Discussions
Should there be homosexual marriage?
Posted by legendarytoby • 8/04/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: gay, lesbian
Yes? No?
I just read these articles about how lesbians were forced to marry men and how they came out to their children when they were ten and so...
User Comments
-
Why? -
"Should there me homosexual marriage?" What ever floats your boat. -
There shouldn't be a state-created thing called marriage at all.-
Madame X,
This is what I wrote in a previous thread.
Marriage is neither a political invention nor an optional moral practice. The institutionalized and socially recognized aspect of marriage does not change the nature of marriage and family, nor does it substitute itself to it. It enables a particular political management, which varies according to eras, places and cultures.
That is where the political nature of marriage lays, not at all with the nature of marriage, as some try to make us believe. In other words, it is marriage as a natural union which comes first, and its political management which comes second.
To suggest the contrary is as silly as stating that you only die when town hall has given you a death certificate, or that an actual birth cannot occur without a birth certificate. Can you see the picture? Some jokers would no doubt never die under the pretext that they have never received their death certificate!
-
-
Yes. -
if by "me" you mean "be", then yes. -
Why do you ask - do you want to get married?? -
Forced to marry men? How were they forced, exactly?
-
? forced -
Well i say 'yes' .Give them the freedom,treat them like a normal people.-
When you say 'normal' you are implying that they are abnormal.
-
Perhaps a re-wording? This is how I read that statement: "Give them the freedom, [and] treat them like [all of the other] normal people."
-
-
Yes. -
@DollinNYC
That is how you see it. The thing is there is so much hype about this topic, why this particular topic is here if it was normal according to all ppl?
I just want to ppl that they are belong to the same community. Dont hate them or force to do the things...........
i hope you got my point. -
Once you allow homosexual marriage though, you have to allow triads also. Years later, others will then probably want the aged lowered to below high school age, then another group will want to marry their cousin... See where were going with this? And your kidding yourself if you think the other groups won't happen.-
[Once you allow homosexual marriage though, you have to allow triads also.]
No you don't. The various countries' laws that allow gay/lesbian marriage specify two consenting adults.
[Years later, others will then probably want the aged lowered to below high school age, then another group will want to marry their cousin... See where were going with this?]
You're using the slippery slope fallacy, which takes this form:
X might lead to Y.
Y might lead to Z.
Z might lead to A.
A might lead to B.
B is wrong.
Therefore, X is wrong. -
YAY voodoo I totally agree with u...slippery slope fallacy = bad -
Kobra, the slippery slope is no fallacy. If you're interested in really understanding how it works, I can point you to some landmark court cases that achieved great things and opened doors that most of the populace never anticipated. I'm cynical enough to believe that at least some of the lawmakers involved knew exactly what they were doing, but regardless, the impact has been very real and demonstrable.
The key is that the slippery slope effect doesn't work the way you've laid out--that is, it doesn't rely on "might". It relies on a precise application of the SAME reasoning that was used to make the first change to achieve increasingly more far-flung results. -
MadameX, there are exceptions where the slippery slope is not a fallacy, but its use in this controversy is fallacious.
As for my use of "might:" Any statement about the future is an inductive claim. Inductive claims are based on probability, not certain. When someone actually sits down and pencils out the compound probability, it can still be cogent.
For example:
Let's say gay marriage will have a 75% chance of leading to legalized triads, and triads have a 50% chance of leading to legalized bestiality. The total probability for those overly generous numbers is only 37.5%, which makes it a weak argument.
Induction gets messy, and most people follow their intuition and never consider probabilities to the degree that I do. -
Kobra, I think the confusion comes from the blurring of the "next people will want to" argument with the "then the law would allow" argument. They're two very different concepts, and the second one is not speculative. I'm at work right now, so can't delve into this like I'd like to, but I hope to have the chance to revisit it.
-
Where did you get triads from? -
So I take it you think homosexual marriage is wrong, as well? not just triads? Or, you wouldn't consider taking something like this away from them, if you thought it was right.
-
-
Love has no boundaries does it not? why not let people marry, if they want to marry, no matter what group they fit into
But if you mean should they be forced to marry - then no, no one should be forced to do anything. -
Did I hear forced? Oh well.... -
-
some animals act homosexually
-
-
My answer is a resounding yes!
On July 20, 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide with the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act.
Same-sex rights in Canada have come a long way since 1965. It was then that the Supreme Court of Canada upheld an outrageous ruling that labeled Everett Klippert a "dangerous sexual offender" and threw him in prison for admitting he was gay and that he had sex with other men.
Today homosexual Canadians enjoy freedom and societal acceptance: not only are they not imprisoned for their sexual orientation; they can marry, and are equally entitled to all rights and benefits that opposite sex married couples enjoy. Alleluia!-
timethief I have a copy of the book' In The Courts of the Lord" by James Ferry. It's an interesting account about Canada's view on gay marriages. Very interesting book.
-
Norway legalized same-sex marriages in 1993, although they were upheld by a law separate from the 'normal' opposite-sex marriage law until this year. The same-sex law did not call the parties involved for 'spouses' but 'partners'. The new 2009 marriage law encompasses both, same-sex and opposite-sex, as equal spouses. And to answer the OP: Yes, there should be.
-
-
Absolutely. Yes! -
No. there should not be. Its a disease. More mental than physical.
Gosh if you want to go homo them probably I dont give a damn. But what if its my brother? I would take him to a doc.-
[No. there should not be. Its a disease. More mental than physical. ]
Shenanigans. Show me any scientifically credible source in the past 10 years that says homosexuality is a (mental) disease.
[Gosh if you want to go homo them probably I dont give a damn. But what if its my brother? I would take him to a doc.]
If it is your brother, I feel sorry for him having to put up with someone as compassionless as you. -
These are the words of Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev of India. I agree with him.
And I really pity you people who have been debating this for more than 2 years. If you are so sure and you have the facts behind you then why the hell is it taking you so long to legalize things. Is it people like me? Dont give a lizards tail about us.
Go ahead and let your brother sleep with another guy cuz you are inefficient helpless creature. I will do all I can for my brother. -
[These are the words of Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev of India. I agree with him.]
I don't care who said the words, I only care that the argument is unsound.
Prove that homosexuality is a disease. Don't just echo the unproven words of others. Think for yourself. -
[If you are so sure and you have the facts behind you then why the hell is it taking you so long to legalize things.]
The bigots outnumber the rational.
[Go ahead and let your brother sleep with another guy cuz you are inefficient helpless creature. I will do all I can for my brother.]
Do you love your brother? If so, then you will not impede his happiness. It's none of your business who makes him happy, as long as their relationship is consensual. I don't see how this realization makes me "inefficient" or "helpless." -
The Rationals were never behind great changes, its the bigots. You limit yourself to available facts and facts change with time.
Your biggest fact the speed of light being constant is now a variable. so grow up find more facts and put in some hard work. Take the pains of taking your brother to a Doc. It might save more than one lives and definitely the society. Prostitutes and marijuana could make my brother happy as well. should I allow that too? -
[You limit yourself to available facts and facts change with time.]
As opposed to what? Bullshit? Lies? Delusion? Faith? Unverified beliefs?
[Your biggest fact the speed of light being constant is now a variable.]
No, that's stupid. The speed of light is and always has been constant in a vacuum. Lightspeed only varies when light passes through materials, due to being absorbed then released by electrons.
[so grow up]
Discriminatory, ageist remark.
[find more facts and put in some hard work.]
I thought facts were unreliable?
[Take the pains of taking your brother to a Doc.]
Are you still stuck on the hypothetical "gay brother" thing? FYI, my brother's hetero.
[It might save more than one lives and definitely the society.]
To take him to a doctor? Yeah. To take him to a doctor for something frivolous like being gay? No. -
You need to see a doc too.
Speed of light is not constant in vacuum. It depends on the objects around who pull it and bend them path hence delaying the speed.
I recommend Stephen Hawking. -
[You need to see a doc too.]
Not for any reason relevant to the topic of this conversation.
[Speed of light is not constant in vacuum. It depends on the objects around who pull it and bend them path hence delaying the speed.]
