Spain Unveils Controversial Gay Marriage Law

[DrTeeth]

Good news!

MADRID (Reuters) - A controversial law that would give gay and lesbian couples the same right to marry, divorce and adopt children as heterosexuals was approved by Spain's Socialist government Friday.

The draft legislation, which now goes to parliament, has sparked a furious reaction from the Roman Catholic church, which warned that it risks "introducing a virus into society."

However, polls show the move enjoys firm support from the country's increasingly liberal population.

The law will make traditionally Catholic Spain only the third country in the world to legalize gay marriage after the Netherlands and Belgium. Some other nations have provisions for recognizing committed same-sex unions.

"We are putting an end to centuries of discrimination ... Spain is now in the vanguard of Europe and the world in fighting this discrimination," Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega told a news conference.

 

[Salome]

 

[kobayashi]

 

[Bajagirl]

HUZZAH!!!!

Im Catholic and support this. Not all of us are closed minded.

 

[meegannie]

I like Spain even more.

 

[BAW]

 

[deep]

Thanks to Al Queada.

Spain is no longer with "US".

 

[nbcrusader]

Yea, Al Queada is a big backer gay marriage

 

[verte76]

I'm a Catholic also and I like this. Way to go!

 

[joyfulgirl]

 

[indra]

Hot damn! Good for Spain. Now if the US could just pop it's head out of it's behind.....

 

[neutral]

["We are putting an end to centuries of discrimination ... Spain is now in the vanguard of Europe and the world in fighting this discrimination," Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega told a news conference.

Put an end to discrimination, wow what a concept!

 

[sharky]

niiiiiice.

 

[pax]

to this move by Spain in favor of

 

[Anthony]

My Spanish side is speechless... and immensely proud.

Ant.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Equal rights for all citizens is always a good thing

 

[DaveC]

Nova Scotia approved same sex marriage just last week!

 

[Renne]

So good to hear!

And wasn't Spain one of the places where it was illegal to be gay 25 years ago or something?

 

[Se7en]

i'm surprised that the scandinavian countries have not allowed the formalization of gay marriage yet. regardless, i applaud the spanish for their move forward.

 

[iacrobat]

This is remarkable! Great news!

"introducing a virus"?? Just shows how fucking archaic the church is here. No wonder they are all empty.

 

[AussieU2fanman]

Big problem here. Encouraging homosexuality by enabling such rights only cause more people that aren't even gay, to join the 'fad.' That Queer eye show and all those gay sitcoms are certainly not helping either. A large reason as to why people are gay these day's is a result of sociological moudling. Television is a good example. And this new 'gay marriage' legilisation is a clear example as well. I personally believe that homosexuality is completely amoral and unnatural, but there are REAL homosexuals that cannot help it.
(Off-topic kinda, but I understand that the majority of people posting to this topic are women, and I noticed that many more women are for homoxuality than men, why?).
Does everyone support and 'encourage' homosexuality just because you see it as an injustice? But it causes more problems than it solves by removing this so called 'injustice.' The main purpose of human nature is to procreate, and enabling all these pro-gay rights is encouraging many more people that aren't even gay in the first place to become gay, and hence not procreate (which is meant to be intercourse between a man and a woman). It is a fact that enabling gay rights\all the media surrounding homosexuality encourages homosexuality and everyone here knows it's true. I have some second hand experience as my cousin who knew he was never actually gay turned gay about a year ago. (BTW Procreation doesn't include any of the medical procedures that allows homosexuals to have kids....) I GUARANTEE he wouldn't have turned gay if being gay wasn't becoming so socially acceptable and 'cool.' Anyway, by being gay, our human purpose is not being fulfilled because we are not procreating, but instead we are allowing the violation of the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman! God (from Christians perspective) created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve! I can't believe Gay marriage is being allowed. The Catholic Church is making a firm stance on this, and I agree with them completely. I could go on and on. But I'll just say that I can see human development and evolution going backwards. We're fucking around with the fabrics of society too much, and you wait for the end result. I can see what's going to happen in the future if trends continue and I really hate what I see. There are going to be single sex parents matching the ratio of male\female parents. Somebody tell me that they don't find anything morally\ethically\socially wrong with that! Say 'Hey I think that outlook is great! I can't see anything wrong with this picture!' etc. I don't think I'll be able to live in a society like that. It sickens me to the stomach. It's immoral and unethical and it is downright spitting in the face of God's laws. (I'm an athiest, but I'm speaking from a Christian point of view).
If you are TRUELY gay, it is still immoral and unethical, but it is a fact that there are gay people, and there is nothing that can be done. You can live out a gay life, just don't violate the sanctity of marriage that is EXCLUSIVELY between a man and a women by getting married to the same sex! And the media should stop converting straight people to gay people. That is just ridiculous. Keep homosexuality to a minority of people. Don't give them equal rights as straight people in the form of marriage. The media and all the new gay rights are fucking up society. Just leave the real homosexuals the way they are and stop trying to turn people like me into homosexuals!
'Introducing a virus?' I couldn't agree more with that comment.

This is all my opinion. Please don't reply with the usual 'You're too young to say anything, you think you know it all etc.' like in my last controversial post on why I am an athiest and deny the existence of God. Let's try and have a civilized debate if you like.
Thankyou.

 

[verte76]

I'm Catholic, and I'm for gay marriage. It's obviously not going to happen in the Church. Marriage in the Catholic Church is a sacrament and it's always between a man and a woman. Outside the Church, though, I don't see why these people can't form legally binding agreements the way straight people do. I have some gay friends who are in a loving, caring relationship. Because of the laws in Alabama, which are probably never going to change, they can't make it official. They think they should be able to and have political opinions accordingly.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I am a young heterosexual Australian male, my political beliefs are best described as libertarian and I am an atheist. Your opinion is equally as valid as mine on the subject as we are no doubt very much alike.

Now, homosexuality is a part of nature. There are queer animals in the wild it is a behavioural pattern. There is nothing at all wrong with being gay, it may be strange off putting but in the end it is part of being free. You are free to lead your life in a way you see fit provided that it does not hurt anybody. Gay or straight it does not really matter, in fact if can often be great because it knocks out competition for chicks and most lesbians are ugly (ahhh, avoid the barrage of angry comments - please take it with a grain of salt, its a throwaway line I tells ya - I am tollerant).

The concept of human evolution going backwards is a rather flawed point. Firsly evolution is not by definition a linear progression and secondly the concept that somehow by allowing gay couples we will undo the fabric of society, I simply cannot see how this can occur. I mean people living their lives freely without suffering repressed emotions and all the associated health problems, what the hell is wrong. It is admirable the way that we in the west are moving forward and accepting difference (as long as it does not hurt anybody). I envision a world where people are not segregated because of who they are, where they can live freely and contribute. Homophobia is a problem, it will not be solved by PC police tagging everyone who says somethin bad about gays, Issues can be tackled if people see homosexuals for who they really are - people - just like you or me, for better or worse.

Raising children in gay households, this is a slightly more interesting point. As a rule I do not think that this is a bad thing, there is no evidence that being raised in a gay household increases the likelyhood of a child being gay or at any disadvantage. This question becomes a little bit different when we are moving into using IVF etc to allow gay couples to have children, here there is no other parent for the kid to confide in, a boy could be raised by a lesbian mother but having a father there is important. I know that often there is a whole set of stuff about having postitive role models but when push comes to shove mums and dads have different roles and two mums or two dads can never fill that completely.

