Thread: same sex marriages

Originally posted by JaWiB
Obviously yes, but what will it be? Do we really think it will make a large difference to homosexuals? Why do they really care in the first place?

I don't know enough to say, but we should examine their motives; are they valid, or simply an effort to "fit in" to society?

Here's what people don't seem to understand, though: There are benefits with marriage. Right now, if two couples -- one heterosexual, one homosexual -- each had one person who was in the hospital. The heterosexual couple can be together, the homosexual couple can't even see eachother. Why? The heterosexual couple was married.

There are more (tax benefits, what happens in case of sudden death, etc, etc.), and that's the real injustice. A SECULAR government can't give a certain part of the population benefits while excluding another part "because the bible says so".

The union of male and female is the natural order of things. It's O.K. that some are born different, but that doesn't change the simple fact that it is an anomaly. All people should be treated fairly and given equal rights. That doesn't mean we should publicly promote all types of lifestyles - does it?

See the problem boils down to basic ignorance of how and what makes biology the way it is.

There is NO "natural order of things", there is no "supposed to" there is mutation and adaptation

The Y chromosome which is what separates male from female in many species (including us), is dieing, it's been dieing for a long time, as time ticks on the number of genes decreases because it cannot exchange genetic material with its partner X-chromosome.

So what happens when there are no genes left on the Y-chromosome? There have been species where this has already happened, what happens is that mutations cause the gender determining gens to move to another chromosome. Thus maledom survives.

But these mutations happen regularly, there are people born with two sets of genetalia, or who are female untill they get to their late teens early 20s at which point male

These "defects", these "anomalies" these people who are clearly not "the natural order of things", and yet for many species (perhaps us though techonology if it's still around will probably offer an alternative) they represent the path to the future.

So are hermaphrodites part natural order? Or not? You see, it's meaningless.

Homosexuality, exists in humans and in other animals, it looks like it has atleast partical genetic basis, it does not harm society (and claiming that accepting homosexualty is bad because it warps social values is spectacularly circular reasoning).

If two people love each other they should not be descriminated against because of their physiology. Whether it be the colour of their skin, or which organs they happen to have been born with.

-Ken-, if being homosexual and gaining a legal homosexual marriage license is such a "natural" or "normal" thing to do (because some people are just born that way, so some say), why haven't you told your parents that you're gay?

that was dumb... but think about this: is marriage a 'natural' thing? no. animals do not get married. look at the facts... homosexuality is more natural than marriage itself.

Homosexuality may be a natural inclination for some, but it should not become institutionalized.

so what about women's rights and slavery? should we not allow them to vote and keep slavery? Just because you don't agree with them, why should they not be able to do what they want... what you're saying is "I don't agree with you, so you're wrong and I'm going to keep it illegal"

We have really strayed off topic as far as I can tell, since the actual issue is not homosexuality, it is about the government recognizing homosexuals as "married"

this was never about homosexuality in itself, it was wether or not it should be illegal for them to be married

not to turn this into a religious debate, but:

Personally, I do not follow any specific religion; however, I do believe that it would be ignorant to dismiss that there may be something(s) greater than ourselves in this universe and that these entities perhaps did influence the evolution of humanity.

I think it would be ignorant to follow a book solely on faith, when it's been proven wrong on most accounts...

The rules of religion are here to bring order.

the laws of the land are to bring order... the rules of religion have no specific meaning

Originally posted by ober5861
...why haven't you told your parents that you're gay?

Most probably because they are as closed minded and unaccepting as yourself.

Man and woman have the power to procreate, one of the greatest powers humankind has the ability to do.

Ok...

We do this through reproduction methods of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, obviously.

Though there will soon be alternatives (Edit: actually there already are alternatives in that men and women can already have children using IVF), technology is a remarkable thing.

Therefore, gay and lesbian marriages, from a religious standpoint, violate that "law" (if that is the correct term). They trample over everything respectful and responsible about love and procreation.

What? There is just as much respect and responsibility in homosexual couples as in heterosexual couples.

Rather, gay and lesbian marriages operate more along the lines of lust, never love. Relationships operating along these lines will never bring true happiness, no matter what people think.

You think gay people can't fall in love, that's utter nonsense. Damnit why do so many of you people hold strong opinion when you lack so much information on the topic?

Furthermore, think about your families people. Gay and lesbian relationships completely and utterly defy the most basic unit of society: the Family.

A) The is nothing intrinisc about the familiy unit, it may stick around or it may die out as social evolution alters humanity. (infact i suspect the family unit is doomed, already we see more and more composite families, people who have married had children, married again had more children etc.)

B) You can have homosexual families through adoption (and probably soon through technology). Admitedly you don't have a mom and a dad, but so what? What basis do you have for claiming that the "normal" state of affairs is infact better?

And without the family, where would our society be today? I do not even want to THINK of where our society would be if it was not for the family.

.... there are plenty of instances where families are the problem. Education when dealing with areas of high poverty and crime come to mind. Those children would be fine if their parents didn't $$$$ them up. They do much MUCH better if they are seperated from their glorious families and placed in boarding schools.

Infact our attitude towards upbrining and the sanctity of the family unit sucks ass, the whole "how dare you question the way i bring up my children" is bollocks, and it stems from considering the familiy unit to be some kind of supreme authority.

The family is the most sacred, solemn, and wholesome institution we have in this world. In the home is where principles and values are taught. In the family is where happiness lies.

... people find happiness in different things.

Families are nice, if you have a nice family. If you don't families suck.

Gay and lesbian marriages, no matter what one thinks, will not satisfy the family relationship.

Why not?

You can argue with whatever statistics you want, but the fact is: Gay and lesbian relationships are NO substitute for the family.

Based on?

They never have been. They are not now. They never will be.

Reasoning? Oh wait this a religious stance isn't it, sorry what was i thinking.

And I think we all know that without the family society would crumble. I shudder to think of the world without the family.

.... what are you talking about? Why do you think families would cease to exist if we accepted homosexuality? That's completely insane, not only can homosexuals form a familiy unit even if *gasp* its different to orthodox family unit but there will still be a majority of heterosexuals around, who's tendency to form families will presumeably not be influenced by homosexuals anymore than it is today.

You missed the point of my remark. If he his so certain that this should be accepted by the people of the world, shouldn't he start with his parents first, instead of us

Hypocritical MUCH?

WTF are you talking about?

Like your parents know everything about your situation.

uh, not everybody lets their sex life slip to their parents... just to let you know...

do i have to dumb that down for you?

Do you think I could go about my business for 2 years and have them not find out?

yes, i do, because if you were careful, you could have easily hidden it for two years, which is a relatively short amount of time.