U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-19-2008, 01:48 PM
 
13,779 posts, read 23,208,064 times
Reputation: 7378

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveTodayLez08 View Post
I don't really care, as long as sexual orientation isn't used to discriminate against others or deny them rights, benefits, etc.

I agree with the previous comment that as long as it's consensual, I don't really care.
That is a great way to put it...

I have never understood why someone elses sex life is up for discussion...gay, straight, bi...whatever. It is a personal interaction between two people (well, usually..sorry, had to joke a bit!).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-19-2008, 01:57 PM
 
1,446 posts, read 4,413,110 times
Reputation: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by zen_klown View Post
It doesn't guarantee it, but if you look at the social science research people are having many more partners before marriage than afterward. The number of lifetime sexual partners decreases with the number of years spent married. So in that sense marriage does reduce promiscuity.
That research has to do with male/female marriages. It probably does not look at the huge numbers of male/females who live together without the paper. That is antiquated research in the sense that it probably only looks at married opp sex people.

I look at everything in terms of discrimination. People should be able to marry whomever- as long as it is another consenting adult. People pushing marriage for moral reasons in 2009 are just being unrealistic. It undermines the whole argument. People are not getting married and pregnant at 20 and staying with one person for 30 years anymore. I'm not saying that that's a good thing but the world has changed. People making marriage arguments that sound preachy just weaken the entire discussion. That is in regard to both the For and Against stances. People getting a marriage license for legal protections at least makes sense. Thinking that it will bring us back toward some brady bunch ideal is just stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2008, 06:20 PM
 
406 posts, read 1,379,415 times
Reputation: 179
A lot of our laws are legislating morality. We ban polygamy and prostitution. There are laws to prevent adults from marrying family members. Sexual harrasment , hate crime and anti-discrimination legislation often prohibits the expression of certain thoughts and beliefs in certain situations. All of that is legislating morality.

If I unintionally kill you with my car in an accident, the law treats that very differently than if try to run you down with my car. Intent is an element of a lot of crimes. If I stab you with a knife, its a crime, but if your doctor cuts you open to fix your heart there is no crime. In both cases a knife is used to cut you open, but because you consented to the doctor doing it, there is no crime.

When you are legislating intent, you are also legislating morality.

To me the only issue is what morality we are going to legislate. To pretent otherwise is to ignore the relevant issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 02:51 AM
 
1,446 posts, read 4,413,110 times
Reputation: 334
The only issue is morality? There is no way to legislate monogamy. That is a full blown fantasy. Of course there are attempts made to legislate morality all the time. There is no way to know who is monogamous and who is not. It usually does not involve money changing hands and there is no registry or surveilliance system to track it.

There is such a thing as ethics. We have already had the ethics vs morals debate on this forum.

Real life is shades of gray even if you live somewhere like Iraq. Obviously personal freedoms are severely limited there and there is no such thing as civil rights. The laws governing women and men are very different and even among the same sex they are not applied evenly- even in cases that seem identical. We are talking about issues here that are common to all individuals and that take place behind closed doors even if laws forbid it. For that reason issues like murder are an entirely different discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 01:39 PM
 
1,446 posts, read 4,413,110 times
Reputation: 334
You could say the same thing about feminism. But did you bother?
That was my point. Using your logic- we have been down this road before. It is the same pathology and that impacted many more people's lives in a direct fashion. That has changed daily life as we know it far more than any of the other topics discussed here.

Special interest groups in general are ebbing away at many of our freedoms. I do understand that. But the world changes and we evolve to some degree. I don't agree with this agenda or that agenda controlling aspects of my life but as an American I feel there are basic liberties we all derserve. It is an trade off. The slippery slope. Funny enough I don't think marriage is a basic liberty. That is a construct I would rather not take part in myself and can live very well without. I don't feel the need to explain my decision to an 8 year old and add my views to their curriculum.

I feel everyone should have access to a decent education, quality healthcare, and certain legal protections. Harassment is something that is redefined from time to time. Some of this is a work in progress. It is not 1910 and we acknowledge that in many ways with our legal system. There are some things people need from marriage that they can't get another way. That may change as well- as I know of people who have lived together for more than a decade and have found that most things are now attainable for them w/o the paper. They are not looking for a document to make them monagamous which I still contend is a stupid argument in 2009. People can remain living in the same home and screw around with or without the other's knowledge. It happens every day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 01:49 PM
 
406 posts, read 1,379,415 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyntmac View Post
The only issue is morality? There is no way to legislate monogamy. That is a full blown fantasy. Of course there are attempts made to legislate morality all the time. There is no way to know who is monogamous and who is not. It usually does not involve money changing hands and there is no registry or surveilliance system to track it.

There is such a thing as ethics. We have already had the ethics vs morals debate on this forum.

Real life is shades of gray even if you live somewhere like Iraq. Obviously personal freedoms are severely limited there and there is no such thing as civil rights. The laws governing women and men are very different and even among the same sex they are not applied evenly- even in cases that seem identical. We are talking about issues here that are common to all individuals and that take place behind closed doors even if laws forbid it. For that reason issues like murder are an entirely different discussion.
In this country murder is criminalised, yet people are still killing each other. By your logic should we repeal the laws against murder since laws against murder clearly haven't stopped all murders from occuring? It is a full blown fantasy for the state to try to even try to decide who I should or should not murder? Since Adam and Eve, people have been killing each. Why are you trying to legislate morality? You just can't do it. If people want to kill each other they are going to kill each other. Isn't it time the state got out the business of legislating against murder all together?

Of course not. Its the argument that you can't legislate morality that is absurd.

The state regularly legislates morality. Criminalizing murder is legislating morality. Deciding who and who can't get married is legislating morality. Allowing or prohibiting slavery is legislating morality. This argument that the state can't legislate morality is emperically wrong. The state is legislating morality all of the time. The only issue is what morality the state is going to impose on others.

To pretend that the state can't legislate morality is to be willfully blind to the facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 01:52 PM
 
406 posts, read 1,379,415 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowDeDo View Post
So, folks, give me an answer. Why do so many feel as if another's sex life is any of their business?'

1. Because sexual perversionists bring it to the public arena to which we belong.
2. Because they cause Corporate America to have sexual preference sensitivity classes , to which we are mandated to attend.
3. Because they demand that everyone admit their lifestyle is permissable and normal ., when everyone (incl. them) knows making love with feces , fisting , and oral copulation is far from natural and correct.
4. Because its wrong for them to promote their lifestyle via the media and groping one another on public Parade Floats , instead of giving it a good try to overcome their sexual confusion thru good professional specialized Counselling which is readily available.
5. Because homosexual agenda groups go into Jr. High and Sr. High schools portaying it as 'normal'.
6. Because the more it infects America like a cancer, the faster the nation will come to ruin just like every other civilization in past history.

Now, can you tell us how much you could care less ?
The state is legislating morality all of the time. The only issue is which morality its going to impose upon others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Texas
42,203 posts, read 49,753,916 times
Reputation: 66975
I think the biggest reason anyone talks about it is b/c any time there is an opportunity to make yourself feel better by looking down on someone else, most people will take it.

O/w it makes no sense to care what 2 consenting adults do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 02:03 PM
 
1,446 posts, read 4,413,110 times
Reputation: 334
Yes we attempt to legislate morality. Of course- we always have. Why would you bring murder into this discussion? We are talking about things that go on in everyone's life even when laws forbid it. To bring up murder again and again when this was a discussion about people's orientations?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2008, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Texas
42,203 posts, read 49,753,916 times
Reputation: 66975
I understand legislating morality when it comes to violating someone else's rights. Murder violates my right to life, liberty, etc. Two guys doing it in their living room violates no one's rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top