The idea that you can be turned gay is just flat out wrong. Now you would have to be very impressionable if you turned on Queer as Folk or whatever television show and decided that hey "the whole rough and tumble of homosexual activity looks like great fun, I think that I might start being gay this week, now wheres my leather pants". There is no shortage of cool straight male role models out there. Sexuality is a tough nut to crack, it is really hard wired in there and no ammount of media conditioning can change who you are, never fully. Now look you have obviously "resisted the pink" and have come out swinging, but ask yourself why do you hate gays. One who wanted to play pop psychology on you may suggest that homophobia is the expression of repressed shall we say tendancies. I on the otherhand think that it is just the way people feel about something that they have little experience with (your cousin may be gay - so are lots of peoples cousins. I have a freaking uncle with gender identity issues). There are cool male role models, if I was given the choice between Queer Eye guys (I dont even watch the damn show because reality TV sucks as we all know) and James Bond I would pick James Bond because he is suave and cool and gets the damn hot women.

Marriage has been fucked over by heterosexuals enough, if there are people out there who genuinely want to get married then I say best of luck. If you believe that marriage is a religious institution then you would be saying that the states must ensure the preservation of this religious belief, now that starts to cross the line of seperation of church and state. If people are believers than I say God imbued mankind with free will, gays are just enjoying their "God given right" to make their own decisions on this earth - deal with it.

Now if I remember correctly you have lived your life within a catholic household. Which would no doubt influence your belief system. You seem like a dissolutioned guy who was raised in the system, rebelled against it and still clings to the dogma. That is just my impression mind you - but when one is throwing around words like immoral and unethical you come off like Cardinal Pell. Now I will keep it civilized, but your statement that homosexuality is like introducing a virus - that crosses the line. Gays are people too, marriage is a formality and it may as well be extended to people who have an interest in it.

Homosexuality is by default a vast minority of society and so shall it remain because no matter how hard you try you cannot get two heterosexual people (who make up the vast majority of society) to all of a sudden turn gay. There will always be people who strongly attracted to the opposite sex and happen to enjoy exploiting these interlocking bodies properly.

 

[Renne]

I have some second hand experience as my cousin who knew he was never actually gay turned gay about a year ago. [...] I GUARANTEE he wouldn't have turned gay if being gay wasn't becoming so socially acceptable and 'cool.'

How can you know? Unless you're inside his head, how do you know if he "turned gay", instead of being like that all his life but conforming to society's expectations of what a man is supposed to be like?

By the way, I hate that term "turned gay" like poison - people who are gay are gay.

They don't "turn" gay. They are not attracted to members of the opposite sex, and they are not waiting for the "right" man or woman to "turn" them straight.

That being said I do know there are people who are gay because it's 'cool' and while that irritates me to an extent [because of attitudes like this it inflicts on people who are gay, have always been gay and will always be gay whether they're "out" or not], I believe that people have a right to choose, just as they have a right to choose who they want to marry - and the marriage thing goes beyond just having a piece of paper to prove they love each other, a marriage gives equal rights in the relationship. As it stands in most places in the world in this day, gay couples aren't afforded even half of the rights straight couples are. Why should two people who are gay and love each other enough to want to spend the rest of their life together be disadvantaged by society because they don't happen to have fallen in love with someone of the opposite sex?

And you know what? I'm not for marriage personally. I find it unnecessary - in most cases. But if marriage is what you need to be recognised by the law - the law, not by the Church - as a couple and thus having the rights of a couple (gay couples in most places aren't even awarded the same rights as defacto straight couples) then I'm all for gay marriage. Gay people are not second class citizens just because the person they love happens to be of the same biological sex as them.

Besides, the world is overpopulated as is, so I don't know how people can argue that our human purpose is to procreate - that is a purely religious argument. What, are we meant to produce babies until the planet falls completely apart because it is incapable of supporting the life on it? Do we expand to other planets just to overpopulate them too? Are we to be some kind of plague on the universe, who's sole purpose is to spread and multiply and suffocate everything until their is only us left?

I am a woman. I am not intending to have children, and quite frankly, I find the concept you're pushing here that my sole purpose on this planet is to marry and be a baby-producting machine quite appalling and abhorrent.

It's immoral and unethical and it is downright spitting in the face of God's laws. (I'm an athiest, but I'm speaking from a Christian point of view).

I wish you'd put that at the start of your rant, and then I wouldn't have bothered to read it at all because of the sheer paradoxical nature of the argument you're atempting to push.

If you're an athiest, why are you speaking from a Christian viewpoint? Why push the Christian agenda? I mean, I would never have guessed you to be an athiest at all from this religious-slanted rhetoric and I'm sure I'm not the only one. So why not speak from an athiest's point of view? Wouldn't that be more logical?

 

[Renne]

This question becomes a little bit different when we are moving into using IVF etc to allow gay couples to have children, here there is no other parent for the kid to confide in, a boy could be raised by a lesbian mother but having a father there is important.

I understand where you're coming from here, but where does your opinion lie with regards to single parents? There are parents out there who are either divorced or separated, or their spouse has died, or they're a single parent who has gone through the IVF system to have a child.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the child will have no role model of the opposite sex to their parent. And it's the same with gay couples. Add to that the fact that gay couples are made terribly aware of just how much society thinks they are lacking when it comes to male/female role models, a lot of them will have someone who can step into that lacking role. Of course, some won't, but heterosexual relationships are hardly perfect either. If the choice was between a loving same sex couple and an abusive heterosexual couple I think I would I would choose.

There are cool male role models, if I was given the choice between Queer Eye guys (I dont even watch the damn show because reality TV sucks as we all know) and James Bond I would pick James Bond because he is suave and cool and gets the beatiful women.

I'd pick James Bond too!

Wait...

Marriage has been fucked over by heterosexuals enough

Exactly. I don't know how people can argue for gay marriage disrupting the fabric of heterosexual society like that - I mean, just take a look at that sham marriage Britney Spears had this year. Or those wife swap reality television shows. There's an argument for heretosexuals doing more damage to heterosexual marriage than gays ever could.

Because really, when it comes to gays what a lot of people really believe are the flaming stereotypes: that gay people are all immoral, unethical and promiscuous, engaging constantly in unsafe sex practices. Don't get me started on the bisexuals.

 

[AussieU2fanman]

Okay. I strongly disagree when you said that straight people cannot be turned gay by the media\gay rights. I don't understand why you don't agree with me on that issue. It seems obvious that sexuality is a fashionble, almost tangible thing these days. It can be advertised like a can of coke. Advertising that homosexuality is okay can cause straight people to become gay, which I believe is very wrong.

I definately acknowledge that there are genuine homosexuals out there, and even though they can't help it, it is still immoral and unethical in my belief system. This seems cruel, but there are just some creases that can't be ironed out! Not everything is perfect in this world, and we have to stop pretending it is.
Now, I strongly believe that society should not encourage homosexuality, let alone infringe on the sanctity of marriage. That is too far. You can be a homosexual, but marrying another person of the same sex is going against every moral fibre in my body, and human nature for the past billion years! And if you disagree there, then there is no point in debating, we must agree to disagree!
I do believe that human evolution is retreating in a sense. I think that human nature is not evolving, instead it is falling back on itself. By changing human nature by converting straight people to gay people, that is halting our human development where real love between a man and a women are no longer becoming the common medium.
As for that 'introducing a virus' comment, I wasn't referring to genuine homosexuals. I was referring to the gay marriage ellegibility and the media blitz. That is a virus that will cause
a outburst of converted homosexuals and straight couples will be in the same category\number as gay couples very soon, which is an absolute social disaster in my mind. If you people think that is fine, then I have nothing to say
Thankyou for responding rationally! I thought I was going to get blasted

 

[A_Wanderer]

Advertise as much as you like I could never get a hard on over another man - sexuality is pretty much hard wired.

One must remember that 50 years ago there may still have been the same frequency of gay individuals but they hid their sexuality and never "came out of the closet". The myth that somehow homosexuality is a new thing is just not true, it was there in Ancient Greece, it was there in the Victorian era and it is with us today - the percentage of individuals who have some degree of sexual attraction to the same sex is the same today as it ever was, only now it is practiced openly.

You are peddling the same crap that about gays as the church does. How many gay people do you know? Have they ever done anything to convert your to their sexual preference?

You treat homosexuality as if it were by definition a bad thing. What on earth is wrong with being gay?

 

[AussieU2fanman]

How can you know? Unless you're inside his head, how do you know if he "turned gay", instead of being like that all his life but conforming to society's expectations of what a man is supposed to be like?

By the way, I hate that term "turned gay" like poison - people who are gay are gay.

They don't "turn" gay. They are not attracted to members of the opposite sex, and they are not waiting for the "right" man or woman to "turn" them straight.

Well I can assure you that he was in a genuine loving relationship with another female, and he even aknowledged that he did turn gay, rather than 'Being gay was natural all along.'
I strongly believe that people can be 'converted' to homosexuality, see my previous post for more info.

[/QUOTE]


Besides, the world is overpopulated as is, so I don't know how people can argue that our human purpose is to procreate - that is a purely religious argument. What, are we meant to produce babies until the planet falls completely apart because it is incapable of supporting the life on it? Do we expand to other planets just to overpopulate them too? Are we to be some kind of plague on the universe, who's sole purpose is to spread and multiply and suffocate everything until their is only us left?

I am a woman. I am not intending to have children, and quite frankly, I find the concept you're pushing here that my sole purpose on this planet is to marry and be a baby-producting machine quite appalling and abhorrent.
[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure 99% of people in the world would agree that the primary human goal is to procreate! I'll be damned if I am wrong on that one! Even though the world is populated, that doesn't change our primary goal in human nature. The physcical containment as a result of procreation hardly affects the purpose itself. We can all move to Mars to get more room if you disagree with me! Anyway, this is getting slightly off topic.

[/QUOTE]
I wish you'd put that at the start of your rant, and then I wouldn't have bothered to read it at all because of the sheer paradoxical nature of the argument you're atempting to push.

If you're an athiest, why are you speaking from a Christian viewpoint? Why push the Christian agenda? I mean, I would never have guessed you to be an athiest at all from this religious-slanted rhetoric and I'm sure I'm not the only one. So why not speak from an athiest's point of view? Wouldn't that be more logical? [/QUOTE]

Because I was trying to put forward an argument based on the lowest common denominator, Christians, to make it easier for people to understand. It is obviously the most common religion everywhere. Even though I am an athiest and I disagree strongly on virtually all things the Church teaches, however, we share a similar ground on this moral and ethical issue.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Now I fear that you renounced your faith but not its more questionable teachings or principles.

Your morality is shaped by the very religion you so claim to despise and no doubt the way that you were raised. You really should approach such matters objectively.

More gay men = less competition when getting a girl.

A simple no-nonsense reason that heterosexual men should support gay rights.

I mean honestly, there is no pink menace. Homosexuality is part of human nature for better or worse.

This topic shall be debated because you decided to throw it into the conversation like a molatov cocktale (as I too have done), we shall do so with civility because that is what FYM is all about - talking about issues in order to understand them better.

 

[Renne]

I strongly believe that people can be 'converted' to homosexuality, see my previous post for more info.

I have to say that I'm with A_Wanderer on this one. You either are or you aren't or you're doing it because it's the hip thing to do. You don't "turn" anything.

We can all move to Mars to get more room if you disagree with me!

Did you even read my comment?

Anyway, this is getting slightly off topic.

Hardly, as it was you yourself who brought up that the human purpose, apparently, is to procreate.

I am intending on not procreating. I am also not a straight woman in the sense that I find men and only men attractive. Therefore I may quite easily choose to spend the rest of my life with a woman I love. So I see the relevance of this.

Because I was trying to put forward an argument based on the lowest common denominator, Christians, to make it easier for people to understand.

Personally, I'd rather read a logically constructed argument based on someones belief system than them trying to promote the agenda of an ideology they don't personally believe in.

[You're an atheist therefore you do not believe. That simple.]