Same Sex Marriage Thread - Part III

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
But SSM is analogous to racial segregation.

Righttttt.

What is analogous is social engineering through the law. It can be through drug laws for example or marriage laws. Conservatives wish to promote the nuclear family standard as ideal recognizing its role in stabilizing society, promoting self-reliance and raising prodigy while reflecting the Judeo-Christian values of Western culture.
The Left social engineers through the oppression of bigger government (social justice, income redistribution, racial quotes) and newly discovered "rights" for its own utopian vision.

The right reforms while the left radically changes.


Promoting social justice is oppression? Oh boy...
 
But SSM is analogous to racial segregation.

Righttttt.

What is analogous is social engineering through the law. It can be through drug laws for example or marriage laws. Conservatives wish to promote the nuclear family standard as ideal recognizing its role in stabilizing society, promoting self-reliance and raising prodigy while reflecting the Judeo-Christian values of Western culture.

I would argue that legal SSM allows homosexual couples to enter into a similar nuclear family standard that stabilizes society and promotes self-reliance. Also what pfan said. Despite your (incredibly biased) framing, your comparison is between 2 different forms of social engineering. You believe that yours is the correct form, but don't try and turn social engineering into a dirty word - Christians have been doing it for centuries.

The Left social engineers through the oppression of bigger government (social justice, income redistribution, racial quotes) and newly discovered "rights" for its own utopian vision.

Ah, so social justice is oppression, is it? Most religious leaders might beg to differ.
 
I don't even think what the left is doing is anything like social engineering. But to call that social engineering while defending the side that literally is suggesting creating an ideal family through the law is just too rich.
 
I guess what did Jesus say about this issue or homosexuals overall?

Since this is such a religious issue I assume the son of god had a very strong case to make and believers can fall back on his words.

If he didn't say anything and it's just cherry picking a verse out of the OT, I really hope those who use it against SSM also don't eat shellfish, have tattoos and anything else the OT deems a "sin".
 
If your religion is against homosexuals, then don't have homosexual relationships or get a different religion. It's just as easy as that to me.

Religion is something personal, for you. Don't force it onto others and don't deny others rights because of YOUR religion. Nobody is forcing you to be gay, don't force gay people to be straight.
 
But SSM is analogous to racial segregation.

Righttttt.

What is analogous is social engineering through the law. It can be through drug laws for example or marriage laws. Conservatives wish to promote the nuclear family standard as ideal recognizing its role in stabilizing society, promoting self-reliance and raising prodigy while reflecting the Judeo-Christian values of Western culture.
The Left social engineers through the oppression of bigger government (social justice, income redistribution, racial quotes) and newly discovered "rights" for its own utopian vision.

The right reforms while the left radically changes.




Is there something wrong with gay people forming nuclear families? I don't see how SSM does anything but further the social engineering goals of the Right, as INDY has laid out.

Racial discrimination in marriage, as was the case up until 1967, is precisely analogous to discrimination in marriage on the basis of sexual orientation.
 
I am genuinely confused.

If someone wants to push conservative social engineering -- locking people into relationships -- so that people are required to take care of each other and any potential children (instead of the State) while at the same time incentivizing monogamy and moderate behavior in all things, and,as INDY does, present marriage as the solution to poverty, why would you want to exclude anyone from marriage?

Even politically, the most conservative voters are white married men -- wouldn't that "outreach" we heard about post-2012 whupping apply here as well? Lotsa married white affluent men, maybe with daughters ... sure, they're gay, but maybe they might start pulling the R lever if they were married.
 
There is no argument and there never has been one against same sex marriage. It is the final floundering of a vile strain of thought. If there was concern for the institution of marriage and children, they should be all for a ban on alcohol, I'm pretty sure it is up there in divorce proceedings and domestic violence. If there was concern for marriage they would stop locking up black fathers every chance they get. IF they were concerned about marriage they would just stop spewing their nonsense and let consenting adults marry.

It's getting to the point where it's just conspiracy theories and ramblings.
 
We've gone over this so many times.

You are not born a polygamist, you choose to marry multiple people, thus it's not a right. Of course SSM critics argue homosexuality is a choice. For those that think it is, I'd like to hear when you choose to be straight or gay (partaking in both and continuing to do so would make you bisexual, which if sexuality is a choice, we are basically bi)

There's the human rights issue of women being forced into marriage, usually at a young age. Then throw in the effect on other relationships. If a man has four wives, that's less women for other single men to try and find. It creates an skew towards more men in that society. Gay marriage doesn't have that effect.

Then there's the legal reasons. Since marriage is a contract between two people, adding more people makes it more complex. How do you deal with next of kin or divorce? Splitting assets? Child support?

While on a high level perspective, I don't really have a problem with polygamy. Seems a bit much, but if all parties are adults and consent...sure. But then you get into legal issues and it falls apart.
 
Why only two? Seems irrational and arbitrary if not bigoted. Marriage equality for ALL.
IT'S NOT THE SIDE EFFECTS OF THE COCAINE
l'M THINKING THAT IT MUST BE LOVE
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE GRATEFUL
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE LATE AGAIN
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE HATEFUL
THE EUROPEAN CANNON IS HERE

IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
 
IT'S NOT THE SIDE EFFECTS OF THE COCAINE
l'M THINKING THAT IT MUST BE LOVE
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE GRATEFUL
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE LATE AGAIN
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE HATEFUL
THE EUROPEAN CANNON IS HERE

IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE

Tell me I person arguing for same-sex marriage in 1976.
 
IT'S NOT THE SIDE EFFECTS OF THE COCAINE
l'M THINKING THAT IT MUST BE LOVE
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE GRATEFUL
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE LATE AGAIN
IT'S TOO LATE
TO BE HATEFUL
THE EUROPEAN CANNON IS HERE

IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE
IT'S TOO LATE

:)
 
We've gone over this so many times.

You are not born a polygamist, you choose to marry multiple people, thus it's not a right. Of course SSM critics argue homosexuality is a choice. For those that think it is, I'd like to hear when you choose to be straight or gay (partaking in both and continuing to do so would make you bisexual, which if sexuality is a choice, we are basically bi)

There's the human rights issue of women being forced into marriage, usually at a young age. Then throw in the effect on other relationships. If a man has four wives, that's less women for other single men to try and find. It creates an skew towards more men in that society. Gay marriage doesn't have that effect.

Then there's the legal reasons. Since marriage is a contract between two people, adding more people makes it more complex. How do you deal with next of kin or divorce? Splitting assets? Child support?

While on a high level perspective, I don't really have a problem with polygamy. Seems a bit much, but if all parties are adults and consent...sure. But then you get into legal issues and it falls apart.

:up: Great post.

It still disturbs me that polygamy is often mentioned when discussing same sex marriage, when the two have absolutely NOTHING in common.




INDY, do you honestly believe homosexuality is a choice? If so, can you please elaborate why you believe that?
 
Have you guys gotten to the bottom of this issue yet?

LOL! My conclusion is that some don't want to accept that times are a changin' and they'll go to great lengths to refuse it. That's all.
 
:up: Great post.

It still disturbs me that polygamy is often mentioned when discussing same sex marriage, when the two have absolutely NOTHING in common.


Well, I would suppose that some people think it their right to marry as many as women as will say "yes".
 
Well, I would suppose that some people think it their right to marry as many as women as will say "yes".



No matter what, so long as it's an opposite sexed partner, they can still get married. They have access to that institution even if it's limited to one person.

Gay people do not have that right in 33 states. They can't get authentically married to anyone. A straight person -- convicted felon or octogenarian -- can always marry someone.
 
I was thinking about this whole "gay marriage/polygamy" bullshit the other morning.

Have any of the countries or states that have legalized SSM (I really hate that acronym) gone on to legalize polygamy?

Is this a real and credible threat?

Or is it just bullshit?
 
I was thinking about this whole "gay marriage/polygamy" bullshit the other morning.

Have any of the countries or states that have legalized SSM (I really hate that acronym) gone on to legalize polygamy?

Is this a real and credible threat?

Or is it just bullshit?

grasping-at-straws1.jpg
 
Well, I would suppose that some people think it their right to marry as many as women as will say "yes".
Some people think it is their right to stone a woman for looking at a man, or driving a car... your point is?

I was thinking about this whole "gay marriage/polygamy" bullshit the other morning.

Have any of the countries or states that have legalized SSM (I really hate that acronym) gone on to legalize polygamy?

Is this a real and credible threat?

Or is it just bullshit?

No idea, it sure isn't legal here. Not even been discussed. I've never even heard the argument in my country.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom