Author Topic: Gay Marriage  (Read 32429 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Unimaginative Username

  • Guest
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #105 on: September 26, 2012, 06:56:43 PM »
^^ That was pretty funny.

I'm an atheistic asexual male and I approve of gay marrige, because it lowers birth rate, which is a good thing.
I like good things. Like cake.

Gay marriage does not lower the birth rate because the people who are getting gay marriages most likely were not having heterosexual relationships beforehand :P

Haha! I didn't even catch that. :p The previous remark was more a stance on homosexuality in general, not whether they should engage in an outdated institution built around insecurity.

I tried reading it all but got tired halfway down the the page so I missed that.

Judedeath

  • ~Insert Japanese things here~
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 2241
  • Gender: Male
  • JOHN-PEE-AIR!
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Old River was as dead as a doornail, this must be distinctly understood or nothing wonderful can come of the story I am about to relate.

Tumbles

  • 海が私の心です。
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3956
  • Gender: Male
  • I am who I am, but not yet.
    • Big Palooka
  • Current Mood: cheerful cheerful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #107 on: September 26, 2012, 07:47:34 PM »
Far out, are people still against gay marriage?  ??? I'm as straight as it gets, but if I were gay, I'd sure as hell want the same rights as everyone else, even if I didn't plan on using them. I'm so tired of people treating homosexuals as lesser citizens simply because of their sexual preference.

Gay marriage is gonna happen. Let's just let it happen and move on.

Spoiler: show


                                         

~

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #108 on: September 26, 2012, 08:10:20 PM »
Far out, are people still against gay marriage?  ??? I'm as straight as it gets, but if I were gay, I'd sure as hell want the same rights as everyone else, even if I didn't plan on using them. I'm so tired of people treating homosexuals as lesser citizens simply because of their sexual preference.

Gay marriage is gonna happen. Let's just let it happen and move on.

Sure, sure, there's a lot of "lesser" citizen stuff that drives opposition to gay marriage, I guess. But the real question is (and I've raised this concern with Jude) why in the world would men fight for the rights to join an all-woman's club? Wait, did the meaning come across in that? Let me re-state in more applicable terms:

Why does an institution for straight coupling have even the slightest importance to gay couples? How does this affect their love, their actions, or their beliefs, and how does marriage in any way equate to equal rights? I mean, some people are born stunted in height, but that doesn't mean they should demand that all rides made for people "this tall" should be changed to accommodate them, does it? Mentally handicapped people are people too, but that doesn't mean they should all be accepted into Yale even though they were born without the ability to get the necessary grades.

I'm all cool with gayness and what-not, but gay marriage seems like such a useless fight. It's like a black man trying to earn the right to join the KKK just so no one will think less of him for being black. I don't care if these cats get accepted into the dog show or not, to be honest.

Now I'm going to kiss my happily unmarried partner, if you don't mind

Tumbles

  • 海が私の心です。
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3956
  • Gender: Male
  • I am who I am, but not yet.
    • Big Palooka
  • Current Mood: cheerful cheerful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #109 on: September 26, 2012, 08:27:53 PM »
You make excellent points, and it sounds like we're on the same side, but you're clearly anti-marriage to an extent, while to some people, marriage is an important act that both defines and secures their relationship.

Being against it for religious reasons annoys me as well. It's like hating anchovies, but being offended if anyone else has anchovies, since you don't like them. Ok, that's terrible, but forgive me, it's early.

Spoiler: show


                                         

~

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #110 on: September 26, 2012, 08:34:14 PM »
Even if I were pro-marriage, I would have this opinion. The only difference would be that if I were married with this opinion you would all think I am discriminating rather than just being logical.

Tumbles

  • 海が私の心です。
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3956
  • Gender: Male
  • I am who I am, but not yet.
    • Big Palooka
  • Current Mood: cheerful cheerful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #111 on: September 26, 2012, 08:42:59 PM »
Hmm, yeah, maybe. O_O

I just think it would be kind of a slap in the face to the gay community if we gave them some gay version of marriage instead of just pure marriage.

I mean, what's the downside to that, really? If they want it, just give it to them. :vikonsmile:

Spoiler: show


                                         

~

Mela

  • 憂鬱
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 2255
  • Current Mood: tired tired
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #112 on: September 26, 2012, 08:47:23 PM »
Don't married couples get (governmental) benefits? Might be a reason for some people (including gay couples) to get married.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 09:09:48 PM by меlа »

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #113 on: September 26, 2012, 08:56:43 PM »
I just think it would be kind of a slap in the face to the gay community if we gave them some gay version of marriage instead of just pure marriage.

I mean, what's the downside to that, really? If they want it, just give it to them. :vikonsmile:

a.) More of a slap than not giving it to them at all?

b.) Who gives it? Why do we need the government or a religion (that likely hates what you're doing) to approve? Legal work and ceremony are poor substitutions for true love and a committed life. They're symbolic at best.

c.) The downside to changing the rules of marriage would be, well, exactly what we see here. People feeling like something they believe in has been cheapened. Nonsensical, certainly, but a downside.

Don't get married couples (governmental) benefits? Might be reason for some people (including gay couples) to get married.

Yes, they do, but I find this the worst reasoning of all. If your argument for getting married is to save some tax dollars, you might want to reconsider what marriage means to you to begin with. Maybe get a picket sign that says "Can we have a bit more money, please?" instead of "Equal rights!"

The fact is, everything that makes marriage important in a spiritual/human sense is possible without governmental consent. Everything that makes marriage important in a mundane sense isn't necessary to lead a happy life with a partner. You guys want it, go ahead, but I think it's a lot like fighting for candy. :p

Ferdk

  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 766
  • Gender: Male
  • Nothing is true, everything is permitted
    • My YouTube channel
  • Current Mood: thoughtful thoughtful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #114 on: September 26, 2012, 09:10:02 PM »
Eh, I don't know. Its not just getting a tax cut, its getting every right considered by the government to a legal couple. Those are not simply tax cuts, there's many things a couple inherit when they're legally married.
I don't think ANY gay person is asking religions to accept gay marriage, they only want the government to give them their right like they're supposed to do (unless you live in an assbackwards theocracy).

The point about giving them a "gay marriage" instead of a "marriage" is for the same reason noone would like it to be called an "interracial marriage". It doesn't need a distinction, what you are defining is the legal procedure between these 2 persons and that should be equal to everybody, therefore there's no need to rename it, because it is the same thing. Does an homosexual pay gay taxes? has gay healthcare? signs gay contracts? its ridiculous.

One thing I'll never understand (though I'm open to hear opinions) is how anyone could be against gay marriage for non-religious reasons. I just can't think of any, really.
My YouTube channel (VG Covers and stuff):
http://www.youtube.com/ferdk16

Mela

  • 憂鬱
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 2255
  • Current Mood: tired tired
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #115 on: September 26, 2012, 09:26:18 PM »
Since when have all people gotten married to someone just out of love? Many times, marriage just seems like some sort of business or/and something that's expected. Well, that's what I have witnessed, as sad as this may sound. I, for one, don't care that much about marriage (I am not against it, though and can see why people do it (for several/different reasons)). I would only do that if it was necessary or if my partner would feel safer doing that (in case anything happens to them).

Speaking of gay marriage, it's a difficult topic. If it's just a spiritual thing about spending your entire with someone, I don't really see why they should need anyone's approval. You can have your own ceremony and be happy with just that.
Most of the time it's just the status marriage brings with itself. If you get married to someone, you've officially married into a family. Some people like the thought of that, which is not a strong point to get married, though. 
I guess it's about security e.g. you've been with this person for a long time and all of sudden, something happens to them and they end up in a hospital and you wouldn't be allowed to visit them, because you are not family/married. Would you be able to cover for them with your health insurance if they don't have one? Nope, as you are not married/family.
Another example: What if you are gay and fall in love with a foreigner and the only chance to stay together (in the same country, mind you) is to get married? Well, wouldn't work in this case, since gay marriage isn't legal.
 
(Sorry if my reasoning sounds stupid. It's late and I am sick.)
« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 09:36:17 PM by меlа »

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #116 on: September 26, 2012, 09:32:08 PM »
One thing I'll never understand (though I'm open to hear opinions) is how anyone could be against gay marriage for non-religious reasons. I just can't think of any, really.


Haha! I guess I'm the only one who doesn't need a religious reason to see that it's a silly idea.

Those above examples are great, and I think Jude has fought me with them before (the best examples are when people are hospitalized and only immediate family can see them; that doesn't include gay partners unless they're married). I combat that by stating the issue you're against is in the exact wrong place. Government and hospital policies are making these legal issues, not marriage.

Marriage wasn't founded on ideas of government rights and taxes and hospital visits. Should this be fixed? Yes. Maybe change the system so that people can have a roster of important individuals that are allowed to see them in the hospital during emergencies (which would subsequently help a lot of other negative aspects of the hospital system). Why these things were tied in with marital communion to begin with blows my mind, but if they were injected before they can be taken out. Seems like a much worthier fight, and we can all be on the same side.

The point about giving them a "gay marriage" instead of a "marriage" is for the same reason noone would like it to be called an "interracial marriage". It doesn't need a distinction, what you are defining is the legal procedure between these 2 persons and that should be equal to everybody, therefore there's no need to rename it, because it is the same thing. Does an homosexual pay gay taxes? has gay healthcare? signs gay contracts? its ridiculous.

I find this a somewhat cheap (not to say you're cheap, but the idea is fairly simple to use on the surface) defense.

In what world did healthcare ever get considered based on sexuality? No this one. So why the "gay healthcare" remark? In what world did marriage get considered on sexuality? This one. So why not gay marriage? I mean, we literally refer to it as that already, why are we condemning future use of it?

Remember when basketball was only for men, then women started getting teams, and that's called women's basketball? Maybe not the prettiest compromise, but it'd be silly to complain about it. So, today, we call them both basketball all of the time. But if we need to be specific, we call one men's basketball and the other women's basketball. Just like if you need to describe two people who are dating, and they happen to be of different ethnicities, you'd call that couple an interracial couple to clarify. It's just an adjective, not harmful nor incorrect.



Tumbles

  • 海が私の心です。
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3956
  • Gender: Male
  • I am who I am, but not yet.
    • Big Palooka
  • Current Mood: cheerful cheerful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #117 on: September 26, 2012, 09:42:31 PM »
But Lannie I don't understand!  :o If you've got no problems with gay people, then why not just let them get married? Creating a whole different type of marriage seems like an unnecessary and offensive step. If an interracial couple got married, it would just be a regular marriage, even if you'd call them interracial. Why not just do the same with gay people?

Sure, marriage in general has its problems, but stopping gay people getting married won't fix that. They're two very different things. ???

Spoiler: show


                                         

~

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #118 on: September 26, 2012, 10:11:33 PM »
If an interracial couple got married, it would just be a regular marriage, even if you'd call them interracial. Why not just do the same with gay people?

I'll say this: If the definition was any man or woman may marry any other man or woman, regardless of gender, so long as they are of the same ethnicity (which is getting harder and harder to pinpoint these days; it'd bring about whole new issues of what "white" means :p), I'd be like, "Welp, sucks for interracial couples. This thing was only designed for same-ethnicity folks."

The idea is that I'm allowed to make a club that you're not allowed in.

You have equal rights, so you can also make a club that I'm not allowed in.

But, that doesn't mean I can get into your club or you can get into mine. And if we let each other in, the club wouldn't be the same club anymore. They'd need redefined entirely.

A real issue in all of this is that gay marriage brings to the surface very unfair governmental benefits that are inherently not a definition of marriage. But rather than fix the government or start a new club, we're trying to redefine marriage.

This follows the same logic as if we all knew congress got paid too much, but rather than reroute some of that money to where it'd be useful, we all tried to join congress.

« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 10:16:17 PM by Merlandese »

Ferdk

  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 766
  • Gender: Male
  • Nothing is true, everything is permitted
    • My YouTube channel
  • Current Mood: thoughtful thoughtful
Re: Gay Marriage
« Reply #119 on: September 26, 2012, 10:36:33 PM »
Yep you're (I think) referring to the religious definition of marriage. That's not what the government took, though. Sure as a religion you can make a club with your own rules, but then government took the term and made it stand for rights that are supposedly of every citizen, like a proper government would do. These are not the same, even if they use the same word. A legal marriage is not getting approved by God to be together, man and woman. That definition is worthless in legal terms because it is discriminatory and at least in the US there's a separation of church and state, so they don't need (nor shouldn't) to conform to the religious definition of marriage (which isn't even the origin of the binding union between individuals anyway, like many other things they just borrowed from someone else).

As for sexuality being considered for marriage, then why is it that I never heard it called "straight/heterosexual marriage"? seems like it should've been there if sexuality was such a crucial part of the contract.

What you describe as the worthier fight is just submitting to bigotry. You can do 1 little thing that solves all these issues (just give'em marriage and call it a day) OR you can individually start changing everything so you can circumvent the trouble of doing that one effortless thing. And the reason to go through all this trouble? Still waiting to hear a good one :P

As for the hospital example, why it needs to be tied to marriage, I guess its because they have these "relative only" policies, and your legal couple should obviously be considered part of your family. But since some people can't get legally recognized as such, they are out of the deal. And that's just one thing, if we do the list you suggest we solve one issue. We have to ask every individual to go through the trouble of circumventing the system to get theirs rights just to solve ONE issue. Then the same for the next issue, and the next, and the next. Marriage as a legal contract is pretty useful because instead of going through all this trouble (as a regular couple as well) you just establish this person is your legal partner and automatically inherits all these rights. This is plain convenience, and common sense.
And it doesn't make sense that sexuality should leave you outside of this because .................. , that's the blank I still want someone to fill with a good reason.

XD

That being said this is just my opinion and I respect yours and everyone's.
My YouTube channel (VG Covers and stuff):
http://www.youtube.com/ferdk16