That does not change the speed, that changes the angle. The speed remains unchanged, it is the direction (which affects velocity, but not speed) that changes.
The bending of spacetime also causes redshifts, but c remains unchanged. -
Gosh you are decades behind dude. Do some reading. I cannot explain here. Consult the brief history of time if you dont consider S. Hawking a bigot.
-
I'm decades behind, am I? Tell that to my physics professor.
FYI, the velocity changes, but the speed does not. Only when passing through a material does it slow down. -
Baba Ramdev is a moron who wants to cure Homosexuality with Yoga..
nonsense -
Marketborn: I think it's just as questionable to put your faith in someone else's words as it is to put your faith in "facts" that, yes, do change with time.
How do you know what you are preaching is correct? Isn't everything relative anyway? What if we (people for gay marriage) are right? Why do some animals perform homosexual acts if it's so "unnatural"...(oh and btw, penguins prostitute themselves for rocks, fyi...)
And why are something like 1 in every 1500 individuals born with genitalia which can be classified both male and female...usually leading to the doctor snipping which ever part looks easiest to hide.
"Here’s what we do know: If you ask experts at medical centers how often a child is born so noticeably atypical in terms of genitalia that a specialist in sex differentiation is called in, the number comes out to about 1 in 1500 to 1 in 2000 births. But a lot more people than that are born with subtler forms of sex anatomy variations, some of which won’t show up until later in life." (www.isna.org/faq/frequency)
So all these people, who are technically not strictly male or female, who are they supposed to love? Are they supposed to only love each other? Ok so we have: men are only supposed to love women. Women are only supposed to love men. And hermaphrodites should only love hermaphrodites....do you see how crazy that is?
The mere fact that these people exist PROVES that the whole idea of gender being black and white is ludicrous.
My belief is that declaring marriage between a "man and a woman" helped serve some political purpose back in the day (no doubt when communities were still forming and the idea of population growth was a plus) and since then has become embedded into the fabric of many cultures and faiths (like yours, who take it as an absolute truth).
I also believe that if the masses were allowed to see homosexuality as falling on the spectrum of what is "normal" and stopped having prejudices against it, mighty big shifts in society would take place due to a more open and enlightened citizenry. This means = TOTAL DISRUPTION OF THE STATUS QUO. And no one likes that...no one who benefits from the status quo at least. -
Why has it taken so long to legalise it? Because of people like you, yes. We don't have the power to change it- I'm not a politician here. But they'll listen to people like you , because many politicians are old fashioned.
-
-
If there is to be any legal marriage, then the governing body that recognizes marriage cannot and should not discriminate between the genders of the parties involved. To do otherwise is baseless prejudice.
I have debated on this topic for well over two years, almost nonstop, and have yet to hear one sound rational argument against gay/lesbian marriage. The arguments I do hear usually take one of the following forms:
1. Slippery slope fallacy.
"If you let the gays get married, people will want to marry dead goats!" This is stupid. There is no direct cause-and-effect relationship between the two, so to say that the premise is bad because the conclusion is bad is to err in reason.
2. Faulty assumption.
"Gays are unnatural." Actually, no. Homosexuality has been found in almost every species whose sexual behavior has been studied by science. There's even an entire species of lesbians! www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921830,00.html
So, to say that being gay or lesbian is "unnatural" is wrong, and any argument based on this assumption is rendered immediately unsound.
3. Appeal to Theology
"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." You cannot prove that the god you believe in exists, let alone prove that your description of his character is accurate. It is also worth mentioning that homosexual marriage is a legal issue, not a religious one. The USA has this thing called an "Establishment Clause" in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America that requires just that.
Therefore, any religious-based argument becomes irrelevant to the controversy.
4. Argument from Tradition
"Marriage should mean what marriage has always meant. It's a tradition!" Two things:
- Marriage originated in ancient, pre-Hebrew cultures such as Egypt and Sumer, which predate Christianity and the European marriage ceremony. If you want a "traditional" marriage, you probably don't know what you're asking for.
- www.kobrascorner.com/opine/prop-8.php
-
According to God, no one will ever be able to prove his doings, no one and so, people tend to do what they think is pleasing to their eyes and what their body wants even if its against God's will, and they can even change the Bible to read what they want to hear. Sorry to them! -
If you acknowledge that the Bible is unreliable, remove it from the arguments entirely. Argue on secular terms or don't argue at all.
-
@voodoo typo..
but the majority of the arguments I've encountered fail under those four.
-
Yes!-
If you are a christian, and love Jesus, then you should know there is nothing like homosexual marriages, marriage is between a man and a woman, and not between a man and a man or a woman to a woman, read the following scriptures that instruct me on this
Genesis 2:24 "For this reason "a man will leave" his father and mother and be united to his "wife (woman)", and they will become one fresh.
Ephesians 5:22 "Wives (women)" submit to your "husbands (men)".. -
-
I'm not a Christian. I worship Satan.
(kidding!) -
Theistic Satanism is a sect of Christianity.
-
I belong to the 'I hate hypocritical Christians' sect of atheism. It's sweeping the country!
-
-
Definitely YES!!!-
ya...
-
-
-
-
[NO! I think there is a remedy for homosexual. There should be a concentration center perhaps a rehab for homosexuality.]
Remedy? Concentration center? Rehab? These are all associated with disease and mental illness. Science has shown that homosexuality is not a mental illness. Therefore, those are unnecessary.
[I can't imagine my children getting marriage to same sex.]
I can't imagine you having any say in the matter.
[If Govt allow there will be more!]
Where's the harm in that? -
[I can assure you that God is perfect and cannot create a human being that way]
You're assuming:
1. God exists.
2. God is perfect.
3. Homosexuality is an imperfection.
What is your basis for this assertion?
[may be the world has created the homos anything is possible in this crazy world when everyone tries perfection.]
I don't see an ounce of cohesion here at all.
[NO TO HOMOS AND GAYS! PERIOD]
If you don't like gay marriage, don't have a gay marriage. If you don't want OTHERS to have a gay marriage, you're out of line. Sit down, shut up, and learn when your rights end (spoiler: the answer is "when others' rights begin"). -
@voodooKobra
Your thoughts or whatever you said are not practical elsewhere. It needs culling.
One can harm the one's society such as Homosexuality in a society where Homosexuality regarded as evil and Stopping that is not a violation of Human Rights. Every society has rights to safeguard their society. -
Weblogian: Can you please try to make a grammatically cohesive post so I know what you're trying to say?
[One can harm the one's society such as Homosexuality in a society where Homosexuality regarded as evil and Stopping that is not a violation of Human Rights.]
I don't even know where to begin fixing the grammar here. Usually I can mentally rework posts to make sense, but this one is helpless. -
voodoo its about understanding the feelings rather than grammar. I am now sure you dont understand a Homo's feelings. Cuz you are not a homo. At last I have facts. He ha ha.
-
I'm bi, actually. However, I've been debating the issue of gay/lesbian rights long before I realized that.
-
That does not change things. You still don't understand feelings and I got my facts.
-
It's not feelings I don't understand, it's poorly-worded posts that I don't understand.
Furthermore, people do not own facts. There are no "your facts" or "my facts." There are facts, then there are opinions and beliefs.
www.kobrascorner.com/opine/words-phrases-fallacies.php
www.kobrascorner.com/fury/stupid-shit-2.php
Above: Some relevant samples of my criticism of the ideas of "personal truths" and "realities." -
OMFG, did you just recommend a concentration camp for gay people? I cannot even create a rational response to that except to ask if you really meant that, because I can only hope that you didn't realize what you typed and how it would come across (i.e. filled with hate and a wish for violence).
-
Oh, wow, how did I gloss over that? I even repeated that in my response.
That's just terribly homophobic. -
I attributed the "concentration center" reference to the obvious language barrier. I hope/choose to believe that assessment was correct.
