Author Topic: Gay Marriage  (Read 13834 times)

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #135 on: June 26, 2005, 11:33:42 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
What if homosexuality was a way to increase the chances of a family group procreating successfully?


I didn't answer the question the first time because it was a dumb what if question that is not relevent to the current topic.  BUT, I'll bite now just to keep you from yappin.  Homosexuality is NOT a way to increase the chances ofa  family group procreating successfully.  That is my answer.

Offline Chairboy

  • Probation
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8221
      • hallert.net
Gay Marriage
« Reply #136 on: June 26, 2005, 11:56:49 AM »
Ok, then do y'all agree that restricting sterile couples from getting married is ok?  Since the conversation has steered to marriage having some special relationship with reproduction.  Still no response on the 'black only' restrooms.
"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #137 on: June 26, 2005, 12:03:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Chairboy
Ok, then do y'all agree that restricting sterile couples from getting married is ok?  Since the conversation has steered to marriage having some special relationship with reproduction.  Still no response on the 'black only' restrooms.


no one here would agree on the steril couples.  The entire tangent has very little to do with the marriage issue but centers around my comments that "being gay goes against nature"  Manadew they proceded to tell me that homos are the new evolved man and that trans gender people make up a good portion of the population AND that there really is no genders at all.


PS I answered your question on page 2 ;)  


Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
you make a good point (even about the analogy  :D  )

The difference as I see it is this.  Black white brown asian (any color) right now enjoy the SAME rights and treatment as any other color (except for whites they enjoy less rights than minorities in some cases but that is a whole nother thread topic)

where was I...oh yea.  Creating gay marriage in your analogy would be like creating "black marriage"  we don't write laws for special minorities we write them for everyone.  Now you could, as Nash said, say this is a matter of symantics but it is wholey imporating to nearly 70% of the population.  This is not another Majority is wrong the world is actual round debates this is one of deep rotted emotions and yes religion too (Disclaimor:  I am trying to make my case by leaving religion out of this as not everyone is religious)


When the civil rights movements claimed victory we did not create special rights just for minorities and I don't think we should creat especial rights just for Gays now.  No one is conforming Gays to have seperate but equal rights, they enjoy the same rights as eveyone else.  Like I said before, if they want special rights than it should apply to everyone.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Gay Marriage
« Reply #138 on: June 26, 2005, 12:17:59 PM »
Gunslinger, it's a question of knowing what you know and knowing what you don't know.

You said, "Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate.", what you should have said is "Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate, that I know of.".


Let's include the next sentance.


"Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate. It seems that only when a species is thriving can it afford such vanity."

What about ants and bees?  The vast majority of the populations don't reproduce.  Is one to say that they are unsuccessful species or are the asexual members and important part of what makes them successful.

Offline crowMAW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1179
Gay Marriage
« Reply #139 on: June 26, 2005, 01:26:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Seagoon
As Adams himself put it: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Sea...I hope you don't mind if I jump in, but your quote attributed to John Adams (not documented by Adams himself, but rather a third party) got me to thinking.  You are assuming that it is your flavor of Christianity that sets the tone for what is "moral and religious".  I doubt your Christianity is what Adams had in mind considering he was a Deist and thought that human reason was supreme over faith (if you doubt that you should read the Adams letters...specifically those to Jefferson...they are very revealing).

And as long as we are looking at Christianity and it's history with same-sex marriage...can you tell me who Saint Serge and Saint Bacchus were?  It seems that the Catholic Church had been performing same-sex marriages up until the 18th Century and documented as far back as the 10th Century.  Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has evolved as a concept and as a ritual.  Take a look at the research done by Yale history professor John Boswell to see more examples.

Of course you can claim that Catholics or the Christians who performed those ceremonies were not "true Christians".  But that opens up a whole new can of worms ultimately leading back to the question of: what makes you think your brand of morality or Christianity is the "right" one and better than anyone elses?  In the end it is all down to interpretation of God's will (which, if He exists, I would say is probably far beyond any human's comprehension anyway...and to think otherwise is hubris)
Quote
Originally posted by Seagoon
In fact, the idea that our laws would directly contravene those of God or "natural laws" was considered repugnant for hundreds of years.

I think we have quite a few laws that contravene God...and personally, I am glad of it.  It is against the law to offer up your child as a burnt offering regardless who tells you to do it (and the "God told me" defense doesn't hold up in court to well...even when the jury is made of Christians).  It is against the law to pander your daughters for sex even if it is to protect some angels.

But I have to ask you, Nuke and the rest...why do you care if two fairies marry?  Allowing same-sex marriage would not effect me at all...and I assume it wouldn't effect you either (unless someone is coming out of the closet).  What I do see is that same sex partners do not receive the same benefits offered to hetero partners.  They are not allowed to marry the person they love.  They cannot then receive the government benefits and protections offered to hetero married couples (things like social security, estate probate rights, child custody, etc).  They frequently cannot receive the same company benefits offered to hetero married couples (health benefits and even car insurance reductions).  

So if you feel this is a sin...fine. Don't engage in it.  But why do you want to legislate that choice for someone else...especially since God supposedly give us all a choice to sin.  And even more so, when that sin does not immediately impact you or your life.

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #140 on: June 26, 2005, 02:25:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
Gunslinger, it's a question of knowing what you know and knowing what you don't know.

You said, "Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate.", what you should have said is "Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate, that I know of.".


Let's include the next sentance.


"Homosexuality has no place in a species trying to survive or propigate. It seems that only when a species is thriving can it afford such vanity."

What about ants and bees?  The vast majority of the populations don't reproduce.  Is one to say that they are unsuccessful species or are the asexual members and important part of what makes them successful.


when's the last time you saw ants or bees get married or try the act of reproduction because it felt good.  Stay on course here thrawn.

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #141 on: June 26, 2005, 02:36:13 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crowMAW

And as long as we are looking at Christianity and it's history with same-sex marriage...can you tell me who Saint Serge and Saint Bacchus were?  It seems that the Catholic Church had been performing same-sex marriages up until the 18th Century and documented as far back as the 10th Century.  Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has evolved as a concept and as a ritual.  Take a look at the research done by Yale history professor John Boswell to see more examples.

crow I hope you don't mind if I jump in here but how can you compare 10th and 19th catholics to modern day christians.

Quote


I think we have quite a few laws that contravene God...and personally, I am glad of it.  It is against the law to offer up your child as a burnt offering regardless who tells you to do it (and the "God told me" defense doesn't hold up in court to well...even when the jury is made of Christians).  It is against the law to pander your daughters for sex even if it is to protect some angels.

now you are brining up old testiment stuff.  Completly irrelevent

Quote

But I have to ask you, Nuke and the rest...why do you care if two fairies marry?


it's not them marrying it's them redefining a common institution to fit their special needs.

Quote

  Allowing same-sex marriage would not effect me at all...and I assume it wouldn't effect you either (unless someone is coming out of the closet).

there has allready been a case were a church is sued for discrimintory practices for declining a same sex marriage.  The plantif is trying to get their tax exempt status revoked.  So yes it does effect me if they come to my church and tell me what I can and can not do.  
Quote

 What I do see is that same sex partners do not receive the same benefits offered to hetero partners.  They are not allowed to marry the person they love.  They cannot then receive the government benefits and protections offered to hetero married couples (things like social security, estate probate rights, child custody, etc).  They frequently cannot receive the same company benefits offered to hetero married couples (health benefits and even car insurance reductions).  


they have the EXACT same marital rights as anyone else.  No one is discriminated against.  Read page two of this thread.

Quote

So if you feel this is a sin...fine. Don't engage in it.  But why do you want to legislate that choice for someone else...especially since God supposedly give us all a choice to sin.  And even more so, when that sin does not immediately impact you or your life.


its not that I am judging them right or wrong I don't care what they do in the privacy of their own homes.  When they come out in public and want to stand as man and man and get "married" it is extremly offensive to me.  It demeans the act of marriage for everyone.  It also opens the door to many other forms of "marriage" to include in the rewriting of the definition.

Furthermore as i've said in this thread I think it is discriminatory to pass special laws just to apease this group.  Gays don't want equal rights (they allready have those) they want special rights.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Gay Marriage
« Reply #142 on: June 26, 2005, 02:47:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crowMAW
What I do see is that same sex partners do not receive the same benefits offered to hetero partners.  They are not allowed to marry the person they love.  


They are not allowed to have those benifits because it's against the law, pretty simple. They are not allowed to marry the one they love because it's against the law to marry a same-sex partner, and society makes the laws. It's also against the law for a brother to marry a sister.

Are you saying that a son should also be able to marry his mother if they so desire? What about polygomy ( learned to spell itfinnaly) ? Do you think that a man should be able to marry an underaged boy if they both agreed and loved each other? How would that effect you?

Gay marriage is no different than any of those examples. Society has decided that it is not moraly acceptable to marry a same sex partner, just as society has decided not to allow the other examples, and I agree.

Gay people have the EXACT same rights as hetero people, to the letter. Nobody has been able to argue otherwise because they can't. So, no gay is being descriminated against in any way.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2005, 02:50:11 PM by NUKE »

Offline -dead-

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1102
Gay Marriage
« Reply #143 on: June 26, 2005, 03:41:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Manedew,

I just go back on the basics of survival I guess.  Homosexuals have no place in a species trying to survive and propagate.  I veiw it as a vanity (anomaly) that shows up when humans are at their peak and don't have to worry about being fed or reproducing.

I don't think I'm assuming much in the above statement but hey that's just me.
How can you be so sure that homosexuals have no place in a species trying to survive and propagate? Sure, their homosexuality guarantees their own personal lack of propagation, but what of the species as a whole?

Socrates, for example was a bit of a homosexual, and yet he had a great influence on the philosphy and thought of the human species. Julius Caesar had a great influence on human development in the culture, politics and borders department, as did Alexander the Great. And IMO as a species we're a lot better off for having had  Hans Christian Andersen, Leonardo Da Vinci, Oscar Wilde, Truman Capote, Emily Dickinson, Michaelangelo, David Hockney and Tennessee Williams around to name but a few.

So we can't just dismiss people who don't reproduce as having nothing to offer society or the species: after all even Jesus never reproduced, according to the bible. Does that lessen his impact in your view?
“The FBI has no hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11.” --  Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI, June 5, 2006.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Gay Marriage
« Reply #144 on: June 26, 2005, 04:04:59 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
when's the last time you saw ants or bees get married or try the act of reproduction because it felt good.  Stay on course here thrawn.



No, you stay on the course.  You gave an arguement about why you thought homosexuality was unnatural, I am arguing that point.

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #145 on: June 26, 2005, 04:11:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by -dead-
How can you be so sure that homosexuals have no place in a species trying to survive and propagate? Sure, their homosexuality guarantees their own personal lack of propagation, but what of the species as a whole?

Socrates, for example was a bit of a homosexual, and yet he had a great influence on the philosphy and thought of the human species. Julius Caesar had a great influence on human development in the culture, politics and borders department, as did Alexander the Great. And IMO as a species we're a lot better off for having had  Hans Christian Andersen, Leonardo Da Vinci, Oscar Wilde, Truman Capote, Emily Dickinson, Michaelangelo, David Hockney and Tennessee Williams around to name but a few.

So we can't just dismiss people who don't reproduce as having nothing to offer society or the species: after all even Jesus never reproduced, according to the bible. Does that lessen his impact in your view?


not to be a jerk but go back and read everything in this thread that lead me saying those statements.

The orriginal context was that homsexuality was against nature and/or unatural.

The above examples you give prove my point.  In those times humanity as a species was thriving NOT barely on the edge of survival.  If it were on the latter homosexuals would not be usfull for procreation of the species itself.

Im not saying Gayness is a bad thing I am saying it is un-natural.  Men flying through the air is unatural.  We don't have wings, if the ones we built to fly us fail we fall to the ground to our deaths

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #146 on: June 26, 2005, 04:12:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Thrawn
No, you stay on the course.  You gave an arguement about why you thought homosexuality was unnatural, I am arguing that point.


ants and bees are insects.  They have very little in common with humans.

Offline crowMAW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1179
Gay Marriage
« Reply #147 on: June 26, 2005, 04:15:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
crow I hope you don't mind if I jump in here but how can you compare 10th and 19th catholics to modern day christians.

You mean the Bible is open to interpretation and which ever way the social wind is blowing at the time becomes God's Truth?  Where is absolute truth?
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
now you are brining up old testiment stuff.  Completly irrelevent
[/B]

Glad to hear you say that...since Old Testiment is completely irrelevent we can now throw out any argument you have to removing 10 Commandments from government property.

But if you want New Testiment...how about Matt 15 and Mark 7.  Of course it seems Jesus would disagree with you that Mosaic Law is completely irrelevent.

But should we have a law forcing everyone to wash their hands before they eat and kill disrespectful children?

Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
it's not them marrying it's them redefining a common institution to fit their special needs.
[/B]

It is a special need to be able to marry the person you love?
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
there has allready been a case were a church is sued for discrimintory practices for declining a same sex marriage.  The plantif is trying to get their tax exempt status revoked.  So yes it does effect me if they come to my church and tell me what I can and can not do.  
[/B]

People can sue for just about anything...let me know when there is a ruling.
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
they have the EXACT same marital rights as anyone else.  No one is discriminated against.  Read page two of this thread.
[/B]

Do they have the right to marry the person they love?

Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
When they come out in public and want to stand as man and man and get "married" it is extremly offensive to me.  It demeans the act of marriage for everyone.  It also opens the door to many other forms of "marriage" to include in the rewriting of the definition.
[/B]

Sounds like a buch of hand wringing to me.  There are many things in this world that are offensive.  Sorry to tell you but but the world isn't a pure homogenious WASP utopia...and never should be.

Quote
Originally posted by NUKE
Are you saying that a son should also be able to marry his mother if they so desire? What about polygomy ( learned to spell itfinnaly) ? Do you think that a man should be able to marry an underaged boy if they both agreed and loved each other? How would that effect you?

I think there are other reasons behind incest...genetics.  And as far as minors go...they cannot make an informed decision.
Quote
Originally posted by NUKE
Society has decided that it is not moraly acceptable to marry a same sex partner, just as society has decided not to allow the other examples, and I agree.

Society used to find it morally unacceptable for mixed race marriages too.  Are you saying that society should stay stagnant?
« Last Edit: June 26, 2005, 04:18:48 PM by crowMAW »

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Gay Marriage
« Reply #148 on: June 26, 2005, 04:22:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crowMAW

I think there are other reasons behind insest...genetics.  And as far as minors go...they cannot make an informed decision.
 
Society used to find it morally unacceptable for mixed race marriages too.  Are you saying that society should stay stagnant?



Why do you care about insest or genetics, if it's really what they want to do and they are in love? And who cares if minors can't make an informed decision, it shouldn't be against the law to be in love and marry.

I never once said that I feel society should remain stagnant. Right now, it is against the law for homos to marry and that's the way it is and should be. I never want it to be legal for them to marry.

The funny thing is that people claim that homos are being descrimitated against somehow, when they are not. They have the exact same rights as heteros do. No more, no less.

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Gay Marriage
« Reply #149 on: June 26, 2005, 04:25:32 PM »
Quote
Glad to hear you say that...since Old Testiment is completely irrelevent we can now throw out any argument you have to removing 10 Commandments from government property.


now you are jumping to conclusions.  The old testiment is not irelevent nore are the ten commandments.  When Jesus died for our sins christions gained a new covenent with god.  The laws and moral lessons of the old testiment are still valid but the ceremonial aspects of it (not eating fish certain days, cripples cant go before the alter of god ect) are no longer valid.

nuff on that.  



Quote
It is a special need to be able to marry the person you love?
Do they have the right to marry the person they love?
 


yes and yes.  A marriage is a union between a man and a woman.  They have the right to that just like everyone else.  Just because they are Gay does not mean they can go a redfine laws to suit their lifestyle.  Should a pedifle have the right to be one just because they were born that way?

Quote
Sounds like a buch of hand wringing to me. There are many things in this world that are offensive. Sorry to tell you but but the world isn't a pure homogenious WASP utopia...and never should be.


nore is it a multicultural deversified rainbow flag waving gay day parade.  There are many things in life that people should be respectfull of that are important to others.  It seems as of late it's the Waspy types that have to make concessions to everyone else.(that's another topic in of itself)

So 70% of a democratic society do not want to redefine Marriage to fill the special needs of a minority group.  They are ALL wrong.  What if all of them said the world is round instead of flat????  the argument can be made both ways it would seem.  

Still  none of you that are for redefining society norms can tell me what is wrong with a law pertaining to "civil unions"