Why Do People Care About Gay Marriage?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
861

[quote]orion wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
what happens if I have facts to show you that homosexual relationships are dangerous and hence should not be allowed to marry? Are you just as willing to give up the ghost?

Are we talking facts that can be proven or wild assumptions based on anecdotes and fear-mongering?

He can prove that homosexuals have a higher rate of STD´s.

What he cannot prove is that it would get any more dangerous when they married and how that risk makes it his business to prevent it.

[/quote]

Exactly. Homosexuals probably are more promiscuous and probably do have more STDs. In fact, I think that’s pretty well established. But that says nothing about nothing. If anything, extending legal benefits to their unions would probably decrease promiscuity or do nothing at all. I’ve love to hear the argument how it would increase promiscuity and make things worse.

862

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Exactly. Homosexuals probably are more promiscuous and probably do have more STDs. In fact, I think that’s pretty well established. But that says nothing about nothing.

If anything, extending legal benefits to their unions would probably decrease promiscuity or do nothing at all. I’ve love to hear the argument how it would increase promiscuity and make things worse.[/quote]

If you let gays marry, planes will fall out of the sky and all electronic equipment will fail. We’ll be back in the dark ages because of ONE computer prog-- I mean ONE gay guy.

864

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

Since I’m the person who has pushed you more than anyone to actually put up some facts to back up your outlandish opinions I understand that you wouldn’t want those facts to be for me…ha ha…kids like you get mad easy, it’s called immaturity…you have it but hopefully will outgrow it.

I’m not mad at all.

Mick28 wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

what happens if I have facts to show you that homosexual relationships are dangerous and hence should not be allowed to marry? Are you just as willing to give up the ghost?

By all means, please present them. Why haven’t you already? I’m not holding my breath.

I’ve been reading an old thread on this very site about Gay Marriage. The level of debate on that thread was just amazing. And yes there were a mountain of facts presented by one poster which pointed to homosexual relationships not being as healthy and happy as your good Professors would have you believe.

What’s the point? I don’t doubt that they face their fair share of problems. It’s tough to be gay in this country. That has no bearing, not one bit, zero on whether legal benefits should be extended to relationships that DO exist and will continue to exist regardless.

Plus, their relationships may well be more succesful if they can make more of formal, recongized commitment to each other. Please explain how having problems means they are ‘dangerous’ to use your words, to themselves, to others, and how extending legal benefits such as hospital visitation would increase this ‘danger.’

This has all been discussed before. Neither then (and I seriously doubt it will be any different this time around) was any showing made that gay relationships are actually ‘dangerous’ or that extending legal benefits would make them MORE ‘dangerous,’ to themselves or anyone else.

You can stop right there. Are you forgetting something? You first must prove that Polygamists should be denied the right to marry because of their “abusive” relationships. It’s now time for you to put up or shut up…oh wait…this is the Internet we know you’ll never shut up…okay put up anyway.

I’m waiting junior.
[/quote]

Oh, I’ll get around to it. In my sweet time. For all your complaints, you’ve done nothing in this thread but make liberal use of the word bigot and complain about other people not producing ‘evidence’ all the while not producing a single shred of proof to back up ANY of your assertions. So, I’m not exactly in a hurry.

865

I’m getting into this discussion a little late, but as a gay man with a partner I would be happy to answer any questions people may have.

I don’t know yet if we would be married if given the opportunity, but I do feel strongly that we should have the right to make that choice.

It is good to see the social climate in our country evolving to reflect what is already taken for granted as fundamental equal rights in several other civilized countries.

866

[quote]forlife wrote:
I’m getting into this discussion a little late, but as a gay man with a partner I would be happy to answer any questions people may have.

I don’t know yet if we would be married if given the opportunity, but I do feel strongly that we should have the right to make that choice.

It is good to see the social climate in our country evolving to reflect what is already taken for granted as fundamental equal rights in several other civilized countries.[/quote]

I would actually be interested in your thoughts on the slippery slope arguments that people make. That extending legal benefits to gay people paves the way to extending them to other arrangements such as polygamy. If you think it’s a legitimate argument.

Also what you think of those kinds of arrangements. The distinction you make between gay relationships and those arrangements. And whether benefits SHOULD also be extended to them or whether they should NOT be in your opinion.

868

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
I would actually be interested in your thoughts on the slippery slope arguments that people make. That extending legal benefits to gay people paves the way to extending them to other arrangements such as polygamy. If you think it’s a legitimate argument.

Also what you think of those kinds of arrangements. The distinction you make between gay relationships and those arrangements. And whether benefits SHOULD also be extended to them or whether they should NOT be in your opinion.[/quote]

My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, as long as it involves consenting adults and there is no inherent harm in doing so.

That aside, I see a qualitative difference between gay relationships and polygamous relationships. Gay relationships are a reflection of the way a person is hard wired, while polygamous relationships are a reflection of social/religious beliefs. You can’t choose whether or not to be gay. Not that both aren’t potentially valid relationships, but I do see them as being fundamentally different.

869

[quote]forlife wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
I would actually be interested in your thoughts on the slippery slope arguments that people make. That extending legal benefits to gay people paves the way to extending them to other arrangements such as polygamy. If you think it’s a legitimate argument.

Also what you think of those kinds of arrangements. The distinction you make between gay relationships and those arrangements. And whether benefits SHOULD also be extended to them or whether they should NOT be in your opinion.

My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, as long as it involves consenting adults and there is no inherent harm in doing so.

That aside, I see a qualitative difference between gay relationships and polygamous relationships. Gay relationships are a reflection of the way a person is hard wired, while polygamous relationships are a reflection of social/religious beliefs. You can’t choose whether or not to be gay. Not that both aren’t potentially valid relationships, but I do see them as being fundamentally different.[/quote]

Thanks for that input.

870

[quote]forlife wrote:
Gay relationships are a reflection of the way a person is hard wired, while polygamous relationships are a reflection of social/religious beliefs.[/quote]

This is an interesting point. You’re implying that on some level, you always knew you were attracted to men?

871

[quote]Makavali wrote:
This is an interesting point. You’re implying that on some level, you always knew you were attracted to men?[/quote]

I believe that I’ve always been gay, and the experiences of my gay friends confirm that. Many of us tried for years to change our sexual orientation due to social/religious pressures, but were unable to do so. I think sexual orientation is hard wired (although where you are on the continuum varies from person to person).

872

[quote]forlife wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
I would actually be interested in your thoughts on the slippery slope arguments that people make. That extending legal benefits to gay people paves the way to extending them to other arrangements such as polygamy. If you think it’s a legitimate argument.

Also what you think of those kinds of arrangements. The distinction you make between gay relationships and those arrangements. And whether benefits SHOULD also be extended to them or whether they should NOT be in your opinion.

My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, as long as it involves consenting adults and there is no inherent harm in doing so.

That aside, I see a qualitative difference between gay relationships and polygamous relationships. Gay relationships are a reflection of the way a person is hard wired, while polygamous relationships are a reflection of social/religious beliefs. You can’t choose whether or not to be gay. Not that both aren’t potentially valid relationships, but I do see them as being fundamentally different.[/quote]

Whoa, trust me I am hard wired to be polygamous, and so is the human species as a whole.

And yes there is serious evidence to support this, like the difference in size between men and women and the size of the male testicles.

So it is more appropriate to say that monogamous relationship are a reflection of religious beliefs, for better or worse.

873

[quote]forlife wrote:
My personal opinion is that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, as long as it involves consenting adults and there is no inherent harm in doing so.quote]

I don’t want to sound rude or immature, but let’s be real about this…you’re only saying this because you’re gay. When you look at it from a biased perspective, you’re more likley to side with the argument that fits your own personal agenda…

and with that being said I have often found that gay males in paticular(gay males in which I myself am friends with) crave deeply to be accepted and treated like a regular person. However they don’t realize that they already are accepted and treated the same.

To that you will reply I am bombarded by homophobic insults, and therfore I am a minority. You may be a minority in the sense you are different from the “norm” of society but you need only take a look around at the users on this page, to quickly realize we are minorities ourselves, because we do things different than the average person.

With that being said, I don’t try to push my weightlifting techniques or ideals on other people in the gym, I simply worry about myself and keep steadfast on my goals. But when I am approached and questioned about my lifestyle habits I am more than willing to open-up without hesitation. That is how I feel that you should handle your beliefs…by not trying to press is on people in order to feel accepted…

874

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Gay people are stupid.

Why would you invite the government into your relationship? Heterosexual marriage is bad enough with government interference, why would you voluntarily invite that into what would otherwise be a normal relationship?

Have the ceremony, go do your gay thing and get on with your damn (gay) lives.

Idiots.[/quote]

I think having my union federally recognized would be beneficial in a lot of ways: reduced taxes, social security benefits, survivorship, hospital visitation rights, etc. My partner and I have done everything legally we can do to protect one another, but there is still a huge gap from our relationship and the rights that married couples enjoy.

875

[quote]orion wrote:
Whoa, trust me I am hard wired to be polygamous, and so is the human species as a whole.
[/quote]

Heh, let’s call it a qualitative vs. quantitative difference then. Gay marriage is about being with the right person, while polygamy is about being with the right number of people.

876

[quote]nickendres wrote:
you’re only saying this because you’re gay[/quote]

I’m not sure how you would know that. Just because it supports my “agenda” doesn’t mean it isn’t a sincere belief. Besides, a number of straight people in this thread have said the same thing.

I don’t try to push my sexuality on other people any more than I push my gym techniques. I do advocate having equal rights, which I see as a different issue.

877

[quote]forlife wrote:
orion wrote:
Whoa, trust me I am hard wired to be polygamous, and so is the human species as a whole.

Heh, let’s call it a qualitative vs. quantitative difference then. Gay marriage is about being with the right person, while polygamy is about being with the right number of people.

[/quote]

Now I am deeply offended ;-).

To imply that I go for quantity instead of quality is like arguing that you only crave the cock with consideration for the man that is attached to it.

Otherwise why would I care to marry several women?

878

[quote]orion wrote:
To imply that I go for quantity instead of quality is like arguing that you only crave the cock with consideration for the man that is attached to it.

Otherwise why would I care to marry several women?[/quote]

I didn’t say that polygamous relationships are lower quality than gay relationships. I said they are qualitatively different (i.e., that they are different in their essential characteristics).

Gay and heterosexual relationships are about being with the gender that you find most compatible.

Polygamous relationships are about the number of people that you are with, regardless of their gender.

I’m not saying one is any better or worse than the other, only that they are fundamentally different in nature.

879

touche’…alright, well what do you think made you gay? Different thinking pattern, additive in the food, just throwing out suggestion, I am genuinley interested on your belief.

880

So what happens to the “oh it’s unnatural” argument if being gay ends up being a genetically hardwired thing?