Same Sex Marriage

Answer

  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
While I generally agree that the government has no business in the affairs of consenting adults, there is a certain connection between society and the government that oversees it. Afterall, governments spring up so that the social order, whether you like that particular system or not, can survive and thrive. Therefore, I would say that the government has a vested interest in defining the basic institution of society, which is marriage.

What is marriage? Marriage is not about love. I'll be a hypocrite when I marry, but I know that this was not the original intention of the insitution. It's a myth propogated by Medieval French poets. It's bullshit. Marriage out of love for the other person, until very recent times, has been a rarity, for all levels of society. Marriage has always been about a couple different things:

-Politics.
-Children.

The political angle is simple. Marriage brings two families together. It provides you with In-Laws. It gives you more resources, more manpower, more everything. It increases your chances for survival, and it definitely increases the chances that your offspring will survive and reproduce themselves. This, of course, leads to children. Marriage removes competition for mates within the group. It formalizes sex, and it forces at least two people to care for resulting children. In polygamous societies it's more than two. Formalization of sex also acts as a check on population, since it becomes taboo to engage in sexual activities outside of the marital institution (this, of course, doesn't stop people from doing it completely).

As I said, marriage for love is a myth, and a destructive one at that. Why do I think the divorce rate is so high in America? Simple. People think marriage is about love. People think marriage is about love, and because of that they go in with high expectations of the other person. What happens when you go into a relationship with high expectations? You get disappointed. You realize this is not what you bargained for. You want out. Religious taboos aren't important anymore, so it's easy to divorce...

Bam. High divorce rate. Miserable children who grow up with single parents, or step parents. Miserable children who turn into miserable, apathetic adults who grew up with the parent they live with bad-mouthing the parents they don't live with on a regular basis. They become cyinical about marriage, about relationships... they meet someone they love, they decide to get married. The cycle begins again.

Why am I against gay marriage, or any other formalization of homosexual relationships? Is it because I hate gays? NO. It's because it reinforces the notion that marriage is about love. That is why gay marriage is destructive to the family.
 
It's sickening that straights decide whether or not gays are good enough to marry. Straights often also feel the need to 'weigh-in' on the subject, as a sort of entertainment and soapbox to righteouly declare their opinions on a deeply personal matter in someone elses life.
Interesting that Bible beatin conservatives support government regulation of love but regard Big Government as bad.
 
Genji said:
It's sickening that straights decide whether or not gays are good enough to marry. Straights often also feel the need to 'weigh-in' on the subject, as a sort of entertainment and soapbox to righteouly declare their opinions on a deeply personal matter in someone elses life.
Interesting that Bible beatin conservatives support government regulation of love but regard Big Government as bad.
Click to expand...
Marriage is not about love.
 
The new focus of marriage on romantic love rather than family, as I see it, is not a cause but a symptom of a general social devaluation of the family as the basic unit of society. It was bound to happen with the onset of radical individualism in Western civilization. Because individualism is so strongly associated with the West, I find it proper that same sex marriage as a symbol of the overriding importance of the romantic relationship should become not only politically but socially accepted, even embraced.
 
Jaster Mereel said:
Marriage is not about love.
Click to expand...
True, for some. But being denied a basic human right like marrying the adult of your choice is yet another glaring example of how the church controls not only the government but our personal lives in the USA, as religion controls personal life in Iran and Saudi Arabia as well.
 
gay marriage isn't about marriage or typically romance (though it can be). It's about equal rights for people who have different orientation than others. Not being able to marry discriminates against homosexuals in that they don't get equal rights as heterosexuals. It's not a marriage issue; it's a rights issue and that's why gay marriage is important. For transexuals as well.
 
falcon22 said:
gay marriage isn't about marriage or typically romance (though it can be). It's about equal rights for people who have different orientation than others. Not being able to marry discriminates against homosexuals in that they don't get equal rights as heterosexuals. It's not a marriage issue; it's a rights issue and that's why gay marriage is important. For transexuals as well.
Click to expand...
Very true. We're good enough to pay taxes but can't say "I Do." We have every right to be as miserable as everyone else in legal marriage.
It is inevitable though, even in Christian jihadist America. We will win.
 
Marriage was/is designed as a social and religious institution between two people of the opposite sex so as to sanctify the integrity of the family. Two people of the same sex cannot have children unless through adoption, and in my opinion, this would certainly lead to the child having an extremely deviant and confused view of society and reality and a very confused view of his or her place and role in life. In the extreme case, if this were the established norm in the world, then we would not be able to reproduce at all - period! Thus leading to an end of the human race - unless you artificially contrive of having an artificial sperm bank or egg bank, which then goes so far into hypothetical science fiction that you might as well call yourself a deviant nutcase - out-of-touch with normal human behavior, natural selection, and Nature's course.

Do what you want, and be who you are. But don't push the deviance onto others who try to be "normal" in this world. It's tough enough, without polluting society with these extreme deviant forms of behavior.
 
Jaster Mereel said:
Marriage brings two families together. It provides you with In-Laws. It gives you more resources, more manpower, more everything. It increases your chances for survival, and it definitely increases the chances that your offspring will survive and reproduce themselves. This, of course, leads to children. Marriage removes competition for mates within the group. It formalizes sex, and it forces at least two people to care for resulting children.

Why am I against gay marriage, or any other formalization of homosexual relationships? Is it because I hate gays? NO. It's because it reinforces the notion that marriage is about love. That is why gay marriage is destructive to the family.
Click to expand...
Another fellow who has never left the backwoods of West Virginia in his entire life speaks up. News flash from the big city (we invented cities ten thousand years ago, you should visit one some day): Gay couples bring two families together and have in-laws, at least outside West Virginia where they can be open about it. Gay couples form families that provide more resources, more manpower, more everything, at least outside West Virginia where they can be open about it. A stable family life increases the chances of survival of gay people, at least outside West Virginia where they won't be persecuted. A stable family life leads to gay people adopting some of the millions of children available or having their own by AI or the old-fashioned way with a caring friend. (Outside of West Virginia this is the 21st Century.) A stable family life that formalizes sex is something that one would expect most straight people to applaud for gay people, at least outside West Virginia where they can be open about it.

Marriage does not "force" straight people to care for their children, judging by today's newspaper. Considering that gay people (men anyway) are stereotyped as fussy, caring people who love to be nurses, hairdressers, teachers and cooks, who insist on good housekeeping and proper grooming and dressing, one would expect those who stereotype them to envision them as model parents. At least outside West Virginia where they can be open about it.
 
Just so long as nobody forces Father McGregor down at the local church to marry same sex couples, I'm fine with it. They can go and marry at a church which will accept them, which I imagine would be the majority of churches.
 
Its one thing being homosexual and another thing wanting the same rights as married couples, and literally getting married to each other. Is the 'enlightened' west losing its moral values, since many people in the west are losing interest in religion? Where does this stop what next? will incest, bestiality etc, etc, be allowed and morally accepted down the line? is this a dangerous line the west is taking to make it self come across as an open and tolerant society?

So whats your take on the issue, are you for or against?


(Please note, the new rules before you reply)

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showthread.php?t=129032
 
Muslim said:
Where does this stop what next? will incest, bestiality etc, etc, be allowed and morally accepted down the line?
Click to expand...
Why do you people insist on equating homosexuality with incest or bestiality? Homosexuality is natural for somewhere between five and ten percent of the human race. Incest is a psychological disorder generally caused by improper parenting. Bestiality is an act of frustration common in societies such as yours where so many men can never get laid.
Is this a dangerous line the west is taking to make it self come across as an open and tolerant society?
Click to expand...
It's part of being a tolerant society but there's nothing dangerous about tolerance toward harmless minorities.

If you expect us to be tolerant of something that has caused so much well documented death and destruction for so many centuries as Abrahamic religion, then our standards are so low that we can hardly reject anything else anyway.

Don't bring your intolerance to our countries please. Leave it at home.
 
If my thinking is clear. Didn't the idea of Marriage spring from religion? Wasn't the idea of a man and a women getting together a religious affair first and foremost? If that's the case, how can there be a thing called "same-sex marriage?"

If you want to have a same-sex partner with the same rights as a "normal" couple then that should be a civil act given but government. But to label it marriage, no. Gotta have another name for it.
 
Muslim said:
Its one thing being homosexual and another thing wanting the same rights as married couples, and literally getting married to each other. Is the 'enlightened' west losing its moral values, since many people in the west are losing interest in religion? Where does this stop what next? will incest, bestiality etc, etc, be allowed and morally accepted down the line? is this a dangerous line the west is taking to make it self come across as an open and tolerant society?

So whats your take on the issue, are you for or against?


(Please note, the new rules before you reply)

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showthread.php?t=129032
Click to expand...
Are two adults of the same sex in a relationship the same as a person that has sex with his child? With animals? How do you come to this wrong and unfair conclusion and what right do you have posing in discussions like this if you have such hatred for non breeders?
 
broadandbeaver said:
Didn't the idea of Marriage spring from religion? Wasn't the idea of a man and a women getting together a religious affair first and foremost? If that's the case, how can there be a thing called "same-sex marriage?"
Click to expand...
Nothing "sprang" from religion. All religions have ever done is institutionalize the prevailing attitudes about things people were already doing.

People kept slaves so the bible condones slavery.

People fight wars so priests bless soldiers and say that their god is on their side.

The 92% of the population who are heterosexual are uncomfortable with the other 8% so religious leaders condemn homosexuality.

In the 1960s the secular American culture succeeded in making tolerance a national issue so all the Christian churches suddenly found overwhelming evidence in the scriptures to support civil rights, after segregating their churches for hundreds of years.

Religions never take a strong stand on anything that is not already popular and they change with the wind.

Any religion that condones something as evil as war and condemns something as innocuous as gay love ain't worth a hamster turd. To cite it as an authority is ludicrous.

Marriage is simply a ceremonious formalization of monogamy. There's no strong reason to suspect that monogamy was invented during the era of religion, whereas there is reason to suspect that it predates it by eons. Human children require many more years of rearing and much more complex rearing than any other animal, mandating the continuous attention of both parents if the species is to survive, much less the overworked mom. Other highly intelligent social species in which both parents share childrearing responsibilities are also monogamous for life, such as wolves and many parrots. It's likely that our paleolithic ancestors were monogamous long before they had language and, therefore, religion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top