White vs Black opening

I am a beginner but pretty solid with the basics. One thing that stumps me that I have not been able to get an amswer to is should you have 2 different openings? One for white one for black or do you stick with the same opening for both? 

You need 1 variation of many different openings as White.

If you choose 1.e4, you need to know one line against 1...e5, one line against the Sicilian, one line against the French, one line against the Caro-Kann.

If you choose 1.d4, you need 1 line against the Queen's Gambit Accepted, one against the Queen's Gambit Declined, one against the Slav, one against the Semi-Slav, one against the Nimzo-Indian, one against the Grunfeld, and one against the King's Indian.

As Black, you need to know every variation of 1 opening against 1.e4 and every variation of one opening against 1.d4, like I play the French against 1.e4 and the Dutch against 1.d4.  With the French, you gotta know the Winawer, Tarrasch, Advance, Exchange, KIA, Reti Gambit, and Wing Gambit.  Etc.

Well that isnt exactly what I was asking, but thank you for informing me about each line variation. My question is if I like to play Kings Indian defense or the Dutch defense is there a way to play that opening with the opposite color or do I need to learn a seperate opening for both white and black?

That isn't how you worded it, but no, the equivalent does not work from both sides and here is the proof as to why.  I will use the Dutch as an example.

In the Dutch, what is the whole point of playing 1...f5?  When White has played 1.d4, his d-pawn has advanced PAST d3, where it cannot ever go back, and has advanced itself to d4.  While it does indeed control the e5- and c5-squares, it has weakened the e4- and c4-squares.  Again, it can NEVER go back to d3, EVER!  So your move, 1...f5, followed by 2...Nf6, is to dominate the e4-square.  Making it very difficult for White to get in the move e4.  Sure, he still has the ability to play f2-f3 at some point, but the move f3 is undesirable.  It weakens the h4-e1 diagonal that the King resides on.  Now you might be asking "But what about Black and f7-f5?  There is a MAJOR difference.  Black will follow up ...f5 with ...Nf6 to control h5 and not allow the Queen to go to h5 to attack the King.  With the pawn on f3, NOT f4, White does not have the same possibility.  A pawn and a Knight cannot both be on f3 at the same time.  Therefore, this is often undesirable and Black often dominates the e4-square for the vast majority of the game.

Now let's flip it and look at Bird's Opening, 1.f4.  Sure 1.f4 is legal.  Sure nobody has found an official refutation.  But it is weaker than the Dutch because the Dutch has a legitmate basis behind it.  The e4-square has been weakened for White by his d2-d4 advance on move 1.  Here, Black has not committed to anything.  He can still play his d-pawn to d6 at any point in time, which helps build the ability to play ...e7-e5.  If Black can contest the e5-square, what was the whole point in playing f2-f4?  You might as well have advanced a central pawn at that point.

So you see, Black's approach in the Dutch has a specific purpose in mind based on a commitment made by White.  White's use of Bird's Opening does not have the same valid points, it is amongst the worst scoring openings for White at just 46 percent (46 percent is an AWFUL score for White - sure, it's a fine score for Black because Black goes second, but not White - White should be scoring in the low-to-mid 50s!)

It would be like trying to play the French as White.  For Black, after 1.e4, the move 1...e6 has a specific point.  Black wants to contest the e4-pawn and not allow it to stay where it is.  Make it advance itself, exchange itself, or force White to protect with a piece, but he does not play 1...d5 so that if White does take, he can take back with a pawn rather than his Queen.  After 2.d4, the move 2...d5 forces that decision on White what to do with the e-pawn.

Well, now let's play 1.e3 as White.  Let's say I told you my point was to play 2.d4.  Is Black obligated to play 1...e5?  Has he committed to moving his e-pawn 2 squares?  Uhm, NO!  That is why you do not play like this.  The Dutch, the French, the Sicilian, the Grunfeld, etc, they are all called "DEFENSES" because they are reactionary responses to commitments made by White.  You do not play the Dutch against 1.e4, it's a defense when White has COMMITTED to 1.d4.  You do not play the Sicilian against 1.d4, it is a reaction to White's COMMITMENT to 1.e4.

So long story short, the answer is no!  You cannot base strategy for Black and strategy for White on the same thing.  While there are a hand few select openings that might APPEAR to have a reverse to it, they are NOTHING alike!

The 1...e5 English is NOTHING like the Sicilian Defense.  Black cannot, for example, play the Yugoslav Attack in a Reverse Dragon setup.  White CAN play the Yugoslav Attack in the Sicilian Dragon.

The King's Indian Attack is NOTHING like the King's Indian Defense.  For instance, Black cannot afford to play the Classical King's Indian in reverse, he will get killed.  White rarely plays f2-f4 in the KIA, it is almost always h2-h4 instead, but in the KID, it's f7-f5.  So while the first 4 moves may be similar, and the name may be similar, they are complete apples and oranges compared to each other.  Same thing goes, as proven earlier, for the Dutch and Bird.

Another thing all these openings with "reverse" lines have in common - the version for Black is more sound!  White should be going after Black, not holding back and trying to curl in a ball and just handing Black a free attack!

Hope this helps.

I play the “Sicilian” and “Indian Game” with the white and black pieces which has served me well.

ThrillerFan hit many strong points.

For me, it’s about understanding the plans, ideas, strategies, low theory, enjoyable positions, pattern recognition and not tripping over your own shoes before the middle can even get started. 

I just saw a game lost in 10 moves at the US Championships today.

@3
"if I like to play Kings Indian defense or the Dutch defense is there a way to play that opening with the opposite color"
++ Yes, as white you can play reverse systems.
If you play the King's Indian Defence as black, then you can play the King's Indian Attack as white, like e.g. Fischer did.
If you play the Dutch Defence as black, then you can play the Bird Opening as white, like e.g. Larsen did.
If you play the Sicilian Defence as black, then you can play the English opening as white like e.g. Polugaievsky did.
If you play the Slav Defence as black, then you can play the London Opening as white.

I recommend the Queens Gambit as it usual gives beginners a slight edge when they first start. I would recommend you check my studies on the Queens Gambit and the Indian Defenses to give yourself a solid foundation