How exactly does gay marriage negatively affect traditional marriage?

[amerikajin]

Ahhh no, if you step back in time you will see that women were less selfish, men were just as selfish as they are now the difference is that back then men got away with a lot more. Women they stayed home and took care of all things family, while the men were out at with the ol'boys club screwing the secretary. Men were praised for being selfish and women had no where to go so they grinned and beared it. Now women no longer have to do that, thanks goodness, we have options too.

 

Yeah sure men feel jipped now a days with women having equal rights, what's good for the goose is finally good for the gander and men just don't like that. Oh well, boo-hoo for men!

 

Excuse me but we do not live in a "genderless" society we live in an equal "human rights" society. If you can't tell the difference then perhaps you are a biggot at heart.

 

 

A gay couple wanting to marry falls in that category of equality perfectly. They deserve "equal human rights"

 

Ah yes, the so-called "Golden Age," when life was simple, couples truly fell in love and honored their love -- and the fact that they almost never divorced proves it....

 

Dude there were thriving red light districts during the Victorian Age.

[boxing123]

AHH.. I know.. If I do not view the past as women being oppressed, I am a bigot..

 

Sally, if you think the only difference between a man and a woman is a scrotum or vagina, then you are simply not in touch with reality. I feel sorry for you.

 

You think they want gay marriage for increased taxes? What about the trillions added in interest, commerce, and taxes by having women work? That was not a social plan or construct? That was you little women all on your own deciding to go work? You have been manipulated. Manipulated into living loveless, worker slave existences, having some empty random sex, buying junk, paying interest on loans,paying taxes, then dying. Congrats.

 

Ameri, during the Victorian age it was a HUGE victory for women NOT to work. Society evolved so that more important duties could be fulfilled by women like raising children, a less stressful home, division of responsibilities, etc. Unless you feel the millions of women working at meaningless jobs today are really making society thrive.

[sally4sara]

AHH.. I know.. If I do not view the past as women being oppressed, I am a bigot..

 

Sally, if you think the only difference between a man and a woman is a scrotum or vagina, then you are simply not in touch with reality. I feel sorry for you.

 

What on Earth for? Because I am comfortable with anyone of any gender filling any role? I cannot give you a uterus. I cannot grow a scrotum. Nothing else beyond that is impossible. The reality is that simple whether you wish it to be or not.

 

You think they want gay marriage for increased taxes? What about the trillions added in interest, commerce, and taxes by having women work?

 

The answer is for a different thread but I'm sure the reasons for this are somewhat similar. Except that single mothers pay less in taxes while duel income, childless families pay more.

 

That was not a social plan or construct? That was you little women all on your own deciding to go work?

 

I'm sure it was comprised of women who needed to work, wanted to work, and a good mix of somewhere in the middle. It also had to do with jobs needing filled due to wartime situations. We've had this thread already. Where were you? Oh, yeah, still not wanting to hear anything that contradicts YOUR VIEWS.

 

You have been manipulated. Manipulated into living loveless, worker slave existences, having some empty random sex, buying junk, paying interest on loans,paying taxes, then dying. Congrats.

 

I've told you before, I am loved and loved well. I don't have empty sex no matter how much you'd like to believe this. I don't buy anything I don't need because I don't like waste and refinish furniture as a hobby. I have no loans I'm paying; thanks for more assumptions. I get a sizable tax return rather than paying taxes.

You only want to believe women's jobs are pointless and thankless. You only want to believe they'd be happier being dependent on you. That is more of what I said was a bad idea. Making your identity as a male, dependent on the limiting of women. Now its gays. If they can get married too, then all your beliefs about traditional marriage will change and you don't like it. So you tell people it will only bring about bad changes. You site a made up illusion of YOUR idealized good old days to prove your point. But it doesn't make it true.

Want to know what happened to your good old days?

It's called DEMOCRACY. God bless America.

[Jake Barnes]

When you guys see two grooms or two brides together at a wedding ceremony dont tell me it doesn't look absurd to you

[boxing123]

We do not live in a democracy, we live in a republic.

 

Face it, you work out of necessity. Not because you want to. If work defines you, then you are a rather boring person. There are too many things to do besides work.

 

You are not living in "freedom" now. Women are merely trapped in a different societal box. In the old box women served a husband and family and received love and freedom of mind.

 

In the new box women more often simply have different people they serve, and receive less love. A boss, landlord, bank, taxes, etc and receive money along with less freedom of mind.

 

This is all off topic, but blurring gender roles further is not a good thing in my opinion for men or women. And it is not because I want women to "serve" me. That is just dumb.

 

Jake of course, it is simply idiotic.

[boxing123]

There was some "true life" show on mtv about gay marriage.

 

It followed gays who are trying to get married.

 

So these 2 guys get married, and of course throughout the show it is painting them to be some loving monogamous couple etc..

 

So after they get married, what do they do? Throw some fetish ball with drag queens, gays, lesbians, tranvestites, etc and one of them looks at an attractive man and says something like "This is going to be a great night", basically hinting that there are lots of available sex partners..

 

Just plain ridiculous.

[Jake Barnes]

There was some "true life" show on mtv about gay marriage.

 

It followed gays who are trying to get married.

 

So these 2 guys get married, and of course throughout the show it is painting them to be some loving monogamous couple etc..

 

So after they get married, what do they do? Throw some fetish ball with drag queens, gays, lesbians, tranvestites, etc and one of them looks at an attractive man and says something like "This is going to be a great night", basically hinting that there are lots of available sex partners..

 

Just plain ridiculous.

 

How touching

 

I think I saw a movie like that starring Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn

[39388]

Don't look then. Problem solved.

Maybe those who yell the loudest against gay marriage want to look.

[39388]

There does seem to be an inordinate fascination for some to dwell so on it, wouldn't you say?

 

I mean, seriously, in my every day life I just don't think about things like this. I'm not gay, so it doesn't affect me personally.

Yeah, it's the same way here. I couldn't even imagaine being attracted to another man. It only comes up sometimes when discussing political issues.

 

Isn't if funny how Boxing is the one who watches the MTV show about gays?

[Untouchable_Fire]

So for all of you who believe so fervently that gays should not marry....how exactly would gay marriage negatively impact traditional marriage?

That is your concern, right?

How would gay marriage cause straight marriages to lose value?

 

Marriage is a religious institution which is legally recognized and socially accepted. If the government made marriage illegal, it would still exist. If marriage were socially unrecognized it would still exist. If the government forcibly removes the religious context from marriage, then it becomes something different.

 

So, the real question is... What's wrong with Civil Unions?

 

Why is it so important to suppress and oppress religious freedoms that you would give up even the opportunity to gain rights for the gay community?

[boxing123]

I watch shows about serial killers too. Doesn't me I strive to be one.

 

Misery loves company. As many of you "pro gay" people ask, "Why would anyone choose to be gay? They have a horrible life" etc etc.

 

So some uppity gays, and right wing/Christian bashers want to bring down all of society to some very low moral tone because they are "born gay" and miserable. So we need to recognize that 2 men having anal sex then blowing each other with feces on their units is quite normal and the same type of relationship men have with women. Sorry, it isn't.

[boxing123]

One more question for the "pro gay marriage crowd"

 

Well, many of you say heteros cheat, heteros divorce, marriage is not for children etc.

 

So why don't we do away with marriage altogether? It does not mean much right? Why is it needed in society?

 

If you are saying anyone can marry I.E. Friends of the same sex, gays of the same sex, Friends of the same sex who have sex, etc, then what does marriage really mean anyway?

[sally4sara]

I watch shows about serial killers too. Doesn't me I strive to be one.

 

Misery loves company. As many of you "pro gay" people ask, "Why would anyone choose to be gay? They have a horrible life" etc etc.

 

So some uppity gays, and right wing/Christian bashers want to bring down all of society to some very low moral tone because they are "born gay" and miserable. So we need to recognize that 2 men having anal sex then blowing each other with feces on their units is quite normal and the same type of relationship men have with women. Sorry, it isn't.

 

So if the anal sex/feces eaters are of opposite gender, do you approve of it (and not bother watching shows about it)?

Yes all those pairings of people can get married, also and including gays AND heteros of opposite gender who do or don't have sex.

Its a partnership. Two people with something to add to the arrangement and a promise to look out for one another.

