SPLIT--> Judicial Review & Gay Marriage - Page 5 - 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 10-14-2007, 01:33 PM   #81
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


And, if we're all on the same page about marriage rates and out- of-wedlock births rising before same-sex marriage, why can't we "monitor" those rates afterwards given these kind of statements from same-sex advocates, also from the article?



you do see the hilarious irony, though, don't you?

guess who's never, ever going to have a single out-of-wedlock childbirth?

gay people.

so let the gay people get married so they can form stable unions and then go about adopting the children that you irresponsible straight people keep shitting out onto the street, just stop blaming us for your shortcomings.

you realize, too, that blaming gay people for things that are 100% straight is really no different than the scapegoating of the Jews.



[q]Now, the American debate is more centered on equality and stability, but is it really bigoted nonsense to even consider the question of the long term effects of same-sex marriage on society? After all, I thought we all approved science, even if it's only social science.[/q]

do you realize the leap you're making when you're blaming the decline of striaght marriages on the rise of gay marriage? you realize that one has NOTHING to do with one another? these are very, very basic Psychology 101 mistakes you're making. the *only* correlation that might be made is when civil unions become an option #2, and open to everyone. then, you might see straights entering into relationships that have been definitionally created as "separate but equal" and, due to your need to kick gay people, they aren't as strong as marriage. however, this is another straight issue that you're foisting on gay people. and thusly, the only way to solve it, is to remove discrimination from marriage and have it open to consenting adult partners, gay or straight.




Quote:
So how is Mike Huckabee or myself wrong when we say "marriage does matter, I would add that nothing in our society matters more. Our true strength doesn't come from our military or our gross national product, it comes from our families."?
so you "make marriage matter" by kicking gay people out? by providing straight people scapegoats? by saying, "no, it's not your fault you got married after you got pregnant by 19 and now you're 26 and you hate each other; it's those terrible gays who want to get married, that's why you want a divorce."

i'm all for straights getting all the help they apparently need, i just don't want to be your scapegoat.

if you're so concerned with the decline of heteorsexual marriage, then lets push legislation that have prohibitions on divorce, birth control, adultery, and female employment.

deal with your own shit, don't put it on me. i haven't done anything except ask to be treated like a citizen of the United States.
__________________

Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 01:38 PM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha
So, the homos are responsible for illegitimate births among heteros?

"Put same-sex marriage aside for a moment, this was also the argument in the 90's about single-family households and Murphy Brown."
Wow!! I thought that was pretty clear. Haven't you mentioned that you're a school teacher?
Quote:
And homos who want to marry ...will be responsible for fewer marrriages?
Is that really what you're saying? If so, did you pull a muscle arriving at these conclusions?
Just quoting Dutch advocates of same-sex marriage. Why don't you ask them for clarification.
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 01:42 PM   #83
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
[B]
"Put same-sex marriage aside for a moment, this was also the argument in the 90's about single-family households and Murphy Brown."

but you're blaming gay people for straight failures. one has nothing to do with one another. nothing.






[q]Just quoting Dutch advocates of same-sex marriage. Why don't you ask them for clarification. [/q]

why are you assuming that these two wild quotes from far left politicians are representative of majority Dutch opinion, or even that such motivations are present in the United States.

i have never, ever heard any serious public figure in the United States make those arguments.

anyway, again, there's a huge irony here: the only people arguing for a smorgasboard of relationship options are straight people. we are at a point where all of the Democratic candidates, a majority of US citizens, and even many Republicans, are all in favor of Civil Unions. it's gay people who want marriage, not a Diet Marriage, but all we seem to be able to get, right now, is this Marriage Lite option.

so, again, it is STRAIGHT people and their inability to view gay people as their human equivalents that are creating this relationship smorgasboard that you so seem to fear. it is not gay people at all. the mainstream gay position, for now, is that we want marriage, but we'll have to settle for civil unions.

again: ALL YOUR FAULT.

stop blaming me for the inability of straight people to live up to your ideals.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 01:47 PM   #84
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Kurtz: In the mid-1990s, out-of-wedlock births, already rising, began a steeper increase


Kurtz: No Western society has secularized more radically or rapidly than Holland. The Netherlands changed from one of the most religious countries in Europe to one of the most secular. Today, nearly three-quarters of the Dutch under 35 claim no religious affiliation.


Kurtz: The cultural revolution of the 1960s weakened the churches. Once faith became too fragile to sustain the social order, the pillars collapsed.... Even as premarital cohabitation became nearly universal, and as cohabitation acquired virtually equal status with marriage under Dutch law in the 1980s


what does any of this have to do with gay people who want to get married?
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 01:52 PM   #85
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 09:48 PM
It has also become a lot easier to get divorced in the last 2-3 decades (depending on the jurisdiction) which accounts for a large number of the divorces obtained since.

But then I suppose some people would prefer that one stay miserable in a marriage like they used to back in the 50s.
anitram is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:29 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


do you realize the leap you're making when you're blaming the decline of striaght marriages on the rise of gay marriage? you realize that one has NOTHING to do with one another? these are very, very basic Psychology 101 mistakes you're making. the *only* correlation that might be made is when civil unions become an option #2, and open to everyone. then, you might see straights entering into relationships that have been definitionally created as "separate but equal" and, due to your need to kick gay people, they aren't as strong as marriage. however, this is another straight issue that you're foisting on gay people. and thusly, the only way to solve it, is to remove discrimination from marriage and have it open to consenting adult partners, gay or straight.

You overanalyze, if this were a debate it would start off:

Proposed (pun not intended)
* Spend enough time telling people that marriage is not about parenthood and they just might begin to believe you. Make household diversity and relationship equality a rallying cry, remove societal supports, and people might decide that all forms of relationship are equal -- especially young people, of family-forming age, most of whom have left religion behind. *

Now this debate started decades before any country sanctioned same-sex marriage. It isn't "Gays are ruining everything" it's "are all forms of relationships equal?" and "should society promote any above the others?"

I think that's a debate worth having. Those in the "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business" crowd don't.

Quote:
if you're so concerned with the decline of heteorsexual marriage, then lets push legislation that have prohibitions on divorce, birth control, adultery, and female employment.

deal with your own shit, don't put it on me. i haven't done anything except ask to be treated like a citizen of the United States.
On what grounds? Personal responsibility is out. Morality is out.
Remember it's "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business."
INDY500 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:29 PM   #87
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Racists had the same exact "science" to back up their views that integration was a bad thing.
BVS is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:34 PM   #88
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,786
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
On what grounds? Personal responsibility is out. Morality is out.
Remember it's "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business."
Who needs "personal responsibility" when we can blame "the gays" instead?
melon is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:34 PM   #89
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
"should society promote any above the others?"
Do you think it should?
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:39 PM   #90
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Personal responsibility is out. Morality is out.
That's your fault, not ours...
BVS is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:43 PM   #91
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,786
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Now this debate started decades before any country sanctioned same-sex marriage. It isn't "Gays are ruining everything" it's "are all forms of relationships equal?" and "should society promote any above the others?"

I think that's a debate worth having. Those in the "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business" don't.
And what if the answer to this "debate" was to have gay marriage and to abolish straight marriage?

That's the thing. You're happy to have a debate, where the ultimate conclusion, one way or another, doesn't affect you in the slightest.

The other thing is that this "debate" has already been played out before. I get the sense, though, that you won't let this debate close unless it is exactly the answer you want.

You don't have to ban gay marriage to have programs to support or strengthen marriage. That's the problem with all of this. Conservatives are so drunk with hatred of homosexuals that they are flat out neglecting the things that they can change!

Canadian religious conservatives, understanding that they do not have public or political support for eliminating gay marriage, recently had a conference on how to strengthen marriages in Canada...and had few to no mentions of gay marriage at all. What a novel concept! It's too bad that American religious conservatives are too narrow-minded to do the same. Strengthening marriages and legalized gay marriage can--God forbid--exist simultaneously!
melon is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:51 PM   #92
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Wow!! I thought that was pretty clear. Haven't you mentioned that you're a school teacher?
Proudly, and if any one of my students attempted the infuckingsane leaps you attempt, I'd fail them on that particular paper.

Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Just quoting Dutch advocates of same-sex marriage. Why don't you ask them for clarification.
Because you're the guy who used the quote to back your bigoted bullshit.
martha is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 02:59 PM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Any third grader who knows how to read a graph could see the curve was heading that direction without that factor...

FreeRepublic, that's so sweet that conservatives would think that would be considered a legitimate source.
You idiot, don't you understand that really means that out of wedlock births cause gay marriage, so if we want to protect the sanctity of marriage then pregnant women must be married off ASAP. The only way to stop gay sinfulness is to stop all sinfulness, equally.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 03:01 PM   #94
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
out of wedlock births cause gay marriage
You, sir, are onto something there!

That must be it! There's no other way to link them that makes any sense, so that's got to be it!
martha is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 03:12 PM   #95
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Now this debate started decades before any country sanctioned same-sex marriage. It isn't "Gays are ruining everything" it's "are all forms of relationships equal?" and "should society promote any above the others?"

I think that's a debate worth having. Those in the "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business" crowd don't.

On what grounds? Personal responsibility is out. Morality is out.
Remember it's "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business."
Now what you have here is the epitome of a statist, there is an issue which your gut tells you is wrong, namely gays getting married, and it must be stopped. And they won't listen to the pleas to make them stop so state force has to be used. Governmental obfuscation of liberty is the same all over the world, and it is generally wrong.

Your not taking a stand for personal responsibility at all, you want to use the state to enforce your morality thus robbing individuals the freedom to do the right thing.

Freedom of choice includes the choice to do the right thing, a monogamous relationship straight or gay is generally thought to be the right thing, if you want to obfuscate the freedom to marry, then you are preventing gays from doing the right thing.

It keeps coming down to it across so many of these hot button issues like the gays, prayer in school, flag burning etc. where people take their gut feeling and want to use it as an excuse to crush others liberties. There is no freedom from being offended.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 05:07 PM   #96
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

Your not taking a stand for personal responsibility at all, you want to use the state to enforce your morality thus robbing individuals the freedom to do the right thing.

There's no need for logic in here...
BVS is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 06:05 PM   #97
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,760
Local Time: 09:48 PM
I don't know why people keep pointing to statistics that have to do with marriage(of any kind) here. I think, in this particular debate, that word - "marriage" - is harped on too much. Conservatives want to make this a debate about marriage and relationships, but I think it's really a debate about equality.

The reason it is so offensive to gay people when they are told that they can't get married is not just that it prevents them from being able to tie the knot, it's because it sends the message loud and clear that they are somehow lesser people than straight people, and that they somehow deserve lesser liberties than straight people. This sentiment is, of course, bullshit.

So, instead of posting statistics about marriage and out-of-wed births and this sort of thing, I think the anti-gay-marriage crowd should just put all that crap aside and ask themselves one question: "Why do I act as though a gay person is a lesser person than I?".

And when you can't answer that question with any kind of validity, perhaps you'll see the light. There is absolutely no reason to treat them differently just because their sexual orientation is different. In the end, that's the point of this. A straight couple might want to get married, or they might want to stay together without getting married. But they have the choice. And that's all the gay community wants: the choice. The equality.
namkcuR is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 06:16 PM   #98
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,749
Local Time: 08:48 PM
all this debate over marriage. and how many of us walk the talk we give??? how many are REALLY going to vote for the candidate who DOES believe that all are equal and believes that love defines marriage and will create legislation in support of that? how many are REALLY going to vote for a candidate that is pro-gay marriage?
unico is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 06:30 PM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

that marriage is not about parenthood and they just might begin to believe you.



how hard is this?

marriage does not equal parenthood. many straight people are married and have no children. many are unmarried and have children. some cohabitate, some are single. marriage is incidental to parenthood. many gay people would get married and have children, many would not.

one has nothing to do with the other, necessarily. it can be agreed that a marriage can enhance one's parental abilities, but one does not need to exist for the sake of the other.




[q]Make household diversity and relationship equality a rallying cry, remove societal supports, and people might decide that all forms of relationship are equal -- especially young people, of family-forming age, most of whom have left religion behind. *[/q]

so what you are saying is that a gay relationship is less worthy than a straight one.

if you'd just come out and say that, then we might have time.

what you don't get is that gay people don't want to change anything. they just want to be let into the club.




[q]Now this debate started decades before any country sanctioned same-sex marriage. It isn't "Gays are ruining everything" it's "are all forms of relationships equal?" and "should society promote any above the others?"[/q]

please, please, please tell me: how is a straight relationship better than a gay one? please, please, please tell me why you would defend Britney's right to marry anyone, anywhere, for however long she wants, and then turn around and tell me that my relationshpis, always, at all times, are worse than hers.

you are valuing form over content. and this is what comes up -- for when you say that one "form" is by definition superior, you ignore content.



Quote:
On what grounds? Personal responsibility is out. Morality is out.
Remember it's "Just let people live their lives any way they damn well please and keep your nose out of their business."

well, i'm sad. i guess i really have failed at trying to flesh my life and relationship out. i've shared so much on this board, i've talked about very, very personal things, and all in order to try and get you to see, INDY, that i am no different from you. yes, i love men in the way that you love women, but other than that, i'm not asking for anything else other than to be treated as your equal. i'm not choosing to live my life any damn way i please. THERE IS NO CHOICE HERE. i'm not choosing shit. the only thing i'm choosing is not to live a life of loneliness and misery. i am choosing to stand up to you and say, yes, i am a worthy person, and my life and loves and relationships are equal to yours in form. i am not asking you to look the other way while i cheat, or abuse my partner, or babysit my kids with the TV, or let my 13 year old smoke pot in the basement, or whatever other fantasies conservatives harbor about how liberals live their lives. all i am asking for is to be treated in exactly the same way you would be treated.

you have absolutely whatsoever no logical argument unless you are going to stand up and say the following two things:

1. Straight relationships are always, and in all ways, preferable to gay relationships, so therefore we have a vested social interest in promoting one and discouraging the other, and it is so important that we need to deny people rights in order to do so

2. Gay people have made a conscious, aware choice to be gay; if they wanted to, they could marry people of the opposite sex, but they choose not to, so therefore, since this option is technically open for them, and since their minority sexual orientation is a chosen action, we don't have to provide any "in" for them into this club, because it already exists.

if you'd just say that, then i wouldn't get so depressed when you post about this subject.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 06:48 PM   #100
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,142
Local Time: 01:48 AM
I'm straight.


I hope to get married some day.



I never want kids. I'm just not the motherly type There are probably a lot more gay men and women out there who would enjoy being parents much more than myself, and they should be allowed to have that opportunity.

A good parent is a good parent regardless of race, sex, or orientation.
__________________

U2democrat 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 08:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×