The health risks alone should cause us to reconsider our headlong embrace of marriage based on the infamous crime against nature.

Finally, the third purpose of marriage is procreation. "Be fruitful," God says, "and multiply and fill the earth." The final purpose of marriage is for a man and woman to conceive children through sexual intimacy, bring these children into the world, and together raise them to adulthood.

When a married couple fails to conceive, it's a tragedy, and our hearts go out to them. But conception through homosexual sex is a biological impossibility.

We know that the optimal nurturing environment for children is in a home where they are raised by their biological parents who are married to each other. Even secular researchers confirm that moms and dads each have something profoundly unique to invest in the lives of their children. Children need both a mom and a dad, not two of one or two of the other.

Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas-Austin conducted the most extensive longitudinal study ever done of adults who had been raised in same-sex parenting environments. His research revealed that children who grew up in such settings fared worse on 77 out of 80 possible outcomes compared to children raised in intact biological homes.

No caring, compassionate society would deliberately place vulnerable young children into a home with a missing mother or father, but that is exactly what every gay adoption does.

Bottom line: marriage is about companionship, sex and children. Gay "marriage" cannot legitimately fulfill even one of these three purposes. It is altogether right and rational for society to endorse only man-woman relationships with the label as well as the benefits of marriage.

God defined marriage at the dawn of human history and has never changed his mind. What God has defined, man must not redefine. Let's hope the Supreme Court is perceptive enough to agree.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Homosexual relationships cannot satisfy the purposes of marriage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the Supreme Court contemplates imposing homosexual marriage on the entire nation, and as Americans think about public policy on marriage and the family, it's worth pausing for a moment to consider what the fundamental purposes of marriage are. Unless we, and the Supreme Court, know what marriage is for, we won't know even how [...]

# data[].attributes.body
-This article talks about all the negative reasons why same sex marriage should not be allowed.

-Gay marriage is not in the child's best interest. The child will be never have one parent who has blood relationship to them and never have either a mother role model or father model

-Same sex marriage validates and promotes the gay lifestyle, this would remove any morals, values, devalue the traditional marriage.

-Being in homosexual marriage will offend GOD and make him HATE YOU

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. It Is Not Marriage

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

The promoters of same-sex "marriage" propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.

2. It Violates Natural Law

Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.

Natural law's most elementary precept is that "good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided." By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act's purpose.

Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.

Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always. Saint Paul taught in the Epistle to the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every man. (Rom. 2:14-15)

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother

It is in the child's best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex "marriage." A child of a same-sex "marriage" will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.

Same-sex "marriage" ignores a child's best interests.

4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle

In the name of the "family," same-sex "marriage" serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its bisexual and transgender variants.

Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society. As such, they play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They externally shape the life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone's perception and evaluation of forms of behavior.

Legal recognition of same-sex "marriage" would necessarily obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.

5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right

Homosexual activists argue that same-sex "marriage" is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s.

This is false.

First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.

Same-sex "marriage" opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.

Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the "marriage" between two individuals of the same sex.

6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union

Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.

On the contrary, same-sex "marriage" is intrinsically sterile. If the "spouses" want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.

7. It Defeats the State's Purpose of Benefiting Marriage

One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial to the upbringing of children-all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.

Homosexual "marriage" does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.

8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

By legalizing same-sex "marriage," the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.

In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new "morality," businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and Christian morality.

9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution

In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex "marriage."

If homosexual "marriage" is universally accepted as the present step in sexual "freedom," what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain "avant garde" subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.

The railroading of same-sex "marriage" on the American people makes increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press:

"The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality."

10. It Offends God

This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex "marriage" does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: "God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: 'Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.'" (Gen. 1:28-29)

The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: "From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife." (Mark 10:6-7).

Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of homosexuality: "The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil." (Gen. 19:24-25)

Taking a Principled not a Personal Stand
In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any individual. In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense of traditional marriage, the family, and the precious remnants of Christian civilization.

As practicing Catholics, we are filled with compassion and pray for those who struggle against unrelenting and violent temptation to homosexual sin. We pray for those who fall into homosexual sin out of human weakness, that God may assist them with His grace.

We are conscious of the enormous difference between these individuals who struggle with their weakness and strive to overcome it and others who transform their sin into a reason for pride and try to impose their lifestyle on society as a whole, in flagrant opposition to traditional Christian morality and natural law. However, we pray for these too.

We pray also for the judges, legislators and government officials who in one way or another take steps that favor homosexuality and same-sex "marriage." We do not judge their intentions, interior dispositions, or personal motivations.

We reject and condemn any violence. We simply exercise our liberty as children of God (Rom. 8:21) and our constitutional rights to free speech and the candid, unapologetic and unashamed public display of our Catholic faith. We oppose arguments with arguments. To the arguments in favor of homosexuality and same-sex "marriage" we respond with arguments based on right reason, natural law and Divine Revelation.

In a polemical statement like this, it is possible that one or another formulation may be perceived as excessive or ironic. Such is not our intention.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Reasons Why Homosexual "Marriage" is Harmful and Must be Opposed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses. The promoters of same-sex "marriage" propose something entirely different.

# data[].attributes.body
i agree 100 % i love that others agree with this as well its great to see such support happening in the world now and i liked the links by the way

# data[].attributes.body
I also wonder why people think its so wrong for LGBT people to get married. It's not like their lives are anyone else's business and they should be able to get married and have a family if they want to just like everyone else can. In your positive 1 article I was fascinated to learn all of those facts about how gay marriage helps the economy and I also didn't know that that many people support gay marriage today. I hope that will continue to increase. And thank you for the feedback on my Padlet page. (Here is my link in case you would like to read my response to you on my page... http://padlet.com/katiecollins363/GayRights )

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Gay Marriage Be Legal? - Gay Marriage - ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should Gay Marriage Be Legal? Read pros, cons, and expert responses in the debate.

# data[].attributes.body
In the second article I found it interesting that the support for same sex marriage has increased significantly. I think it is that people don't want their family members being treated that way.

# data[].attributes.body
I found your positive 1 post very interesting, I never knew how much gay marriage could help the economy. Great research!

# data[].attributes.body
- Half of all Americans are in support of gay marriage

-Legalizing same sex marriage can be beneficial for lawmakers

-Legalizing gay marriage brings in 20 mill and 40 mill more per year in taxes

- Gay marriage cuts spending on government programs since a marriage helps people be more financially stable

-Major companies like apple & nike are believe same sex marriage is a good idea, since it makes it easier to hire top applicants

-More marriages means more money for the states and businesses. Its like a financial boost for everyone

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Legalizing same-sex marriage can be politically beneficial for lawmakers, considering about half of Americans say they are in support of it. But marriage equality has its economic incentives as well.
Here are 8 ways legalizing same-sex marriage is good for the economy:
It would help curb the deficit: A widely-cited 2004 analysis from the Congressional Budget Office estimated that legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide would have a small, net benefit to the national budget's bottom line.

It would boost tax revenues: Legalizing same-sex marriage would bring in between $20 million and $40 million more per year in taxes, according to a December paper from University of Michigan economist Adam Stevenson.

It helped NYC's economy: In the first year that gay marriage was legal in New York City, the city reaped $259 million, thanks to license fees and wedding-related spending, according to CNNMoney.

It would alleviate payroll headaches for many businesses: According to PBS, many companies argue that by not legalizing same-sex marriage, the U.S. is hindering their competitiveness by creating more administrative hurdles. For example, states where same-sex marriage isn't legal have different tax laws for same-sex versus opposite-sex couples.

It can boost struggling state economies: If California were to legalize same-sex marriage, it would generate $123 million for the state economy during the first three years same-sex marriage is legal, according to a 2005 Stanford study cited by the Fiscal Times. And the state could certainly use the money; California has been mired in a budget crisis for years. In Massachusetts, legalizing same-sex marriage has generated en estimated $111 million over the first five years same-sex marriage was legal, according to CNNMoney.

It will cut spending on government safety net programs: Marriage makes people more financially stable and less likely to qualify for government assistance, Bloomberg reports. Therefore, legalizing same-sex marriage would save the government hundreds of millions per year in welfare funding, according to Bloomberg's Josh Barro.

More weddings mean more money: A recent study from the Williams Institute at UCLA estimated that same-sex weddings would boost the economies in Maine, Maryland and Washington by $166 million over the next three years.

Lots of major corporations think it's a good idea: More than 60 companies, including Apple, Nike and Morgan Stanley, signed onto a brief submitted to the Supreme Court supporting same-sex marriage in February, according to Fortune. The companies argued that keeping same-sex marriage illegal made it difficult for them to recruit and hire top applicants. One major executive at Goldman Sachs almost considered leaving the country because states' differing same-sex marriage laws put his partner's student visa in jeopardy after they married.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this post incorrectly stated that legalizing same-sex marriage would boost California's economy by $123 billion over three years. It would boost it by $123 million, according to a 2005 Stanford study.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Gay Marriage Opponents Don't Want You To Know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Legalizing same-sex marriage can be politically beneficial for lawmakers, considering about half of Americans say they are in support of it. But marriage equality has its economic incentives as well.

