Should same sex marriages be legal?

[falconwind]

Ah... that must be the new "tolerant" version.. scary.

I wouldn't say that it's tolerant, so much as it is accepting. There is a subtle difference between the two, but there is a difference.

People who are "tolerant" are willing to hide/ignore/surpress their negative feelings. People who "accept" are either supportive, or impartial to the issue, because they've accepted it.

I think most people are still in the "tolerant" phase, and the only place to go next is acceptance.

Civil Unions are the tolerant solution, and Marriage is the accepting solution. However, I think that it would be better, strategically, to shoot for civil unions first, and then get it redefined as marriage later. Slow and steady wins the race, generally.

The US is simply not ready for acceptance, I think. And people tend to resist big changes, whereas if you introduce change gradually and in steps, people are more likely to be less shocked.

 

[Yakuza]

Same for a sterile couple. So? They can, and DO, have kids.
Also, it is illegitimate to speak of "benefit" in terms of science. Science is not normative.



Let's see: gay people can't be allowed to make lifelong socially recognized commitments to each other, but then they also get blamed for... not being as committed in their partnerships. Seems like a pretty unfair deal.



No, you never did any meaningful study. People that actually conduct real studies don't refer to "scientific point."



Ah, so you were invited into your parent's relationship and lovemaking sessions were you?

So there is no benifit to science.


No they acquire kids, there is a difference.

Of course they can, but statistics have shown that not only do gay couples have shorter relationships they also are not as manogamous. Throw a child into it and its just as bad as a single parent broken home. All I am saying is that Children dont do good in either situation and of the situations gay people are statisticaly worse. meaning they break up more often.

Oh sorry, I didn'y meet your standard of how to do a real study....


I believe that the first relationship we see are the ones between our father and mother. Its also interesting to see the studies on how many "homosexuals" have had troubled relationships with their moms and their dads. Anyways, I believe we learn how to love members of the opposite sex by how are parents treat each other. I have not met any one who treats a women with respect and honor, when his dad treated his mom like a peice of crap.

oh and real nice apos, i do think love extends beyond the bed room.

 

[Phraxtion]

I wouldn't say that it's tolerant, so much as it is accepting. There is a subtle difference between the two, but there is a difference.

People who are "tolerant" are willing to hide/ignore/surpress their negative feelings. People who "accept" are either supportive, or impartial to the issue, because they've accepted it.

I think most people are still in the "tolerant" phase, and the only place to go next is acceptance.

Civil Unions are the tolerant solution, and Marriage is the accepting solution. However, I think that it would be better, strategically, to shoot for civil unions first, and then get it redefined as marriage later. Slow and steady wins the race, generally.

The US is simply not ready for acceptance, I think. And people tend to resist big changes, whereas if you introduce change gradually and in steps, people are more likely to be less shocked.

I dont see change on this issue as a good thing.

 

[falconwind]

...I believe that the first relationship we see are the ones between our father and mother. Its also interesting to see the studies on how many "homosexuals" have had troubled relationships with their moms and their dads. Anyways, I believe we learn how to love members of the opposite sex by how are parents treat each other. I have not met any one who treats a women with respect and honor, when his dad treated his mom like a peice of crap.

The only difference that a same-sex couple will have on a child is that they will grow up knowing that homosexuality isn't wrong. The parent's have a moral responsibility to have the child understand that being gay is okay, but by that same token, they can't raise him in such a way as to control his sexual orientation. Gay people know first-hand how 'indoctrinating' children leads to hate/anger/division in society and in the family. Opposion is the way to war, tolerance the way to cease-fire, and acceptance the way to peace.

The child will be raised at peace.

 

[Yakuza]

The only difference that a same-sex couple will have on a child is that they will grow up knowing that homosexuality isn't wrong. The parent's have a moral responsibility to have the child understand that being gay is okay, but by that same token, they can't raise him in such a way as to control his sexual orientation. Gay people know first-hand how 'indoctrinating' children leads to hate/anger/division in society and in the family. Opposion is the way to war, tolerance the way to cease-fire, and acceptance the way to peace.

The child will be raised at peace.

Your living in a false reality.

 

[ShadowFox]

Good post, falconwind. I agree completely.

Gays are causing themselves problems right now. These people should be looking for a slow, steady change. Outward demonstrations don't help. When I see these gay rallies with near-nude men and women, I'm not thinking that they deserve more rights. Of course, not all gays are this way, but a scarily high percentage are.

 

[Yakuza]

I will never accept homosexuality, regardless of how slow they intorduce it.

 

[ShadowFox]

I will never accept homosexuality, regardless of how slow they intorduce it.

Well, the point of going slow is that it wouldn't matter what you think.

 

[f|uke]

I will never accept homosexuality, regardless of how slow they intorduce it.

How does what other people do in the privacy of their own home effect you?

 

[Phraxtion]

How does what other people do in the privacy of their own home effect you?

Can you people not see down the line what could happen as a result of same-sex marriages?

 

[Ikerous]

Can you people not see down the line what could happen as a result of same-sex marriages?

Same-sex divorces? What...

 

[f|uke]

Same-sex divorces? What...

Exactly!! :O
I really don't see how its going to be any different. These people are living together anyways,. having kids anyways,. they're as good as married in every way except legally.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Can you people not see down the line what could happen as a result of same-sex marriages?

Please elaborate. I'd love to hear your prophetic vision.

 

[Phraxtion]

Exactly!! :O
I really don't see how its going to be any different. These people are living together anyways,. having kids anyways,. they're as good as married in every way except legally.

You know what.. it dosent matter anymore. The battle for "gay rights" is only just beginning. Soon after that it will be polyamory, etc. Then God knows what... but their not bringing physical harm to anybody so its got to be ok......

I live in a country that was built on great ideals. I feel helpless as I watch it get abused and raped.

 

[Phraxtion]

Please elaborate. I'd love to hear your prophetic vision.

Im sure you would Mech.

Do your own reading, searching, thinking. You seem like smart person for the most part. Besides im just a closeminded individual who cant see past the bible right...

 

[Mechagodzilla]

statistics have shown that not only do gay couples have shorter relationships they also are not as manogamous. Throw a child into it and its just as bad as a single parent broken home. All I am saying is that Children dont do good in either situation and of the situations gay people are statisticaly worse. meaning they break up more often.

So, are you proposing that single parents, disenfranchised parents and the like are not to be allowed children as well?

And what statistics? Do you have a source?

I believe that the first relationship we see are the ones between our father and mother. Its also interesting to see the studies on how many "homosexuals" have had troubled relationships with their moms and their dads.

I like how you assume the worst, based soley on the fact that they are gay.

Anyways, I believe we learn how to love members of the opposite sex by how are parents treat each other. I have not met any one who treats a women with respect and honor, when his dad treated his mom like a peice of crap.

Wha? Parents are not the be-all and end-all of a child's education. I do not wish to be a computer engineering contractor like my father. Nor will I be a nurse like my mother.

Divorce, adultery, death, poverty. Straight parents experience it all. But no-one is popping up to take thier kids away.

i do think love extends beyond the bed room.

Obviously not, since "the bedroom" is the only difference between gays and straight people.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Do your own reading, searching, thinking. You seem like smart person for the most part. Besides im just a closeminded individual who cant see past the bible right...

No, really. Tell me what horrible things will happen if gays are allowed to act like straight people.

You can't just allege some sort of future crime without proof. Let alone scapegoat it onto the gay community.

I do plenty of research, and a lot more thinking than many people I know. And I can't see a single reason why gay marriage would be bad.

You know what.. it dosent matter anymore. The battle for "gay rights" is only just beginning. Soon after that it will be polyamory, etc. Then God knows what... but their not bringing physical harm to anybody so its got to be ok......

Well, by definition, it is OK. If no-one is getting harmed, then what is the problem? Any bible believer should just happily ignore the gays until they "burn in hell" or whatever you hope happens to people who are different from you.

If they don't hurt you in this world, and you will be segregated from them in the next, why are you complaining?

I live in a country that was built on great ideals. I feel helpless as I watch it get abused and raped.

That's just retarded. No-one is being harmed, let alone "raped."

I'm shocked that you would trivialize the terror that rape is, just to justify religious intolerance.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Well from a scientific point there is no beneift for two people of the same sex being together.

Lots of thinks have no direct and provable benefit. This forum. Soda. SUVs. Carpet instead of tile.

If you ban everything but the base necessities, you're left with nothing.

they can not reproduce. Further more same sex couples are more likely to have extra marital relationships, taking this from the the studies done on gay relationships. i forget what the exact % is but it was high.

Convenient that you forgot. And who cares about other people's marital stability? There is no law against adultery, believe it or not.

50% of straight marriages end in divorce. Should we ban straight marriages too?

Also i did a study on the raising of children in unstable homes.
This wasn't homosexualy centered but the study showed that children who live with a two parent family, with one mom and one dad, do better in school, less likely to get in trouble( even crimnal activity), less prone to act of in a homosexualy lifestyle.

right.

So, can we see the scientific procedure behind this study? What was the study base? Was conclusion based on national polling, or just a small locality?

Children learn how to interact with people by whatching you and the other person you are with. How hard would it be for a male growing up with two dadies to interact with some one of the opposite sex.

They also learn from friends, the rest of the family, school, television, books, and all manner of other sources. Not to mention instincts. Until every single one of those things turn 50%+ gay, you have nothing to worry about.

 

[falconwind]

I will never accept homosexuality, regardless of how slow they intorduce it.

Who's living in a false reality now? Stubborness is the virtue of the lazy mind. Unwilling, unable, and uninclined to see the truth.

 

[Viperidae]

I'll never accept homosexuality, regardless of how slow they intorduce it.

And I'll never accept gravity, regardless of how obvious it is!

*Puts on wings made of duck feathers*
*Climbs onto turret of castle*
*Jumps*
*Floats for a brief moment, until gravity overcomes air resistance and starts pullin'*
*Realises how dumb this idea was*
*Crashes into ground*

These are such medieval ways of thinking...

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I don't care because I am atheist.

But I believe its disrespectful to the people who marry because of religion purposes and saying that its a sin. So no Gays should marry. They could have unions and have the same rights but calling it a marriage is just trying to piss people of beliefs. Union yes marriage no.

Marriage is, under law, a secular bond. Atheists can marry all they want, and no religious people complain that it is "cheapening thier religion".

If you want to give it religious connotations, more power to you. But those connotations are arbitrary, not necessary.

Don't forget that most other religions have marriages that don't fit the christian definition either.

Please site proof that all gays want marriage simply as a way to anger every religion on earth.

Read his post again, that's not at all what he said. He was talking about unstable homes. Gay marriages have a history of being unstable. Is it a stereotype? Perhaps, but it is backed up with statistics.

What statistics? I would like to see a source.

'Hetero' marriages have much the same reputation now it seems, 52% divorce? It's disgusting. But at least the kid doesn't grow up confused while he still has a father and mother.

Again, don't just assume that these children will be harmed and confused. PROVE it. You can't just assume the worst case scenario just because they're gays. Innocence until proven guilty.

I think gay marriage is a bad idea. I'm a Christian, so you can go ahead and call it 'religious intolorance', but there are other reasons for me to believe the same thing. Their children is at the top of my list.

Okay, but since you are basing the removal of this liberty on an apparently baseless assumption, it's not a very solid belief.

As bgesley pointed out with his quote:

Gay unions provide more stability and security to adopted or medically-enhanced children than broken homes and struggling single mothers. Homosexuals account for roughly 6% of the population regardless of environmental influences. Despite prevailing misconceptions, biological factors account for the lion’s share of homosexuality, not faulty modeling or dysfunctional family relationships. Biological factors—not personal or moral depravity—also account for around 5% of the population afflicted with alcoholism. There’s no evidence—scientific or otherwise--indicating that children raised in gay unions have any more chance of homosexuality than children raised in traditional families. “Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children . . .” said the document, perpetuating pernicious propaganda about homosexual relationships.

Please disprove this quote. I'd like to see someone.

Here is my thought on the subject. I had a chance to ponder it this morning. Currently, there is no real form of gay 'marriage', but there needs to be one. The majority of people in this country are against it. What is so wrong about finding a middle ground in civil unions, which provide equal rights under law. In politics you cannot get every single one of your demands met, but you people seem to think so. Nothing will ever get accomplished if conservatives keep calling for an Amendment and liberals keep calling for gay 'marriage'.

I'm all for civil unions, as they are better than nothing. I just find it foolish that the intolerance has to stick on the name like some sort of residue. The name thing is just petty exclusion.

I said two parents on mom and one dad. Children with one parent are several times more likely to be criminals.

what are you talkking about?

I would like to know what you are "talkking about."

Specifically, what study has given you this awesome unsourced statistic?

I believe gay marriage is wrong. I dont believe that God intended for two peole of the same sex to unite like this. Yet as an american I have to look at what this country says about something like this. My country says that all people are given by their creator certain unaliable rights, life, lyberty, and the pursiute of happiness. I do not think human beings should be discriminated for whatever beliefs they uphold and all people should be given the same chance to a happy life as the rest of us. Yet I do not agree with it and I will stand firm in what I believe. and in the same country that gives them a chance to fight with what the believe I have the freedom to oppose it.

I actually have to agree with you there, except for that last little point: You don't have the freedom to oppose other's freedoms.

I dont think that two people of the same sex should be together, but I dont not think that people should not be able to acquire certain benifits because of their sexual orientation.

And what better way give everyone equal benefits than to legalise civil unions / marriage?

Ah... that must be the new "tolerant" version [of the dictionary].. scary.

Why is tolerance scary? It's the minimum that is expected of Americans, to preserve freedom by preventing any hatred from harming people.

 

[Viperidae]

Mecha, you should be a lawyer :rolling:

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Mecha, you should be a lawyer :rolling:

Haha, maybe!

I could fund my practice with the 40$ that I will never need to pay up.

 

[f|uke]

Keep that campfire burning, Mecha

I must say, I am quite impressed at the poll numbers. The majorty of HL2 fans are for greater acceptance of different lifestyles.. probably more so then the general population.

I'm thinking that is because, generally, HL2 apeals to a more mature, intelligent crowd.

 

[Ikerous]

Mecha, you should be a lawyer :rolling:

He's simply arguing the obvious, now if he could come up with a decent argument against gay marriage.. then he would make a good lawyer.

And wow.. i'm surprised at the intolerance of some Christians :-/ We're not all like this.. i swear..

 

[Mechagodzilla]

He's simply arguing the obvious, now if he could come up with a decent argument against gay marriage.. then he would make a good lawyer.

Too true, although any lawyer who could successfully argue for intolerance may be skilled, but I'd refuse to call him "good".

I find it sad that I have to argue this obvious concept to nearly half the people responding to this poll.

It's very possible that we are the only people who will ever tell the "no" crowd that they are being harmfully discriminatory.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

...Mechagodzilla took the cake.

I'am with you 100%

 

[Zeus]

no (tencharlimit)

 

[Yakuza]

I dunno why the poll allows for multiple answers, but anywho:

The answer to this is a fairly obvious "yes."

The only reason to ban the marriages would be a religious reason, and having religion influence law is directly equivalent to legalising discrimination.

To even the most hardcore christian, it should be a bad idea. Why?

Well, think of it this way: What if there were, say, a jewish majority were voted into the US government (instead of the current christian majority) sometime in the far-off future after gay marriage were banned?

Using the gay ban as a guideline and precedent, they could outlaw non-kosher foods withiout much trouble. Goodbye, pork.

You wouldn't want pork outlawed, right? People have eaten pork for years, and are no better or worse than people who don't. No-one is hurt when I have a potroast for dinner, so why ban it?

Us pork-eaters would want to be allowed to have the same rights as the majority of people. We definitely wouldn't want people who only eat kosher food to be allowed tax breaks that we can't have. Why, that would be preferential treatment for the jewish! That would discriminate against every non-kosher religion in the world, as well as atheists, agnostics, and every other minority belief.

Hell, what if there were a vegetarian majority? No meat-based products at all, and it would discriminate against damn near everyone.

If that sounds far-fetched, just replace Jewish with christian and Non-kosher foods with gay marriage, and you've got next year, if Bush gets his way.

From what I have heard the majority of America is against Gay marriages, so is the majority of America religious?

Its not outlawing Pork, people can eat pork all they want, its eating pork and saying that they have a place in the jewish society.

Its not that people cant be together. I have two family members who are gay. They have lived with each other for some time now. The only reason gays are after this marriage idea is that it gives them benifits that otherwise they wouldn't have. So maggiage for gay people has nothing to do with how much they care for the other person rather how the can benifit from society. if two people of the same sex wanna be togther thats their choice but I dont think they should call it marriage because thats not what God intended for marriage.

 

[Yakuza]

I really can't see any argument against same sex marriage (other than on relegeous grounds, but then it's unfair to people who aren't religeous as there are legal benefits to marriage).



I'm quite shocked by this bigoted response, do you really think that people who are award of the extend of intollerance and homophobia in todays society would really try to raise their children as homosexuals?

If homosexuality is okay and natural then why wouldn't they. Besides it doesn't matter what they do, they are teaching the child about homosexuality by simply being with some one of the opposite sex.

You know its kind of interesting. From the amounts of gay marriages i have scene in real life as well as the movies it seems that the roles of gay people in a relationship seem to play out s if the are not gay.

I mean have you ever noticed that of two gay women one of them seems to be "more" masculine than the other. With two gay guys it seems one is almost allways more femenin..
Almost like a male and female relaionship between those of the same sex.

 

[Phraxtion]

Here are a few reads
http://www.same-sex-gay-marriage.com/
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1034938/posts

 

[qckbeam]

I've been itching to reply to this thread for a while, and now that I have the chance, everything that could possibly be has been said. Shoot

There are only two reasons people oppose gay marriage. Either they are afraid of homosexuality because they don't understand what it is, or they have religious beliefs which say it is wrong in some way. As a society, making judgments based upon ignorance, religion, or both, is flat out irresponsible. Anyone who understands homosexuality knows that it isn't the result of a choice, and that it isn't something that can be changed. It's like being black, or Asian. I'm not quite sure what it is that causes a man or woman to be homosexual, but it's beyond an individuals control. So to deny homosexuals the right to participate in marriage is to discriminate against a group of people simply because they were born differently than the majority of people. It's no different than saying blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry.

 

[ShadowFox]

From what I have heard the majority of America is against Gay marriages, so is the majority of America religious?

Yes, the majority of America is religious. And it is most likely that majority that is the proponant of the constitutional ban.

I find it funny that, contrary to popular rhetoric, religion is once again used as a mechanism for hate. But I thought only Islamic evildoers do that.

 

[Yakuza]

Yes, the majority of America is religious. And it is most likely that majority that is the proponant of the constitutional ban.

I find it funny that, contrary to popular rhetoric, religion is once again used as a mechanism for hate. But I thought only Islamic evildoers do that.

Since when does not believeing in homosexuality mean hate against them.

 

[Yakuza]

I've been itching to reply to this thread for a while, and now that I have the chance, everything that could possibly be has been said. Shoot

There are only two reasons people oppose gay marriage. Either they are afraid of homosexuality because they don't understand what it is, or they have religious beliefs which say it is wrong in some way. As a society, making judgments based upon ignorance, religion, or both, is flat out irresponsible. Anyone who understands homosexuality knows that it isn't the result of a choice, and that it isn't something that can be changed. It's like being black, or Asian. I'm not quite sure what it is that causes a man or woman to be homosexual, but it's beyond an individuals control. So to deny homosexuals the right to participate in marriage is to discriminate against a group of people simply because they were born differently than the majority of people. It's no different than saying blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry.

I believe you are wrong. Were are not talking about skin color but the status of the mind. Homosexuality is a choice, however it may be made easier buy a particular circumstance it still is a fundemental choice made by the individual. If I was born a crack addict, do I have a choice on whether or not I continue to use Crack when I get older. Sure using crack might be rather easy for me and i might even seem right, but should I use it?

 

[Phraxtion]

Yes, the majority of America is religious. And it is most likely that majority that is the proponant of the constitutional ban.

I find it funny that, contrary to popular rhetoric, religion is once again used as a mechanism for hate. But I thought only Islamic evildoers do that.

Wow, im not suprised though. Most people are ignorant in this way.

Can you not see how objection to this would be love?

 

[ShadowFox]

Wow, im not suprised though. Most people are ignorant in this way.

Can you not see how objection to this would be love?

Actually.. I cannot see that at all.

And Yakuza, I'm not refering to you specifically.

 

[Phraxtion]

Actually.. I cannot see that at all.

And Yakuza, I'm not refering to you specifically.

Again, im not suprised. Im done in this thread, its going to be same old circular crap over and over.

 

[Ikerous]

Perhaps he thinks that by somehow depriving them of natural human rights they'll stop sinning and come to Christ (Therefore showing them love)... :-/ I mean.. Makes sense to me.

There are plenty of gay Christians, and in my opinion they'll be going to heaven. But there would be a lot more homosexuals living for Christ if the Christian community wasn't so closed minded. If you want to show them love accept them as who they are.

 

[Apos]

So there is no benifit to science.

That is a criminally stupid misreading of what I said. No, there is no normative judgement in science. Science examines what is, not what one thinks is best. "Benefit" is a normative concept that presupposes some particular goal. But science only discusses goals inasmuch as they help us understand particular causes and motivations. To say that something benefits a species evolutionarily, for instance, is not to say that it's good or bad.

No they acquire kids, there is a difference.

Gay people and infertile straight people can both have kids, whether through adoption, surrogacy, or even pregnancy in the case of lesbians. And, in fact, many gay couples ALREADY have and are in the midst of raising kids. This is a reality, and nothing could change it short of draconian measures. So, given that it IS a reality, why should we make it harder on some families and easier on others merely because of the gender of the parents?

Of course they can, but statistics have shown that not only do gay couples have shorter relationships they also are not as manogamous.

Given that many gay people can't even have OPEN relationships, and given that they are forbidden to join the very institution that helps straight people maintain lasting relationships, this is a very stupid argument. In addition, while gay men are indeed more promiscuous, lesbian women in partnerships are LESS promiscuous than straight couples.

Throw a child into it and its just as bad as a single parent broken home.

Actually, no. While there is no solid research in this area, most studies show that two gay parents are as good if not better at providing stable homes.

And the reality is this: whatever the general trends, it makes no sense to deny a PARTICULAR gay couple the right to raise a child. If you look at different ethnic groups, you will most certainly find different rates of promiscuity and stable homes... but that is not a legitimate argument for allowing some ethnic groups to marry and adopt and denying it to others. In such situations, what is warranted is a case by case judgement, not a blanket one.

All I am saying is that Children dont do good in either situation and of the situations gay people are statisticaly worse. meaning they break up more often.

Can you cite any of this phantom information? You can't, because it doesn't exist, at least not for comparing committed gay couples to committed straight couples. If you are talking about single gay men, then of course there is less monogamy. But comparing single people to married people is ridiculous.

Oh sorry, I didn'y meet your standard of how to do a real study....

The standard isn't mine, it's called peer review and scientific rigor. Tell me, smart guy, which journal was your study published in? What was the margin of error? What was the sample size? How was the sample drawn?

Give me a break.

I believe that the first relationship we see are the ones between our father and mother. Its also interesting to see the studies on how many "homosexuals" have had troubled relationships with their moms and their dads.

Again, without taking into account how often this trouble is related to their moms and dads hating them for being gay, this is meaningless, not "interesting."

Anyways, I believe we learn how to love members of the opposite sex by how are parents treat each other. I have not met any one who treats a women with respect and honor, when his dad treated his mom like a peice of crap.

So... how does this relate to gay people? If two gay people treat each other well in a loving home and relationship, how is that not a good model for relationships in general? Why does the particular gender matter to the overall values of things like mutual respect, love, sharing burdens, etc.?

oh and real nice apos, i do think love extends beyond the bed room.

Ah, your father must be quite well endowed then. Congrats.