|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
maxxy
Gender: Male
Location: PA
|
- #11
- Posted: 01/22/2009 16:39
- Post subject:
|
People who oppose gay marriage rights have no basis for a valid argument. You don't choose whether or not you're gay, and the only thing they have against it is the word of the bible, but think about it: 2000 years ago, they only wanted heterosexual marriage because they needed to expand the population with every child possible. Now, that's not an issue...some people just won't change.
Go watch milk!
_________________
"I'm so ugly but that's OK cause so are you"
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
joannajewsom
Location: Philadelphia
|
- #12
- Posted: 01/22/2009 17:45
- Post subject:
|
| nibbles wrote: | | That cat has the most mesmerizing voice ever. |
It sure does.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Charicature
Age: 49
Location: Vermont
|
- #13
- Posted: 01/22/2009 18:35
- Post subject:
|
| maxxy wrote: | People who oppose gay marriage rights have no basis for a valid argument. You don't choose whether or not you're gay, and the only thing they have against it is the word of the bible, but think about it: 2000 years ago, they only wanted heterosexual marriage because they needed to expand the population with every child possible. Now, that's not an issue...some people just won't change.
Go watch milk! |
Dear God, don't let me wander into this thread much.
People who oppose gay marriage rights DON'T have a basis for it, you're right. But people who oppose gay marriage laws do indeed have a valid argument.
Laws governing rights and privileges in the United States are supposed to be general and apply to everyone equally. Gay marriage does not. Whereas a homosexual can - if they so choose - get married to a member of the opposite sex under current marriage laws without regard to their sexuality, a heterosexual can NOT get married to a member of the same sex under gay marriage laws as they have heretofore been proposed or passed into law because they are not gay.
In other words, gay marriage laws create a special right for homosexuals that the rest of the population does not enjoy. People can marry for love, yes - but when you marry, there are also legal and financial entitlements that go hand in hand, and gay marriage says "certain people can enter into unions with members of the same sex to get tax benefits, survivor benefits, etc. but others can't, and the determinant is sexuality." Gay marriage laws discriminate in the name of non-discrimination, much as affirmative action laws do. This is a bad precedent that, regrettably, is already established. It's the precedent that says, legally, some people are more equal than others.
If instead the law were changed to say "any two consenting adults may marry" then it wouldn't discriminate. But the government doesn't want that because it means less tax revenue and therefore less power in the hands of the Federal and State governments...we can't have that, can we? *sarcasm*
Anyway, the argument is also easily made that if marriage between two members of the same sex should be allowed, then marriage between several adults should also be allowed. If one group's morality can't be used to justify the opposition to gay marriage, why would it be acceptable to use any group's morality to oppose polygamous marriage? I'll leave out bestiality because you can always use the argument that the marriage must be consensual and there's no way to gauge whether an animal has consented, but it's still an issue of one group's morality dictating to someone else what is right or wrong. For that matter, the same holds true for theft, rape, and murder. Where exactly do you draw the line and how do you justify that line as being anything more than arbitrary and based on someone else's morality?
Frankly I see much of the same irrationality in the pro-side of this issue as in the anti-side.
_________________
<(: @  >
Last edited by Charicature on 01/22/2009 18:45; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Charicature
Age: 49
Location: Vermont
|
- #14
- Posted: 01/22/2009 18:43
- Post subject:
|
May I just amend?
Anti- Religiondfasdfadafasfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfsasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfadsfasdfasdfasdfasdf Religious Fanatic
<-----------I-----------------------------I-------------------------------I----------->
Even without knowing or________live and let live______ There can be no
understanding the universe_________________________________arguing with what
I know there's no God___________________________I believe
Which can also be stated as such:
Anti- Religiondfasdfadafasfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfsasdfasdfasdfasdfasdfadsfasdfasdfasdfasdf Religious Fanatic
<-----------I-----------------------------I-------------------------------I----------->
You must believe as I do________you can believe what you___ You must believe as I do
_____________________________believe, and so will I
_________________
<(: @ >
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
JohnnyRocketFingers
Location: PA
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Charicature
Age: 49
Location: Vermont
|
- #16
- Posted: 01/22/2009 21:20
- Post subject:
|
| JohnnyRocketFingers wrote: | | Just because a argument is long does not mean it is good |
Just because a one-liner sounds clever doesn't mean it is.  Meanwhile it always lacks substance.
_________________
<(: @ >
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
joannajewsom
Location: Philadelphia
|
- #17
- Posted: 01/22/2009 21:43
- Post subject:
|
| JohnnyRocketFingers wrote: | | Just because a argument is long does not mean it is good |
Perfectly stated. Charicature's post was one of the most nonsensical arguments that I have encountered in my entire life. Apparently, gay marriage discriminates against straight people because straight people can't get gay married. And gay marriage is just like affirmative action? My head just exploded.
"In other words, gay marriage laws create a special right for homosexuals that the rest of the population does not enjoy"
Wow. Just wow. I don't know what to say. That quote needs to go into the hall of fame. Some hall of fame. Any hall of fame.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
banana brother
Location: A Polyethylene Bag
|
- #18
- Posted: 01/23/2009 01:24
- Post subject:
|
Wow... is that what you actually believe Charicature? Who fed you that bullshit? I can't beleive the ignorance of what i just read, so you think it is ok to deny a homosexual rights, essentially telling them they are less equal then a heterosexual, because somehow if we allowed them this basic freedom it would be denying a heterosexual a right that they would never partake in? And also what the hell did you mean by that a heterosexual wouldn't be allowed to marry a homosexual? Correct me if i'm wrong but its my understanding that if someone wants to marry someone of the same sex that makes them homosexual. so i your scenario wouldn't it then be a marriage of two homosexuals and not one of each? And finally what is your logic that allowing homosexual marriage is in the same vein as allowing polygamy? People are born homosexual they are not born to be polygamous.
BTW Johnny nice quip
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Harvos
|
- #19
- Posted: 01/23/2009 08:55
- Post subject:
|
|
Religion is great! Especially if you are a robber, pawn shop broker or window repair man. With church each sunday, it makes it very easy to know the best time for breaking and entering.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Charicature
Age: 49
Location: Vermont
|
- #20
- Posted: 01/23/2009 13:40
- Post subject:
|
| banana brother wrote: | Wow... is that what you actually believe Charicature? Who fed you that bullshit? I can't beleive the ignorance of what i just read, so you think it is ok to deny a homosexual rights, essentially telling them they are less equal then a heterosexual, because somehow if we allowed them this basic freedom it would be denying a heterosexual a right that they would never partake in? And also what the hell did you mean by that a heterosexual wouldn't be allowed to marry a homosexual? Correct me if i'm wrong but its my understanding that if someone wants to marry someone of the same sex that makes them homosexual. so i your scenario wouldn't it then be a marriage of two homosexuals and not one of each? And finally what is your logic that allowing homosexual marriage is in the same vein as allowing polygamy? People are born homosexual they are not born to be polygamous.
BTW Johnny nice quip |
The only person who's ignorant is you. I have no problem with homosexuals being given the right to marry, as long as that right is not given in a discriminatory way. But I won't bother trying to convince you or anyone else here - you're just another example of why this country's as screwed up as it is - you don't want to bother considering other points of view because you're just SO convinced you're right. Nobody else's views should matter.
Oh, dear, I'm so sorry to all of you for daring to dissent with the majority opinion on these boards. I'll try harder to conform in future. I've just never been that good at being a conformist, as banana found out when he rated my chart poorly for not being the same as his.
_________________
<(: @ >
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