# data[].attributes.body
-The recognition of marriage for same sex couples for federal purposes is in full effect

-The majority of the public is now approving that same sex marriage is allowed

-The more conservative generations are dying out and are being replaced by the younger more liberal minds.

-People want to see change and let everyone be with whatever gender they prefer without having to be harassed.

-The population is changing their minds on views since they're are really no negative outcomes coming from gay marriages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is a guest post by Andrew Flores, the Public Opinion Project director at the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law and Ph.D candidate of political science at UC Riverside.
In the past months, there have been two pivotal U.S. Supreme Court cases and numerous lawsuits in several states by same-sex couples seeking marriage recognition. The recognition of marriage for same-sex couples for federal purposes is now in effect. Thus, it's a good time to take stock of public opinion about same-sex marriage. My analysis of recent polls generates three key findings:
1) It is much safer to say that a majority of the public approves of same-sex marriage
Below are the 2013-2014 polls on same-sex marriage (compiled from PollingReport.com). There are some polls reporting an estimate below 50 percent, indicating that there is still some uncertainty depending on the source of the poll. However, for every one poll that reports less than majority support, there are five polls that report majority support. There is not much evidence that the Supreme Court's June 2013 decisions produced a major shift in approval. Before the decision, an average of 52 percent supported same-sex marriage. After the decision, 54 percent did.

The national trend using all surveys asking opinions on same-sex marriage also suggests that the majority of Americans now supports same-sex marriage. In fact, in the past year, the change in support has increased more rapidly than ever. (The graph excludes questions that separate out marriage equality, civil unions, or no recognition - but these questions also show that support for same-sex marriage is increasing.)

2) Support for same-sex marriage is accelerating.
Here is some evidence that support for same-sex marriage is truly accelerating. Below I compare how well two different kinds of trends fit the pattern in the polls: a simple linear trend, which assumes that the rate of change is stable, and a polynomial trend, which assumes that the rate of change is increasing.

The accelerated regression line better fits both the data prior to 2004 and the upward trend after 2012. Additional statistical tests confirm that the accelerated trend does indeed out-perform the linear trend.

This has important implications for where public opinion is headed. If the stable linear trend were the right one, then by 2016 just over 56 percent of the public would be expected to support same-sex marriage. However, the accelerated trend predicts that support for same-sex marriage will be about 5 points higher by 2016. It is appropriate to infer that opinions are trending positively and changing exponentially as time goes on.
3) A majority of the shift in attitudes is coming from people's changing their minds, not more younger, more liberal generations replacing older, more conservative generations.
In a post about a year ago, Nate Silver concluded that about half of the change per year was due to changing minds and half was due to generational replacement. Silver estimated that 1 point of change per year was due to generational replacement. If that is correct, then anything beyond that 1 percent change a year would be attributable to changing opinions. Taking the 2013-2014 results and forecasting opinion in 2016 using the accelerated trend, I estimate that opinion change is greater than 2 percent a year. Thus, a majority of the increase in support appears to derive from changing minds. In short, people who once opposed same-sex marriage are beginning to support it, and this will be the driving force behind any future changes.

Right after the Supreme Court's decisions in June, Patrick Egan postulated on this blog that the changing views of same sex marriage were more similar to changing views of interracial marriage than of abortion. In the latter case, the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wadelikely hardened preferences, leading to little ebb-and-flow in opinion. In the former case, the Supreme Court's decision inLoving v. Virginialikely facilitated the upward trend in support for interracial marriage. Given the little evidence of backlash against the recent same-sex marriage cases and the data provided here, trends should continue in the Loving direction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Support for same-sex marriage is increasing faster than ever before

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a guest post by Andrew Flores, the Public Opinion Project director at the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law and Ph.D candidate of political science at UC Riverside. In the past months, there have been two pivotal U.S. Supreme Court cases and numerous lawsuits in several states by same-sex couples seeking marriage recognition.

# data[].attributes.body
Same sex marriage or gay marriage is the marriage between two people of the same sex. In history there have been marry same sex marriages in many cultures. Although that can't be said about every culture where it is rare or non existent. Laws to allow same sex marriage were not made up until the 21st century. There are 17 countries allowing same sex marriage. The U.S. count is going up. People fight for gay rights it is recognized as a political, social, human rights issue, and even religious. There is always that controversy and people will always show there gay pride to fight for their rights.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this topic because many people don't want to see gay people marry. They see it as something that's terrifying or wrong. What's so wrong about couples that are in love moving on to the next step that every person wants to have in life? It's sad to see that gay marriage isn't more widely accepted as it should be.