Why Are So Many People Debating About Gay Marriages? You've All Got It All Wrong!

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

If this thread became a debate then NewSoul WON!!!!

While she was patiently giving her arguments and portraying herself like nothing less than an open book and willing to talk about anything related to the debate impatient people barked at her, name called her and therefore lost the debate.

No one forced NewSoul to come into a Gay Marriage discussion - - with gay intolerance.

Sugar coating Bigotry - - - does not change anything. It is still Bigotry.

Denying Equal Rights - - is still Denying Equal Rights.

I've been fighting this fight for 20 years. Patience? You've got to be kidding.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by Annee
LEGAL MARRIAGE. It is a government contract - - that basically is what it is. It is a contract of protection and affords certain rights/privileges granted by the government.

No one - - straight or gay is required to get married. It is a choice. Except gays do not have that choice. And there is no reasonable reason for them not to have that choice.

LEGAL MARRIAGE has nothing to do with any belief - non-belief - - - it is a contract. That is all it is.

If its about Gays - - then its about Equal Rights - - not about what Marriage is.

Most of the rights afforded by the government that you speak of thanks to this contract are not what I would consider human rights anyhow

Irrelevant. What does that have to do with gays separately from heteros. Everyone should have the same rights.

There is a middleman here and it's the church

Show me any mention of god in the Government Contract Marriage License. We are a secular government. Therefore any government contract is secular.

Gays should open up private wedding churches or centers and lobby for it to be state/federally recognized

That is not Equality of what is currently in place. Separate but Equal is never OK.

But instead trying to change religion is a futile path

We are a secular government. Any government contract is secular.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IanPaul

Ok, that is a good "cop out" as you put it. Let me rephrase...

Annee, I have quite a serious question for you, and I would like your honest answer.
If a man were to fall in love with an 8 year old girl, or even a 16 year old girl, and the girl shared the same love back with the man, would it be ok for them to get married? or even to have a physical relationship?

And I am saying this as if the couple in question are in sane mind, and completely in love with eachother in all ways that two people can be.

I gave you a legitimate answer.

You changed your wording - - - didn't you say Father/Daughter?

The "rule of law" is the girl should reach the age of her menstrual cycle.

In most states in the United States - - I think the legal age for marriage with parent consent is 12 (I'd have to look that up again to be positive).

In some states the legal age is 16 without parent consent.

In countries that have arranged marriages and marry off young girls - - the husband is supposed to wait until she is of age (menstrual cycle) before intercourse.

The idealistic situation for a young girl to marry - - would be into a family unit with older women who treat her kindly and help her learn to take care of a household and be a wife.

There have been older men who have married young girls just to get them out of an abusive household.

So -- the answer is - - totally depends on the circumstances.

I did originally say father/daughter, and that's why I said I wanted to rephrase.

I still haven't gotten a yes or a no specifically... Let's assume it is your granddaughter that wanted to marry some stranger that is 67 years old. Do you believe that if they were in love, they should be allowed to marry/get physical?

Using your statement, "It is not human equal - - as in who you love - - who you are emotionally and physically attracted to"...
So a 67 year old man wants to marry your granddaughter, do you BELIEVE that they have the right to make that decision? Regardless of laws, they WANT to get married, and they will fight the government to override the status quo and allow them to get married... Do you believe that they should be allowed to because it is their "human-equal" right, because they are in love?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Gay marriage is not a right, and neither is a straight marriage....period!
How can a man-made institution be a human right?
That's like saying owning an Xbox is a human right

It should be up to the church to decide, and different churches can have different opinions.
And hey guess what, gay churches can open up too, private ones that is.

It's not the role of govt. to tell you who you can't marry
But wait... don't agree with me just yet, because it's also not the role of govt. to tell you who YOU CAN marry either.

So the entire debate becomes a non-issue, and so much energy is being wasted on it

I completely agree with you.

Marriage is nothing more than a religious ceremony. The ONLY reason why this is an issue is because of taxes.

Fact is, as a married person you get specific tax breaks that a single person would not get. As a married person, you can file as "Head of Household" as a single person, you can not do that. So as a gay couple, you are forced to file as a single person.

The real problem here is the fact that Government is involved in marriage at all. It is a religious ceremony and has nothing to do with Government, at least it used to have nothing to do with Government until IRS came along.

The argument against gay marriage is usually moral and it's usually because of what the Bible says. That's okay. As long as the Bible thumpers are demanding that all people live by their personal favorite book, I think the Bible thumpers can step up to the plate and walk the talk too. I bet the Bible and it's values will be out of the Laws quickly this way.

If GAY people can't MARRY,
Straight people are not allowed to DIVORCE.







*

Originally posted by IanPaul

I still haven't gotten a yes or a no specifically...

Right at the bottom of my last post: "So -- the answer is - - totally depends on the circumstances."

Let's assume it is your granddaughter that wanted to marry some stranger that is 67 years old. Do you believe that if they were in love, they should be allowed to marry/get physical?

Yes. Everyone must walk their own path.

So a 67 year old man wants to marry your granddaughter, do you BELIEVE that they have the right to make that decision? Regardless of laws, they WANT to get married, and they will fight the government to override the status quo and allow them to get married... Do you believe that they should be allowed to because it is their "human-equal" right, because they are in love?

Your comparison is not relevant.

Heteros do not have the right to break the law and marry a minor.

Equality - - is Heteros - same as Gays. If its legal for Heteros - - then it should be legal for Gays.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by IanPaul

Ok, that is a good "cop out" as you put it. Let me rephrase...

Annee, I have quite a serious question for you, and I would like your honest answer.
If a man were to fall in love with an 8 year old girl, or even a 16 year old girl, and the girl shared the same love back with the man, would it be ok for them to get married? or even to have a physical relationship?

And I am saying this as if the couple in question are in sane mind, and completely in love with eachother in all ways that two people can be.

Here's a couple of questions for you, IanPaul. Honest answers, please.

If an atheist man falls in love with an atheist woman, would it be ok for them to get married and have a physical relationship?

If an infertile man falls in love with a quadriplegic female, would it be ok for them to get married and have a physical relationship?

Of course, all parties in question are of sane mind and completely in love with each other in all ways that two people can be.

1. Yes I believe it is OK.
2. Yes I believe it is OK.

My questions may have seemed callous and presumptuous, but what I am getting at is that individuals' beliefs are relative to the individual. Annee felt that because another poster had an alternative belief than hers, that she could assume she is a biggot, or hateful. When NewSoul was expressing her alternative viewpoint she was met with assumptive replies rather than a constructive discussion. Regardless of the situation someone will have a point where their belief acceptance may reach a breaking point... By asking about something that maybe won't sit well with her beliefs, I can illustrate how one's personal opinion/belief can be called bigotted or hateful, when in fact it is simply their belief.

Hope I wrote that clear enough.

Originally posted by IanPaul

Using your statement, "It is not human equal - - as in who you love - - who you are emotionally and physically attracted to"...
So a 67 year old man wants to marry your granddaughter, do you BELIEVE that they have the right to make that decision? Regardless of laws, they WANT to get married, and they will fight the government to override the status quo and allow them to get married... Do you believe that they should be allowed to because it is their "human-equal" right, because they are in love?

12-year-olds know a lot about crushes - but not a lot about adult love. Also, it's not really fair to make a 12-year-old sign and agree to a legal contract they probably don't understand.

Couldn't we keep this debate about consenting adults - not children, or dogs, or toasters? Do I think two 12-year-old gay boys should be allowed to marry? No. Do I think two 30-year-old gay men should be allowed to marry? Absolutely.

I feel that homosexuality is against the natural laws of the universe. Many gay people have pointed out to me that in the animal kingdom, homosexuality is quite normal. That is a weak argument, animals also eat their offspring and often engage in cannibalism. By their logic, am I to also accept fallicide and cannibalism in humans? I mean if animals do it, it must be fine for us.

reply to post by newsoul


Well I for one am glad that your "feelings" do not actually influence the natural laws of the universe. The argument that the animal kingdom also contains homosexuality is not a "weak argument", it is hitting the nail on the head. One cannot claim that a behavior is "unnatural" and then find it all over the place in nature. I also must admire your skills at deflection, because then when someone answers the unnatural argument you jump the rails and point out a number of other natural behaviors found in the animal kingdom and equate them to Homosexuality! "A" and"B" are found in nature and I don't like them so "C" is just as bad!

