User Tag List

First 8161718192028 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 319

  1. #171
    Another awesome member. Curator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    eNFP
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    901

    Default

    hmmm, well, My general opinion, is that Marriage is considered a religious institution meant to be between a man and a woman, a ceremony of great importance that is integral to many religious belief systems, and that the most even handed thing to do for everyone, would be to remove ALL legal benefits for marriage, let it remain only a religious ceremony with no government benefits or recognition, then offer everyone regardless of the couples sex federally supported Civil unions with all of the same benefits marriage had.
    (I'm also for offering these civil unions to polygamists, as long as they are consenting adults, I don't see the harm in more than two people wanting to be in a committed relationship to each other.)

    That way the religious people have nothing to complain about (although some of the REAL hardliners will still complain) and the Gay rights advocates will have nothing to complain about (again, some of the REAL hardliners will still complain) and voila! equality under the law!

    Usually the best compromise, is the one the hardliners on either side wont like.

    Just my two cents.
    Last edited by Curator; 01-24-2011 at 07:00 AM. Reason: Edited for grammar, its 4 am...LOL.

  2. #172
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Curator View Post
    hmmm, well, My general opinion, is that Marriage is considered a religious institution meant to be between a man and a woman, a ceremony of great importance that is integral to many religious belief systems, and that the most even handed thing to do for everyone, would be to remove ALL legal benefits for marriage, let it remain only a religious ceremony with no government benefits or recognition, then offer everyone regardless of the couples sex federally supported Civil unions with all of the same benefits marriage had.
    (I'm also for offering these civil unions to polygamists, as long as they are consenting adults, I don't see the harm in more than two people wanting to be in a committed relationship to each other.)
    That is the best solution. But of course the religious right would raise a hue and cry to no end at the mere thought, even though the concept is, to some degree, actually already in effect, they just call both things 'marriage'.

  3. #173
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by perfectgirl View Post
    Come on Jennifer, you know better than that. Two females cannot procreate, just like two males cannot procreate. A man's asshole doesn't lubricate itself or lead to the 'magic' egg. Furthermore, I don't care about your skewed 'feel good' hippie philosophies or Joan Roughgarden's hippie book "Evolution's Rainbow" regarding animal sex. Think for yourself!

    The animal anomalies stated in your post have absolutely NOTHING to do with human reproductive biology. Nothing! Nor does the animal brain even compare to the human brain in size and intelligence. "Rationally then", the choice to override your discussion on animal homosexuality has to do with my superior intelligence and independent thinking. There isn't an animal brain on this earth that can outperform the intellectual feats of the human brain, so it's not surprising to hear about precarious animal instincts. I don't need double rainbows and Joan Roughgarden's research to shed new light on the well established scientific truths. Please! :rolleyes2:
    Satire might be funny, but it doesn't legitimately deal with the issues I raised.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #174
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    The biggest issues with homosexuality are obvious. People are afraid that if homosexuality is permitted, too many people will choose same-sex partners, thus preventing the human race from reproducing. This is the most logical reason, all the others are pretty much religious in nature, and come from a basic fear of social degradation that may occur if religious principles are violated.

    I think that right now, however, we have a population problem, so homosexuality is actually a good thing... because these people won't breed and place additional strain on our social structure.

    However, I will say that if our population growth slows down too much, and we find that too many people are in same-sex marriages, we should probably go back to the old laws at that point. But I personally believe that enough people are biologically wired to be attracted to the opposite sex that laws and social codes pressuring them to do so are not necessary to ensure reproduction will occur. If we try it, and that turns out not to be true, I will change my position.

  5. #175
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    The biggest issues with homosexuality are obvious. People are afraid that if homosexuality is permitted, too many people will choose same-sex partners, thus preventing the human race from reproducing.
    Preconditions:

    1. Marriage is necessary for people to procreate.
    2. The state can dictate what people do with their lives. We need more cameras.
    3. Homosexuality grows in relation to heterosexuality, because, as we all know, people become gay around gay people.
    4. Unless otherwise permitted, homosexual people force themselves to procreate in the manner desired by their repressive heterosexual fellow citizens.
    5. We care about the human race in general and in the future, although we do not care about the people living right now and their desire to live a fulfulling life.
    Last edited by Nicodemus; 01-24-2011 at 07:36 PM.

  6. #176
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    However, I will say that if our population growth slows down too much, and we find that too many people are in same-sex marriages, we should probably go back to the old laws at that point.
    Ath... honestly, I really don't think people are going to flock to same-sex marriages.

    Hets find it as difficult to be gay as much as gays find it as hard to be het.
    And some even feel repulsion over it.
    That's been part of the problem.

    At best, I can see straight women who have issues with men and good emotional intimacy with other women to maybe want to build a stable BFF-style commitment with each other... but that's the only realistic scenario I see for self-professing straights to enter any sort of same-sex union... and these sorts of pairings probably would never be sexually intimate, it would just be a family unit.

    I really don't think, given the male sex drive and the nature of heterosexual sexuality, that there's an issue with the human race diminishing if same-sex marriage is permitted. (And even gay people often reproduce before they decide that the het thing does not work for them and they need to change their lives.)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #177
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Preconditions:

    1. Marriage is necessary for people to procreate.
    2. The state can dictate what people do with their lives. We need more cameras.
    3. Homosexuality grows in ratio to heterosexuality, because, as we all know, people become gay around gay people.
    4. Unless otherwise permitted, homosexual people force themselves to procreate in the manner desired by their repressive heterosexual fellow citizens.
    5. We care about the human race in general and in the future, although we do not care about the people living right now and their desire to live a fulfully life.
    I didn't say it was GOOD logic.

    But if you start with those assumptions, it seems logical. And I know a surprising number of people who start with several of them.

    I can understand the emotions of people who make those assumptions, and thus feel empathy, because if I did so, I would feel the same way. But of course, I don't, because I've analyzed and dismissed all of those assumptions (although sometimes I drift back into believing 2 and 5).

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Ath... honestly, I really don't think people are going to flock to same-sex marriages.
    I don't think so, either. I was just saying that if, by some near-zero chance, it did happen, I would see the point that people were making against it.

  8. #178
    Diabolical Kasper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    11,544

    Default

    Recon this just about covers it:



    Nothing else to say really, those who have an issue with it tend to have an issue with homosexuality in general, and usually in the name of religion, so meh.

    It's a big issue here at the moment and catholic leaders have been instructed to get their congregations to write to politicians to stop equal marriage getting through government. It's really such a frightening proposition for them that they would stand on a pulpit and condemn gays publically. Sad.

  9. #179
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Does the legal institution of marriage, as it exists in modern society, even resemble your concept of marriage then?
    With no-fault divorce in place for example, I would have to answer in the negative.

    Does it deserve to bear the same name?
    Yes, since in essence it's still marriage - abeit a weakened and bastardized version of it. Of course this is assuming we're still talking about union of male and female here.

    I hope you agree at least that there is a difference between a marriage before the law and one before god.
    It depends.

  10. #180
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight View Post
    I had it explained to me.. that maybe I should explain a few things.. so people better understand.

    Here in Ottawa, the gay community has a lot of political clout. They earn more money on average than straight people and have a higher disposable income on average due not having traditional families.
    They have been accepted pretty much into the main stream . They can also legally marry.
    SO it seems that perhaps there is a communication breakdown because I am not taking about giving rights to gays, but rather about the effects of what some are fighting for.
    You can't understand my argument. because you don't understand how different things are here, and I don't understand how different things are there.

    Here in Ottawa.. the university was forced to take down a valentine decoration because it depicted a silhouette of man and woman kissing inside of a heart. The reason? Because it discriminated against same sex unions.

    So in light of the higher income, the political clout and the equal rights. there is still a need to feel this prevailing sense of persecution and unequal opportunity when statistics say otherwise.
    It is in fact the hetero culture that is under attack here.
    The irony is the Gays wanted to become mainstream and they have.. in more ways than one.. They in fact now discriminate against the culture they wanted so badly to be part of, by first claiming that they want to be equal and part of it, and then become such a part of it that they become what they used to fight against. Which is having someone else's morality crammed down your throat and being ostracized and labeled if you don't get with the program.
    They still end up rejecting what they wanted, anyway.. How? by claiming to still be special even though they are just one of the guys like they asked to be and were granted.

    I hope the difference in political culture clears up why my arguments might seem so polarized to many Americans.

    I am presenting the story after the fact,, and many of you are still fighting for that fact to exist.
    I am talking about your future, and you are talking about my past. This might explain a few things .

    Oh and I was also told I am working class.. So I am too well aware of the differences between the majority and minorities. That if I was a multi-millionaire I wouldn't care as much about the majority.
    This was ascertained, because I said everybody needs to stop whining so god damn much about their personal issues like they are only ones that know suffering.. We all know suffering and suffering is indiscriminate. No one's suffering is more special than anyone else's.
    This makes me a socialist apparently..
    I agree with you that PC-ness can get ridiculous, particularly in Ottawa for obvious reasons. I don't think that this PCness implies any sort of attack on heterosexuality any more than I think "happy holidays" implies an attack on christmas or "firefighter" implies an attack on men who fight fires. It's just PCness, and some people like it more than others, that's all.

    Your arguments seem extremely polarized to me and I'm not American; I also live in Ottawa. I'm curious where your views come from since I don't see this happening at all in this city.
    -end of thread-

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] The Limits of Awesomeness (alternatively, Common ENTP Issues)
    By Qre:us in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 10:23 AM
  2. The issues of fatherlessness.
    By guesswho in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-02-2011, 12:40 AM
  3. The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage
    By teslashock in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 04-12-2010, 02:51 PM
  4. So what's really the big deal about Gay marriage?
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 12:06 PM
  5. Gay marriage, adoption, related issues -- Take 2
    By Zergling in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 01:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO