View Poll Results: Same-sex marriage is wrong because

Voters
113. You may not vote on this poll
  • It isn't, and should be available to all gay couples

    77 68.14%
  • Being gay is wrong, so they can't get married

    16 14.16%
  • The sanctity of marriage. No, I wasn't laughing. I was coughing. *cough* ... see?

    4 3.54%
  • It will set a bad example for Christian youth

    0 0%
  • I don't honestly have a good reason, but I still say no

    1 0.88%
  • Other (please explain)

    15 13.27%
Page 114 of 158 FirstFirst ... 1464104112113114115116124 ... LastLast
Results 1,131 to 1,140 of 1577

Thread: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

  1. #1131
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Why wouldn't it fall under the same scrutiny, especially if one believes in polygamy for religious reasons?
    Because the access to polygamy is still legal as far as religious ceremonies are concerned.

    Access to multiple marriage contracts and the rights that go with those marriage contracts would be based on number of people allowed in a contract and/or number of contracts allowed at one time for each person. It is not a discrimination based on religion, since no religion is being denied access to their religious practice of marriage and every person is limited by number of/in marriage contract at a time. That puts the characteristic used for discrimination being number of/in contract, not religion.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #1132
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,726

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Only if someone plans on fighting certain decency laws and can show that they are being harmed in some way by them and that their harm is more important than whatever harm(s) the state is claiming is in their interest to protect against.

    It is unlikely that decency laws will go away any time soon, and I am pretty sure that they have been challenged and held up in a number of court cases due to their level of scrutiny, how little harm is being caused to someone by preventing them from having sex and/or being naked in certain places and the level of possible harm (supported by some evidence hopefully) that the laws are in place to prevent.

    I have given at least one possible harm that could be claimed and probably has some psychologically supported evidence to back it that could come, at least to children, for these laws, as long as they apply equally to everyone. Still no one has been able to give me any sort of idea what harm could come from allowing same sex marriage, let alone why that harm should outweigh the harm of not allowing same sex couples access to marriage, most especially at the level of scrutiny that this type of discrimination would be at.
    I think you yourself have made an argument that marriage between two people will no longer be about family, as any two people of consenting age will be allowed to marry for whatever reason. Honestly, I would be less bothered by allowing only gay people (I know, how would you prove it?) to marry someone of the same sex, because I don't care for the cheapening of marriage that, what you advocate for, would cause.
    The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mahatma Gandhi


  3. #1133
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I think Mac is worried, as I am, about the domino effect. I've seen a couple arguments here that suggest that to be for gay marriage, you have to chuck any meaning marriage has beyond just a contractual one. I also don't want to have to support public nudity or public sex. Does supporting SSM mean that morality no longer has a place in the law, at all?
    How likely are those things to happen just because of SSM being legalized?

    We can look at many things to determine this, such as what happened when other changes to marriage happened in the past, what has happened in states and other countries that have legalized SSM, what the arguments are for each of those things, from both sides and how likely those arguments are to stand up to the Constitution. Not every characteristic that is being discriminated against is given the same level of consideration by the courts in cases that could be a violation of Equal Protection. Some wouldn't even be considered a violation when everyone is treated equally under the law when they are in similar situations in regards to each issue that comes up.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #1134
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I think you yourself have made an argument that marriage between two people will no longer be about family, as any two people of consenting age will be allowed to marry for whatever reason. Honestly, I would be less bothered by allowing only gay people (I know, how would you prove it?) to marry someone of the same sex, because I don't care for the cheapening of marriage that, what you advocate for, would cause.
    Actually, I believe marriage is very much for making a family (although I consider two married people who love each other without children to be just as much a family as those with children). I just don't believe that it is the government's place to decide whether or not people are in love, nor do I feel that people should have to reveal their sexuality when it comes to them getting married.

    I love my best friend just as much, if not a little more sometimes, as I love my sisters and brothers. In fact, my brothers and sisters actually call her "sister". She is a part of my family. I believe that we should have some way for the law to legally recognize such things for certain cases, such as being able to claim a loved one has died or is in the hospital to justify taking emergency leave. Given the right circumstances (i.e. both of us had some bad experience with men or were both widows who decided that we didn't feel like bothering with a sexual relationship any more), I would consider it completely acceptable to make her my legal "wife", despite not being attracted to her intimately. I love her as I do a sister, but there is no other way, currently, to legally state that. If she were a he instead, I would actually have no problem doing what I just described right now, even if the relationship were exactly the same.

    I am not saying that marriage should just be completely a legal contract. I am saying that legal marriage, in the eyes of the law, should be a legal contract. On a personal level, love is important to a marriage, along with many other things, but I do not want the government or society being able to tell me that I have to justify my love of whoever I say I want to marry.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #1135
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,726

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Because the access to polygamy is still legal as far as religious ceremonies are concerned.

