PDA

View Full Version : Do you believe that gay marriage should be legal?


ubermeyer
08-24-2009, 05:06 PM
Discuss.

http://i669.photobucket.com/albums/vv58/ardaniss/lol.gifhttp://i669.photobucket.com/albums/vv58/ardaniss/lol.gifhttp://i669.photobucket.com/albums/vv58/ardaniss/lol.gifhttp://i669.photobucket.com/albums/vv58/ardaniss/lol.gif

(sorry, I had nothing else to say)

allez_mike
08-24-2009, 05:14 PM
mmmm, yes. Gays, like everyone else, are humans. They have the right to get married like everyone else. Just my two cents

ubermeyer
08-24-2009, 05:16 PM
mmmm, yes. Gays, like everyone else, are humans. They have the right to get married like everyone else. Just my two cents

then vote in poll for yes.

CanadianChic
08-24-2009, 05:18 PM
I feel a sense of deja vu but I can't quite place it. And I voted yes of course.

Claudius
08-24-2009, 05:19 PM
Sure, why not?

ubermeyer
08-24-2009, 05:21 PM
Sure, why not?

then vote in poll for yes

CanadianChic
08-24-2009, 05:22 PM
then vote in poll for yes

Someone voted no but didn't post uber. Was that you or will you need to put on your bright orange vest and grab your whistle to track 'em down? ;)

mtommer
08-24-2009, 05:39 PM
I don't but then I don't think any marriage should be legal. IMO it's not a legal arrangement.

drakulie
08-24-2009, 05:40 PM
I feel everyone has a right to marry:

brother/sister
sister/brother
mother/son
father/daughter
cousins
man/dog
man/pet rocks
etc

oh yeah, and gays.

destroyer
08-24-2009, 05:43 PM
Marriage is gay dude.

Lionheart392
08-24-2009, 05:45 PM
Well I'm gay so I naturally voted yes, but I have no desire to get married. I think marriage is generally is kinda pointless these days, gay or straight. But if one is legal then the other should also be.

Lionheart392
08-24-2009, 05:47 PM
I feel everyone has a right to marry:

brother/sister
sister/brother
mother/son
father/daughter
cousins
man/dog
man/pet rocks
etc

oh yeah, and gays.

You fail (unless this was sarcasm).
Cousins can get married here in the UK actually, although the thought of my kid and my sister's kid having sex seems very strange. :shock:

skyzoo
08-24-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm not to sure. maybe it's really because I don't care and this post should placed in the New york times blog.

fed_the_savior
08-24-2009, 06:08 PM
Marriage just means joined. You can be married, that is joined, to many things in many ways. Marriage should simply be a contractual agreement and nothing more, and should be legal in any form in which deciding parties choose to make it. This displays the very heart of the idea of freedom within reasonable limits and minimal governmental control. The only reason marriage with animals should be illegal is because we can never be sure if the animals are really consenting. If this was the case, it surely should be legal. Polygamy and any form of marriage should be legal, as there is no definitive authority for marriage meaning "two" adults, and that's it. I also think the government has no place in determining a legal age for anything, as 60 year olds can be stupid and immature, and 6 year olds can be quite intelligent and mature. If a certain religion wants to only acknowledge marriage between man and woman, or any other criteria, that should be their right to do so. But the government giving married people any kind of discounts or helps beyond single people is very unfair.

10sfreak
08-24-2009, 06:22 PM
I voted "No".

ubermeyer
08-24-2009, 06:24 PM
Someone voted no but didn't post uber. Was that you or will you need to put on your bright orange vest and grab your whistle to track 'em down? ;)

Was not me, but it's OK with me if they don't want to post, as long as they vote. Anyway, I don't need to whip out the vest + whistle for this, haha.

Skywalker91
08-24-2009, 06:33 PM
If anyone loves each other enough who has the right to stop them from being happy

fed_the_savior
08-24-2009, 06:46 PM
If anyone loves each other enough who has the right to stop them from being happy

Be happy as you want, but leave the government out of marriage. The question is not people loving each other, nor being happy. Many people will tell you that once they entered an official marriage they were less happy. Happiness has nothing to do with it. I can't vote yes or no, as I don't think the government should really be involved in the idea of a "marriage" at all, but any form of agreement can be drawn up and agreed upon. I mean, marriage already gets so ridiculous with people drawing up pre-nuptial agreements or divorcing 5 times. Marriage has no real meaning. What is the point of this illogical institution except people drawing some kind of fuzzy emotional meaning from it. Which is fine, except the government should not be involved in this kind of thing.

Eviscerator
08-24-2009, 06:54 PM
I feel a sense of deja vu but I can't quite place it. And I voted yes of course.

Yes because this subject has been discussed, and polled to death.

If they want to live together and do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home fine.
However society should not be forced to redefine marriage just so they can feel included because of their aberrant sexual behavior.

skyzoo
08-24-2009, 06:58 PM
Yes because this subject has been discussed, and polled to death.

If they want to live together and do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home fine.
However society should not be forced to redefine marriage just so they can feel included because of their aberrant sexual behavior.
Hit it right on the nose

raiden031
08-24-2009, 06:59 PM
Can anybody think of a secular reason why gay marriage should not be legal?

According to the states, marriage is nothing more than a contractual agreement between two people to take care of one another until death or divorce. As long as the people involved are capable of giving consent then I don't see any reason not to allow it.

Although the problem with my opinion is that it supports the idea that incest would be ok, but I definitely don't agree with incest. I'd have to make that one a special case.

CanadianChic
08-24-2009, 07:14 PM
I voted "No".

And this would be one of those things we don't see eye-to-eye on. :???:

Tenzo
08-24-2009, 07:20 PM
When its comes to marriage, it's what the two in love wants that counts. Everything else and everyone else is insignificant.

fed_the_savior
08-24-2009, 07:27 PM
When its comes to marriage, it's what the two in love wants that counts. Everything else and everyone else is insignificant.
Or the three in love. The thing that annoys me most about gay marriage proponents, is they don't stand on principle for other forms of marriage equally. They just think about gays because, either they have gay friends, or feel gay marriage is more important than other forms like polygamy because there are more gays. In this way, they betray the same prejudice that people have against gay marriage, except for it. And why people want to claim a certain term and government acknowledgement outside of a mere contract, is illogical.

scraps234
08-24-2009, 07:29 PM
yes... gays are humans...

EtePras
08-24-2009, 07:57 PM
Or the three in love. The thing that annoys me most about gay marriage proponents, is they don't stand on principle for other forms of marriage equally. They just think about gays because, either they have gay friends, or feel gay marriage is more important than other forms like polygamy because there are more gays. In this way, they betray the same prejudice that people have against gay marriage, except for it. And why people want to claim a certain term and government acknowledgement outside of a mere contract, is illogical.

As hypocritical as it might seem, at least they support 2 types of marriage which is better than the opponents who only like 1 type of marriage.

fed_the_savior
08-24-2009, 08:01 PM
As hypocritical as it might seem, at least they support 2 types of marriage which is better than the opponents who only like 1 type of marriage.

No, this is not somehow a more is "better" type scenario. In reality it's a form of double-hypocrisy, in that they are being as hypocritical as the hypocrisy they decry. Supporting 3 types is not better than 2, and supporting 4 types is not better than 3, it is staying true to reasons and logic behind what you believe in that is "better," and not favoring one group just because you sympathize with them, but being fair to all. And I wish people would stop using the "because they humans too" and "because they have the right to love." Both of those facts, which could be said of any belief whatsoever, have nothing to do with what a government should specifically support.

flyinghippos101
08-24-2009, 08:23 PM
I feel everyone has a right to marry:

brother/sister
sister/brother
mother/son
father/daughter
cousins
man/dog
man/pet rocks
etc

oh yeah, and gays.

Dude, are you actually equating gay marriage with incest? :shock: They're completely irrelevent! I voted yes, gays should have the same rights as straight people. Basic laws and rights shouldn't take into consideration sexual orientation.

Lakoste
08-24-2009, 08:24 PM
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/9994/gaymarriage.gif

raiden031
08-24-2009, 08:26 PM
Dude, are you actually equating gay marriage with incest? :shock: They're completely irrelevent! I voted yes, gays should have the same rights as straight people. Basic laws and rights shouldn't take into consideration sexual orientation.

I am for gay marriage and against incest. Yet I can't think of a single argument as to why gay is ok and incest is wrong. Can someone explain to me why being gay is ok but incest is not? Both are "unatural", but can be between consenting adults...

fed_the_savior
08-24-2009, 08:28 PM
I am for gay marriage and against incest. Yet I can't think of a single argument as to why gay is ok and incest is wrong. Can someone explain to me why being gay is ok but incest is not? Both are "unatural", but can be between consenting adults...

Finally an honest person!

tikkimonkey
08-24-2009, 08:48 PM
Gay marriages should be allowed. Mind your own business. nuff' said

StuckInMalibu
08-24-2009, 09:04 PM
I think gay marriage should be legal because marriage promotes stability for families and provides economic benefits. These were the reasons for marriage for thousands of years for straight people. Only recently have we claimed that marriage is only "natural" people or it's "sacred" or that if we don't protect marriage, people will have sex with ducks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXPcBI4CJc8

ronalditop
08-24-2009, 09:11 PM
I dont know if they should get married or not, but what I know is that I hate to watch gays making out on public. That is simply not right, especially if there are kids around who might watch that.

VivalaVida
08-24-2009, 09:15 PM
Yes because this subject has been discussed, and polled to death.

If they want to live together and do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home fine.
However society should not be forced to redefine marriage just so they can feel included because of their aberrant sexual behavior.
Absolutely. Great post,sir.

autumn_leaf
08-24-2009, 09:27 PM
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/9994/gaymarriage.gif

i think around 20-30% of that chart needs to be gays divorce.

CanadianChic
08-24-2009, 10:05 PM
i think around 20-30% of that chart needs to be gays divorce.

Still making it significantly less than the straight divorce rate.

VivalaVida
08-24-2009, 10:10 PM
Still making it significantly less than the straight divorce rate.
They will catch up pretty fast.

ShiroRm
08-24-2009, 10:18 PM
I dont know if they should get married or not, but what I know is that I hate to watch gays making out on public. That is simply not right, especially if there are kids around who might watch that.

why is it "simply" not right?
because they're showing their love?
Love per se shouldn't either be considered immoral or denied by laws.

It seems to me that this "simplicity" you speak about, is the actual problem.

If they want to live together and do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home fine.
However society should not be forced to redefine marriage just so they can feel included because of their aberrant sexual behavior.

I don't agree with you, for several reasons.

First of all, Gay people don't do anything wrong to others, so their needs have to be respected, according to our Constitutions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (articles: 1, 2, 7, 12, 16, 18, 19, 22, 28, 30) and the International pact about civil and politic rights (especially, articles: 2, 3, 5, 17, 18, 19, 23).
Some people may like or dislike them, but that shouldn't affect gay people lifes. This wouldn't be right.
Our society have to be pluralistic, so gay people rights have to be guaranteed. Gay marriage is simply one of the guarantees they need.
Laws (including those about marriage) are mere instruments to satisfy human needs, in other words, they aim to guarantee. When new needs gain importance, laws have to consider them. If not, they miss their goal, becoming mere instruments of oppression.

Secondly, the concept of Nature, used to legitimate the discrimination against gay people, is a false argument, for two reasons, at least:
1) nature isn't steady, but changes constantly. There have been times when human beings didn't even exist. So, this concept isn't able to translate to a set of definite rules.
2) gays have always existed. So they're natural too.

max
08-25-2009, 01:32 AM
Bad for the kids; it's also bad to have our major definition be sexual.

Lionheart392
08-25-2009, 03:34 AM
I can't believe some people is this world still think being gay is 'unnatural' :shock:
Yes you are in fact born that way and cannot do anything about it.
Instead of posting narrow-minded stuff why don't you think about it for a second? Why would anyone 'choose' to be gay, and be persecuted throughout life? Do you have ANY idea what it's like to grow up gay, lying to all your friends out of fear of what might happen? All your friends talking about who they like but you can't? It's really really difficult ya know? Who would choose that?

I dont know if they should get married or not, but what I know is that I hate to watch gays making out on public. That is simply not right, especially if there are kids around who might watch that.