 

In the book 'Hagakure' (Way of the Samurai), there is a really interesting role one can take on called a "Retainer". You place another person's interests at least at the same level, if not more important, as you place your own interests. You see to their goals and protect their endevors. To chose someone as capable of doing this as you can vow to do for them is a wise choice IMO. Why is it so hard to believe that people can partner up like this without OMG! bringing down the complete moral tone of society!

Who's moral tone? Your's? Well aren't you self important?!

The right wing christians can just continue to not be gay if they want. Just because its going to become legal doesn't mean they all have to go buy Johnny McGovern CDS and start blowing each other on day one. Day 7, maaayybe.

 

Its going to become legal and I know you already see enemies everywhere as it is, but its going to be alright. Life goes on.

[Untouchable_Fire]

Its going to become legal and I know you already see enemies everywhere as it is, but its going to be alright. Life goes on.

 

Yes, it will be legal some day. Yes, life will go on as normal for you. However, there are many of us that do not hold to the "mainstream" view, and we will face discrimination for it.

 

I just saw Miss. California lost because she stuck to her beliefs. Again, this issue isn't about gay rights... It's about the discriminating against people of faith.

 

My ancestors came to this country, fought and bled for this country so that they could live free from religious persecution. We need to protect those rights.

[sally4sara]

Yes, it will be legal some day. Yes, life will go on as normal for you. However, there are many of us that do not hold to the "mainstream" view, and we will face discrimination for it.

 

I just saw Miss. California lost because she stuck to her beliefs. Again, this issue isn't about gay rights... It's about the discriminating against people of faith.

 

My ancestors came to this country, fought and bled for this country so that they could live free from religious persecution. We need to protect those rights.

 

Protect the rights of people who persecute due to religious beliefs......only if I HAVE to.

Can you imagine your kid telling you you had to buy them a car inspite of a report card full of Ds because The Great Rock Lizard who dwelleth in the highest mount commanded it so and all those that oppose him get damned to the ovens of Gloried Betty Crocker....praise Garnockt the lizard-son?

 

That is how it sounds to people who don't believe what you believe. Go to your church, read your bible and tell your kids all the impossible things you want to get them to live by your rules under your roof, but PLEASE, stop asking everyone else to hold your faith up for you. It is NOT persecusion when people want to also live free but different than you.

[Jake Barnes]

Protect the rights of people who persecute due to religious beliefs......only if I HAVE to.

Can you imagine your kid telling you you had to buy them a car inspite of a report card full of Ds because The Great Rock Lizard who dwelleth in the highest mount commanded it so and all those that oppose him get damned to the ovens of Gloried Betty Crocker....praise Garnockt the lizard-son?

 

That is how it sounds to people who don't believe what you believe. Go to your church, read your bible and tell your kids all the impossible things you want to get them to live by your rules under your roof, but PLEASE, stop asking everyone else to hold your faith up for you. It is NOT persecusion when people want to also live free but different than you.

Sally

 

What do you think of denying the tax exempt status of churches that refuse to recognize gay marriage?

[sally4sara]

Sally

 

What do you think of denying the tax exempt status of churches that refuse to recognize gay marriage?

 

I believe we should stay the hell out of their pockets. Most churches are not wealthy. Let them have their customs and ceremonies as long as it isn't funded or backed by government legislation.

But this also means the churches that DO have a lot of concentrated wealth must be banned from using that money to buy legislative sway.

 

I also feel there is a huge loss of perspective in that way more attention is being paid to who screws who rather than how we can keep tax exempt religious groups from meddling in politics. What ever happened to just voting how you pastor told you god wanted you to and leaving it at that? Aren't they just suppose to "give it to god" and "let his will be done"? Acceptance and what not? How does buying a judge or a senator work into all that?

[Jake Barnes]

I believe we should stay the hell out of their pockets. Most churches are not wealthy. Let them have their customs and ceremonies as long as it isn't funded or backed by government legislation.

But this also means the churches that DO have a lot of concentrated wealth must be banned from using that money to buy legislative sway.

 

I also feel there is a huge loss of perspective in that way more attention is being paid to who screws who rather than how we can keep tax exempt religious groups from meddling in politics. What ever happened to just voting how you pastor told you god wanted you to and leaving it at that? Aren't they just suppose to "give it to god" and "let his will be done"? Acceptance and what not? How does buying a judge or a senator work into all that?

That sounds reasonable enough. I have no problem with that

 

How about using the legal designation Civil Union for everybody and doing away with the legal construct of marriage....so that marriages can be carried out privately according to peoples personal beliefs without special interest groups (both conservative and liberal) trying to shove each others agendas down each others throats?

[sally4sara]

That sounds reasonable enough. I have no problem with that

 

How about using the legal designation Civil Union for everybody and doing away with the legal construct of marriage....so that marriages can be carried out privately according to peoples personal beliefs without special interest groups (both conservative and liberal) trying to shove each others agendas down each others throats?

 

It wouldn't bother me at all. I do feel it should still be a union that is recognized across borders (domestic and international).

Sometimes I feel like everyone is 17 year old girls who can only comfortably go to the bathroom if they have a group going with them.

[Jake Barnes]

It wouldn't bother me at all. I do feel it should still be a union that is recognized across borders (domestic and international).

Sometimes I feel like everyone is 17 year old girls who can only comfortably go to the bathroom if they have a group going with them.

See..I don't believe in gay marriage and you do, but we both can agree on this

[sally4sara]

See..I don't believe in gay marriage and you do, but we both can agree on this

 

I don't remember telling anyone they couldn't disagree. Disagree all you like, but decide for others how they can or cannot live........you can't do that.

I don't care what anyone calls their marriage. Its been called "being married" for a long time though. Why change that if it shouldn't matter what it is called either way unless you wish to signify it as different from marriage?

 

Remember when we told black people they could vote but not EXACTLY vote per say..........still discrimination.

[Jake Barnes]

I don't remember telling anyone they couldn't disagree. Disagree all you like, but decide for others how they can or cannot live........you can't do that.

I don't care what anyone calls their marriage. Its been called "being married" for a long time though. Why change that if it shouldn't matter what it is called either way unless you wish to signify it as different from marriage?

 

Remember when we told black people they could vote but not EXACTLY vote per say..........still discrimination.

Because "marriage" is loaded with socio-cultural implications that have a rather long history. The concept has religious and sacred connotations to many people. And there are many people who feel that homosexuality is a sin and their beliefs shouldnt be disrespected for the sake of political correctness

 

On the other hand I realize that the government has to be fair to different points of view on such a controversial subject. Therefore just having the legal contruct of civil unions to determine the rights and responsibilities of people who want to enter such an arrangement no matter their orientation seems like the best compromise

 

But if people who believe gay marraige is ethical (or indeed even exists) want to keep pushing this agenda on me Ill keep voting against it

[sally4sara]

Because "marriage" is loaded with socio-cultural implications that have a rather long history. The concept has religious and sacred connotations to many people. And there are many people who feel that homosexuality is a sin and their beliefs shouldnt be disrespected for the sake of political correctness

 

Ahh, but even those many, many cultures that recognize marriage contradict each other sometimes. From one culture/religion to the other. Some of them are not so offended by homosexual relationships as others. Do THEY just not count? Do they not count because they are not your beliefs or faith?

 

P.S. other people living different from you is not them doing it out of disrespect for your beliefs. Its just them living their lives the way they want to. It is not their fault that you've adopted a faith that condems them. You certainly are not legally obligated to follow that faith. So why legally exempt them from things based on your religious beliefs?

 

Even if it passes as a Civil Union, it will get to where we call it marriage.

Just like allowing only land owning black men to vote grew into letting everyone of age 18 to vote.

[39388]

Marriage is a religious institution which is legally recognized and socially accepted.

 

Why is it so important to suppress and oppress religious freedoms that you would give up even the opportunity to gain rights for the gay community?

You mean people that are not religious can't marry? I didn't know that.

 

Two same sex people that are either non religious or from religions that support same sex marriage marry. That oppresses religious freedoms? I learn new stuff every day.

 

What else can I learn today? Maybe something like 2+2=5.

[39388]

Even if it passes as a Civil Union, it will get to where we call it marriage.

Just like allowing only land owning black men to vote grew into letting everyone of age 18 to vote.

 

I expect it unfortunately will take many years and there will be many many bitter fights before this becomes law. The religious right will be kicking and screaming and then some all the way through.