Same Sex Marriage Thread-Part 2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Moonlit_Angel said:
Though, as I noted in the last thread, I'm fine with polygamy being legal, as long as everyone's of legal age and consenting. And once more, you can CHOOSE to be polygamous, you aren't born polygamous. Which is why the comparison isn't quite the same.
Click to expand...

I respect that you are consistent but you can't choose to be polygamous if it's illegal where you live. If marriage is about love, commitment and support who are we to judge if a man falls in love with 3 women? If marriage is anything but between one man and one woman you can't.
 
Since Indy is big on defending the ancient foundations of modern society, he might want to have a look at Alexander the Great's life; Someone who had a bigger impact on modern civilization than any of the bible thumpers (real or imagined) he likes to hold sacred.
Nope, no homo eroticism there
 
I like that this topic has brought out the hardline dictionary thumping religious folk. Who would've thought they hold definitions so dear?
 
PhilsFan said:
So, the slippery slope? You believe that if gay marriage is legalized, the floodgates will open?

Look, I get it. You envision a future where people start making the argument that polygamy should be legal because, scientifically, mammals are not meant to have only one sexual partner.
Click to expand...

No, only that any legal argument falls apart once the definition becomes fleeting.
Frankly, I think you are too smart not to know the difference, so this argument is disappointing.
Click to expand...

Not arguing, just seeing what we can agree on. So one; we agree no government, society or tribe in history has not definded marriage in some way. Right?

Next, do you think men and women have innate qualities other than the naughty bits being different?
 
These guys seem pretty comfortable together too

niankhnumt10.jpg


Or are we only counting the lack of homosexuality in art and history after the christians started burning them?
 
INDY500 said:
Oh, we're counting Pagans?


why wouldn't we?


That men and women are interchangeable apart from their plumbing and that marriage is a civil right. And maybe to some degree that to be against same-sex marriage is to be anti-gay. I don't believe those things... you do. That is the difference.
Click to expand...


so separate but equal then. yes?
Click to expand...
 
INDY500 said:
I respect that you are consistent but you can't choose to be polygamous if it's illegal where you live. If marriage is about love, commitment and support who are we to judge if a man falls in love with 3 women? If marriage is anything but between one man and one woman you can't.
Click to expand...



the slippery slope argument holds no water. polygamy is illegal. it is not illegal to be gay.

further, polygamists can marry one person they love. i can't marry anybody i love.

polygamists -- or polyamorists, i know of a woman who lives with and says she loves two men -- are free to fight their own battles. but this is not the same as being gay.
 
INDY500 said:
No, only that any legal argument falls apart once the definition becomes fleeting.
Click to expand...


garbage. we now have an age of consent. women must now consent. would you argue these are bad things, that we now don't allow adult men to marry girls in their early teens?
 
INDY500 said:
Next, do you think men and women have innate qualities other than the naughty bits being different?
Click to expand...



and because of this we must prevent gay people from getting married.

ok?

i don't see how if i get married to a man that means that men and women are the same. do we really need to deliberately target our discrimination against certain groups of people in order to prove something? isn't this the same as saying that we need Jim Crow laws because if we don't then black people will start thinking that they're white people, and why on earth do we have races then? isn't it self evident that black people and white people are different?

sorry, i should multi quote.
 
INDY500 said:
I don't remember saying that. I recognize all your human and constitutional rights which is why I support civil unions. Marriage, wife, husband, bride, groom and spouse all have meanings and definitions however. I understand perfectly why you might wish to marry someone you love at some time in your life. I'm not patronizing you when I tell you I wish you happiness in your life. It just happens that you've bought into a narrative that I haven't:

That men and women are interchangeable apart from their plumbing and that marriage is a civil right. And maybe to some degree that to be against same-sex marriage is to be anti-gay. I don't believe those things... you do. That is the difference.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, just get that simple point across in some way.
Click to expand...

Methinks there's a lot of hypocrisy in this post that you may not be aware of.

Saying you're just trying to get a point across sounds like you are trying to change people's minds.

Also, saying you support human and constitutional rights for homosexuals yet turn around and say they should not get married reeks of contradiction. Its been said time after time in FYM that denying marriage to gay people is denying their human rights. If you are saying they are not worthy of marriage because of who they love, you are basically saying gay people are less than human. How is that supporting human rights?
 
Governments have marriage definitions, yes. Can we agree that governments also change their laws from time to time on various issues?

INDY500 said:
Next, do you think men and women have innate qualities other than the naughty bits being different?
Click to expand...
There are some trends, but not uniformly, no.

Why does this matter in this discussion, though?
 
it seems that INDY thinks that the only way we can preserve and prove necessary gender differences is to discriminate against gay people.

or am i reading this wrong?

what does preventing gay people from getting married really accomplish, other than to prevent gay people from getting married?

it's like the religious freedom argument. how does the existence of gay people infringe upon your right to freely practice your religion? moreover, how does the fact that gay people sometimes marry each other somehow prevent you from practicing your religion? isn't all that will happen when gay people get married is that it will be a little bit more difficult for people who don't believe that gay people should get married to hold this believe that gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married?

my big issue is that gay people seem to be the objects of blame -- and, yet, objects of immense cultural power with the ability to eradicate gender itself -- for things that we have nothing to do with.

kind of like how i'm responsible for out-of-wedlock births.
 
also, were i 15 years younger and struggling with my sexuality, this whole Chik-Fil-A nonsense would have devastated me.

i'd be stunned and saddened and fearful of the people lining up outside to buy chicken to prove how much they dislike me and want to exclude me.

i know it's your new avatar, INDY, but you're part of the problem. you're part of a group of people who walk around proclaiming FREEDOM OF SPEECH! FREEDOM OF RELIGION! while doing untold psychological damage to gay kids struggling with self worth and self acceptance.

and, worse, it offers aid and comfort to the people who are often the real bullies: parents.

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.co...goes-viral/news/2012/08/07/45756#.UCFRofaPW8A

letter-to-gay-son-from-hateful-dad.jpg
 
Hey, do you guys remember that time they redefined what marriage meant to exclude the part about the women belonging to the man?
 
Pearl said:
How could anyone read that letter and not feel any empathy for gay people?
Click to expand...



i'm much more concerned for Christians who are going to be persecuted for speaking out against same-sex marriage and not being able to have their freedom of religion. that should be our primary concern here.
 
martha said:
I wonder where Jesus said to do that? 'Cause I'll bet He didn't say anything like that at all.
Click to expand...


Jesus also didn't tell us the genders were the same. why should we pretend like they are?

also, lots of black kids are born out of wedlock.

in summary, i am pro-family.
 
well, martha, what i do on my own time behind closed doors is my own business.

it's when i try to redefine marriage that black children suffer.
 
Hiding your bigoted beliefs behind frivolous reasons doesn't make you any less of a bigot. In fact, the idea that you might not even realize you're being a bigot might make you more of one.
By the same token, simply saying "I'm not anti gay, I just.." doesn't make you less anti gay
 
Jive Turkey said:
Hiding your bigoted beliefs behind frivolous reasons doesn't make you any less of a bigot. In fact, the idea that you might not even realize you're being a bigot might make you more of one.
By the same token, simply saying "I'm not anti gay, I just.." doesn't make you less anti gay
Click to expand...

:up:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
Hello, hello!
Replies
2
Views
883
Ralph_Sutter
R
M
Ticketmaster app
Replies
3
Views
486
rosephile
R
R
Help a MacPhisto out! - Night #2 (9/30) at the Sphere (pics and videos)
Replies
3
Views
734
Ralph_Sutter
R
U
Hello, From Dallas, Texas
Replies
3
Views
537
TheFlyZooTV
T
K
U2 Show Logistics Question/Theories
Replies
7
Views
729
lazarus
lazarus

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom