Same Sex Marriage Thread-Part 2 - Page 28 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-15-2012, 01:01 PM   #406
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
I'll just throw out a blanket answer here. Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.

1) Prohibitions on incestuous marriages are thousands of years old predating any possible understanding of genetics.

2) Effects of inbreeding take generations to appear in humans being statistically no more common than birth defects in children of older mothers. Do we prohibit them from marrying, having children? Chromosomal abnormalities such as trisomy would be up to twice as high in brother-sister marriages but don't explain restrictions on 2nd cousin/2nd cousin or uncle/niece marriages. Do we prohibit adults with Down Syndrome from marrying and having children although there is a 50% chance a child born to a mother with DS will have DS?

3) It isn't 1600 anymore. Most trisomy affected fetuses miscarriage or, after an amniocentesis diagnosis, can and are aborted.

3) Birth defects are of no concern if two brothers wish to marry, why restrict them?

4) What happened to equal protection?

5) We know we can't use religious arguments from old books against incestuous marriages anymore. Debating from wisdom or tradition doesn't spin the world forward it only protects the status quo. So I guess, like same-sex marriage, the only argument is the yuck factor right?

6) The only way my comments can be misconstrued as hurtful to gays or supporters of SSM is if they're forced to acknowledge they don't believe in the right to marry "no matter who you love" any more than I do. That's my only point.


This is bullshit and you know it.

If you and some others who support invest would like to push for the legalization of incestuous marriages, by all means, go ahead and do so.

But this has nothing to do with homosexuality and EVERYTHING to do with heterosexuality.

Im sure you just read another Dennis Prager column for ammo and were looking for a rise on a Friday night. But we've all been down this road many times before and I, at least, don't have the patience or interest to deal with it again.

If its all about love, INDY, why don't we let 12 year old girls marry 35 year old men anymore? That's certainly Scripture based.

In the meantime, keep your heterosexual issues to yourself and sort out the apparently clear and present mass expression of millions of Americans who, in addition to being able to marry the person of their choice of the opposite gender, also wish to have the right to marry a siblin of the opposite gender.

I recommend you start a CONSERVATIVES FOR INCESTUOUS MARRIAGE thread to keep these things distinct.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 01:04 PM   #407
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 10:21 AM
Scientific research points to the possibility that homosexuals are born as they are, so they can't prevent what they feel. I haven't heard of incestuous tendencies being supported based on scientific research.

Also, homosexuality doesn't damage the individual or society as a whole. Incest does because I believe anyone who is in love with their family member has a serious emotional dysfunction. Plus, there's a good possibility of abuse and manipulation going on.
__________________

__________________
Pearl is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 01:07 PM   #408
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I
6) The only way my comments can be misconstrued as hurtful to gays or supporters of SSM is if they're forced to acknowledge they don't believe in the right to marry "no matter who you love" any more than I do. That's my only point.
The problem with you Indy, is that you get nasty and aggressive when you try to make your point. I'm willing to hear arguments against homosexuality and SSM as long as the person is a lot more tactile, especially to those they are targeting.
__________________
Pearl is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:05 PM   #409
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl View Post
The problem with you Indy, is that you get nasty and aggressive when you try to make your point. I'm willing to hear arguments against homosexuality and SSM as long as the person is a lot more tactile, especially to those they are targeting.
I can only assume by "nasty and aggressive" you mean refusing to evolve, like our president, on the issue. I understand this is a personal and emotional issue. I understand as well some of the arguments for same-sex marriage (which is why I support civil unions that grant legal privileges married couples enjoy), I just don't accept them.

I support the institution of marriage as a foundation for families and families as the foundation of civilization. I don't believe gay marriage is a civil rights issue. I define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I believe in gender distinctions.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:16 PM   #410
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500


I support the institution of marriage as a foundation for families and families as the foundation of civilization. I don't believe gay marriage is a civil rights issue. I define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I believe in gender distinctions.

Gay people have families and make for terrific parents. There are millions of kids with gay parents. Why do you want to punish, stigmatize, and hurt other families by denying them equal rights?

Dogmatic statements of belief aren't thoughts or reasons.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:41 PM   #411
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Gay people have families and make for terrific parents. There are millions of kids with gay parents. Why do you want to punish, stigmatize, and hurt other families by denying them equal rights?

Dogmatic statements of belief aren't thoughts or reasons.
Given a chance, why couldn't your post apply equally to incest?
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:43 PM   #412
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I can only assume by "nasty and aggressive" you mean refusing to evolve, like our president, on the issue. I understand this is a personal and emotional issue. I understand as well some of the arguments for same-sex marriage (which is why I support civil unions that grant legal privileges married couples enjoy), I just don't accept them.

I support the institution of marriage as a foundation for families and families as the foundation of civilization. I don't believe gay marriage is a civil rights issue. I define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I believe in gender distinctions.
But your tone is usually harsh and you resort to insults sometimes. If you were more tactile, it would be easier to converse with you.

I don't see how gay marriage is not a civil rights issue. By saying a homosexual couple does not deserve to be on the same level as a straight couple, you are basically making them less than equal, and therefore, secondary to others.

I agree marriage is...well, should be sacred. Unfortunately, you see many couples on their third or fourth marriage. How is their union better than a gay couple that's been together for 30 years?
__________________
Pearl is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:50 PM   #413
War Child
 
Caleb8844's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 662
Local Time: 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Missed the mark on that one...
Woops, meant to say "How long ago was homosexuality illegal?"
__________________
Caleb8844 is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 02:52 PM   #414
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:21 AM
Because they are different things. Please stop comparing a sexual orientation to a crime and compose an actual argument that justifies why it is you feel you must harm children am families so you feel better.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 03:23 PM   #415
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,270
Local Time: 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobl04 View Post
It's somewhat legal in a number of countries. And personally I don't really give a fuck, to be honest.

But while you were joking around INDY, it's pretty offensive, when you consider that incestuous relationships can result in birth defects and so on, while the word itself comes from a Latin word meaning not pure.

So for you to compare it to homosexuality is disgraceful.
This, pretty much. I don't really care, either, as said, consenting adults can do whatever the hell they want. But yes, there is a wee bit of a difference between incest and homosexuality, as has been noted here. To compare the two like this is just crazy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I understand this is a personal and emotional issue. I understand as well some of the arguments for same-sex marriage (which is why I support civil unions that grant legal privileges married couples enjoy), I just don't accept them.

I support the institution of marriage as a foundation for families and families as the foundation of civilization. I don't believe gay marriage is a civil rights issue. I define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I believe in gender distinctions.
If you understand the arguments, why not accept them, then, especially since they actually have facts and logic behind them? If you know full well that denying people the right to marry whomever they love is an emotional issue, fraught with problems, why are you opposed to fixing that?

Civil unions is just another "separate but equal" sort of thing. There's too many complications there. If you get married in a state that recognizes same sex marriage, but then have to move, for whatever reason, to a state that doesn't, don't you see where that would pose some problems with paperwork and other legal matters and that sort of thing? Why not just let everyone, straight, gay, whatever, have a civil union and leave the marriage aspect to the churches, if it bothers people that much?

It's either that, or if I get to call my union with a guy a marriage, so therefore do gay couples. To make them have to call it something different because of one's personal uncomfortableness with them "taking the word" from straight people or whatever is ludicrous. Why do people's love lives have to revolve around what you deem acceptable? You've never explained to me why you and others like you get the power to dictate what other people get to call their relationships, can tell them who they do and don't have the right to marry.

Marriage is a very important part of society. No argument there. But as noted, I don't see anti-gay rights people out protesting every single straight couple who gets divorced or commits adultery. I don't see them fighting to pass laws to deny those people a chance to marry again, since they violated the "sanctity" of marriage.

I just don't understand how two people who are in love and want to get married should be subjected to such debate and controversy. It is a civil rights issue, and I still do not understand at all where you are coming from with the "gender distinction" thing. Life does not fit some nice little neat cookie cutter pattern, sorry to break it to you.
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 05:36 PM   #416
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 03:21 PM
Kay, lots of responses since my last one. Figures I'm totally WRONG anyway.

Angela, I fulheartedly agree with your post. It's so funny, really, when you think some people can decide what other's can't and can do. Like they think they have some superior right or whatever. Ridiculous.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 05:45 PM   #417
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleb8844

Woops, meant to say "How long ago was homosexuality illegal?"
But you're still missing the mark and exposing your misunderstanding of the issue in doing so.

Why don't you start by trying to explain why you believe the two are analogous.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 06:45 PM   #418
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:21 AM
where does it end? what laws can i break, what rules don't apply to me, who am i allowed to discriminate against, all so that i may freely exercise my religion?

do i get to beat my teenage daughter if she has sex? do i get to smack my wife because she doesn't want to have sex with me? can i set her on fire if she has an affair? am i allowed to mutilate my son's genitals because my religion tells me to?

talk about slippery slopes.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 09-15-2012, 06:50 PM   #419
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,039
Local Time: 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
It isn't 1600 anymore
__________________
cobl04 is offline  
Old 09-15-2012, 06:57 PM   #420
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500

Why? Can't two brothers or two sisters fall in love just as easily as a brother and a sister?
It's already been explained to you,and you already know anyway.Genetics. Unless the one brother and sister are never going to have intercourse so that there will never be a chance of pregnancy. Or fool around to the point where there could be a chance of pregnancy, we know how that works. Plus, I don't think we want parents having sex with their offspring. Not appropriate and I think we all know why.

The two gay people are not related and are adults on an equal plane.
To compare the two is ridiculous and I think you know why. Incest is criminal, being gay is not.

There is such a thing as genetic sexual attraction, and people who don't even know they're related can wind up sexually attracted and/or having sex. There's plenty of research about it.

You can fall in love with anyone, but the reasons for that are different and acting on it is illegal for reasons already explained. Falling in love with a relative, when you know you're related-well you could have a field day with the emotional and psychological dysfunction involved with that.

So unless you're trying to say that gay relationships are automatically dysfunctional on the same level? Just by their existence?
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com