RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage?

RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/11/2010 1:43:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly Wait until she gets a wee bit frustrated or snarky, then phrase it simply: "Is that PMS?" Woman love that. LMAO my hubby did that last month, both my strapping boys looked at me and said, "oh he didnt did he? " and both locked themselves away in their rooms. it may be too late for my darling hubby, but my boys know better

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/11/2010 4:20:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly Wait until she gets a wee bit frustrated or snarky, then phrase it simply: "Is that PMS?" Woman love that. LMAO my hubby did that last month, both my strapping boys looked at me and said, "oh he didnt did he? " and both locked themselves away in their rooms. it may be too late for my darling hubby, but my boys know better snickers Valyraen is smart enough not to ask. I just know when he thinks I'm on my period cause chocolate starts to magically appear in the house...

Lucylastic -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/11/2010 6:22:52 PM)
Hubby knows he can buy me off with a mars bar for small faux pas like that :) hes a good man[;)]

GotSteel -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 7:29:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Brainwashing takes more forms than just religious. And, frankly, quite a few posters who will argue for religion are here arguing for the rights of gays getting married. Both those statements are completely true and neither one refutes mine. Carmeldelight is a perfect example of exactly what I'm talking about.

subrob1967 -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 11:34:12 AM)
Why do you assume that everyone who is against it, fears it? There are many reasons one might oppose it.

AsmodaisSin -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 11:35:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 Why do you assume that everyone who is against it, fears it? There are many reasons one might oppose it. i was wondering the exact same thing. -Smiles.-

popeye1250 -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 11:59:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 Lady, I cannot believe that you are for real, and again, from NYC, not that there are not racists and homophobes living there, but one usually associates at least a modium of sophistication and intelligence in the Big Apple. But perhaps you just relocated there from Planet Extremeism. Sexy Red, "sophistication and and intelligence?" In NYC? lol Why, because there's "museums" there? "Hey! I'm fuckin' WALKIN' HEE-ah!"

philosophy -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 12:00:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 Why do you assume that everyone who is against it, fears it? There are many reasons one might oppose it. i was wondering the exact same thing. -Smiles.- ....ok, want to lay some of those reasons out for us?

AsmodaisSin -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 12:58:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 Why do you assume that everyone who is against it, fears it? There are many reasons one might oppose it. i was wondering the exact same thing. -Smiles.- ....ok, want to lay some of those reasons out for us? While i am personally on the fence about gay marriage, i do try and listen to both sides rationally. Try. i am not without fault. One of the reasons i was given is that homosexuals have the same rights that straight people do, and therefore gay marriage is, in fact, discriminatory against straights. Let me see if i can explain this as it was explain it to me. Gays have exactly the same amount of opportunity that a straight person has to marry a person of the opposite sex as straight people do of marrying someone of the opposite sex. Straights also do not have the opportunity equally as gays do. There is also the argument against all marriage. As far as the religious standpoint is concerned? The church, especially the Catholic Church, has a responsibility to its beliefs and to its congregation to stay strong on opposing gay marriage. If the church began accepting homosexuality as a whole, what else would it back pedal on as far as traditional beliefs? Now, i am not Catholic, but i do understand why they do what they do. That isn't to say that engaging in illegal, despicable, horrible, unmentionable behavior is acceptable at all. That is something that needs to be looked at and fixed. As a conservative in a lifestyle which generally requires a more liberal view on things, i find myself struggling some times to make sense of it all. Personally, i do not support gay marriage, but i do support gay civil unions. Marriage, in my eyes, has a connotation of religious belief, and that requires that the government step in and tell the church what it can or can't do. Separation of church and state anyone? Perhaps changing the terminology in legal terms to unions/civil unions would be more acceptable, and formal ceremony on the basis of religion would continue to be marriage. As it's been said to me on many occasions, changing the definition of marriage is a very dangerous thing. What else can we redefine? Your bed is no longer a bed. It's a box of shit? That's no longer a dog in your lap. It's a cunt. That kind of thing. (i used an extreme example, i know).

lusciouslips19 -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 1:01:57 PM)
Why shouldnt the gays be a miserable as everybody else?[:D] I think not all who oppose gay marriage oppose it due to religious reasons. I would assume there is some self interest on a business/money aspect. Thats alot more people for corporations to cover for medical insurance? Just a thought.

Kirata -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 1:20:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy want to lay some of those reasons out for us? Leaving aside folks who jerk off to Leviticus, the reason I've heard most often is simply akin to the same reason we use the words heterosexual and homosexual, namely, because they mean different things. These people see no problem with gay unions being legally recognized and afforded the same rights under the law as marriage. They just regard "marriage" as the union of a man and a woman, and dismiss the idea of the gay community claiming it. From their point of view, it's as illogical and bizarre as if gays were insisting on being called "heterosexuals". K.

kdsub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 2:16:20 PM)
Here in Missouri they are against both...and I think you will find that attitude in many other states. Prejudice plain and simple. You know as well as I it has nothing to do with the meaning of a wrod. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 2:46:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You know as well as I it has nothing to do with the meaning of a wrod. You are welcome to project whatever kind of nonsense you want onto whatever I or anyone else may say, but "you know as well as I" that you don't read minds, and that the twisted attitudes people may have in whatever shithole you live in do not define the thinking of everyone else in the world. K.

philosophy -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 4:26:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin One of the reasons i was given is that homosexuals have the same rights that straight people do, and therefore gay marriage is, in fact, discriminatory against straights. Let me see if i can explain this as it was explain it to me. Gays have exactly the same amount of opportunity that a straight person has to marry a person of the opposite sex as straight people do of marrying someone of the opposite sex. Straights also do not have the opportunity equally as gays do. ...oh come on. Seriously? Let's turn that around. i assume you're straight, so imagine if the roles were reversed. If gay marriage was the norm and this debate was whether or not straight people should be allowed to be married, would you accept for one nanosecond the argument that to allow two straight people to get married was unfair on the basis that they were already allowed a gay marriage? Seriously, that's one of the most pathetic arguments i've ever heard.

AsmodaisSin -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 4:29:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin One of the reasons i was given is that homosexuals have the same rights that straight people do, and therefore gay marriage is, in fact, discriminatory against straights. Let me see if i can explain this as it was explain it to me. Gays have exactly the same amount of opportunity that a straight person has to marry a person of the opposite sex as straight people do of marrying someone of the opposite sex. Straights also do not have the opportunity equally as gays do. ...oh come on. Seriously? Let's turn that around. i assume you're straight, so imagine if the roles were reversed. If gay marriage was the norm and this debate was whether or not straight people should be allowed to be married, would you accept for one nanosecond the argument that to allow two straight people to get married was unfair on the basis that they were already allowed a gay marriage? Seriously, that's one of the most pathetic arguments i've ever heard. As i stated, it was explained to me, so i might not have explained it as well as i could have due to memory complications. Logically speaking, if it were turned around, i am sure i would have a problem with it, however; i AM straight, and i am not affected by it. Of course, if i were to fight for every cause that may or may not affect me in the long run, i would never get anything done. As far as i am concerned, civil unions are acceptable. That being said, i do not see any reason whatsoever to force the church to accept homosexuals within their congregation.

tazzygirl -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 4:49:17 PM)
I have heard this argument before, on these boards somewhere. To be honest, i didnt buy into it then, and i dont now. when gays have the same right o marry someone of the same sex as straights have of marrying the opposite sex, then we can call it equal. At this point, they are being denied the same right a straight person enjoys... the ability to marry someone they choose/love/desire/hate/ect... any reason why you may decide to marry anyone.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 9:29:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin While i am personally on the fence about gay marriage, i do try and listen to both sides rationally. Try. i am not without fault. One of the reasons i was given is that homosexuals have the same rights that straight people do, and therefore gay marriage is, in fact, discriminatory against straights. Let me see if i can explain this as it was explain it to me. Gays have exactly the same amount of opportunity that a straight person has to marry a person of the opposite sex as straight people do of marrying someone of the opposite sex. Straights also do not have the opportunity equally as gays do. Honestly, I don't think the problem is that you have memory complications and didn't explain it correctly. I think it is more that seeing in black and white in front of you shows the silliness of it. quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin There is also the argument against all marriage. So that argument is that NO ONE should be permitted to marry at all? Where exactly is the sense in that argument? What happens to all the people who already ARE married? Do they get "grandfathered" and still be considered married, or are they suddenly just room mates? quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin As far as the religious standpoint is concerned? The church, especially the Catholic Church, has a responsibility to its beliefs and to its congregation to stay strong on opposing gay marriage. If the church began accepting homosexuality as a whole, what else would it back pedal on as far as traditional beliefs? This is an age old argument, but there's one big problem here. No one is saying that the church is being forced to "accept" homosexuality. quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin As a conservative in a lifestyle which generally requires a more liberal view on things, i find myself struggling some times to make sense of it all. Personally, i do not support gay marriage, but i do support gay civil unions. Marriage, in my eyes, has a connotation of religious belief, and that requires that the government step in and tell the church what it can or can't do. Separation of church and state anyone? Again, the problem here is that marriage is a LEGAL union, not a religious one. A couple who gets married in a religious ceremony but never gets the license from the municipality they are married in are not legally married. You do realize that there are a great number of heterosexual couples who are not married in a religious ceremony. They are married by the town mayor, a judge, a justice of the piece, captain of a ship....none of which are religion based. While the word "marriage" may have a religious connotation in your eyes, in REALITY, marriage is a legal union, not a religious one. You can' t make an argument for separation of church and state and in the same breath try to make something that is a legal issue into a "separation of church and state" issue. At no time has the argument for gay marriage ever implied or stated that churches would be required to marry gays. Why? Because of the fact that marriage is a legal issue. Incidentally, the wedding ceremony is what happens in the church. The marriage is the result. So I assume then that you believe anyone who is not having a religious wedding ceremony, homosexual or heterosexual would not be "married" instead they would be "civil union" partners? quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin As it's been said to me on many occasions, changing the definition of marriage is a very dangerous thing. What else can we redefine? Your bed is no longer a bed. It's a box of shit? That's no longer a dog in your lap. It's a cunt. That kind of thing. (i used an extreme example, i know). Again, no one is changing the definition of "marriage." Marriage is the act of two people being joined in a legal union. They only thing that would be changing is who is permitted to do it.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 9:37:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 Why shouldnt the gays be a miserable as everybody else?[:D] I think not all who oppose gay marriage oppose it due to religious reasons. I would assume there is some self interest on a business/money aspect. Thats alot more people for corporations to cover for medical insurance? Just a thought. This is another argument that tends to be put forth that has a lot of flaws. Many companies now allow for couples who are living together to obtain insurance for their partner. Nowadays, employees are paying higher and higher portions of their insurance and many married couples maintain separate health insurance through their individual employers due to that cost factor. They concept that if gays were allowed to marry, there would be this sudden huge influx of insurance costs might sound feasible on the surface, but the reality and the statistics regarding insurance just don't add up. What if suddenly all heterosexual couples who were living together suddenly got married? What would that do to the almighty insurance industry? Much more than the homosexual marriages. Now regardless of the above, certainly there would be an intial "upsurge" of insurance coverage because of the number of gay couples who have been together for years and forbidden the right to marriage, now having that right. Even then, it doesn't mean that all of them are going to run to sign up on their partner's insurance. However, on the other side of that even (what's that 3 sides now?), is the fact that some who didn't have insurance before, but might have state insurance would now no longer be insured under a state plan which would actually save the state money.

Kirata -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 10:12:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Again, no one is changing the definition of "marriage." Marriage is the act of two people being joined in a legal union. They only thing that would be changing is who is permitted to do it. Personally, I don't give a damn. But that is just not true. "Who" is doing it has since the Code of Ur-Nammu and through all of Western history been part of the definition. marriage - noun 1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. 2. the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage. 3. the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage. 4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage. Yes, gay marriage makes it in there, as is current with what has become modern usage. But in the minds of many people who wish nobody ill, marriage is the joining of a man and a woman, and means a great deal to them as such. To announce like some kind of self-appointed prophet that "gay marriage" doesn't redefine "marriage" ignores both their feelings and thousands of years of history. And to imply (as some do) that their feelings about marriage amount to prima facie evidence of "homophobia" is simply paranoid and insulting. K.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/12/2010 11:34:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Personally, I don't give a damn. But that is just not true. "Who" is doing it has since the Code of Ur-Nammu and through all of Western history been part of the definition. marriage - noun 1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. 2. the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage. 3. the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage. 4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage. Yes, gay marriage makes it in there, as is current with what has become modern usage. But in the minds of many people who wish nobody ill, marriage is the joining of a man and a woman, and means a great deal to them as such. To announce like some kind of self-appointed prophet that "gay marriage" doesn't redefine "marriage" ignores both their feelings and thousands of years of history. And to imply (as some do) that their feelings about marriage amount to prima facie evidence of "homophobia" is simply paranoid and insulting. K. The key is that things do change over time, hence the inclusion of same sex couples within the definition. I'm kind of curious though where anything I said implied homophobia. Because that is not something that I have ever said. I do, however, believe the comparison of the opposition against gay marriage to the opposition of integration back in the 60s. Everyone argued that segration was "right" many used the bible as justification. It used to be that inter racial marriage was illegal also. Hell, if you got all the way back to the beginning of the USA, slaves were not even considered to be of the same species, forget about race. I don't agree with any of those thoughts, but many did. Should we have worried about insulting them to protect their feelings? Society evolves over time and our laws need to reflect that evolution. Fear of change is a big part of the problem. You know "marriage" does mean a great deal to many people. But there is no logic to the concept that allowing gays to marry will deminish the meaning. Allowing gays to marry doesn't diminish John and Jane Doe's marriage any more than Joe and Mary Smith refusing to marry but rather "shack up" without the benefit of marriage does. The bottom line is that if the laws truly did give "civil unions" all the same rights of marriage, the discussion wouldn't be happening. But it doesn't. And at the end of the day, those who are so attached to the word "marriage" and making the point you did above are essentially saying that they are superior to the homosexuals who want to wed and deserving of more rights than the homosexuals. So the argument of being "paranoid" and "insulting" cuts both ways, even though I never mentioned or even implied homophobia. So allowing gays to marry is insulting to those people to whom the meaning of the word has such intense meaning, yet refusing to allow gays to marry is equally insulting to them. In the end, one side or the other is going to be "insulted." Realistically, when deciding which side will have to suffer the insult, it is unreasonable to refuse equal rights to one to placate the other. Because make no mistake about it, those against it are not having any rights infringed upon by giving the right to the gays, but homosexual rights ARE being infringed upon by refusing it.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875