View Poll Results: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

Voters
232. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes,-- everybody should be treated equal

    95 40.95%
  • No--some people should recieve preferential treatment

    137 59.05%
Page 15 of 85 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 847

Thread: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

  1. #141
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    If this is a math test, I better take off my shoes.---sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits.
    No math test.

    I was just remembering a sci-fi novel I read, wherein a planet was colonized, but some mutation in the colonists caused a 5:1 ratio between female and male children who survived birth. To sustain a population, the majority of males had to "spread themselves around" more than would be socially acceptable currently here in the USA.

    As a situation like that appeared to be what Rassales was suggesting would be needed for laws supporting stable polygamous marriages to be formed, I asked a clarifying question.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #142
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Rassales View Post
    Actually, polygamy/polyandry are inherently destabilizing in a society with roughly equal numbers of men and women.
    Possibly. I won't dispute it. That fact in itself is not sufficient to outlaw th practice.

    Marriage has salutary effects on poverty, the emotional and social stability of society, and the creation of families. We have very little to help us organize society around plural marriages and in those places where it's practiced, the situations are unstable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rassales View Post
    In actual practice, plural marriages are only sociologically functional among the very wealthy and in societies where the number of men and women is seriously skewed by war, starvation, or other causes.
    Then the people who can afford it should not be denied it.

    I'm fair.

    I never claimed I've been denied a Gulfstream IV, I just can't afford one.

    I'll never claim I've been denied polygamy, if it was legal. My wife would crack my head open.

    Regardless of it's effects on "society", the reality is that who someone marries is not "society's" concern. And nor is how many someone marries "society's" concern, either.

    If a man can afford six wives and for some insane reason wants six wives, hell, let him do it, assuming those six woman want him and each other. I say that polygamy and polyandry require the consent of all current spouses to add another.

    Oh, and divorce should be so damned difficult that it's almost unheard of, if children are involved.

  3. #143
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Rassales View Post
    Actually, polygamy/polyandry are inherently destabilizing in a society with roughly equal numbers of men and women.
    Possibly. I won't dispute it. That fact in itself is not sufficient to outlaw th practice.

    Marriage has salutary effects on poverty, the emotional and social stability of society, and the creation of families. We have very little to help us organize society around plural marriages and in those places where it's practiced, the situations are unstable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rassales View Post
    In actual practice, plural marriages are only sociologically functional among the very wealthy and in societies where the number of men and women is seriously skewed by war, starvation, or other causes.
    Then the people who can afford it should not be denied it.

    I'm fair.

    I never claimed I've been denied a Gulfstream IV, I just can't afford one.

    I'll never claim I've been denied polygamy, if it was legal. My wife would crack my head open.

    Regardless of it's effects on "society", the reality is that who someone marries is not "society's" concern. And nor is how many someone marries "society's" concern, either.

    If a man can afford six wives and for some insane reason wants six wives, hell, let him do it, assuming those six woman want him and each other. I say that polygamy and polyandry require the consent of all current spouses to add another.

    Oh, and divorce should be so damned difficult that it's almost unheard of, if children are involved.

  4. #144
    Guru
    Skateguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston/Heights
    Last Seen
    02-07-12 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,571

    joke Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    No math test.

    I was just remembering a sci-fi novel I read, wherein a planet was colonized, but some mutation in the colonists caused a 5:1 ratio between female and male children who survived birth. To sustain a population, the majority of males had to "spread themselves around" more than would be socially acceptable currently here in the USA.

    As a situation like that appeared to be what Rassales was suggesting would be needed for laws supporting stable polygamous marriages to be formed, I asked a clarifying question.
    One good Bull, can service a large herd.
    "Don't be particular bout nothin, but the company you keep"

  5. #145
    
    TheGirlNextDoor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    09-24-14 @ 02:31 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,033
    Blog Entries
    21

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    What makes you think married guys get any action?

    I'm for gay marriage as I think they ought to have to suffer the same way we straight folks do.
    I was going to post almost this exact thing earlier in the thread, but I'm a chicken and didn't want to rain on the parade.
    Fool me once, shame on you.
    Fool me twice....shame on me.

  6. #146
    Advisor Rassales's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    03-08-10 @ 02:23 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    564

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    So, if the male/female ratio were something like 1:3, or 3:1, 1 male marrying 3 females, or the opposite, would become socially acceptable?
    At such a basic level, and for basic issues, people tend to do what's practical, or even necessary, to sustain the group. Social customs are often shaped by necessity.

  7. #147
    Advisor Rassales's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    03-08-10 @ 02:23 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    564

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    I'll never claim I've been denied polygamy, if it was legal. My wife would crack my head open.

    Regardless of it's effects on "society", the reality is that who someone marries is not "society's" concern. And nor is how many someone marries "society's" concern, either.
    Actually it is. Marriage is always society's concern. It's an institution with rules aimed at making society more stable, not just making couples happy. It serves a function. The question isn't so much whether something should be illegal (it's not, really--you can co-habitate in a conjugal way with anyone you choose), but whether society through its laws should support the institution. Marriage isn't just a legal convenience--if it were that simple and that trivial, people wouldn't get so emotional about it.

    There are all sorts of reasons that marriages with more than one person create instability, from both an interpersonal and sociological standpoint. Certainly when the practice is widespread, you eventually end up with a lot of men who cannot find licit sexual partners. Where it is practiced, it's usually done to elevate the status of the person (almost always a man) who takes the multiple partners, so it's inherently disempowering to all the mates and to their sex generally (and they, strangely enough, are almost always women).

    When your wife threatens to crack your skull if you take another wife, she's not only defending herself, but all women. If, suddenly, there were 3 women to every one man in your society, that would probably change--fast.

  8. #148
    Student
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    01-16-10 @ 03:12 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    229

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Skateguy View Post
    I brought this up on another thread the other night. It just kind of rolled out in response to a "Gays getting married" thread.--but the more I think about,the more it seems like a legitimate question. I ask why would two people of the same sex, have to be homosexual to get married? --Because once married, they would then be able enjoy the benefits that go along with being married. Such as tax Breaks, special insurance rates, and so on. If Two Homo Men can get Married legally, then why couldn't two straight Men get married also? (Not that I would want to, but just sayin) Just seems to be more discrimination against Straight Guys to me. Male is Male, and Female is Female, regardless of sexual orientation.-So my question is, if made legal, should two people of the same sex be allowed to marry, whether they are Homosexuals or not? ---this could be interesting
    The inherent problem with this poll is the biased language of the poll itself.

    Should 5 year olds be allowed to marry or should adults get preferential treatment?

    Should people be allowed to marry their dogs or should same species couples receive preferential treatment?

    Should a man and his stuffed teddy bear get the same rights as a married couple or should bigotry prevail?

    The poll is not worded very fairly.

    How about this:

    Should marriage be between a man and a woman, or should words not have any meaning (seeing as how to do it otherwise means you get to redefine terms (i.e. marriage) at will)?

    Should the government be allowed to redefine any concept or institution it wants to?
    If marriage can be between a man and a man (which is a redefinition of the term) or a man and a child, or a man and his cat, then why don't we say up should be down, in should be out, and hot should be cold if it suits our fancy.

    We'll redefine freedom if we choose. We'll redefine fidelity.

    We'll make concepts and ideals relative to our desires and our convenience.

    Look, if two men want to live together and sleep together then let them. But lets not call that a marriage any more than we should call a pig a poodle.
    Last edited by Matt633; 01-15-10 at 07:04 AM.

  9. #149
    Student Antagony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Northern England
    Last Seen
    09-13-11 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    278

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt633 View Post
    The inherent problem with this poll is the biased language of the poll itself.

    Should 5 year olds be allowed to marry or should adults get preferential treatment?

    Should people be allowed to marry their dogs or should same species couples receive preferential treatment?

    Should a man and his stuffed teddy bear get the same rights as a married couple or should bigotry prevail?

    The poll is not worded very fairly.

    How about this:

    Should marriage be between a man and a woman, or should words not have any meaning (seeing as how to do it otherwise means you get to redefine terms (i.e. marriage) at will)?

    Should the government be allowed to redefine any concept or institution it wants to?
    If marriage can be between a man and a man (which is a redefinition of the term) or a man and a child, or a man and his cat, then why don't we say up should be down, in should be out, and hot should be cold if it suits our fancy.
    None of the questions you asked are what is being proposed and never will be; at least not in any serious manner like the same-sex marriage debate. The poll didn't state it, but it should be pretty obvious to anyone reading the OP that he was talking about marriage between consenting adults. Not children; not animals; not inanimate objects; just grown up people with a wish to commit to their significant other and to receive any state benefits associated to marriage. Your attempt to widen the discussion to include concepts that would be seen as perverse or abhorrent to the vast majority of people is as transparent as it is ignorant.

    Look, if two men want to live together and sleep together then let them. But lets not call that a marriage any more than we should call a pig a poodle.
    This has already been covered extensively in this thread I suggest you try reading it. It's not about simply being allowed to use the term; it's about getting all the benefits that are afforded to married couples, like being trusted to make decisions on each others' behalves in critical situations.
    -Ant

    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
    -Voltaire

  10. #150
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Should Same Sex People be allowed to Marry

    Quote Originally Posted by Antagony View Post
    This has already been covered extensively in this thread I suggest you try reading it. It's not about simply being allowed to use the term; it's about getting all the benefits that are afforded to married couples, like being trusted to make decisions on each others' behalves in critical situations.
    No it is not. If this were the case civil unions with all the benefits of marraige would be acceptable.

    This is about legitimizing the gay lifestyle, period.

    In CA for example. Gay couples get all the benefits of married couples. Yet that was not good enough. Now we have the whole prop 8 fight etc.

    So I don't see this as being about benefits or equal treatment under the law.

    I don't care if it gets legalized or not to be honest. It will not affect me one way or the other, but let's be honest about the reasons behind the push.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Page 15 of 85 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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