Concerning same-sex marriage.

  • 79 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for edisni_edistuo
edisni_edistuo

75

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 edisni_edistuo
Member since 2009 • 75 Posts
Why is this even an issue? Love is love, no matter what gender. If a male wants to marry another male, that's their life and their decision. Who are we to deny them the love they've found in one another?
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#52 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
Why is this even an issue? Love is love, no matter what gender. If a male wants to marry another male, that's their life and their decision. Who are we to deny them the love they've found in one another?edisni_edistuo
We are the society, thats who.
Avatar image for mixmax5
mixmax5

2347

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 mixmax5
Member since 2006 • 2347 Posts

I really don't know why this thread was started but I am just fine with gay marriage.

Avatar image for Head_of_games
Head_of_games

10859

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 Head_of_games
Member since 2007 • 10859 Posts
Wrong! If same-sex marriage was legalized: Pastors could be sued/arrested for refusing to marry homosexuals, anyone could be arrested for "hate speech" if they voiced their opinion on the issue, etc. I say that we need a new system of uniting lovers. Some complain about "civil unions" so I say that we change it so that you get all the same rights with a civil union as a marriage. That way, homosexuals could have the same legal rights as others without christians having to participate in it.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts
A biological family isn't necessarily an imperative of marriage. There isn't a law somewhere saying; Married people MUST have a baby which is related by blood and MUST be a family. Marriage is strictly, prima facie, a business transaction to share specific rights between the two. Marriage does not hollistically equal family. Vandalvideo
No one's disputing that, but it would be preferable in practice. What I prefer though is that civil unions would take the place of how you define marriage, giving marriage a better, stronger meaning for fertile individuals who want to reproduce with each other. Your definition of marriage, as taken per face value, comes off emotionless. Essentially, you are ignoring the responsibilities that comes with those rights and the resources that are available, which can establish a proper family and can only be done so through family. Adoption works as a last resort. It is not, however, the preferable option, especially on the child.
Avatar image for Maniacc1
Maniacc1

5354

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#56 Maniacc1
Member since 2006 • 5354 Posts
Yes, it can cause some problems. But this is an issue that won't go away. This is just one more change the United States isn't ready for, just like the civil rights movement. Eventually, we will gradually be open enough to the idea that it will be allowed. It just seems to be taking longer than usual :P
Avatar image for edisni_edistuo
edisni_edistuo

75

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 edisni_edistuo
Member since 2009 • 75 Posts
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"]Why is this even an issue? Love is love, no matter what gender. If a male wants to marry another male, that's their life and their decision. Who are we to deny them the love they've found in one another?Vandalvideo
We are the society, thats who.

Yes, and as the society, we need to recognize that those who are gay want to marry just like those who are straight.
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#58 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"] No one's disputing that, but it would be preferable in practice. What I prefer though is that civil unions would take the place of how you define marriage, giving marriage a better, stronger meaning for fertile individuals who want to reproduce with each other. Your definition of marriage, as taken per face value, comes off emotionless. Essentially, you are ignoring the responsibilities that comes with those rights and the resources that are available, which can establish a proper family and can only be done so through family. Adoption works as a last resort. It is not, however, the preferable option, especially on the child.

You have to unmarry marriage from the emotional aspects that people have irresponsibly applied to it. You have to look at the facts of what marriage actually is. Marriage, at face value, is strictly a business transaction which doesn't expressly state that one must have sex with their partner or establish a 'proper family' with their partner.
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#59 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Yes, and as the society, we need to recognize that those who are gay want to marry just like those who are straight.

We can recognize it all we want, the society gets to decide. If society wants to restrict gays, they have that power.
Avatar image for Maniacc1
Maniacc1

5354

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#60 Maniacc1
Member since 2006 • 5354 Posts
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Yes, and as the society, we need to recognize that those who are gay want to marry just like those who are straight.

We can recognize it all we want, the society gets to decide. If society wants to restrict gays, they have that power.

Maybe that's the problem. Maybe some parts of society aren't competent enough to decide the life of people they don't even know.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts
Yes, it can cause some problems. But this is an issue that won't go away. This is just one more change the United States isn't ready for, just like the civil rights movement. Eventually, we will gradually be open enough to the idea that it will be allowed. It just seems to be taking longer than usual :PManiacc1
That, ultimately, is what I think will happen. People will be more open to the idea as time progressed and eventually, there's no resistance.
You have to unmarry marriage from the emotional aspects that people have irresponsibly applied to it. You have to look at the facts of what marriage actually is. Marriage, at face value, is strictly a business transaction which doesn't expressly state that one must have sex with their partner or establish a 'proper family' with their partner.Vandalvideo
Fine, but ignoring the implicit details removes much what makes marriage a marriage.
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#62 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"] Maybe that's the problem. Maybe some parts of society aren't competent enough to decide the life of people they don't even know.

Maybe, but this is mob rule. vor de volk.
Avatar image for Bourbons3
Bourbons3

24238

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#63 Bourbons3
Member since 2003 • 24238 Posts

[QUOTE="Ravenhoe"]

Unfortunately, intolerance has always been (to most people) an important part to establish their own position in society. The "mob" will always look for something or someone to discriminate, because by creating boundaries between the "self" / the "established" and "the "other" people create their own identites in which they feel secure and snuggly. Homophobia is after all only one sort of discrimination in a long line of discriminations in human history, of which some are still going on. Women, Jews, Afro-Americans, Indians, Disabled people .. sadly, the list goes on.

Homosexuality is not unnatural (there are homosexual animals)and it is not the same as siblings or cousings (1st, 2nd grade) marrying because the reason why they are not allowed to be married is the risk of bearing a disabled child. (BTW, only sexual intercourse between siblings and cousins is illegal, nothing else.So, they can live together, kiss and have sex but no coitus)

Everyone who discriminates homosexuals is basically on the same level as a fascist in the Third Reich, an uneducated, selfish simpleton.

River

SegaGenesisfan

Your showwing a lot of flawed thinking in the wholepost, like comparing homosexuals to animals... Your suggesting that white people are bad, your descriminating. Heck we descriminate against illegal immigrants all the time, is it bad, not exactly, so the term descrimination is so cliche. It seems like your the one who wants to feel secure and snuggly. And I am not afraid of homosexuals, if anything they are afraid of me (ok I got that from Master Chief sucks at Halo). Well intermarraying is unnatural because it does not produce good children, homosexuality is unnatural because it does not bear children in a marriage setting. Is that not the poitn of marriage? And dont make the arguement that you can have kids without being married, because that has so many holes in it. Most people who have kids before marriage do it out of stupidity. Marriage is how we organise family life, without it we have anarchy, just like what the animal kingdom is.

See the slippery slop fallacy has been overturned, now someone is sayying "but why cant young people have sex?" And it is not oppresion that gay marriage is illegal for the most part, they can still get jobs just like anyone else. Most peoples morals are that homosexuality is wrong, mainly because it also has a wide range of perverted sex acts, having sex with anyone, spreading disease.

So if anything, maybe same sex marriage is not really bad, maybe it will control all the random sex that produces disease. I mean come on people, for someone to be in the pornography business, they have to be homosexual...

And you talk about flawed thinking... There are plenty of straight people who sleep around. Heck, there are even a group of women who go around South Africa who rape men on purpose to spread AIDS. The reason why AIDS is spreading across developed countries is because of the children who are born as a result of the sex between straight couples where one is already infected. Why does everyone assume that every gay man must have a one-night stand seven times a week? And that every one of them is infected with dozens of sexual diseases? And even if they were overly promiscuous, why would those who sleep around even go near marriage? The homosexuals that want same-sex marriage to be legalised are the ones who want to be in a long-term relationship, or those who have been living with their partner for a while, and who want the opportunity to gain the same rights straight married couples have.
Avatar image for MasterC5
MasterC5

2932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 MasterC5
Member since 2006 • 2932 Posts

The fact that it's an issue disgusts me.

Avatar image for TyrantDragon55
TyrantDragon55

6851

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#65 TyrantDragon55
Member since 2004 • 6851 Posts

The fact that it's an issue disgusts me.

MasterC5

Same here, makes me want to take one of those idiots who likes to point at Obama and say "Look how far we've come!" and punch them in the face. We're the same closed minded savage society we've always been, we've just found a new target.

Avatar image for joao_22990
joao_22990

2230

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#66 joao_22990
Member since 2007 • 2230 Posts

...without it we have anarchy, just like what the animal kingdom is.SegaGenesisfan
I'd appreciate that you'd never again compare these two. Please. Anarchy would work because we are not normal animals. And i suppose you never though homosexuality could be a self containing method to prevent overpopulation? Marriage is the problem here. It shouldn't exist.

Avatar image for Serraph105
Serraph105

36092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 Serraph105
Member since 2007 • 36092 Posts
[QUOTE="modestkraut1291"]

gay marriage is ridiculous in the first place. it doesnt make any sense(to me). why would a gay person want to get married? its a religious thing and being gay doesnt exactly fit into any religion...at all.

but it should definitely be legal and the fact that we only havea few statesthat allow it is sick.

because only religious people get married
Avatar image for SegaGenesisfan
SegaGenesisfan

1085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 SegaGenesisfan
Member since 2008 • 1085 Posts

And you talk about flawed thinking... There are plenty of straight people who sleep around. Heck, there are even a group of women who go around South Africa who rape men on purpose to spread AIDS. The reason why AIDS is spreading across developed countries is because of the children who are born as a result of the sex between straight couples where one is already infected. Why does everyone assume that every gay man must have a one-night stand seven times a week? And that every one of them is infected with dozens of sexual diseases? And even if they were overly promiscuous, why would those who sleep around even go near marriage? The homosexuals that want same-sex marriage to be legalised are the ones who want to be in a long-term relationship, or those who have been living with their partner for a while, and who want the opportunity to gain the same rights straight married couples have.

I simply did not bother to talk about straight sleeping around, but homosexuality = sleeping around no matter how you look at it. Dude, even my human biology book has a part on homosexuality and diseases. Yes straight people have the same disease, guess how they got it? I dont think having sex with random people is ok either way, I did imply that sleeping with random people is wrong did I not? The fact is homosexuals are far more likely to have diseases, and people are using speudo science to say it is natural... Well even so, I personally would not want to have to worry about that. Difference here is you didnt directly address my point, you changed the subject if anything. Yes Africa has the supstition that sex solves the problem, but I never mentioned that, talk about flawed thinking, your not addressing my points. A non sequiter.