-
dude, homosexuality isn't a disease. it's not something you need to cure. and so what if YOU can't imagine your kids marrying the same sex, it's not up to you is it?? It's their life, and you're their dad, bloody well support them! -
I can't believe the backwardness of @muthumbi's comments on God. Isn't "God" supposed to be all knowing, all powerful and in possession of a master plan that no human being can escape? Surely that applies to EVERYONE, not just the people you think are "normal".
If God IS perfect (which he isn't because he doesn't exist) then he has planned homosexuals and they're a part of "his great work". So stop your whining and stop pretending you know what an omnipotent God is thinking.
Thank you... -
" Isn't "God" supposed to be all knowing, all powerful and in possession of a master plan that no human being can escape? "
No. I'm not sure where you got that idea. Are you familiar with the concept of free will? -
Yes I know about free will, I'm an atheist so hold it in extremely high regard. I meant that that was what I heard believers, or at least the stronger ones, believed.
-
Huh. I don't know anyone who believes that. I've actually never heard anyone make that suggestion except for atheists seeking to mischaracterize Christianity.
-
really? oh... haha, ok I'll check my sources then.
-
-
From the viewpoint of ethics, the question is should love/pleasure be the new ethical basis of (administrative) marriage vs the recognition of the natural family unit (man, woman, children - as a general rule) as a legal foundation of society. Those who put the two types of marriages on the same level, are comparing apples and oranges.
-
@ weblogian - My brother is gay and he is not evil nor do we need to be safeguarded from him.
-
-
@cathy13
You live in a world where homosexuality is permitted by laws. I am not talking about that. I am talking about where homosexuality is regarded as evil. The society have every right to stop homosexuality.
Where there is no homosexuality; there can no homosexuality. the person(homosexual) have to change or leave the society /place to find another homosexual.
I was a homosexual, I have relationship with the brother of my wife.But I changed and now I am a father.-
[The society have every right to stop homosexuality.]
And how does each nation* intend to do that? You're sounding very reverse Machiavellian right now, with a faulty premise.
Objectively, homosexuality is not evil. Just because a culture* erroneously believes it is evil does not justify any evil acts that culture does towards homosexuals.
*I've decided to correct you here. You're talking about different cultures and nations; there is only one human society.
[I was a homosexual, I have relationship with the brother of my wife.But I changed and now I am a father.]
Changed in what capacity? Absolutely gay to absolutely straight? Unlikely. Absolutely gay to relatively gay, or even relatively straight? Possible, but not over a short time period, I don't think. -
@ Weblogian - No amount of words or pseudo facts will change anyone's mind on a subject as volatile as this.
As long as you are not living in denial then you must be very happy. -
@weblogian ... you're lying to yourself and are just fooling only yourself. Homosexuality isn't something you just "change". If you actually changed, then you weren't homosexual to begin with ...
So, you effectively believe that a segment of the population, just because of it's sexual orientation should be discriminated against? How far do you think your opinions would go if you were talking about the colour of someone's skin? Disabilities? Gender? Religion?
No person should be discriminated against. -
Hmnnnnn. It's an interesting point that the people who are *most* homophobic are often the ones that are in the closet.
I think Weblogian might have secret homosexual desires--or else he would not feel so threatened by homosexuality.
-
-
ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS BETWEEN 2 CONSENTING ADULTS SHOULD BE LEGAL -
Exactly...as long as theres a "safe word", right?? -
That's a wee bit wide-ranging, as "anything" goes a long way. But, with regard to personal and physical relationship, I couldn't agree more.
-
I don't see why that's wide ranged..I mean if both parties are consenting and it's not causing any kind of greater harm then I say fine. For example...people compare same sex marriage (for some reason) to incest and statutory rape...well...HELLO, there is a greater harm from both situations. Incest causes health problems in the resulting children and statatory rape can effect/harm a young person who isn't ready to make a real decision about sex. Same sex marriage does NOTHING to ANYONE in any harmful way.
-
I wasn't implying anything about rape or pedophilia or anything "nasty". I believe that gay marriage should be legal and to me it's a "no brainer" question. I just meant that "anything" didn't limit that consent to the two things I mentioned. It could cover euthanasia, for instance, or assisted suicide not based on terminal illness. While I support the right of people to die with dignity and in the way of their choosing, I don't think that argument belongs here or was intended in Lolita's post.
-
-
This is america. Everyone should be able to do what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. PERIOD. PERIOD.
PERIOD.-
I think you'd be hard put to find a single action that most adults in our society can take that doesn't affect other people. Sometime the impact is small, other times it's devastating. Where do you draw the line? For instance, your response to legbamel's comment seems to suggest that you think it's just fine for one person to kill another if the other has consented. But what if the "victim" leaves behind several young children with no one to care for them? That certainly "harms someone else". And, of course, there's a long list of other possible harms to others--what if the "victim's" elderly mother has a heart attack? What if widespread acceptance of this makes killing more generally acceptable and the rate of people who DON'T volunteer being murdered increases? Are you suggesting that humans have absolutely no obligation to one another (even in the case of a parent/child relationship), or do you hope to find a line somewhere to determine the degree of harm to others that is acceptable?
-
-
-
spam
-
yourtampa, linkdropping in your responses will get them deleted. Unless you've got a relevant post that would contribute to the discussion, don't add links to your blog.
-
-
We have to remember that we are explaining things to a 12 year old blogger here. so we have to discuss facts in a way that is understandable.I don't wish to add to the opinion here though I am a representative of the said subject too. We will see.I am still at work.
-
I was unaware of the OP's age.
-
-
How to produce children with homosexual marriage?-
The planet is overpopulated by humans. Why do we need more children?
-
I agree. Just look at those kids without parents. or kids born from parents who are not responsible and in turn turning their kids into a problem with the society.
-
Hi Coolingstar--I know quite a few gay couples (both M & F) that have kids--they are great parents. You don't need to be straight to raise a child.
-
-
homosexuality is not normal in any form, This is western insanity. Before the great Mighty British empire were against it and now what they are saying.
The world is not moving in Western thought and ideology. We don't buy on that.
There are some people who want others to think act and live like them-This only create problems. That's why they have many enemy everywhere.-
[There are some people who want others to think act and live like them-This only create problems.]
People who condemn homosexuality are among those who want others to think, act, and live like them. -
@VK--and it is also true that often, the people that feel *most threatened* by homosexuality are those who have repressed homosexual tendencies themselves.
-
Or maybe people are just raised by their parents/school/church to believe that way..and never questioned those beliefs.
-
weblogin - so what is normal?
I was always taught that to be different is to be normal.
I have brown hair, that guy has black. I'm tall, he's short. I'm straight, he's gay. Who cares? -
@CMF--that's true--but this is 2009--and we live in a world where there is so much information--opening one's mind is possible regardless of being raised narrowminded.
This is a very touchy subject for me. I have lived in San Francisco most of my life, which has a very large gay population. I'd say half of my friends (maybe more) are gay. I have seen them persecuted, the victims of hate crimes, and be treated like second class citizens--when they did absolutely nothing but be who they are.
I get really pissed off when I see people who are so hateful to gays. Everyone should be allowed to be who they are--and have the same rights as everyone else too! -
hahaha they have many enemies because of people like you. you JUST DID what you said creates problems: you want homosexuals to think and act like YOU. All they want (and the rest of us enlightened individuals) is for you to LEAVE THEM ALONE and let them enjoy the same freedoms as anyone else.
And that whole idea of "western insanity" u speak of is crap and only makes sense to you because you have been indoctrinated in the beliefs of your culture, and yours alone. And if THAT is how the Easterners roll...then god help u. Judging is really unhealthy...also, you guys prolly spend your time (ALL YOUR TIME) judging others because it allows for less time to judge yourself. Look in the mirror. You prolly don't think women are on the same level with men too huh? Am I right?
-
-
Yes -
Weblogian-I agree it's important that we respect the beliefs and ways of other cultures. But it's a two way street. Why should you call our ideas insane or hate us because they're different than yours?
-
@nothingprofound
That's exactly what I want ask. There will be no problem than if we respect each other cultures and belief. But one must not try to influence other with ideas and thinking. Let your belief and culture stay where it is. Don't try to put that on others.
-
-
@honeymoonapples
I am not talking about nor telling homosexual to think like me. It is about accepting or allowing homosexuality. You are the one judging me because disagree with homosexuality.
If your country allows homosexuality, I have no problem with that. But it doesn't stop there. It tries to influences others by calling in topics like Human Rights violations.
I wouldn't have made that statement, if you accept or respect my belief-
homosexuality doesn't do anything to drag in other section of society! fine, you can disagree with it, but you're wrong to say it will bring the rest of us to our knees
-
Haha! Multiple entendre!
-
You said homosexuality wasn't "normal". You also implied that homosexuals try to get others to think like them and thus have many enemies everywhere.
First, homosexuality is natural and "normal".
Second, the only real influence homosexuals have on people is to make them more open and respect equality. I don't think that causes enemies. The enemies you speak of are prolly enemies because of some religious or philosophical belief system they follow.
I'm not judging you. Sorry if it seemed that way!
-
-
I oppose this kind of marriage bcoz i hate anal sex.-
Don't have it then, or use more lube.
-
lol
-
Reported! Just kidding, silly bones!
-
I was totally serious.
-
I know you were. I'm the one who's kidding.
-
Shhhh
-
don't knock it if you haven't tried it!
-
werd--
-
-
wp
-
Lesbians forced to marry men? What country was this? -
I have removed comments from this discussion. It is fine to have a debate, even a heated one on this site, but implying that any segment of the population should be harmed or imprisoned for their lifestyle will not be allowed here and comments supporting those views will also be removed. The comments I removed we felt did just this and that is why they are gone.-
I am personally glad you removed those HATEFUL comments--I found them to be extremely offensive.
Unbelievable that there is this kind of hate and intolerance in the world. -
I approve of their deletion-- not that you require my approval, mind you.
-
-
You can't pick though certain groups out and say you can get married while the other groups you tell you can't get married. If someone wants to marry three people, you have to let them then. All it takes is enough people protesting in the streets for a group to get more rights. It will pave the way for many groups to start coming out more in public. Nobody thinks long enough into the future. It will happen.
-
Prove that it will happen.
Marriage has come to mean a committed legal relationship between two consenting adults in cultures that have legalized same sex marriage. People who want two or more spouses are SOL. -
You are so 1985, mikeny07!
-
whats the worst that could happen if 3 people WERE eventually allowed to get married? Maybe the whole institution of marriage wouldn't be the focus of our lives, maybe we would all be more individual, less attached to the government, less of a number. WOuld all that be so bad?? Plus, that would be WAY in the future. But, seriously, I don't think it would happen. I think we have to let homosexuals have the same rights as the rest of us because it would be uncivilized in this day and age not to.
-
@melinda
No, I make that 1945 or earlier.
@honeymoonapples
I think we have to let homosexuals have the same rights as the rest of us because it would be uncivilized in this day and age not to.
No sh*t. I'm sick to death of hearing Americans claim that equality prevails in their country. Like hell it does. I'm also sick to death of hearing the claim that religion and state are separate in the same country.
It's long past time for true equality to be evidenced and actualized, and that also means that women ought to be able to make their own medical and reproductive decisions in privacy with their doctors, and without the intervention of that state, just as men do. -
I completely agree! The people in this nation who justify denying others equal rights are in denial, covered by a thick and heavy blanket of it. It's frustrating to see and not be able to do anything about it really.
They have this rhetoric fed to them by their religions or belief systems and they find a way to accept it as absolute truth. People don't like being unsure; if they can find something to believe in, something to be SURE about (like the bible, or how human nature is 'supposed' to be), then they feel much more safe in the world.
I almost feel bad for people who have been indoctrinated to believe that anything other than equal rights is appropriate. I don't think they get to fully experience life and all it has to offer. If you shut yourself off to one thing (like believing everyone is equal), you inevitably shut yourself off to a lot of other things, AND, in the process, cause yourself a lot of unnecessary stress.
Everyone is allowed to have their own beliefs and I understand this...I wouldn't be so concerned about the US if I thought these people were thinking freely and clearly, uninfluenced by religion or hate, and, INSTEAD, influenced by the constitution. But they aren't. -
If love/pleasure becomes the new ethical basis for legal marriage, then, agreeing with Mikeny, three people should logically be allowed to marry, if such is their pleasure...
-
-
Should there be homosexual marriage?
My opinion is a big Yes.
As far as I understand, marriage is the union of two people under the law of the land. It seems only when religious influences are reflected in law that it becomes an issue but surely it's a right and not a choice to be voted on. Religion and State are supposedly meant to be seperate. If people want religious equality and freedoms they have to conceed to a secular state and from the point of view of a secular state I've not heard a decent argument for why the marriage of same sex couples should not be allowed.-
@SGS,
Do you realize (legal) marriage as we know it and same-sex marriage are two completely different ethical viewpoints? The new ethical basis of marriage with the latter would be love/pleasure. One needs to measure the full consequences of such a paradigm shift.
-
-
Why not? If they want to ruin their lives like the rest of us (not me) by marrying let them.-
hahaha fer serious!
-
Watch out you laughed. The internet is serious business. You dont want these folks thinking otherwise.
-
-
Everyone whether gay or straight Should read up on marriage, as it is no bed of roses for either sex. I have been married five times to all straight men and I have some gay friends and all, any of us want is to find that perfect person and be happy. So my answer to the question is yes.
How else would we ever know what true pain is.The prince charming or Princess charming are still out their.-
[out their]
*cringe*
Thank you for showing me what true pain is.
-
-
Harvey, what you call the "new ethical basis" I call "the only applicable ethical basis."
-
I don't see why it would be the "only applicable ethical basis".
If love/pleasure should be the new ethical foundation for legal marriage, then there is no logical reason why other forms of marriage based on "pleasure" should be disallowed... you are fine with that? -
You're trying to zero in on the pleasure, not the love. Don't think I don't see that.
The ethical basis is love. That's all that matters, ethically. Legally is a different matter.
The love between two consenting adults of differing genders is virtually identical to the love between two consenting adults of the same gender. There is no legal basis for discrimination.
There are legal and biological reasons to oppose incest; animals and children cannot consent (or are not of a sound enough mind to consent); and so on and so forth. All other strawmen are equally irrelevant.
-
-
Somehow homosexual marriage discussion reminds me the EU membership of Turkey.
They are trying to give another kind of membership =P-
Not sure I see what your point was there.
-
I think he just called Turkey 'gay'
-
Oh. I think you're right.
-
-
I have no idea and no given reasons why my thread on sibling marriage has been deleted by BlogCatalog. I thought that was a serious topic? I woke up this morning and it is just gone.
-
I dunno...maybe it had something to do with bigotry?
-
-
-
Absolutely. Gay people should not be deprived of the same misery that everyone else can opt to endure.
-
with all due respect, no.
-
If two gays/lesbians are together, and live together, what difference would it make if they went that extra step and got married??? their lives wont change much before and after the marriage. And in the end, preventing them from getting married, wont really stop them from staying in love with each other. But like some have mentioned, when this is allowed, maybe it will have a chain reaction and lead to other things being allowed. Of course they would take a long time, just like this has taken a while, and is still a hot debate in many many countries.
I dont know, am really confused about which answer i would give. Not sure if its a yes, or a no.
I though about something right now, that after this marriage is legalized, what would happen if one of the males would modify his body to enable him to get pregnant, just like that guy did in canada. i know he was a female, that chnged herself into a male,but kept her female reproductive organs, but who knows, wiht the all the technology today, cant a guy change into a female which would enable him to get pregnant.-
You are wrong in that nothing would change if they got married. Marriages come with certain legal rights that nonmarital relationships do not guarantee. Hospital and inheritance rights, especially.
-
voodookobra is correct. Marriages come with both federal and state rights over 100 of which civil unions do NOT encompass. We have discussed this so many times on the General Discussion and Political Issues forums previously that I do not feel inclined to produce all the specifics yet again. In that regard, the Discussion Search in the sidebar is helpful ->
-
-
lol @madameX "state created thing"; my dear you are a product of the state.. they are watching you right now
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
