View Poll Results: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Voters
430. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    186 43.26%
  • Yes, explain

    244 56.74%
Page 177 of 192 FirstFirst ... 77127167175176177178179187 ... LastLast
Results 1,761 to 1,770 of 1915

Thread: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  1. #1761
    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: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    No. Precisely the opposite. Everyone else on the thread is relating marriage to sex, and I am the only one asking why. If you divorce the concept of marriage from the concept of sex, then the whole homosexual marriage argument falls apart. Straight men who want to marry other straight men are being discriminated against. Are they being discriminated against for being straight? Homosexual men who want to marry homosexual women are not being discriminated against. They are free to do so. Without connecting sex to marriage (and by marriage I mean this exclusive list of privileges of which we are speaking) then sexual orientation has no bearing.



    See? Right there. You accuse me of mistakenly connecting sex and marriage, and then you connect them yourself in the very next paragraph.



    Dunno. Seems silly to me. Maybe the government shouldn't be involved in giving out goodies based on your sexual relationships. Whaddaya think?

    Also, if you had same sex marriage, then you could marry your best friend legally if you would prefer to have him make all those decisions and get the benefits from that marriage. You could even enter into a civil marriage with him, and be privately married to a woman you loved if you prefer.
    Sex is not marriage. A civil marriage to someone is directly giving them the legal rights to make those decisions. And the spousal testimony rights are directly from the US government. You haven't really argued against anything I have said.

    The government gives anyone who is married the right not to testify. At the moment, since only heterosexual marriages are recognized by the federal government, that means that only having heterosexual intimacies with someone actually gives you the right not to testify against your spouse. So the question should be, what makes heterosexual sex so special that it determines who someone should be protected from testifying against or not being having testimony from them used against you?



    And gay couples could be publicly married to someone of the opposite sex, and privately married to someone of the same sex.

    Marriage just isn't a business in which the government should be involved.
    You're right. The reason we generally use hetersexual and homosexual to describe marriages is because it is easy and what is most often the case. However, marriages certainly do exist between people who have no sex at all or who don't have an attraction to each other at all.

    However, you're argument then becomes one of semantics. I will use opposite and same sex marriage to describe things to you, since you are insisting.

    The government has good reasons to be in the civil marriage business. It has already been shown in this thread and others how marriage is beneficial to society as a whole. I believe CC posted some of the argument just within a few pages of this one. It also helps to protect individuals from abuses related to family structure and inheritance, and makes it so that a couple only has to make one contract instead of several to resolve legal issues that affect most couples, such as those I have mentioned. Most people who get married, want their choosen spouse to be the one to make those legal/medical decisions for them. Those who marry for some other reason, and want someone else to make such decisions, can designate the difference through their own legal contracts.

    The spousal privilege laws are considered necessary for marriage. I believe they are considered along the same lines as attorney/client privileges and doctor/patient privileges. The difference is that it is assumed that someone will tell their spouse things they would not say to anyone else, because of their intimacy level. It is really a privacy issue.

    Spousal privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now, since you wish to make a distinction, the government assumes that most people want to be married due to an intimate connection. Because of this intimate connection, the couple wishes to make each other legal family. Now this is not always true. In fact, some opposite sex marriages have been merely smoke screens to hide one or both partners' homosexuality, especially during times when there were laws against homosexuality or when it may have been damaging to the person's career to come out.

    I would love to know what these "goodies" of marriage are. Now certainly, there are some tax benefits to being married, but there are tax benefits to plenty of things that are seen as a benefit to society, such as charity and taking care of family members who do not/cannot take full care of themselves for whatever reason. The decision-making part is as much of a responsibility as a "goody", and can be designated to someone besides a spouse. The private businesses make their own rules on what "goodies" are given to spouses. Some businesses will even give those "goodies" to partners or whoever their worker wishes to designate.
    "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. #1762
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,194

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    I know, right? It's kinda ridiculous.

    Except that we are social creatures who create family units. The government has a vested interest in promoting family units. Sex is not necessary to have a family. Most of the time, it is a part of marriage though.

    The government is discriminating against a group of people who wish to have their family unit given the same treatment from the government.



    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    Gay men can also have a living will or give their partner power of attorney.
    That isn't the whole family package of rights though.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  3. #1763
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Last Seen
    09-26-10 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,219

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by BCR View Post
    Does it pain you that much to use the word Marriage to describe a Gay couples union? That seems somewhat childish.
    What is childish is to insist on using the term inappropriately.

  4. #1764
    User sweEt Mauritius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    07-15-12 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    79

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    I'm not insinuating anything. I was asking a question. A great majority of the folks that I have communicated with that are in support of gay marriage say that the studies indicate that people are born gay, when in fact there is no study that says that. every study I have read on homosexuality concludes that homosexuality MAY be caused by some combination of genetics or environmental factors but also usually state no proof exists. My point is that people who say the studies say this, that or the other thing should read and understand them first.
    In psychology, there is no such thing as proof of causation, so the language used is always the "may be caused," "research supports the hypothesis," etc. kind. It's not concrete what the exact cause of different sexual orientations is, but that's the way it looks so far. So if it is a combination of genetics, pre-natal and post-natal environment, brain structure, or whatever, it's fair to say that research supports the generalization that people are "born gay."

    Regardless, I really don't understand what your point in debating the cause of homosexuality is. Let's pretend it has nothing to do with any kind of predisposition (even though research indicates otherwise), what is your alternative hypothesis? What do you think causes it? And why does that have any bearing on this discussion? Something has to cause it, since people blatantly don't choose their sexuality.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Asking me when I decided I was heterosexual as a point that there is no choice to being homosexual usually holds no validity with heterosexuals. Heterosexuals consider heterosexual intercourse to be natural while homosexual intercourse is unnatural. Therefore, there is no need to legitimize heterosexuality to refute the validity of homosexuality.
    I'm talking about sexual orientation in general. People don't choose it. People don't choose to be gay just like people don't choose to be straight. Your avoidance of my question makes me think that you didn't choose your sexual orientation.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    The argument that environmental factors may cause homosexuality is very valid in my view. However it doesn't in and of itself validate homosexuality, for me personally, since there are a great many mental disorders which are said to be caused by environmental factors. Don't take that to mean I think homosexuality is a mental disorder, I don't necessarily. I'm sure if I were homosexual I would have a different view on that. My personal religious views are not a strong enough factor for me to rely on in opposition to gay marriage so I've tried to find away to convince myself that it is valid through reading studies on the issue.
    Difference between homosexuality and any mental disorder is that homosexuality itself hasn't been found to have any inherently negative effects on any aspect of humans. Whereas obsessive-compulsive disorder, for example, has serious negative consequences for the individual and antisocial personality disorder, for example, can lead to negative effects for both the individual others in society, there are no analogous negative effects associated with homosexuality itself for the individual or for other members of society.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Personally, I do not feel that homosexuality or gay marriage will affect me personally in anyway, however I do believe it will have some pretty serious affects on our society. Maybe good effects, maybe bad. Time will tell. That is more my concern than anything, and is the only reason I oppose it.
    I mean, what makes you believe there will be serious effects on our society? As others have pointed out, there are now 9 nations around the world that have legalized same-sex marriage, as well as 5 states and the District of Columbia here in the U.S. I haven't heard of any kind of societal collapse as a result, and it's been legal for years in some places. If you have heard about these negative effects, please point me to the article or report. On top of that, research indicates that same-sex marriage improves the lives of LGBT people and their families. And all I've heard about the negative effects are empty assertions about societal collapse without even an ounce of concrete evidence to support such radical assertions. So what ON EARTH makes you believe that there will be serious "bad" effects on society? Just a hunch?

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Since homosexuals can live "marriage-like" lifestyles now, and are as protected by hate laws and discrimination laws as are anyone else, I don't see that legalizing marriage would provide any benefit worthy of the potential risks involved with changing the societal definition of marriage.
    Again, I'd love an example of a "potential risk" and your reason for believing that it is a risk. If you don't see any benefit that is worth the "potential risks," then you should read about the 1,138 rights and responsibilities of marriage provided by federal law. Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It's worth it to plenty of people, especially when the only argument against it are these phantom "risks" to society that don't seem to be evidenced anywhere.

  5. #1765
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by sweEt Mauritius View Post
    In psychology, there is no such thing as proof of causation, so the language used is always the "may be caused," "research supports the hypothesis," etc. kind. It's not concrete what the exact cause of different sexual orientations is, but that's the way it looks so far. So if it is a combination of genetics, pre-natal and post-natal environment, brain structure, or whatever, it's fair to say that research supports the generalization that people are "born gay."
    In the instance of homosexuality. There is plenty of proof of causation in other behaviors related tot he brain. It's my assumption that homosexuality is a choice based on the "evidence" that I have seen. As such, I feel that the decision over whether or not to accept it as a society is also a choice.

    Regardless, I really don't understand what your point in debating the cause of homosexuality is. Let's pretend it has nothing to do with any kind of predisposition (even though research indicates otherwise), what is your alternative hypothesis? What do you think causes it? And why does that have any bearing on this discussion? Something has to cause it, since people blatantly don't choose their sexuality.
    My point is that if it were shown, conclusively, to indeed be beyond the choice of homosexuals, then I would support gay marriage regardless of my personal feelings on the matter.

    I'm talking about sexual orientation in general. People don't choose it. People don't choose to be gay just like people don't choose to be straight. Your avoidance of my question makes me think that you didn't choose your sexual orientation.
    The majority of the "evidence" is derived from interviews with homosexuals. The homosexual, as a defense mechanism, is likely to believe, or make him/herself believe that they had no other choice. It has been proven, conclusively that there are people with absolutely no impulse control. That lack of control doesn't make what they do "right" or acceptable by society, depending on the uncontrollable impulse.

    Difference between homosexuality and any mental disorder is that homosexuality itself hasn't been found to have any inherently negative effects on any aspect of humans. Whereas obsessive-compulsive disorder, for example, has serious negative consequences for the individual and antisocial personality disorder, for example, can lead to negative effects for both the individual others in society, there are no analogous negative effects associated with homosexuality itself for the individual or for other members of society.
    That doesn't in an of itself make it acceptable. I personally believe that homosexual marriage will have no direct and definable impact on me or my family beyond what I feel is further damage to a nearly destroyed concept of marriage.

    I mean, what makes you believe there will be serious effects on our society? As others have pointed out, there are now 9 nations around the world that have legalized same-sex marriage, as well as 5 states and the District of Columbia here in the U.S. I haven't heard of any kind of societal collapse as a result, and it's been legal for years in some places. If you have heard about these negative effects, please point me to the article or report. On top of that, research indicates that same-sex marriage improves the lives of LGBT people and their families. And all I've heard about the negative effects are empty assertions about societal collapse without even an ounce of concrete evidence to support such radical assertions. So what ON EARTH makes you believe that there will be serious "bad" effects on society? Just a hunch?
    I like that though there is no concrete evidence supporting the validity of homosexuality, you ask for concrete evidence that it will have negative affects on our society. Was it generally assumed that the invention of the light bulb and motor vehicle would relatively rapidly destroy our environment? Apples and oranges? Maybe, but, there are unforseen negative affects...sometimes dire.....to almost everyhting, eventually we are going to have to consider them.
    Last edited by mac; 06-20-10 at 07:25 PM.

  6. #1766
    User joe246's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    08-08-10 @ 06:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    95

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    how bout we get rid of marriage and have free love then we could rapidly populate the solar system by crowding the earth and we would then have access to massive amounts of new resources and of course gays can do do free love with whoever they want including guys. everybody wins!

  7. #1767
    Irrelevant Pissant

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    03-13-14 @ 07:55 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,194

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    Except that we are social creatures who create family units. The government has a vested interest in promoting family units. Sex is not necessary to have a family. Most of the time, it is a part of marriage though.
    Han and Chewie are a family unit. Why shouldn't they receive the same benefits that Beru and Owen do?

    The government is discriminating against a group of people who wish to have their family unit given the same treatment from the government.
    Yeah. that is the entire point of marriage licenses. It is in fact the sole reason they exist.

    That isn't the whole family package of rights though.
    Ok, well, those were the examples that were given. Use another example and I will be happy to demonstrate how it too should be equally applicable to Han and Chewie despite the platonic nature of their relationship.

  8. #1768
    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: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    Han and Chewie are a family unit. Why shouldn't they receive the same benefits that Beru and Owen do?



    Yeah. that is the entire point of marriage licenses. It is in fact the sole reason they exist.



    Ok, well, those were the examples that were given. Use another example and I will be happy to demonstrate how it too should be equally applicable to Han and Chewie despite the platonic nature of their relationship.
    Actually, if Han and Chewie existed, they absolutely should be allowed to enter into a legal marriage contract. (Just so you realize, in the Star Wars universe, I'm pretty sure that Chewbacca was considered a humanoid adult that could legally consent to enter into contracts with other humanoids, such as marriage.) In fact, I bet a lot of people on the pro-SSM would have no problem if two guy friends feel that they are close enough to enter into a legal marriage contract with each other, whatever their reasons. Although, it might be a disadvantage to them if either or both of them happen to find a partner (of whatever gender) that they would rather be married to and give those legal/medical decisions to instead.
    "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. #1769
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Actually, if Han and Chewie existed, they absolutely should be allowed to enter into a legal marriage contract. (Just so you realize, in the Star Wars universe, I'm pretty sure that Chewbacca was considered a humanoid adult that could legally consent to enter into contracts with other humanoids, such as marriage.) In fact, I bet a lot of people on the pro-SSM would have no problem if two guy friends feel that they are close enough to enter into a legal marriage contract with each other, whatever their reasons. Although, it might be a disadvantage to them if either or both of them happen to find a partner (of whatever gender) that they would rather be married to and give those legal/medical decisions to instead.
    What's the possibility that they are doing so simply for the financial benifits, and the right not to have to testify against each other, and then when other situations arise that necisitate dissolution they simply file for an uncontested divorce? Benifit to society?

  10. #1770
    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: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    What's the possibility that they are doing so simply for the financial benifits, and the right not to have to testify against each other, and then when other situations arise that necisitate dissolution they simply file for an uncontested divorce? Benifit to society?
    Probably about the same or even less of a possibility than some opposite sex couples doing so for the same reasons. I don't really know why people think that this would be prevalent when same sex marriage is legal than it is with opposite sex marriage legal. I knew a few people in the military who would marry someone just to get the housing and/or the benefits. They usually only got caught if they were doing something stupid, like not living together or lying about where one of them was living. How do you prove someone is in love? How do you prove that a couple is not marrying for financial reasons? And, would it be much different than marrying because the couple had a kid together, but they really didn't like each other after that one night affair, so they decide to just have an open marriage?
    "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.

Posting Permissions

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