Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Gay Marriage

  1. #1 Gay Marriage 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    32
    In my government, I'm fighting a losing battle. We were put into groups of three. Tehere are two intrest groups and a cabinate member. Ech group is given a issue to write about. We got gay marriage. One girl is bisexual. She's the nuetral Cabinate member. The other girl is pro8 gay marriage. I had to get the hard one. I have to convince my teacher that my argument is better than that of my peers. He's a democrat. I've cosen to use legal arguments. The fact that If the bill were passed, it would be a pro choice marriage bill. This would open doors to "polygamy is legal because of mutual concent of all parties" and "It's o.k. to marry someone, no matter what the age differance if all parties have reache a mutual agreement." That's my best argument. Also, if this were true, many laws concerning marriage rights such as ownership, custody, insurance, and divorce procedings would need modern interpitations. Do you think this argument will fly?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Gay Marriage 
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Quote Originally Posted by gravitywell
    In my government, I'm fighting a losing battle. We were put into groups of three. Tehere are two intrest groups and a cabinate member. Ech group is given a issue to write about. We got gay marriage. One girl is bisexual. She's the nuetral Cabinate member. The other girl is pro8 gay marriage. I had to get the hard one. I have to convince my teacher that my argument is better than that of my peers. He's a democrat. I've cosen to use legal arguments. The fact that If the bill were passed, it would be a pro choice marriage bill. This would open doors to "polygamy is legal because of mutual concent of all parties" and "It's o.k. to marry someone, no matter what the age differance if all parties have reache a mutual agreement." That's my best argument. Also, if this were true, many laws concerning marriage rights such as ownership, custody, insurance, and divorce procedings would need modern interpitations. Do you think this argument will fly?
    Yes. Heres my philosiphy on the matter. Ignorance is bliss.


    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    You could make the *domino* argument in opposing legalized *same sex marriage*, but may polygamy is a stretch or at least a good way down the list. Many people live together for a number of reasons. Older sisters/brothers, Mom and an older kid, even some good friends all of which are likely non-sexual. They could legitimately say they deserve the rights of any couple.

    IMO, your best shot is at the rights any two people have, who live together for whatever reason, already have. That being a *Contract* in law, which provides most anything a marriage contract can. Its hard to argue giving legitimacy, to any form of deviance, but certainly this is a result of same sex marriage. So in maintaining a sense of being politically correct...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Shaderwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    OPSEC, baby. Sorry.
    Posts
    425
    I agree.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    32
    Thank you for this incite. It will be useful.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 gay marriage 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6
    the government should just stop fighting gay marriage and stop being homophobic
    infoaddict.com is THE source for strange, weird, or just plain wacky web news.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: gay marriage 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeDev
    the government should just stop fighting gay marriage and stop being homophobic
    If government is 'of the people' and those people have certain beliefs in what constitutes a spiritual union of the biblical (or other text) man/woman purpose in life, why should government object to their beliefs (those people).

    By their own definition (gay/lesbian) acceptance of these life styles are for fundamentally abnormalities in genetic or psychological defects, where further extremes in sexual desires are called perversion, many of which are illegal. IMO; Any extreme to acceptable behavior, should be clear under law, where with out such limits, behavior to personal fantasy would soon become the norm and the end of acceptable social decentcy or respect...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    53
    Plus the main point of sex and marriage is to reproduce and expand the human population. Though of course there are many benifits of each, other than reproduction and not every man and women reproduce, it was still the basic principle upon which marriage was based was it not?

    But I see being homosexual as a mental inbalence or the result of an emotional scar early on in life (rape, rejection, social inbalence, want of a place to fit in.) And correct me if I am wrong but isn't STDs more common in same sex relations? Not to mention the unhealthy effects these intiment relations can have. I have read of extreme cases resulting in death so, you could say that overall it just seems to have more downfalls then postive effects on socity in general. To sacrifice the health and safetly of many for the happiness of a few, I just find no logic in that.

    Then again I could be totaly wrong.

