Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Same-Sex Marriage

Posted Oct 18, '11 at 9:34pm

zakyman

zakyman

1,682 posts

but why don't they just try something new and see how it goes?


While I fully support you logic, it is highly improbable that you will be able to convince about 1/3 of the nation that you are right and that LGBTs should be allowed to have a "marriage"
 

Posted Oct 18, '11 at 9:41pm

wipe42

wipe42

840 posts

While I fully support you logic, it is highly improbable that you will be able to convince about 1/3 of the nation that you are right and that LGBTs should be allowed to have a "marriage"


I think I see what your saying now. It's unfortunate but you're right.
 

Posted Oct 18, '11 at 9:45pm

Bladerunner679

Bladerunner679

2,534 posts

I myself wouldn't have a problem with it, even though I am a christian. if you wan't to call it marriage, that's also fine. I have two gay neighbors, and they seem just like normal families to me. however, this isn't the same in the rest of my family. it's kinda divided down the middle in my family. half are right-wing nuts, and the other half is the really to the left liberals we all know and love.

from what I have seen, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality whatsoever, but people oppose what they hate, hate what they fear, and fear what they don't understand. by this logic, since most of us aren't gay, chances are we will as a whole oppose it. individually, however, is another matter.

the only thing that I don't like is when they flaunt it flagrantly (yes, that actually happens).

 

Posted Oct 18, '11 at 9:51pm

dair5

dair5

3,475 posts

the only thing that I don't like is when they flaunt it flagrantly (yes, that actually happens).


I don't feel that is nessicary. If thats who you are thats fine. But you don't need to exclaim it, its kindof annoying. The same goes for those who exclaim that they are heterosexual.

"NO HOMO!"

Before anything was even thought of. Its a litle annoying.
 

Posted Oct 18, '11 at 9:58pm

wipe42

wipe42

840 posts

I don't feel that is nessicary. If thats who you are thats fine. But you don't need to exclaim it, its kindof annoying. The same goes for those who exclaim that they are heterosexual.


It is very annoying even when it's a guy, actually especially when its a guy. It's not a necessary, pointless to say, and it just makes you actually look gay.
 

Posted Oct 19, '11 at 12:05am

Xzeno

Xzeno

2,354 posts

so if I commit some faux pas here
A few. Don't infantilize us. I don't mean the calling us immature thing. That's just basic manners. I mean the manner in which you explain LGBT. It comes off as though you have a misplaced sense of superiority. And yes, we know what social conservatives are, and we understand how religion affects the issue. This isn't some grand untapped playing field. In fact, people agreeing on gay marriage has nothing to do with your past community. It does not indicate maturity or intellect. People on Internet forums are socially liberal. The fact that they are on the right side doesn't mean they're on the right side for the right reasons.

Now you see the risk of calling us immature, don't you? It gives us an indignant sense of superiority.

As in, we basically all agree with each other so no exciting debates really happen.
Well, you won't get debates here. Not a one. AG is not a debate forum. The WERP section neither endorses nor facilitates debate these days. Polemic arguments, yes. Okay, the point's been almost made. Onto the topic:

Gay marriage is not a gay rights issue. It has nothing to do with marriage rights for homosexuals vs. heterosexuals. The law does not discriminate. Sexuality has no effect on one's ability to be married in a legal sense.

Rather, it's a feminist issue. "But Xzeno, you say EVERYTHING is a feminist issue." That's true, rhetorical device, and it's true in this case.

The law discriminates against homosexual couples. There's a difference. A straight man's right to marry a man is no more protected than a gay man's. The problem with this is it creates a gender inequality. Men are being denied a right afforded to women. Women are being denied a right given to men. It should be clear that that is unjust. "Separate but equal" isn't equal, even in rights.

Questions:
1. Yes. Because gender equality.
2. Yes. Because democracy.
3. Yes. Because justice.
4. Yes. Because it will prevent future issues a little.
5. Yes. All legal actions endanger society in some way.
 

Posted Oct 19, '11 at 12:27am

Kasic

Kasic

5,740 posts

1. Do you believe same-sex couples should be allowed to marry? Why or why not?


Yes they should be able to, they are harming no one by doing this and marriage is a way for them to publicly show that they are devoted to one another.

2. Do you believe Christianity should influence our country's laws when regarding same-sex marriage? Why or why not?


No. Religion should play no role at all in our government. It's even in the constitution. Laws should be passed for the betterment of society, not to uphold the beliefs of a particular religion.

3. Should the federal government repeal the Defense of Marriage Act? Why or why not?

Yes, it should. It is simply a law which is just the beliefs of a particular religion and thus should be considered invalid. There is absolutely no reason to not allow same sex marriage.

4. Should the federal government enact a law that forces the legality of same-sex marriages? Why or why not?


I think that it would certainly speed up the process of having it legal. I doubt such a law would be passed at this time though.

5. Do you believe allowing same-sex couples to marry will somehow endanger society in some way? Why or why not?


I fail to see how it could harm it and see several ways it could help it.

1) Same sex couples cannot reproduce unless using other means, thus adoption of orphaned children will rise.

2) Eventually it will become familiar to everyone and there will be one less thing that we argue about and have people inflamed about.

3) The happiness of those couples who would then be allowed to marry would increase.

Rather, it's a feminist issue.


Sigh, no, it's not. If it were, then male/male couples would be allowed to marry. Since this is not the case, it is not a feminist issue but a homosexual/heterosexual inequality.
 

Posted Oct 19, '11 at 12:39am

Xzeno

Xzeno

2,354 posts

Sigh, no, it's not. If it were, then male/male couples would be allowed to marry. Since this is not the case, it is not a feminist issue but a homosexual/heterosexual inequality.
Learn what feminism is. And learn to read.
 

Posted Oct 19, '11 at 12:42am

Xzeno

Xzeno

2,354 posts

I'm sorry. That was a mite more curt than intended. I mean to say: Feminism is about gender equality. The fact that women have a right that men do not is just as anti-feminist as men having a right women do not.

It is not a heterosexual/homosexual rights issue. Heterosexuals and homosexuals have the same marriage rights provided that they are the same gender.

 

Posted Oct 19, '11 at 1:35am

Kasic

Kasic

5,740 posts

Heterosexuals and homosexuals have the same marriage rights provided that they are the same gender.


Uh...No. If they are the same gender as each other, they do not have the same marriage rights.

Male + Female = Marriage

Male + Male = No Marriage

Female + Female = No Marriage.

Both Males and Females can get married, so it's not a gender issue. However when two of EITHER try, they cannot, making it a sexuality issue.

Definition of Feminism is...the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men And since in this case they are equal to that of men...

I suppose you could argue this definition... an organized movementfor the attainment of such rights for women. But then it would "just" be homosexual women we are talking about, not Same-sex marriage in general.
 
Reply to Same-Sex Marriage

You must be logged in to post a reply!