Avatar image for Bourbons3
Bourbons3

24238

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#69 Bourbons3
Member since 2003 • 24238 Posts
I simply did not bother to talk about straight sleeping around, but homosexuality = sleeping around no matter how you look at it. Dude, even my human biology book has a part on homosexuality and diseases. Yes straight people have the same disease, guess how they got it? I dont think having sex with random people is ok either way, I did imply that sleeping with random people is wrong did I not? The fact is homosexuals are far more likely to have diseases, and people are using speudo science to say it is natural... Well even so, I personally would not want to have to worry about that. Difference here is you didnt directly address my point, you changed the subject if anything. Yes Africa has the supstition that sex solves the problem, but I never mentioned that, talk about flawed thinking, your not addressing my points. A non sequiter.SegaGenesisfan
No, homosexuality does not = sleeping around. I can honestly say that I don't sleep around. Even if homosexuals were more likely to carry sexual diseases, it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to marry. Those who do wish to marry will be as likely to stay faithful to their partner as any straight married person. So they won't spread diseases anyway. Back to one of your original points, marriage isn't exclusively about having children. If someone gets married just to have children, then their thinking is wrong. You should get married because you love someone, and because you want to stay with them. People who can't have children, either for medical reasons or through age, get married all the time. Do you honestly believe that they shouldn't be allowed to marry? As far as I'm aware, the government shouldn't be allowed to ask someone why they want to get married. So the fact that homosexual couples can't have children is irrelevant. If they want to marry, they should be allowed to. As for homosexuality being unnatural, that's debatable. I think it is natural. Anything that occurs in nature is natural, and homosexuality among animals is well-documented. Apart from anything else, we don't live natural lives any more. The clothes you wear, the car you drive, and the computer you use, are all unnatural. Even the food most people eat is so processed that its barely natural by the time it gets on to their plate. You can't apply the 'its not natural' argument to some things, while living a perfectly unnatural, manufactured life yourself.
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#70 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
[QUOTE="Bourbons3"] As for homosexuality being unnatural, that's debatable. I think it is natural. Anything that occurs in nature is natural, and homosexuality among animals is well-documented. Apart from anything else, we don't live natural lives any more. The clothes you wear, the car you drive, and the computer you use, are all unnatural. Even the food most people eat is so processed that its barely natural by the time it gets on to their plate. You can't apply the 'its not natural' argument to some things, while living a perfectly unnatural, manufactured life yourself.

Unnatural? Maybe not. Could be a population control. Abnormal? Definitely so.
Avatar image for Vandalvideo
Vandalvideo

39655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#72 Vandalvideo
Member since 2003 • 39655 Posts
[QUOTE="Bourbons3"] Abnormality is a state of mind. A lot of people don't share that one. ]

Abnormality can easily be labeled objectively. For instance, using Levin; Homosexuality is abnormal because it involves the misuse of a body part. I body part is for something if it benefits the host and is how the part came to be and continues to be.
Avatar image for Epic__Lulz
Epic__Lulz

454

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 Epic__Lulz
Member since 2007 • 454 Posts

Im fine with any 2 CONSENTING people to get married via Civil union/marriage . Just don't force a church to marry people if they don't want to marry them

Avatar image for stevenk4k5
stevenk4k5

5608

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 stevenk4k5
Member since 2005 • 5608 Posts
Live and let live.
Avatar image for SeanDog123
SeanDog123

1327

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#75 SeanDog123
Member since 2005 • 1327 Posts
I could care less about who gets married, because it doesn't effect me at all.
Avatar image for AdamJT89
AdamJT89

57

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#76 AdamJT89
Member since 2009 • 57 Posts

I cannot believe that this is even a goddamn issue. If someone wants to marry, whoever it may be, just **** let them. As long as its consensual and the groom/bride is of age. Thats it. If you don't approve of gay marriage, you are a **** fascist.

xxDustmanxx

So in your opinion, I'm a fascist.

Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
-Sun_Tzu-

17384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 -Sun_Tzu-
Member since 2007 • 17384 Posts

Im fine with any 2 CONSENTING people to get married via Civil union/marriage . Just don't force a church to marry people if they don't want to marry them

Epic__Lulz
The state has no authority to do such a thing. The first amendment protects the church's rights vis-a-vis who they marry.
Avatar image for links136
links136

2400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 links136
Member since 2004 • 2400 Posts

Wrong! If same-sex marriage was legalized: Pastors could be sued/arrested for refusing to marry homosexuals, anyone could be arrested for "hate speech" if they voiced their opinion on the issue, etc. I say that we need a new system of uniting lovers. Some complain about "civil unions" so I say that we change it so that you get all the same rights with a civil union as a marriage. That way, homosexuals could have the same legal rights as others without christians having to participate in it.Head_of_games

church's don't have to marry homosexuals if they don't want to.

Avatar image for Dark_Knight6
Dark_Knight6

16619

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 Dark_Knight6
Member since 2006 • 16619 Posts

It shouldn't even be an issue. I'm just glad to see that it has been legalized in two states recently and that it's now being pushed for in New York.