    I would actually think yours would be easier. There is alot of information you could gather that would support your case. Now the legal side of it. Don't know.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum- Flavius Vegetius Renatus

    Try to sound smart, but end up looking stupid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Re: Gay Marriage 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by gravitywell
    In my government, I'm fighting a losing battle. We were put into groups of three. Tehere are two intrest groups and a cabinate member. Ech group is given a issue to write about. We got gay marriage. One girl is bisexual. She's the nuetral Cabinate member. The other girl is pro8 gay marriage. I had to get the hard one. I have to convince my teacher that my argument is better than that of my peers. He's a democrat. I've cosen to use legal arguments. The fact that If the bill were passed, it would be a pro choice marriage bill. This would open doors to "polygamy is legal because of mutual concent of all parties" and "It's o.k. to marry someone, no matter what the age differance if all parties have reache a mutual agreement." That's my best argument. Also, if this were true, many laws concerning marriage rights such as ownership, custody, insurance, and divorce procedings would need modern interpitations. Do you think this argument will fly?
    My opinion is that either gay marraige and/or polygamy are not Constitutional and do not deserve a legal status

    Gay marraige does not have a Mary in its relationship. So Mary is left out and discriminated against. Ha ha. This is 'unConstitutional.

    Polygamy is a product of the OT that says, 'be fruitful and multiply'.
    So this really discriminates against the females by using them as 'farm animals(?) In other words, as breeding stock only.

    So Islam and polygamy create inequality by having one male fathering many children. Besides, these population bombs are destructive to GODS Nature as it tries to maintain a state of equality between all the species. That is why it uses the 'food chain' in the oceans and seas where around 80% of the newborns are consumed as food.
    On land, the carnivores will consume their offspring (post abortion) on occasion with the males as the main offenders.
    So if Nature allows 'post abortion', then the women should also have this option of aborting their fetuses if they choose.

    So, I endorse family planning where the couples are not required to produce large families that are detrimental to their pocket books. This way, they can then buy a house or a car to increase the buyer numbers for a thriving economy.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Junior Zitterbewegung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Demon X01
    Plus the main point of sex and marriage is to reproduce and expand the human population. Though of course there are many benifits of each, other than reproduction and not every man and women reproduce, it was still the basic principle upon which marriage was based was it not?
    Is that soooooo???? Did you take a look at the statistics recently?? And what about the children of extramarital affairs?? Or people who do not see the point in getting married just because they spawned offspring??

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon X01
    But I see being homosexual as a mental inbalence or the result of an emotional scar early on in life (rape, rejection, social inbalence, want of a place to fit in.) And correct me if I am wrong but isn't STDs more common in same sex relations? Not to mention the unhealthy effects these intiment relations can have. I have read of extreme cases resulting in death so, you could say that overall it just seems to have more downfalls then postive effects on socity in general. To sacrifice the health and safetly of many for the happiness of a few, I just find no logic in that
    How the friggin' fuck does gay marriage damage your personal health and safety? If you mean HIV then it is clearly your own friggin fault if you catch it, plain and simple. If you screw around without protection, well then you deserve to die out of sheer stupidity. And about the ".....extreme cases resulting in death..."-bit: yes, it is called domestic violence and happens in mixed-sex relationships at least as often as in homosexual couples.
    I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    84
    Eh, this thread isn't too old. Might as well point out some crap:

    But I see being homosexual as a mental inbalence or the result of an emotional scar early on in life
    1) Frued would disagree, as would Yung, Alder, as would Masters and Johnson. 2) I'm openly pansexual and I have never been raped, rejected, or anything of the sort. Tell me, doc, why am I gay?! In fact, in the Homosexual Matrix, the author talks about how homosexuality may be caused from the mother being under stress while pregnant. Of course, a few psychologists disagree with this claim.

    And correct me if I am wrong but isn't STDs more common in same sex relations?
    You are wrong. STDs are more common in relationships who don't use a condom. As Zitterbewegung said above, stupidity is the main cause of STDs.

    I have read of extreme cases resulting in death so,
    BDSM does not count as an extreme case. Unless are you getting screwed in the rump by a horse (someone DID die like this) then you're not going to die.

    To sacrifice the health and safetly of many for the happiness of a few, I just find no logic in that
    Do you want to kill all the people with STDs? There goes 1/10 of the hetrosexual people and 1/15 of the homosexual people!

    You might be homosexual and not even know it! After all, we know only a little about ourselves.

    Plus the main point of sex and marriage is to reproduce and expand the human population
    Ok, so the point of humans is to make more humans? Can you say circular logic? The point of sex and marriage is to, and this may sound crazy, LOVE.

    Then again I could be totaly wrong.
    Agreed.

    Just knit picking, going along now...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 Re: gay marriage 
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    If government is 'of the people' and those people have certain beliefs in what constitutes a spiritual union of the biblical (or other text) man/woman purpose in life, why should government object to their beliefs (those people).

    By their own definition (gay/lesbian) acceptance of these life styles are for fundamentally abnormalities in genetic or psychological defects, where further extremes in sexual desires are called perversion, many of which are illegal. IMO; Any extreme to acceptable behavior, should be clear under law, where with out such limits, behavior to personal fantasy would soon become the norm and the end of acceptable social decentcy or respect...
    Argumentum ad populum, just because a majority believes something does not make it right. A government has the responsibility to protect the interest of the minority in certain instances. After all, a large majority of people in Nazi Germany were infavour of antisemetic legislation, but that doesn't justify the acts of the government.

    If one accepts a secular government to protect the right of all people to believe what they want, then you have to accept that all decisions made by the government should involve secular reasoning. A majority of Christians would believe it is wrong to be a Hindu, but I'm pretty sure their would be public outrage if someone proposed making non-christian faiths illegal.

    Edit: Also, I don't know where you get this "by their own definition" bullshit about homosexuality being a defect. Where do you draw the line at what behavior is disfunction and what genes are defects, different genes are not by definition defective genes any attempt to label them as such is based in bias.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    IFT; Gay/Lesbian advocates for decades have said sexual orientation was from some thing (genetic/medically) uncontrollable and not from physiological or nurturing (environmental) reason. I take their word for this, since the many I have known, indicate no desire to be in that life style. My own opinion, would not classify any such behavior as a defect or in fact do I generally agree with the advocates. Perversions/Fantasy are part of sex itself, not necessarily a sign of any abnormality, at least in men. Its also IMO progressive, as one fantasy turns into another and so on.

    No, government reflects the people, the cultures and traditions of their culture. The US Constitution, our foundation for government, leaves LAW (opposed to government), to the various States, with regards to many things including religion and/or moral issues. You will find ALL States, have or had sodomy, adultery and other moral laws written into their laws.
    Society itself has changed, probably as more and more families have experienced the perceived problem. Even where moral legislation remains (and there are many) less and less to none are enforced. Reverse 'Argumentum ad populum' if you prefer...

    The US Government indicates 'Marriage is between a man and a woman' for clarification of recognition under law only. (benefits/inheritance etc).
    You will see today in the US and now Canada, where social changes are demanded by the populace, over bigamy in various cults/sects. Neither government can respond, at least under law, unless other law is broken. In the Texas FLDS case, State Government, broke many laws of procedure and Canada is searching for abuse victims in a like case. I mention these cases, because as in G/L relationships, under certain conditions (methods in practice), there is nothing illegal being done whether a religious or conscience preference is involved...IMO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14 Okay 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    53
    Damn guys seems while I was gone eveyone got into an uproar. Holy Shit.

    Listen guys I did not mean to offend anyone. I mean hell it wasn't like I was providing just my view of things'if you don't like the way I see things, oh well. I didn't post to win a popularity contest. The extreme I was refering to, well I will just say it me and my girlfriend were considering different forms of sex. She was afriad and wanted to consult someone so we went and talked to a docter. The doctor replied that there was a low possablity that anal sex could result in a torn anal cavatiy and could in extrem cases cause death from interinal bleeding. That was the extrem cases I was refering to and though males and females have these relations. I just assume that two homosexual males would have these relations more often therefore increasing the chance of death. Hey I am only 18 so what do I know right? Listen I never said that my view was right or inncorrect, as you have clearly pointed out I said I could totally be inncorrect. That was just my view on things.

    As for it being a mental inbalence, again just my view on things, could be totally inncorrect but that just the way I see it.

    Call me narrow minded, incopnetent, stupid, or whatever. I have never claimed to be smart as you can see from my other posts and my spelling.

    And please also note I am a very cold hearted mean person, just the way I am. Maybe one day I will grow more of a heart or maybe I won't, who knows, hell the only reason I am nice to my girlfriend is because of sex other than that nothin really, well sometimes she can be pretty cool to be around and then sometimes not so much.

    Hell maybe one day I will get an STD. Wouldn't that be ironic.

    Also don't know what BDSM is, so cant really say if anything above that I posted you have already shutdown. But see all the info I gained from this unqiue converserion. You always learn something new.

    By the way never take anything I say to heart I am still learning how to deal with people, only been doing it for 18 years still got a lot to learn.

    Demon Out.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum- Flavius Vegetius Renatus

    Try to sound smart, but end up looking stupid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Junior Zitterbewegung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    217
    Also don't know what BDSM is
    www.google.com ???????????????????????????????????????

    Ample sites to look at

    The doctor replied that there was a low possablity that anal sex could result in a torn anal cavatiy and could in extrem cases cause death from interinal bleeding. That was the extrem cases I was refering to and though males and females have these relations.
    This also can happen during vaginal intercourse, ya know. One of my former girlfriends is a MD daeling with heterosexual HIV cases from time to time (to be more specific: twice or three times a week in a major hospital in a city of 1.500.000) and she's really annoyed with the reactions she gets, like: "I don't do drugs and I am not gay, how can this happen??? Oh my god, how do I tell my wife that I screwed a hooker without condoms/this little kid in Thailand?!! The problem really is the irresponsible stupid shitheads that transmit those STDs to their unsuspecting wifes they are soooooo happily married to for 20umpteen years.
    +
    I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    53
    Thanks for the info wasn't thinking about google sorry.

    This also can happen during vaginal intercourse, ya know. One of my former girlfriends is a MD daeling with heterosexual HIV cases from time to time (to be more specific: twice or three times a week in a major hospital in a city of 1.500.000) and she's really annoyed with the reactions she gets, like: "I don't do drugs and I am not gay, how can this happen??? Oh my god, how do I tell my wife that I screwed a hooker without condoms/this little kid in Thailand?!! The problem really is the irresponsible stupid shitheads that transmit those STDs to their unsuspecting wifes they are soooooo happily married to for 20umpteen years.
    +
    Thanks, didn't know that, that sort of scares me a little I did not know that you could do the same damage during vaginal intercourse.

    Learn something new everyday, see.

    Thanks, Demon
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum- Flavius Vegetius Renatus

    Try to sound smart, but end up looking stupid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Junior Zitterbewegung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    217
    Thanks, didn't know that, that sort of scares me a little I did not know that you could do the same damage during vaginal intercourse. Shocked

    YOU HAVE TO BE SHITTING!!?? RIGHT!!??

    Sorry for all the caps but I assume you ARE joking when you're telling that you did not know that all kinds of exchange of contaminated bodily fluids (i.e. semen, blood, vaginal secretion etc.) can cause an HIV transmission.

    I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Zitterbewegung
    Thanks, didn't know that, that sort of scares me a little I did not know that you could do the same damage during vaginal intercourse. Shocked

    YOU HAVE TO BE SHITTING!!?? RIGHT!!??

    Sorry for all the caps but I assume you ARE joking when you're telling that you did not know that all kinds of exchange of contaminated bodily fluids (i.e. semen, blood, vaginal secretion etc.) can cause an HIV transmission.

    He is talking about vaginal and anal tearing, not transmission of STDs, at least I think he is lol.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    I think it's an example of 'tyranny of the majority'. It may well be a democratic decision that limits marriage to hetero couples in most countries, but that doesnt make it right. When majorities can do injustice to minorities then democracy has gone too far. It shouldn't depend on the opinion of the people who gets fundamental rights and freedoms and who has to do without them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •