How will gay marriage change the world?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by arauca, Feb 28, 2013.

  1. arauca Banned Banned

    Why did top officials of the United States become engaged in such a thorny issue? What happened to the moral standing of the world community in general and the U.S. in particular in a such short period of modern history? The history of stand-off regarding the issue of same-sex marriage received its first legal registration in 1972, during the sensational trial of "Baker vs. Nelson." Back in those days, the Supreme Court of Minnesota ruled that the only true definition of marriage was the one defined in then-existent laws.

    The story became the starting point for the ongoing struggle between the champions of opposite views on the issue. Since then, the debate would involve almost all top political figures of the U.S.. They could no longer remain on the sidelines, due to immense public interest in the subject. According to a recent opinion poll, 50 percent of Americans are actively involved in the discussion of this topic, and, for the most part, support the democratic policies of Barack Obama.

    The aggressive lobbying of the interests of sexual minorities, as many analysts say, may be caused with the presence of homosexual individuals in the inner circle of the U.S. President. There is also a possible financial benefit to the shattering U.S. economy that is standing on the brink of default. The profit may come in the form of tax revenues from new marriages, new jobs and gay tourism. It can also be directly connected to new influences that decay the morals of modern society. Trendy views, freedom of expression, have been replacing human values lately. All this and many other things show a devastating impact on traditional human, family and personal values of the modern civilization. The U.S. is no exception.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Same reason they got involved with the thorny issues of abolishing slavery and allowing women to vote. We have this thing for rights.

    Conservatives said the same thing about allowing blacks to marry whites. It was bullshit then, it's bullshit now.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. arauca Banned Banned


    I just put an opinion of other part of the world, which I second them.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Balerion Banned Banned

    Which "new influences" are these, precisely? At any rate, I would argue that larger acceptance of homosexuality reflects a change in the morals of modern society rather than a decaying of them.

    I certainly hope you're not referring to equality as a "trendy view."

    Freedom of expression is a human value.

    This is exceptionally vague, so I'm not sure you really have a point to make here aside from blustering about how much you hate homosexuality. What values, exactly, are being devastated? And why is tradition itself to be valued? Isn't gay marriage now becoming a part of that tradition?
  8. Bells Staff Member

  9. Balerion Banned Banned

    Fantastic! How did I miss this??
  10. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    It is just human rights being preserved. Historically a gay man that falls ill and enters a hospital his anti-gay family or hospital could deny his lover access to see him. Imagine if you were denied last words with someone you cared for.

    Then when the man dies his family can swoop in like vultures and sell everything the man owns including his house or share of the house with no care as to who is displaced. Morals often go out the window when large amounts of money and resentments are present.

    There were of course legal arrangements that could be made that gave these rights and emulated marriage, but it was not quite the same in the eyes of those involved.

    Marriage has rules concerning matrimonial home, division of assets upon deaths, and the rights to be considered family when a loved one is in serious condition at a hospital.


    Now here is my question.

    How can anybody be against Gay Marriage?

    Denying Gays marriage will not stop them from living together in lifelong loving relationships. If anything the sanctity and respect marriage has might make married gays less likely to stray and also slow down spread of STD's .

    This pastor in the video says it claims being gay goes against the bible which I don't see, but denying them marriage won't make them straight.

    Honestly misled religions are the ONLY arguments I think can be presented against Gay Marriage. If it is against religious views to be gay then why is there so many gay priests raping boys. At least Gay marriage is consensual.

    As mentioned on the plus side we have tourism, retail, and a myriad of businesses occupied in the construction of a wedding. More money for everyone, hip hip hooray.

    Gay men can often afford great weddings as well. They often have double male incomes and no kids.

    I really cannot see any reason against it aside from religion. I know I keep going to that statement, but I really cannot fathom any other reason at all.

    There is so many reasons for and no reasons against.

    That petty Pastor in the video linked was likely getting his first and only 5 minutes of fame for his stance. He's probably washing dishes in some diner as we speak.
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2013
  11. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Homosexual individuals are everywhere . . . who cares? In the US homosexuals are becoming less stigmatized. And that is a good thing. Homosexuality has nothing to do with moral decay. To say that it is just flies in the face of fact. Homosexuality didn’t hurt the Hellenic or Roman empires where homosexuality was openly recognized and accepted. Alexander the Great may have been a homosexual and he created the biggest most powerful nation in the world. Homosexuality was an accepted part of Roman and Greek societies. It didn’t harm those empires. Just what do you think human values are? Tolerance and acceptance of our differences is not a human value? People should not live in fear or shame of their sexuality. We are sexual beings. As long as we are not unfairly imposing our sexuality on others, there is no wrong and no reason to be ashamed. Being honest with ourselves and others makes us stronger, not weaker.

    You don’t think there are a similar number of homosexuals where you live? If you don’t, you are deluding yourself. The only thing legalizing homosexual marriage will do is to create more business for the divorce lawyers and the marriage industry. It doesn’t add dollars to federal coffers. In fact it is going to cost government by increasing government employee benefit expenses and staffing divorce courts. You may be surprised to know private industry has already recognized the value of their homosexual employees and recognize gay marriage by extending employee benefits to the gay partners of their gay employees. Government just needs to catch up with private industry. And there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and there is nothing wrong with homosexuals.
  12. rodereve Registered Member

    Conservatives need to stop approaching everything by what the bible says. Not all conservatives are christians, ie. some atheists, other religions. I'm liberal on the majority of things, but I take a conservative stand on some issues.

    With that said-- and I almost never agree with arauca, I think there needs to be a point where you draw the line. I have no issue with gay or lesbian people, because marriage is a man-made concept, so I could care less who they marry. And they don't get it twisted - gay men understand that they are men that like other men (likewise with lesbians). But gay and lesbians are a gateway and stepping stone towards other groups which I do not accept.

    What I DO have a problem with has to do with the latter end of the acronym LGBT (les gay bi trans), transgender and more specifically transsexuals. Homosexual people are attracted to people of the same sex. Transsexual people want to BECOME the other sex.

    They do this by taking hormone-replacement therapy, ie. men that want to become transwomen take estrogen to change their face, their body, and estrogen has an even greater effect on how they feel and think. They may also undergo sex-reassignment surgery (SRS) to change their genitalia to be more like the other sex. Women that want to become transmen undergo a therapy to enlarge their clitoris to be more like a penis, they undergo scrotoplasty to make the labia folds form the scrotum, vaginectomy to remove the vagina, they take grafts of skin to construct an artificial penis on themselves! Advances in bioengineering may one day construct a fully functional penis on a woman.
    Men that want to become transwomen have the option to undergo colovaginoplasty, a process that takes part of their colon to form the vagina lining OR they may choose to undergo a surgery called penile inversion to form their neovagina, which the details are too disturbing for me to describe but you can imagine what penile INVERSION would entail.

    Now, I outlined these procedures not because I wanted to disgust you, but because these are real surgical operations and you should treat them as such. And frankly, you should be a little shocked. Transsexualism is diagnosed as a disorder, defined by the American Psychiatrist Association and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. People that want to construct themselves as men, or construct their bodies to become women, this is not a perversion of religion or faith or marriage, but a perversion of humanity and nature. And we're saying its OK. Do you think it is right for people to determine if a penis should be attached to the fetus prenatally? How about postnatal? Or does it require the permission of the fetus whether or not they will have a penis, then does everyone now have a right to a penis?

    This topic touches a nerve deeper than just gender and sex roles. If the surgical operations existed, this line of reasoning opens itself to other possibilities. What if an asian man wanted to become a black man, because he felt like a black man at birth. What if a man wanted to become a monkey, because he felt like a monkey at birth. We shouldn't be promoting these identity disorders, because they pervert humanity and are essentially abnormal mental behavior. Homosexuality is a natural behavior that is commonly seen throughout the animal kingdom. Transsexuality (not asexuality)- not so much.

    Lastly, I'd like to respond to the the archetypical thinking of the Liberal party - Why should we care? Who are we to tell them what to think or do? It's also the same apologetic response of theists - Why should you care what I believe or think, I'm not harming you.
    We should care what others think and do, because we have a stake in it, because no man is an island. We allow some Christians to believe they are a saved people with the rest of humanity going to hell, that the earth is 6000 years old, that they are talking to some imaginary divine being all the time. Why does it matter? because these are the same people that make up over 90% of the congress and 80% of the senate, the same people that pass laws on how you should live your life, what is prohibited and what is allowed, and how social and education program should be run.

    So yes, you should care. You should care that people with identity disorders might be a socially acceptable thing, and that they may one day come to pass laws about humanity and social norms and behaviors. Feel free to disagree, I've made comments against both the left and the right so I expect dissent

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. Balerion Banned Banned

    This statement makes no sense. The conservatives who are quoting biblical scripture are obviously Christian conservatives. Atheist conservatives obviously aren't quoting scripture as justification for their beliefs.

    This is a false statement. Homosexuality does not lead to transsexualism. It's an entirely different trait that has to do with sexual identity, not sexual preference.

    And what's your point?

    Why is it a perversion? If people cannot help how they identify sexually, is gender reassignment surgery not a correction of the original mistake? And why should it be something that concerns you one way or the other?

    This is a straw man. No one is suggesting reassigning fetuses. The problem doesn't arise until the person is old enough to recognize it anyway, so no one would know it until then, making the scenario you proposed absolutely fucking ridiculous.

    This is an appeal to the absurd, and a logical fallacy. Are there any biological conditions you know of which create racial identity issues? And so what if they did? Why is it any concern of yours what race I am?

    You should apologize for this one. Seriously. This is the religionist's argument against gay marriage almost verbatum.

    You haven't explained how they "pervert" humanity. And nobody's promoting these disorders (whatever the fuck that means). Rather, we're acknowledging them, and treating them. What is your alternative? Pretend they don't exist, and allow people to suffer because the surgery makes you uncomfortable? Why the hell is your opinion of any relevance?

    How do you know? Gender identity is something expressed verbally, so how are to know if a male bear feels like a female bear? And going by your logic, then surgery of any kind is a perversion. So is medicine, and television, and everything else that we can't see elsewhere in nature. So let's stop pretending that this has anything to do with what's natural and what isn't. Own your bigotry.

    You expect dissent to your ignorance and bigotry? Shocking.

    You still haven't made your case, so there's really not much to reply to. So far, all you've done is construct vague boogeymen about laws being passed on how to live one's life, and knocked down the prenatal surgery straw man. All you've done so far is spread misinformation and fear-monger. But then, maybe that was the whole point?
  14. Bells Staff Member

    You need to watch the video to the end.

    That Pastor's speech had a very surprise ending and frankly, his move was brilliant.

    Here is a transcript of his speech.. See if you can pick what he did and just why what he did is brilliant:

  15. billvon Valued Senior Member

    No, it's not. This is a very standard misreading of the DSM-V, which is often used to support people's agendas by claiming that people they dislike are "sick."

    Yes, and it's done all the time. Babies are born with ambiguous genitalia and the parents effectively "decide" which sex to go with (with the help of a surgeon of course.)

    Once they are adults - yes, it does. No one has the "right" to a penis, but every adult certainly has the right to ask a doctor for one.

    Sure. Michael Jackson became a white man. I always thought he was a bit creepy, but that's his decision, not yours.

    You can care about whatever you like. But if you think that transsexuals in government will result in laws that discriminate against non-transsexuals - then I suspect you have never met a transsexual. (Or, more likely, you have, but just didn't know it.)
  16. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Allowing gay marriage may not be Christian, but it is American. We are all about freedom. And the Russians tend to be homophobic bigots, so they still have a long way to go.
  17. arauca Banned Banned


    Freedom , that is a buss word , you have probable more laws then the Italian
  18. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    We have some ridiculous laws, but at least some states allow two loving people to benefit from the institution of marriage.
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Yep. For example we have several laws against institutional discrimination. You could argue that that restricts freedom, but in general it improves overall freedom.
  20. Thoreau Valued Senior Member

    The fact that we are still arguing about this is mind-numbing to me.


    Please explain something to me....

    I'm a man who happens to like other men. I am also in a long-term, monogamous, loving, and very committed relationship with the man I love and who loves me very much. Do you know what that has to do with you, or ANYONE else? That's right, NOTHING. I don't know you and I don't care to know you. What you do and who you love is your own business. If you like one race over another, I don't care. If you like one hair color over another, woopeedoo! If you like short people rather than tall, I don't care either! In fact, I don't care about ANYTHING or ANYONE that you love or are attracted to so long as it doesn't negatively affect anyone else.

    You live your life, I'll live mine. I couldn't care less about who you or anyone else is attracted to, nor would I ever try to prevent you from enjoying it/each other. So why do you and so many other people care so much about MY life? Last time I checked, the relationship I'm in only has two people in it, and neither one of them are you. So why do you feel the need to have a say in MY consensual relationship with my partner?
  21. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Pravda??? Russia??? That's not another part of the world. That's another world! You might as well quote Al Jazeera!
  22. rodereve Registered Member

    OK, I'll clarify my argument for those of you who'd like to respond.

    Here is my thesis: "But gay and lesbians are a gateway and stepping stone towards other groups which I do not accept."

    Meaning to say that laws accepting gays and lesbians cases, will be a gateway to accepting transsexual cases.

    Here is my argument: "We shouldn't be promoting these identity disorders, because they pervert humanity and are essentially abnormal mental behavior."

    Now, onto responding to Balerion.

    Yes, I meant "conservatives" as in the Republican party (the term is almost interchangeable, here in Canada the Conservative party IS the homologue to the GOP). The Republican politicians, representing the Republican party, do base many of their stances from a biblical view. My point is that this is alienating the rest of the republicans that aren't christian. So instead of approaching things from a Christian Republican standpoint, they should approach things as from a Republican standpoint instead. In other words, they represent the Republican party not the christian Republican party.

    Read explanation of thesis. And yes, some distorted form of homosexuality is a requirement of transsexualism, because homosexuality deals with sex and gender, what exactly are you if you are a transwoman? You're a man by sex, woman by gender.

    Not every statement has to contain a point (this is evident from the majority of your posts). But it may lead up to a point. So quoting a few statements and then asking "Whats your point?" is really hilarious and ignorant on your part.

    If a person cannot help how they identify racially (asian man feels like black man) or how they identify taxonomically (human feels like monkey), is reassignment surgery a CORRECTION of the original mistake? This is not a correction, because it is an error to identify the original status as a mistake. Because there is nothing wrong with being an asian man. Or being a black man. But there is something inherently wrong with being an asian man trying to become a black man. Refer to the end of my first post to why you should care or be concerned.

    You can call it a strawman, I don't consider it such because its a slippery slope. Lets use the homosexuality movement as an example (although I am not opposed it, its a good example of how one landmark case FOR something leads to another). Proponents wanted gays and lesbians to be treated as normal human beings. (But people argued that they'll receive the same rights as people in such areas as this this and this, no no, that is a stawman). Gays and lesbians wanted equal rights in terms of marriage (But people argued that they'll receive the same rights as parents such as this, this and this, no no, that is a strawman). Now just last week, supreme court ruled that a lesbian non-biological mother has the same rights as the biological mother of the children. So yes, in line with being progressive and moving forward, one will lead to another until conservatives draw a line with liberals.

    Would transsexual people want their children as transsexuals, would homosexual people want their children as homosexuals, would heterosexual people want their children as heterosexual? The argument is not so far reaching.

    I'm not apologizing for anything. Eg. You're a white male human. To think you're a female, is as perverse as thinking you're asian, is as perverse as thinking you're any other animal other than a human being.

    You don't treat a disorder by entertaining it. You don't tell schizophrenics that their imaginary friends are real. So by the same token that you shouldn't give surgical procedures to people with gender identity disorder, you don't give gifts to the imaginary friends of schizophrenia patients. This is promoting it.

    Because the female bear isn't taping an artificial penis to herself to act like a male bear..... I can't tell what animals are thinking, but they're definitely not as screwed up as humans. No, my line of reasoning doesn't follow that surgery of any kind is a perversion of humanity. Repairing limbs, transplanting vital organs, this is an advocation of humanity and life. Amputating your arms and replacing it with legs instead, that would be a perversion of humanity. We can disagree on what would constitutes a perversion of humanity, but take your 4 legged humans with you.

    As for your last argument, it really is a strawman. I said that gender identity disorder was an abnormal mental behavior, which it is. But I didn't say that everything abnormal or non-natural was bad. I didn't say people with IQ of 200, or people with synesthesia, or that medicine or television was bad (lol!). But you should not promote abnormal mental behavior like gender identity disorder

    And lastly, this actually has everything to do with what is natural and what isn't. When I say perversion of humanity, I'd like to think that there is some natural sanctity to humanity, that is why we must respect each others rights as human beings. All our inherent rights and laws are made with regards to "humans" (All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.). Once you start to defile what is human, then you start to break that respect and sanctity.

    Just because people have an opposing belief, doesn't make them bigots. What constitutes a bigot is someone who has complete disregard for other's beliefs and vehemently opposes anything other than his own opinion; and it is apparent throughout the forum quarrels that you are the epitome of such.
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2013
  23. arauca Banned Banned


    Let's take this way for every action there is a reaction . I lived for many years I did not react . I know Homos existed they exist and thy will exist . The gay movement did not exist , thy lived their own life and that was it , no one got exited. Now they ( homos ) want to create a new society , so the question is what fore , is the present society not good for you ?
    The way that I look at it . The open gay movement is it is to say to young generation , go on , thy other form to get sexual pleasure , beside male an female , "there is no thing wrong "The next step , perhaps will be It is ok tho be a pedophile, and then the next perhaps is bestiality. We can keep on going exploring .
    There is nothing wrong with man having Platonic love for other man, keep it to your selves

Share This Page