    Access to multiple marriage contracts and the rights that go with those marriage contracts would be based on number of people allowed in a contract and/or number of contracts allowed at one time for each person. It is not a discrimination based on religion, since no religion is being denied access to their religious practice of marriage and every person is limited by number of/in marriage contract at a time. That puts the characteristic used for discrimination being number of/in contract, not religion.
    I'm sorry, I don't understand this. If polygamy is illegal then any "religious ceremony" is, at best, useless and at worst, illegal itself (by performing an illegal ceremony). Also, just because there is a secular reason for banning polygamy doesn't mean it's still not discriminatory to a particular religion. Take, for example, the proposed ban on circumcision, the reason behind it is secular, but it will discriminate against religions that require circumcision as a tenant of it's faith.
    The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mahatma Gandhi


  6. #1136
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I'm sorry, I don't understand this. If polygamy is illegal then any "religious ceremony" is, at best, useless and at worst, illegal itself (by performing an illegal ceremony). Also, just because there is a secular reason for banning polygamy doesn't mean it's still not discriminatory to a particular religion. Take, for example, the proposed ban on circumcision, the reason behind it is secular, but it will discriminate against religions that require circumcision as a tenant of it's faith.
    You have it backwards X. The Constitution states that the government cannot establish a state religion. As such, the government is not obligated to respect the practices of any religion.

    Furthermore, freedom of religion does not entitle anyone to the privileges and rights of marriage. Those privileges and rights come from the state and no religion is entitled to them.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 06-01-11 at 01:50 AM.

  7. #1137
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I'm sorry, I don't understand this. If polygamy is illegal then any "religious ceremony" is, at best, useless and at worst, illegal itself (by performing an illegal ceremony). Also, just because there is a secular reason for banning polygamy doesn't mean it's still not discriminatory to a particular religion. Take, for example, the proposed ban on circumcision, the reason behind it is secular, but it will discriminate against religions that require circumcision as a tenant of it's faith.

    Then ban on polygamy applies to all religions equally. The ban on gay marriage does not apply to the genders equally.

    And if you are going to go the religious discrimination route there are gay Christian Churches that do do gay marriages. So you effectively you'd be arguing for those marriages to have State recognition as well.
    Last edited by winston53660; 06-01-11 at 02:10 AM.

  8. #1138
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    I'm sorry, I don't understand this. If polygamy is illegal then any "religious ceremony" is, at best, useless and at worst, illegal itself (by performing an illegal ceremony). Also, just because there is a secular reason for banning polygamy doesn't mean it's still not discriminatory to a particular religion. Take, for example, the proposed ban on circumcision, the reason behind it is secular, but it will discriminate against religions that require circumcision as a tenant of it's faith.
    Polygamy is not illegal. Being involved in multiple legal marriage contracts at one time is.

    And there is no such thing as an illegal marriage ceremony, unless it is violating a law that has nothing to do with the legal marriage contract (i.e. forced marriage, some sort of sacrifice involved, some act done during the ceremony that is illegal, etc.).

    As for circumsion bans, they would not just be fought on the grounds of religious discrimination, although that could come up, because circumcisions are done by people for non-religious reasons (my sons are both circumcized for other than religious reasons).

    Plus, you have to include all the arguments for and against any law. For polygamy, that would mean a discussion on how preventing legal recognition of multiple marriages or multiple partners in a marriage prevents the person from practicing their religion (what part of the things that come with legal marriage are involved in the actual religious practice of polygamy, does it mean that churches are not allowed to recognize a person as having more than one spouse if that is part of the religion), what is the potential harm in allowing a person access to polygamy, and which outweighs the other. For circumcisions, it would mean discussing how denying access to circumcisions prevents a person from practicing their religion, what is the potential harm in allowing circumcisions to be performed, and which outweighs the other.

    From just looking at these two, I can tell you that unless I am missing something about the religions themselves that allow/encourage polygamy, they are completely legally allowed to still practice their religion as they see fit when it comes to their churches/religion being allowed to recognize polygamous marriages and/or conduct polygamous ceremonies (not sure if that is the right way to put that), while a law preventing circumcisions does not allow the practice of a particular religious rite because there is not legal way for a religious person to be able to get a circumcision for their child without breaking the law.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #1139
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,726

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    You have it backwards X. The Constitution states that the government cannot establish a state religion. As such, the government is not obligated to respect the practices of any religion.
    You forgot part,

    Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    A religion that advocates polygamy sure has an argument that they are prohibited from their "free exorcise thereof".


    Furthermore, freedom of religion does not entitle anyone to the privileges and rights of marriage. Those privileges and rights come from the state and no religion is entitled to them.
    An interesting argument from someone who believes gay people are (or should be) entitled to marry. So, are you saying non religious people have more rights than religious people?
    The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mahatma Gandhi


  10. #1140
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,726

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Then ban on polygamy applies to all religions equally. The ban on gay marriage does not apply to the genders equally.

    And if you are going to go the religious discrimination route there are gay Christian Churches that do do gay marriages. So you effectively be arguing for those marriages to have State recognition as well.
    Oh, I have no trouble agreeing that this would be the case in order to be consistent. BTW, I don't support polygamy, I just see the issues and arguments as being very similar.
    The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mahatma Gandhi


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •