Why Is Gay Marriage Wrong? - Page 9 - 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 04-14-2008, 04:25 PM   #121
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique
Bisexuality is not a cultural thing, it is an immutable characteristic as much as homosexuality is. Of course, you don't personally seem to believe that, and I find it highly ironic that as a gay person you would suspect that person before giving him the same benefit of the doubt that you rightly demand about your own identity.



then you've misread my posts. go back and take a look. i think that bisexuality is as immutable as any other sexual orientation.





[q]I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but when you make assertions like 'most gay men will tell you..' - well frankly, that means little, because those same gay men clearly aren't bisexual, are they?[/q]


and many bisexual men eventually come all the way out and are gay men. i'm not saying this is right or wrong, and i've stated that this is anecdotal. but this has been my experience, and men tend to be more black and white in their sexual orientation than women tend to be.

this isn't good, bad, right, or wrong. human sexuality is a complex and beautiful thing. but i think it's incorrect to pretend that there aren't differences, and i think we do ourselves a disservice not to look at similarities and differences.


Quote:
So you would be opposed to a bisexual person pursuing a legal marriage / life with the man and woman they love?

no, not really. i'm quite opposed to the sexual exploitation of women by one powerful, cultish man, and i'm opposed to the marrying off of teenaged girls to this one powerful, cultish man. but we both agree upon that.

if there are three adults in, say, Paramus, NJ who want to all be married to each other, i guess i don't care all that much. i don't think anyone is harmed, and i think solidifying bonds between people is better than rendering them asunder.

but this seems to me to miss what is the issue here. all three of these people -- unless they are all men or all women -- have an avenue into a marriage with the person of their choosing. there is a path for the bisexual to social equality. it might be different than the ideal, but it is available.

this does not exist, yet, for gay people.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-14-2008, 04:27 PM   #122
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 02:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique


I'm not terming it polygamist for 3 persons who live in a bisexual relationship to marry, that is the term that has been forced upon it here. I think any attempt by a gay person to call what I'm describing 'illegal polygamy' is as ridiculous as the straight person calling the gay couple 'illegal sodomists' or some such foolishness. So while I would agree that they could be different debates, let's not fool ourselves here, they are very closely related.


Might be that there are different definitions in America and Germany. Here one refers to polygamy if it's marriage between more than two people, fair and simple, and without any consideration whether it's legal or illegal.
If in the US the term polygamy is strictly linked with the illegality of it, I apologize for the confusion.

It was rather a recommendation from my side to discuss that issue on its own, feel free to disagree.

Quote:
Anyways, about religion, I thought we were trying to debate this on secular merits? Why do I care about someone's religion? I'm not even bothering with the holy quotations, far as I'm concerned they're irrelevant beyond gaining an understanding as to why society has such stupid laws and misconceptions in the first place.

Or are we proving that the thing - as is the case with any debate on polygamy, bisexual or not - simply cannot be debated in a purely secular sense?
I'm agnostic if not even atheist (though I will always be open for this tiny percentage point that I'm wrong) either, and would love to see a discussion of these topics without religion in any way included. As you see in this thread, and Martha pointed out countless times, apparently the secular arguments for a restriction of marriage are extremely limited, and very weak.

I would also like to add that religion here in Germany plays more or less no role in the public sphere and religious interference in state issues (and marriage today is a state issue in this country) is extremely limited, i.e. there is still a church tax you pay if you don't leave the church, but that's basically it. Though they are still weighing in on issues such as marriage being open for homosexuals or the euthanasia debate, and have some influence on the conservative side of society and politics, their influence is much more limited than in the US. Hence, they might decelerate progress, but don't slow it down as much.

I can't think of any compelling arguments against polygamy, except for religion, tradition and that most people would find it gross (so, pretty weak arguments again), but I have to admit that I didn't make up my mind on that issue at all.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

we’ve just seen in Texas why polygamy was outlawed. It has historically involved the statutory rape of young teenaged girls.
Ok, that would make a very compelling argument.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 04:40 PM   #123
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique
No I'm not suggesting that, I'm outright stating that the fullest realization of a bisexual person's identity could well be a union where they are free to have both of the individuals they love as permanent and legally recognized partners. Of course not every bisexual person needs/wants this, but then again not every gay person necessarily wants to marry, either. Some gay people don't even have gay sex!

Of course, arguable that it's no different than heterosexual relationships, but that's a whole other debate
Why is it a whole other debate? When you--male or female; gay, bisexual or straight--marry someone, you're freely choosing to formally and legally commit to a monogamous romantic relationship with them (and vice versa). In no gender's or orientation's case does that mean you're no longer capable of falling in love with and/or becoming sexually involved with someone besides your spouse; it simply means you're choosing to formally commit to not do that. Being bisexual doesn't mean you require a threesome to feel sexually satisfied anymore than being heterosexual means that.

I understand there's a debate to be had about whether or not polygamy should be legal, since some in certain American subcultures would like it to be; but as Irvine said, that's a separate debate from extending monogamous marriage to couples of all orientations. If polygamy were legal here, most polygamous marriages would be heterosexual anyway. Personally I'm not in principle opposed to legalized polygamous marriages, so long as it were clear to me that this wouldn't result in people (particularly girls and young women) being forced into marital arrangements not of their choosing. However, since I can't think of a single culture or subculture where polygamy is traditional where marriages aren't also traditionally arranged--and, again, where women in particular traditionally have very little say in the matter--I'm wary concerning that choice factor. It's true that there are gray areas here in that arranged *monogamous* marriages are legal, and while technically forced arranged ones are not--i.e., technically the man and woman involved must consent to the arranged marriage--in practice that's not so easy to monitor or enforce. But that's not in itself a good reason to knowingly broaden the scope of potential for such abuses.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 05:18 PM   #124
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


shrillness aside, I listed the "main" reason.
I'll ask you once again to cut the crap, if you are using that word "shrillness" to describe me. I've asked you numerous times, and yet you continue. Should I start asking someone else?

That's the natural logical conclusion from what you posted, it's not "shrillness".
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 04-14-2008, 05:53 PM   #125
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Umm, I forget what we were squabbling about.



<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 05:55 PM   #126
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,998
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
Umm, I forget what we were squabbling about.

That's your response? I wasn't "squabbling" at all, just responding to what you posted. You seemingly didn't like that, so you insulted me.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 04-14-2008, 06:00 PM   #127
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:52 PM
No I did not either
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 08:03 PM   #128
Blue Crack Addict
 
kafrun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upside-down
Posts: 19,644
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by unico

I don't agree with that argument either, I think it's stupid. Kids are gonna get bullied no matter what. It's almost like saying people shouldn't have children with disabilities because they are more likely to be bullied. Kids look for any excuse to bully others these days.
Children of biracial parents may be bullied. Children of fat parents, low-income parents, older parents, younger parents.. you get the idea. Kids will zero in on anything if it suits them to make someone a target. If a child grows up in a loving, strong, supportive family they'll come out even stronger and smarter than their counterparts, and likely more accepting of others' differences.
__________________
kafrun is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 08:06 PM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by kafrun

Children of biracial parents may be bullied.
Truuuuuuuuuuuuue story. I could write a fuckin book!
__________________
unico is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 08:41 PM   #130
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by unico


Truuuuuuuuuuuuue story. I could write a fuckin book!
Then to protect you, biracial marriage should clearly be relegated to second-class status. Or perhaps outlawed all together.

Because we do need to think of the children.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 09:36 PM   #131
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:52 PM
and what's bi racial marrigage have to do w gay unions?

oh yes that's right the agenda-silly me.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 09:39 PM   #132
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
and what's bi racial marrigage have to do w gay unions?

oh yes that's right the agenda-silly me.
did you miss the part when we were talking about reasons kids get bullied and how that is not a valid reason to deny people rights? also i think you should stop taking spelling lessons from A_Wanderer
__________________
unico is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 11:52 PM   #133
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

all three of these people -- unless they are all men or all women -- have an avenue into a marriage with the person of their choosing. there is a path for the bisexual to social equality. it might be different than the ideal, but it is available.
It's not available truly for the bisexual who wants to marry their same sex though, is it?

I have read your thoughts and think you make alot of valid points. I'm not arguing with you really, we pretty much agree I'm just saying that in the redefinition of marriage there are other questions raised..
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-14-2008, 11:56 PM   #134
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:52 PM

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 12:03 AM   #135
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

In no gender's or orientation's case does that mean you're no longer capable of falling in love with and/or becoming sexually involved with someone besides your spouse; it simply means you're choosing to formally commit to not do that. Being bisexual doesn't mean you require a threesome to feel sexually satisfied anymore than being heterosexual means that.
If you are bisexual and wish to fulfill your natural inclinations as do straight and gay people, you can't really make that choice - the choice to formally commit to not being sexually involved with someone other than your spouse - without suppressing the other side of you. Explain to me how a bisexual person gets to retain their identity while remaining monogamous? I don't expect you to understand this, and again you seem to want to polarize bisexuality into the extreme where a threesome is the standard sex act. I wasn't even talking about sex per se. A truly bisexual person also enjoys an emotional and romantic connection with both sexes. Emotional and romantic connections can sometimes lead to - you guessed it - marriage. Which works for straight and gay people, but if you're bisexual, you are forced to choose one or the other.
__________________

__________________
acrobatique 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 08:52 PM.


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