Homosexuality is NOT a "Lifestyle".
Ignorance IS a lifestyle.
Why?
Because you can educate yourself.
Unless you're just plain stupid, which is usually coupled with arrogance.
FYI.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IanPaul

I still haven't gotten a yes or a no specifically...

Right at the bottom of my last post: "So -- the answer is - - totally depends on the circumstances."

Let's assume it is your granddaughter that wanted to marry some stranger that is 67 years old. Do you believe that if they were in love, they should be allowed to marry/get physical?

Yes. Everyone must walk their own path.

So a 67 year old man wants to marry your granddaughter, do you BELIEVE that they have the right to make that decision? Regardless of laws, they WANT to get married, and they will fight the government to override the status quo and allow them to get married... Do you believe that they should be allowed to because it is their "human-equal" right, because they are in love?

Your comparison is not relevant.

Heteros do not have the right to break the law and marry a minor.

Equality - - is Heteros - same as Gays. If its legal for Heteros - - then it should be legal for Gays.

edit on 4-4-2012 by Annee because: damn F key keeps sticking.

Well technically it is illegal for gay marriage, not in all states, but it is illegal... The point is they are fighting for a change in the law...

So again, the 67 year old and your granddaughter will fight the government to recognize that their "illegal" love is the same as any other relationship and that they deserve the same rights....

I feel I'm beating a dead horse..

I see your point 100% about gay marriage, and I don't believe that you are crazy for believing that way, although I don't agree with your belief, I don't view you as any less of a person, or anything negative... However when one is so passionate about a subject, there is practically nothing that could be said to change one's belief. Just as you are firmly set in your beliefs, others are set in theirs, and it's not always out of hate, or biggotry, it is simply their beliefs.

Is there anything that is a legal act, that you don't believe should be?

Originally posted by MrWendal

The real problem here is the fact that Government is involved in marriage at all. It is a religious ceremony and has nothing to do with Government, at least it used to have nothing to do with Government until IRS came along.

Marriage has always been about a contract. Only it used to be the families that determined the contract.

Licensing came about to create a Legal way of doing something Illegal. There were certain cultural rules - - the license provided a way to skip the rules.

When the Catholic church found they could make money issuing Marriage Licenses - - they entered the Marriage License business.

Marriage has never been about religion - - - its always been about a contract. The fact people as a whole were religious - - doesn't make Marriage religious - - Marriage is a contract.

I don't support the root of the word Marriage - - enough to claim it religious.

All modern words come from somewhere in the past where religion was the prevalent as government.

Originally posted by IanPaul


My questions may have seemed callous and presumptuous, but what I am getting at is that individuals' beliefs are relative to the individual. Annee felt that because another poster had an alternative belief than hers, that she could assume she is a biggot, or hateful. When NewSoul was expressing her alternative viewpoint she was met with assumptive replies rather than a constructive discussion. Regardless of the situation someone will have a point where their belief acceptance may reach a breaking point... By asking about something that maybe won't sit well with her beliefs, I can illustrate how one's personal opinion/belief can be called bigotted or hateful, when in fact it is simply their belief.

Hope I wrote that clear enough.

But it is a very different situation when someone may be against a child getting into something they don't really understand, as opposed to someone who just thinks gays don't have the right to be married, or someone who wants to teach their children to be intolerant of gays.

Do you see the difference? You would be surprised at how tolerant and unprejudiced children are naturally. They are taught to be prejudiced. And that is what Annee is against.

Originally posted by IanPaul


Well technically it is illegal for gay marriage, not in all states, but it is illegal... The point is they are fighting for a change in the law...

Equal - - as in same as Hetero.

You presented a scenario that would have been illegal for Heteros.

Did you know the real reason for the US government marriage license was to prevent inter-racial marriage?

Laws get changed when they are wrong.

Originally posted by IanPaul

I see your point 100% about gay marriage, and I don't believe that you are crazy for believing that way, although I don't agree with your belief, . .

My belief? Equal Rights is a belief?

Anyone of legal age should have the right to marry who they love.

Why do you think you have the right to deny them?

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by IanPaul

Using your statement, "It is not human equal - - as in who you love - - who you are emotionally and physically attracted to"...
So a 67 year old man wants to marry your granddaughter, do you BELIEVE that they have the right to make that decision? Regardless of laws, they WANT to get married, and they will fight the government to override the status quo and allow them to get married... Do you believe that they should be allowed to because it is their "human-equal" right, because they are in love?

12-year-olds know a lot about crushes - but not a lot about adult love. Also, it's not really fair to make a 12-year-old sign and agree to a legal contract they probably don't understand.

Couldn't we keep this debate about consenting adults - not children, or dogs, or toasters? Do I think two 12-year-old gay boys should be allowed to marry? No. Do I think two 30-year-old gay men should be allowed to marry? Absolutely.

Again, I'm using extremes to make a point... Would it be ok for someone to assume you are a biggot because you don't believe two 12-year-old gay boys should be allowed to marry?

It is relative to each individual. As to the staying on topic, I agree that it should be up to the church to decide, and different churches can have different opinions. It shouldn't be up to the government to say who can marry, and I believe gay people should have all the same rights me and my soon to be wife have...

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Do you see the difference? You would be surprised at how tolerant and unprejudiced children are naturally. They are taught to be prejudiced. And that is what Annee is against.

Yes. We had a gay roommate.

When my granddaughter was 9 - - she asked: "Does gay mean boys like boys?" I said: "Yes".

She responded: "Oh - OK" - - then ran outside to play.

I'm sure she's scared for life.

Originally posted by IanPaul

Again, I'm using extremes to make a point... Would it be ok for someone to assume you are a biggot because you don't believe two 12-year-old gay boys should be allowed to marry?

When you ask these questions - - you need to first insert Hetero instead of Gay and see if it makes any sense to you.

As in: "Would it be ok for someone to assume you are a biggot because you don't believe two 12-year-old hetero boys should be allowed to marry?"

Originally posted by Star128
Homosexuality is NOT a "Lifestyle".
Ignorance IS a lifestyle.
Why?
Because you can educate yourself.
Unless you're just plain stupid, which is usually coupled with arrogance.
FYI.

True - - "Lifestyle" is not an appropriate word to use when discussing Gays. I've let that one slide.

Gays are not a GROUP THINK. They have One thing in common - - attraction to same gender. That's it.

Lifestyle is a choice. Both Heteros and Gays - - choose how they want to live their lives.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by IanPaul


My questions may have seemed callous and presumptuous, but what I am getting at is that individuals' beliefs are relative to the individual. Annee felt that because another poster had an alternative belief than hers, that she could assume she is a biggot, or hateful. When NewSoul was expressing her alternative viewpoint she was met with assumptive replies rather than a constructive discussion. Regardless of the situation someone will have a point where their belief acceptance may reach a breaking point... By asking about something that maybe won't sit well with her beliefs, I can illustrate how one's personal opinion/belief can be called bigotted or hateful, when in fact it is simply their belief.

Hope I wrote that clear enough.

But it is a very different situation when someone may be against a child getting into something they don't really understand, as opposed to someone who just thinks gays don't have the right to be married, or someone who wants to teach their children to be intolerant of gays.

Do you see the difference? You would be surprised at how tolerant and unprejudiced children are naturally. They are taught to be prejudiced. And that is what Annee is against.

And that's what I said that I see her point 100%... I want tolerance as well, especially for alternative views. That's what makes us all unique. Someone can have a belief without being hateful or ill-minded and that is what is not being recognized. My issue originally is with the unacceptance of everyones beliefs. I accept yours, Annee's, and NewSoul's, and everyone's on here. I may not agree with everyone's belief but I accept that that is who they are, and will share my opinion, as well as listen to theirs.

On a side/similar note: I remember when I was younger my parents didn't want me watching certain shows that displayed strong sexual scenes or foul language, even though they knew I would eventually see it or hear it, they wanted to keep innocence in my life. If someone doesn't want their children witnessing gay people kissing or strong language, it is entirely up to the parent to make that decision. Now if the parent is telling the kids, "you see those 2 men over there? They are evil devils and you need to avoid them like the plague!", that is hateful and biggoted. There is a clear difference between being a biggot and having an opinion.