Geo Stelar Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Well, my main reason, Family. Say, if a man is to be married to another man, or a woman is to be wed to another woman, how are they gonna have a real family? And secondly I think man should just love fellow men as friends, or woman love her fellow women as friends as well. (I'm guessing I am still yet to explain on this more deeply later... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gestalt Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If society has no restriant then who's to say we wont be weding man and child in the future :/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xortberg Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Well, my main reason, Family. Say, if a man is to be married to another man, or a woman is to be wed to another woman, how are they gonna have a real family? Easy. They adopt one of the thousands of children who don't have parents. And secondly I think man should just love fellow men as friends, or woman love her fellow women as friends as well. (I'm guessing I am still yet to explain on this more deeply later... ) Yeah, that's what you think, not why you think it. Elaborate on the why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sroberson Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Well, my main reason, Family. Say, if a man is to be married to another man, or a woman is to be wed to another woman, how are they gonna have a real family? And secondly I think man should just love fellow men as friends, or woman love her fellow women as friends as well. (I'm guessing I am still yet to explain on this more deeply later... ) Aaaah! Now we are getting somewhere! As far as having a real family, they can easily adopt. Plenty of kids flood orphanages that are unwanted by heterosexual couples which seems almost ironic considering the point of this thread. Adopted kids and foster-parents are as easily capable of loving and providing a good home in "real families" as a family with an adopted kid. As far as whether homosexual parents can provide a good environment overall for a kid, its anyone's guess really. I don't think there has been any substantial evidence to suggest that a child raised by homosexuals will inherently turn out for the worse. Most are too afraid to allow it to happen to see. I think what you may suffer from, Geo, is the trappings of society trying to tell you what is and isn't acceptable for whatever reason. EDIT: I must congratulate Geo on starting apparently an extremely hot topic that it has already expanded to 4 pages in the matter of a day or so. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dublinthefox Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 As far as whether homosexual parents can provide a good environment overall for a kid, its anyone's guess really. I don't think there has been any substantial evidence to suggest that a child raised by homosexuals will inherently turn out for the worse. Most are too afraid to allow it to happen to see. And here is an example of how it can work. My neighbors are a married lesbian couple and I've known them for about 8 years. Their son Zach is a good example that even a same sex couple raising a child can work. Here is a video of his defense during a public forum on House Joint Resolution 6 in the Iowa House of Representatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fana McCloud Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If society has no restriant then who's to say we wont be weding man and child in the future Because children aren't mentally competent enough to sign marriage contracts. XD And as for "real families" - that begs the question also as to what a "real family" is, as there are many ideas on THAT subject as well. Was my family not a REAL family when it was just myself, my mother, and my brother, with no father in the house? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sroberson Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Because children aren't mentally competent enough to sign marriage contracts. XD And as for "real families" - that begs the question also as to what a "real family" is, as there are many ideas on THAT subject as well. Was my family not a REAL family when it was just myself, my mother, and my brother, with no father in the house? Methinks he is trolling at this point lol. I suppose children are able to sign marriage contracts, but in this case they are protected by law that they are not of the age of reason and thus cannot make such agreement. I feel it a good time to yet again point out that heterosexual relationships have already proven how badly they can mess up biological families and break down the sanctity of marriage in the religious sense. The joke goes, "Hey, since straight people have screwed it up so badly, its time for the homosexuals to try and save it! Not like they could do any worse!" or something to that extent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fana McCloud Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I feel it a good time to yet again point out that heterosexual relationships have already proven how badly they can mess up biological families and break down the sanctity of marriage in the religious sense. The joke goes, "Hey, since straight people have screwed it up so badly, its time for the homosexuals to try and save it! Not like they could do any worse!" or something to that extent. Personally I view it as marriage completely messing things up, not people messing up marriage - but that's far more based on my personal feeling that marriage as a concept is next to useless, if you look at it as constraining people from taking certain actions that would make them happier (like polygamy say). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Stelar Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Easy. They adopt one of the thousands of children who don't have parents. As far as having a real family, they can easily adopt (lol, seen this coming ) Yeah, that's what you think, not why you think it. Elaborate on the why. ( I will ) Plenty of kids flood orphanages that are unwanted by heterosexual couples which seems almost ironic considering the point of this thread. Adopted kids and foster-parents are as easily capable of loving and providing a good home in "real families" as a family with an adopted kid. As far as whether homosexual parents can provide a good environment overall for a kid, its anyone's guess really. I don't think there has been any substantial evidence to suggest that a child raised by homosexuals will inherently turn out for the worse. Most are too afraid to allow it to happen to see. I agree, but it is still a bit different from having your own family... I think what you may suffer from, Geo, is the trappings of society trying to tell you what is and isn't acceptable for whatever reason. I can live with that besides, am I the only one? Was my family not a REAL family when it was just myself, my mother, and my brother, with no father in the house? That isn't an unreal family. It is a broken family, which is an entirely different issue. EDIT: I must congratulate Geo on starting apparently an extremely hot topic that it has already expanded to 4 pages in the matter of a day or so. ( ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gestalt Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Teehee Do you honestly not see where i'm going with this??? i know i doesnt make sense but its not supposed to...its called societal breakdown. If you tell jimmy its alright to steal cookies, then he will grow up to steal handbags....a simple metaphor to bring out the issue of setting precedents when passing laws in the U.S. What's next on the list for gay rights? Is it not already enough that its legal for same sex couples to be together? Why marriage? What's next, same sex disney movies? In a sense i'm lost...i do believe it is a constitutional right to have this choice. So if that's the subject we are debating on...then yes go ahead and pass the damn law...i'm not going to shove my morals down anyone's throat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redeemer Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 What's next on the list for gay rights? Is it not already enough that its legal for same sex couples to be together? Why marriage? What's next, same sex disney movies? What? You mean it's possible that homosexuals will be treated even MORE equally after the marriage pass? OH NOES. WE CAN'T HAVE THAT. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluxy Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 That isn't an unreal family. It is a broken family, which is an entirely different issue. Hold on. So I'm only doing this for clarification, and not to side track. Because I grew up with only a mother and my sister, I live in a 'Broken' family? Is that what you're saying? Cause if so... Then there are some really big issues in that logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xortberg Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Teehee Do you honestly not see where i'm going with this??? I see where your argument is going, yes. It's going straight down the drain, because... i know i doesnt make sense but its not supposed to...its called societal breakdown. If you tell jimmy its alright to steal cookies, then he will grow up to steal handbags....a simple metaphor to bring out the issue of setting precedents when passing laws in the U.S. No, it's an argument. In the debate forum. It is supposed to make sense. And again, this is an argument based on the slippery slope fallacy. You entire point is based in fallacy. Not that I'm entirely sure on what your point even is, because your posts are completely incoherent and have no cohesive structure. What's next on the list for gay rights? Is it not already enough that its legal for same sex couples to be together? Why marriage? What's next, same sex disney movies? What's next? Maybe, I dunno, being treated as equals? And what's the problem with a same sex Disney movie if it did exist? I mean, you ask "Why marriage?" but we've already been over this. Marriage gives certain rights that we have no right to deny others based solely on their sexual orientation. I'm not too sure on all the specifics, but I do believe it affects how you do your taxes. It affects how things run if your partner is in some sort of emergency. It affects a lot of things, and denying the homosexual couples those rights based on an aversion to who they like to boink is just wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redeemer Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 What's next on the list for gay rights? Is it not already enough that its legal for same sex couples to be together? Why marriage? What's next, same sex disney movies? I honestly can't get over this. You're actually looking down on homosexuals and saying "We are giving you the honour of marriage, what more do you need?" as if we actually are higher than them? As if we're rightfully in control of what they're allowed and not allowed? Dude I'm so disappointed that people still think like this today. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fana McCloud Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 That isn't an unreal family. It is a broken family, which is an entirely different issue. Um, my family wasn't broken dude - it was different than the societal image of an ideal family but that doesn't make it broken or inferior. I loved my family at that time just as much as the one I have now. A family, IMHO, is a far more flexible thing than a mommy and a daddy and 2.5 kids - it's whomever you hold closest in your life. THAT is why I think marriage as it is currently implemented is antiquated - because it's used to make people with non-traditional families feel "broken", and that's just wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geo Stelar Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Um, my family wasn't broken dude - it was different than the societal image of an ideal family but that doesn't make it broken or inferior. I loved my family at that time just as much as the one I have now. A family, IMHO, is a far more flexible thing than a mommy and a daddy and 2.5 kids - it's whomever you hold closest in your life. THAT is why I think marriage as it is currently implemented is antiquated - because it's used to make people with non-traditional families feel "broken", and that's just wrong. Ok then, maybe I misunderstood what you said that you don't have your father in the house But still, your family is not unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Personal opinions should take a lesser part on topics inside the counter point . The "I personally think" should be followed with good facts provided by either a good information source or a good, valid point. You are welcome to let us know what you believe, but don't use it as a pivot statement for your arguments. First of all, the term family doesn't only apply for "man, woman, and a bunch of kids", there's no turning back on that. Yes, that's the supposed "most common type of family", but it's not the only type, get your facts straight. Back on topic, seeing as how history revolves around controversial events, I believe "gay marriage" will end up being something accepted by most countries one day. Homosexuality is just a natural thing, it's not something hellish that eats souls or throws people in madness. Even in the animal kingdom, homosexuality is presented, so there's no "this goes against god's will!" for religious folks or "lol, this is not normal" for non-religious folks. Heterosexual couples can adopt kids and still be called a "nuclear family" even without the blood bonds, I see no problem with two men/women doing the same. I see our education system (globally) to be partially blamed for all this supposed "hate". Since elementary school, we were all taught that a family begins with a man and a woman, and that idea sticks altogether, so I feel it goes like "if school teaches me that a family starts with a man and woman, and I belong to a happy family formed by a daddy and a mommy, therefore, anything different is wrong". We also have religion to be blamed for this hate, but I really don't need to dwell on that because it's pretty clear as it is. And seriously, heterosexual marriages are not perfect either, people cheating on each other, man beats wife, woman beats husband, raping, etc. And so it happens on homosexual couples, there's no difference at all, so there's no point on going "gay pride" either. If I were to choose were to put a kid into adoption, I'd rather choose a loving gay marriage than a dysfunctional man-woman marriage,as well as I'd rather choose a loving man-woman marriage than a dysfunctional gay marriage. And I can see someone asking "what if you are faced with a loving gay couple and a loving heterosexual couple, who are you going to choose?", then I suppose it should fall into the standard adoption procedures. There's also a whole other debate that could come out from this "a kid needs a father as example and a mother as example, so how would a gay marriage fit?" To tell the truth, kids being raised by a single dad, or a single mother have come up to be fine lads, so I don't see this as an excuse. Another excuse I have heard is "Gay couples will enforce homosexual behaviors on their kids", it's the same thing as a heterosexual dad forcing his son to like women when the kid is clearly gay. Assuming they accept their adoptive child's sexual preferences, then they are fine. Let's not forget that the heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual trends are genetic things, not things you openly choose. Personally, I don't see how this could affect anyone in a negative way, it just feels kinda "racist". From my point of view, there aren't enough good reasons to ban gay marriage, the economy won't get worse, we will still have wars and teenagers will still have random sex. All I see is a bunch of conservative people going "GOD HATES FAGS" or people that really don't want to see that gay couples are human beings as well, they have feelings too. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorAllosaurus Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I honestly don't care if they get married or not. It's a part of humanity I'll never understand but it also doesn't personally affect me in any way whatsoever, so why the hell not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Because children aren't mentally competent enough to sign marriage contracts. XD That's like saying a gay person is not mentally competent enough to sign a marriage contract, or anyone else for that matter. Children should be treated the same as anyone… right? Why are children treated "different" from someone else? See where I'm going with that? Kind of kidding, but not really. If we're all so big on rights, rights, rights!!, then who IS to say we won't be wedding a child and a 70-year-old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fana McCloud Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Well I consider mental competency to be an important factor in deciding whether or not people can enter into contracts or make important life decisions, and so does the law, due to the idea of informed consent. That's why I make a distinction between gays versus children, because adult gays ARE as mentally competent as any other adult. I sometimes disagree with the law on what constitutes a child, however, but that's a completely different discussion. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redeemer Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Some of the reasoning in this topic is just embarrassing. I expect morals and common sense to come into a debate. This is really disappointing. So what you're saying is, Icy, that if we let two men or two women marry, we may as well go ahead with pedophilia? We're talking about rights here, yes. We're talking about letting two people express their love for each other. And there are people, like some of the people in this thread, that want to deny them of that because "oh I dunno, it's just not right, that man on man business". Talking about a 70 year old marrying a child is just stupid and pointless, so quit embarrassing yourself. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 @Redeemer: I was talking pretty much directly to Fana, actually. @Fana: Yeah, I get it. As I said, mostly joking with my post, and your explanation makes sense. Sorry. With my views on the whole rights thing, I sometimes get a little carried away. It's usually pretty ridiculous. There are so many "rights" that are so messed up that we might as well give everyone, everything, equal rights, if we're going by what we already have. Eh, this isn't the topic for that, though. Continue the discussion… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If society has no restriant then who's to say we wont be weding man and animal in the future Not to anger anybody or derail the thread, but 1) That blatantly insults gay people. You're looking down on them as less than normal. 2) That's not even a logical step. Perhaps polygamy, but that's acceptable in other countries and in some religions such as Islam. 3) You can't marry an animal. They can't speak, they can't sign a marriage contract, they can't even comprehend what's going on at a wedding. 4) Even in the cases where you can marry an animal, such as in certain countries, it's EXTREMELY unusual and regarded as taboo. So it wouldn't happen anyways. Teehee Do you honestly not see where i'm going with this??? i know i doesnt make sense but its not supposed to...its called societal breakdown. What's next on the list for gay rights? Is it not already enough that its legal for same sex couples to be together? Why marriage? What's next, same sex disney movies? Alright, now to pull apart your next post. 1) No, I don't see where you're going with this. 2) Societal Breakdown? Seriously, the fuck? How does that even- 3) Is it enough for them to just be together? No! There's also legal rights and benefits that they're missing out on if they don't get married. You also sound a bit condescending there, like we shouldn't even let them be together. That's just... no. You can't ban two people from liking each other. 4) I wouldn't be surprised if Disney featured a homosexual couple. And there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I personally find gay characters add to the plot in a unique way. But that's just in my opinion. Your logic confuses me, man. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redeemer Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I would love to see a gay married couple in a Disney show/movie. We need to start showing kids that being gay is just fine, not pressure them into thinking they'll be forever shunned should they grow up to find themselves swinging that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sroberson Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I would love to see a gay married couple in a Disney show/movie. We need to start showing kids that being gay is just fine, not pressure them into thinking they'll be forever shunned should they grow up to find themselves swinging that way. Sadly Disney and much of children's entertainment on television LOOOVES to use homosexual or effeminate characteristics of individuals as a means of making fun of or debasing said individual. You want to see real change in the way society accepts homosexuals or males of effeminate characteristics (I am not saying it is bad, and I also do not point out the "strong woman" type because it is more acceptable overall) then tell the entertainment industry to stuff it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts