Same sex marriage

[thunderflare]

I must say this thread has grown a lot, 4 pages in like a day or two wow, I'm having trouble keeping up, nice job Geo

While we're on the topic about gay movies have any of you seen The Bird Cage (1996) it was a French movie and it was great, and might I mention hilarious. If you haven't seen the movie watch it there is an English version. Here's a description.

"A gay cabaret owner and his drag queen companion agree to put up a false straight front so that their son can introduce them to his fiancé's right-wing moralistic parents".

[Gestalt]

I ride on no high horse, Redeemer. My judgement is clouded by fear alone. I concede. I am a firm believer in equal rights, however, i still retain my fears of the possible propagation of an influential trend. But i now realize my argument is unsound because i should not have brought up homophobia in the first place-- since it, in and of itself, is a form of racism.

Unfortunately i cannot kill my fears, ill found and far fetched as they may be, in one day’s time. It is a process. But i guess one should not take to living in fear because it is ultimately damaging.

Being that, after 2 years and 300 posts, i still do not crusade the hillside of SF-O counterpoint regularly, i had not realized, contrary to popular belief, the amount caliber of which is required in every post as Steve has now pointed out. But now i do.

Once again i lean toward legalization of ‘same-sex marriage’ because i think the freedom of ‘choice’ is most important with-in ‘this issue.’ I only had a few points of the opposition to bring up (i.e. setting precedents, societal conformity, & adoption) which had still worried me. As i now see that the ‘milk the cow’ for a concise rebuttal method is flawed and has only caused retorts in the counter-point and can be equated with nothing more that a troll. Please accept my apologies.

----------

On the issue of adoption. I need to look at this from one last angle. What if i am an adopted child who does not wish to have same-sex parents? Do not my rights matter? I realize the question: “when is a child influenced by sexuality?†comes into play, but can you really say a child has no feelings on the matter of who there new parents is to be?

[sroberson]

On the issue of adoption. I need to look at this from one last angle. What if i am an adopted child who does not wish to have same-sex parents? Do not my rights matter? I realize the question: “when is a child influenced by sexuality?†comes into play, but can you really say a child has no feelings on the matter of who there new parents is to be?

Interesting dilemma...I don't know personally about the adoption process but I get some feeling that what the child wants does come in to some consideration? Someone else would have to tackle this one. That question caught me off guard really.

If there truly is any force to be reckoned with that has no bounds nor logic, it is fear. Everyone is afraid of something - its a matter of learning about it and dealing with it so one can manage it.

[CrypticQuery]

On the issue of adoption. I need to look at this from one last angle. What if i am an adopted child who does not wish to have same-sex parents? Do not my rights matter? I realize the question: “when is a child influenced by sexuality?†comes into play, but can you really say a child has no feelings on the matter of who there new parents is to be?

I'm sure that, in that position, if you express those concerns to the adoptive agency [but most likely the potential adoptive parents], they'd be understanding. Who would want a child to go into a home in which they are uncomfortable?

[LoneWolf]

I am a firm believer in equal rights, however, i still retain my fears of the possible propagation of an influential trend. But i now realize my argument is unsound because i should not have brought up homophobia in the first place-- since it, in and of itself, is a form of racism.

Unfortunately i cannot kill my fears, ill found and far fetched as they may be, in one day’s time. It is a process. But i guess one should not take to living in fear because it is ultimately damaging.

JOIN THE FURRY FANDOM

HANG OUT WITH FLAMING GAY-MOS

LOSE HOMOPHOBIA

That's pretty much my story. I used to be a bit of a homophobe until I found the fandom. In that aspect it's been very beneficial, I find myself to be much more open minded than I used to be to other cultures, ideas, and sexual things.

[Fana McCloud]

On the issue of adoption. I need to look at this from one last angle. What if i am an adopted child who does not wish to have same-sex parents? Do not my rights matter? I realize the question: “when is a child influenced by sexuality?†comes into play, but can you really say a child has no feelings on the matter of who there new parents is to be?

Children never in reality have a choice in who their parents are. What if a child is born to and raised by a heterosexual couple who happen to be avid nudists and the child is so ashamed and embarrassed by it they don't want them to be their parents? What if that child is ridiculed severely for it? Would it be reasonable to give every child a choice to ditch their parents for new ones? I don't think it is, nor is it very practical. Children don't have the faculties to make an informed decision.

[Geo Stelar]

I'm sure that, in that position, if you express those concerns to the adoptive agency [but most likely the potential adoptive parents], they'd be understanding. Who would want a child to go into a home in which they are uncomfortable?

Highly Agree

Who would want a child to go into a home in which they are uncomfortable?

The only ones who'd do that are inhumane

Children never in reality have a choice in who their parents are. What if a child is born to and raised by a heterosexual couple who happen to be avid nudists and the child is so ashamed and embarrassed by it they don't want them to be their parents? What if that child is ridiculed severely for it? Would it be reasonable to give every child a choice to ditch their parents for new ones? I don't think it is, nor is it very practical. Children don't have the faculties to make an informed decision.

It's sad but true. Children should have extended rights on this matter.

[Harmony Descent]

I'm REALLY late to get on the boat for this topic, but I have to agree with Redeemer's first post on the first page. If a person of the same sex as another person loves them, and that person loves them back, then by god LET THEM LOVE EACH OTHER!! Don't just jump on the segregation-train and just humiliate them just because they aren't straight.

I recently saw an article that said North Carolina banned gay marriages (not sure if it's true, so someone clear this up) and I just thought to myself, "...how wrong... I mean, c'mon!"

I'll admit it, even though it may be over the line here, but I was bisexual at one point. I eventually grew out of it, but if I say that gay marriages are wrong, then I'm basically stabbing my own self in the back. I'm not gay now; I'm just saying that I was on the same boat as those people at one point, but I still respect them.

Also, I live with people that are against the gay marriage thing and they are, like LoneWolf said in his first post on the first page, Christians. So, 'they' believe that "God didn't create men to like men," and yada yada - I'm stopping it there since I don't want to turn this into a religious debate. It seems we've had our fair share of those as it is over the years here on SF-O.

I was never against gay marriage and I ALWAYS thought people had the right to love anyone, regardless of their gender. So, I say leave the gays alone and stop scapegoating for no reason.

[Zzz]

Wow, I mean who cares if they want to marry? If anything be happy for them that THEY can be happy. What is all this fuzz about?

Does same sex marriage have any negative effects on others? Like where's the harm done to you?

Does it have ANY effect on you? Do you think your marriage is being depreciated? Then obviously your connection with your partner is not based on love but your status in society. Congratz.

Is being against same sex marriage a big thing in your party? What a pathetic attempt at vicously individiuating yourself from other parties.

Why be against this? How boring must your life to be to even actively be against something like this?

Almost all around the world we live in societes with short temper created by a humongous amount of duties you have to care about; education, job, etc. Our modern society is apparently/supposedly plagued by not having enough time for anything. I know what I'm talking about.

So my question is: Are you actually that evil to be against this or just extremely bored?

If you ask me this is nothing but wasting time and energy. Let people do whatever they want if there's no harm done to you. Live and let live.

And I'm christian.

And after my understanding does it NO way contradict my belief.

[Redeemer]

Please accept my apologies.

No need to apologise bro, I'm just wanting to make sure we remain on topic and express our views without too much personal bias. The debate forum is a touchy place, but no need to apologise. If staff thought something required an apology, the member concerned would receive a PM about it.

[LoneWolf]

Dug up a good video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=PD-INsIbVcw

[DZComposer]

It matters not your opinions on the morality of being gay, or if gay people give you the willies, or you feel there is something 'wrong' about it. All of that does not matter in this argument. All of those arguments are straw men.

What matters is that there are special benefits that our government has decided to give to people who commit to eachother. Because of this, marriage is an INSTITUTION OF THE STATE. As such, the institution must abide by the US Constitution, which states in Amendment 14, section 1 the following:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Emphasis mine.

You can cry about it being an institution of the church all you want, but that does NOT change the fact that when the government decided to recognize marriages under the law and provide for people in a marriage certain rights, mostly power of attorney and such, as well as tax benefits (which I have a problem with, but that is a separate issue) that it BECAME an institution of the state. These laws must be applied equally according to the constitution.

Why did it become an institution of the state? Because it the state enacted it. It can not be a religious institution at this point in the eyes of the law due to this (US Conmstitution Amendment 1):

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

If the state issues marriage licenses, it must issue them to everyone. It cannot put up barriers to people solely because they are different. That is unconstitutional. None of those religious or gay people creep me out type arguments change that fact. You would have to make a case that the 14th amendment does not apply to gays, and there is nothing in there saying it doesn't. All other arguments are straw men designed to distract you from the question of law at hand.

Now, this doesn't mean that churches will be forced to do anything. That first amendment quote earlier comes into play here as well. Thus, your church can refuse to perform marriage cerimonies for gays if it wants, but that does not give it the authority to tell the government that a Justice of the Peace can't issue a marriage license to a gay couple.

[The Green Fox]

u guys r so right.

i was in a weird mood.

[Gestalt]

come again...i'm not catching you

[LoneWolf]

wat

[thunderflare]

I think what Green Fox is trying to say is that some gay marriages aren't gay because, some people don't like that they are male or female so they refer to themselves as the opposite sex.

Maybe I'm a little lost, care to revisit this idea Green Fox?

[Redeemer]

I think what Green Fox is trying to say is that some gay marriages aren't gay because, some people don't like that they are male or female so they refer to themselves as the opposite sex.

Maybe I'm a little lost, care to revisit this idea Green Fox?

I think you got it right there, thunderflare.

But I don't think it's wise going too deep into this. This topic looks like it's tilting more from gay marriage to transgender, so don't derail it, please. It looks like this topic is cooling down otherwise, so if we start going around in circles, I'll be closing it. We can only clash personal opinions so far.

[Harlow]

Personally, I'm still digesting the idea. Love is love and it's fine by me, but I tend to have limits. Not any religious or those nearly-BS reasons, but those usually applied to keep the (my) definiton of mental health. Not saying homosexuality is a disease, but I won't accept a marraige out of the idea of that of two loving persons, by their own valid consent (mayority of age, non-family, human), agreeing to bond and live together. Some other stuff may be done solely for the symbolic value, but I won't think of them even remotely having legal benefits.

So, sorry, but you can't be Miss Pet Rock...

One thing it's redefining marraige and other it's abusing the extent of that redefinition.

[someguy63-]

Honestly, I am against it. However, I don't see it as a "disease", just something uncommon and obscure for me. I am also aware that I am not the only person of this world. What happens happens, I just wouldn't care about this, so it's their decisions. However, I agree with your opinion about such limits.

[DZComposer]

With the exception of the mental health argument, those are still "gay people creep me out" type arguments. They do not establish any valid legal reason to deny marriage to someone.

As far as mental health, science does not classify homosexuality as a mental disorder. In order to make that claim, there must be a falsifiable study published in a major mental health journal (IE the journals of the American Psychological Association) that finds that conclusion. But, even if it did, you would have to show that homosexuality effects someone's mental state enough that they do not have the competence to enter into legal agreements (which would have far more consequences for gays than just marriages as you can't even sign an apartment lease or buy a car if you are found legally incompetent).

And also, there is the number one question on this issue: If you're not gay, why does it matter to you that gays can get married? It doesn't even effect heterosexuals.

[sroberson]

Not really meaning to create an argument, but I felt it applied since the discussion of "disease" or "mental disorder" came around...didn't they supposedly find a "gay gene" just recently? Or was that just some dumb gimmick they could throw around and use for whatever somebody wanted to argue?

[Redeemer]

Guys, this is about gay marriage, not what causes homosexuality or whatever? Last chance and I lock this topic. Marriage or nothing.

[Ala1n-J]

Whoops, a bit late for the debate.

So... the thing here is how you define the word "marriage". Is it just the union of two people or some kind of mutual oath (with or without religious matters) for the creation of a family? I also heard that marriage allowed adoption and unification of the two fiancees' bank accounts (I'm not sure this is the case in the USA). One thing to consider too is that society changes and so does the marriage's meaning.

Now as it stands, I'm not against same sex union, mainly because I see it as a formal union, with two people who want to live together and organize their lives as such.

Deleted last part because I just saw Red's comment.

Edited May 20, 2012 by Ala1n-J

[Harlow]

I'm just saying that, there are some kind of behaviors or mindsets that are generally unhealthy or even illegal that some people want for them to get accepted just because this is supposed to be a "tolerant" society, it's something that should be "accepted".

Example Given: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

[Redeemer]

I'm just saying that, there are some kind of behaviors or mindsets that are generally unhealthy or even illegal that some people want for them to get accepted just because this is supposed to be a "tolerant" society, it's something that should be "accepted".

Example Given: http://en.wikipedia....ove_Association

We aren't going there, are we? How can you even COMPARE homosexuality to a group that wants the same as what's in your link?