This is BS. I'm not advocating 'making out in public' because I think public displays of affection, gay or straight, are cringeworthy and unnecessary. But what if a kid did see it? Would they suddenly explode?

Yes because this subject has been discussed, and polled to death.

If they want to live together and do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home fine.
However society should not be forced to redefine marriage just so they can feel included because of their aberrant sexual behavior.

Being gay isn't about 'sexual behaviour' you perv, it's about something far more complex. Yes who you are attracted to, but also who you LOVE. People like you are exactly why young gay people are committing suicide as we speak because society has convinced them that their feelings are 'wrong'.

autumn_leaf
08-25-2009, 03:54 AM
Still making it significantly less than the straight divorce rate.

no it isn't.... 50% is mostly the repeat offenders. the avg divorce rate is actually around 32-33%. It actually has been getting lower since the 80s.

hollywood9826
08-25-2009, 04:10 AM
I look at marriage as a religous union of people. Im not sure why I think of it like that. I guess because of the cerimonies and stuff. So if theres a church or pastor/revern/rabbi who will accept and marry homosexuals then fine it doesnt bother me.

I also dont think people should get a tax break because they are married. It has never made sense to me why the govt decides i need to pay more taxes becasue Im single than somebody who has a wife and or kids.

But I dont see how the govt can justify not letting a gay couple marry. if they dont let gays marry why let catholics marry jews. Or baptists marry scientologists. or white marry blacks. It shouldnt be the govts say.

malakas
08-25-2009, 04:19 AM
Yes,they should have the right,exactly as straights do.

But of course the church is never going to let it happen.

raiden031
08-25-2009, 04:23 AM
But I dont see how the govt can justify not letting a gay couple marry. if they dont let gays marry why let catholics marry jews. Or baptists marry scientologists. or white marry blacks. It shouldnt be the govts say.

Its very simple. Its a way for right wings to force their christian beliefs on the rest of us. There is no other justification.

raiden031
08-25-2009, 04:29 AM
I can't believe some people is this world still think being gay is 'unnatural' :shock:
Yes you are in fact born that way and cannot do anything about it.
Instead of posting narrow-minded stuff why don't you think about it for a second? Why would anyone 'choose' to be gay, and be persecuted throughout life?

Well being unnatural doesn't mean you chose it, but its unnatural in that it goes against human design and is more likely a genetic defect (or one due to environmental factors). Humans are meant to procreate and being gay does not allow that. Just as being a hermaphrodite or mentally slow isn't a 'normal' condition for the survival of the human species.

Of course we live in a civilized society where people should be able to be themselves as long as it doesn't hurt others. Being gay might not help the species grow and survive, but there are plenty of straight people who choose not to procreate as well.

diggler
08-25-2009, 04:55 AM
I feel everyone has a right to marry:

brother/sister
sister/brother
mother/son
father/daughter
cousins
man/dog
man/pet rocks
etc

oh yeah, and gays.

I'm pro gay marriage, but this raises very valid interesting points.

Are we anti incest because of genetic defects? Does that mean it is ok if the couple is sterile or uses a condom etc?

Why is beastiality against the law? Are we assuming the animal suffers? I've seen a video of a man up a cow and from what I could tell, the cow didn't feel a thing.

Are we against beastiality because it is weird? ****ing a tree is weird, but that's not illegal. Where do you draw the line?

drakulie
08-25-2009, 05:17 AM
Dude, are you actually equating gay marriage with incest? :shock: They're completely irrelevent!


How so????

Isn't the "gay marriage" argument about two "consenting adults" who want to be "contractually" joined, just like hetero marriage? Why should they be discriminated against?

S H O W S T O P P E R !
08-25-2009, 05:25 AM
I say that gays should be able to marry, but there has to be a marriage reform along with all the other things we have to redo in this country. Prenups and the simplicity of getting a divorce (literally, you can just pay $50 and sign it and you're done) makes it so easy for golddiggers. If the government is going to do anything about the divorce rate being over 50%, then they should make the couple wait at least 1 year together and have them show evidence of this so they have proven they love each other and are compatible. Also, ban those prenups. If you truly want to divorce, then split everything 50/50.

raiden031
08-25-2009, 05:51 AM
I'm pro gay marriage, but this raises very valid interesting points.

Are we anti incest because of genetic defects? Does that mean it is ok if the couple is sterile or uses a condom etc?

Why is beastiality against the law? Are we assuming the animal suffers? I've seen a video of a man up a cow and from what I could tell, the cow didn't feel a thing.

Are we against beastiality because it is weird? ****ing a tree is weird, but that's not illegal. Where do you draw the line?

There is no justified cause as to why incest should be illegal but most of us think it should be.

Beastiality should be against the law because animals are not intelligent enough to consent.

raiden031
08-25-2009, 05:52 AM
I say that gays should be able to marry, but there has to be a marriage reform along with all the other things we have to redo in this country. Prenups and the simplicity of getting a divorce (literally, you can just pay $50 and sign it and you're done) makes it so easy for golddiggers. If the government is going to do anything about the divorce rate being over 50%, then they should make the couple wait at least 1 year together and have them show evidence of this so they have proven they love each other and are compatible. Also, ban those prenups. If you truly want to divorce, then split everything 50/50.

How does a prenup make it easier for golddiggers? Actually a prenup will filter out those types of marriages and someone who signs a prenup is more likely to genuinely be in love with their partner. So why ban prenups?

ramseszerg
09-04-2009, 01:54 AM
Any kind of love is fine. It's the hate you have to watch.

VGP
09-04-2009, 04:40 AM
I've seen a video of a man up a cow and from what I could tell, the cow didn't feel a thing.

Uh, ok.

Just not my thing, man.

David_Is_Right
09-04-2009, 04:51 AM
There is no justified cause as to why incest should be illegal but most of us think it should be.

Inbreeding invariably results in the line of descendents quickly dying out. This is because harmful recessive genes are much more likely to be expressed. The incest law reflects this danger.

Every culture ever studied has an aversion to incest. This behaviour has been selected for because it increases genetic fitness.

drakulie
09-04-2009, 05:45 AM
Any kind of love is fine. It's the hate you have to watch.

ah yes! The dark side.

mtommer
09-04-2009, 09:34 AM
Inbreeding invariably results in the line of descendents quickly dying out.

So does "gay" breeding. Only there is no breeding so the line of descendents dies out VERY quickly instead of just quickly. Please note that I'm not arguing for or against anything in this post.

r2473
09-04-2009, 09:46 AM
I believe gay marriage should be legalized for heterosexuals only.

raiden031
09-04-2009, 09:49 AM
Inbreeding invariably results in the line of descendents quickly dying out. This is because harmful recessive genes are much more likely to be expressed. The incest law reflects this danger.

Every culture ever studied has an aversion to incest. This behaviour has been selected for because it increases genetic fitness.

Well there is no requirement for straight couples to breed, and gays certainly can't breed, so whats the difference? Is this good enough reason to make incest marriages illegal while making straight and homosexual marriages legal?

Truth is if you want to be objective about it, you either make both gay and incest marriages legal, or you make none of them legal.

drakulie
09-04-2009, 09:54 AM
Well there is no requirement for straight couples to breed, and gays certainly can't breed, so whats the difference? Is this good enough reason to make incest marriages illegal while making straight and homosexual marriages legal?

Truth is if you want to be objective about it, you either make both gay and incest marriages legal, or you make none of them legal.

Agreed.

To add, if the only reason to not allow incest couples to marry is the whole, "their kids will be born with 5 eyes" argument, then shouldn't couple who have a history of cancer, heart disease, etc in their family not be allowed to marry either because they are risking having children who will be born with "defects" as well??

pabletion
09-04-2009, 10:04 AM
Hey, were not far off from genetic engineering being able to prevent certain genetic defects, so, if/when they finally are able to state that it is "safe" for brother-sister to procreate, for mother-son to procreate, etc... then would you think "inbreeding" should be legal and/or accepted?

In the meantime, a brother-sister couple could claim a desire to adopt......... Its not crazy to think that could happen, a brother-sister wanting to get hitched and having kids... seems like anything goes now

raiden031
09-04-2009, 10:08 AM
Hey, were not far off from genetic engineering being able to prevent certain genetic defects, so, if/when they finally are able to state that it is "safe" for brother-sister to procreate, for mother-son to procreate, etc... then would you think "inbreeding" should be legal and/or accepted?

In the meantime, a brother-sister couple could claim a desire to adopt......... Its not crazy to think that could happen, a brother-sister wanting to get hitched and having kids... seems like anything goes now

I think incest is wrong and should be illegal, but its only because of my own biases. I think the point is that you can't make homosexuality legal without making incest legal as well, because its all based on our own biases anyways.

Bud
09-04-2009, 11:06 AM
Two consenting adults should be able to marry, regardless of their sexual orientation.

YULitle
09-04-2009, 11:31 AM
I think incest is wrong and should be illegal, but its only because of my own biases. I think the point is that you can't make homosexuality legal without making incest legal as well, because its all based on our own biases anyways.

Actually, to be clear, there is a scientific reason why incest is unsavory: that being the maladies of inbreeding, which are all but inevitable.

mtommer
09-04-2009, 11:35 AM
Actually, to be clear, there is a scientific reason why incest is unsavory: that being the maladies of inbreeding, which are all but inevitable.

but as mentioned, condems and birth-control. There's no issue anymore. It's time to let the unsavory go. Besides, what about Drakulie's point? People with known genetic defects shouldn't be allowed to breed either.

LuckyR
09-05-2009, 06:24 PM
This is really a question of eliminating special rights. Why should Gays alone have a legal reason to not marry? They should be subject to the same internal and external relationship pressures to marry (perhaps in error) that everyone else does.

ubermeyer
09-05-2009, 10:17 PM
Every culture ever studied has an aversion to incest.

The Egyptians? The Aztecs? Brother-sister marriages were common among the royal families, even required.

By the way, I totally agree that incest should be illegal. It's disgusting and *******ed. I'm just pointing out some facts here.

David_Is_Right
09-06-2009, 09:02 AM
So does "gay" breeding. Only there is no breeding so the line of descendents dies out VERY quickly instead of just quickly.

Well yeah, "gay breeding" is oxymoronic.

David_Is_Right
09-06-2009, 09:04 AM
Well there is no requirement for straight couples to breed, and gays certainly can't breed, so whats the difference? Is this good enough reason to make incest marriages illegal while making straight and homosexual marriages legal?

Truth is if you want to be objective about it, you either make both gay and incest marriages legal, or you make none of them legal.

I wasn't making any prescription about gay marriage in my post. I was merely providing an answer to someone's question on why incest is illegal.

Terr
09-08-2009, 04:08 PM
Be happy as you want, but leave the government out of marriage. The question is not people loving each other, nor being happy. Many people will tell you that once they entered an official marriage they were less happy. Happiness has nothing to do with it. I can't vote yes or no, as I don't think the government should really be involved in the idea of a "marriage" at all, but any form of agreement can be drawn up and agreed upon. I mean, marriage already gets so ridiculous with people drawing up pre-nuptial agreements or divorcing 5 times. Marriage has no real meaning. What is the point of this illogical institution except people drawing some kind of fuzzy emotional meaning from it. Which is fine, except the government should not be involved in this kind of thing.

I see where you're coming from. But as bureaucratic and 'pointless' as it is that marriage must go through a country's government to become valid, it is a necessity in this day and age. I know most people who choose to get married would want their spouse to receive full benefits with regards their estate in the event of their death. Not to mention that in the States marriage gives both parties 1138 federal rights (most of which are denied to civil partnerships.)

So, unfortunately, as much as it sucks that marriage has to be thrust on to the desks of greedy politicians so that they can judge whether or not certain members of society are fit to be married, it is a reality we have to face since it is politically orientated.

BTW. I voted yes. There was a time when blacks and whites could not marry, but look at the world now. Gay people will receive equal rights, it's inevitable. The very notion that their fight is for 'gay rights' is insane. It's a small part of the much larger civil movement of the mid-20th century that is just finding its voice during troubled times.

Terr
09-08-2009, 04:10 PM
I think incest is wrong and should be illegal, but its only because of my own biases. I think the point is that you can't make homosexuality legal without making incest legal as well, because its all based on our own biases anyways.

You know that homosexuality isn't illegal in most countries and that incest is in almost every country...

Because two people who are genetically similar often produce defective offspring. (I used the word 'defective' for lack of a better word)