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.
Well it is society's interest because such pairing result in, what I like to call, inbreeding. It is biologically unsound, and that why it isn't allowed - not because it is "creepy".
Thread title says it all. If you support redefining marriage, do you support a mother marrying her daughter, if they both are consenting adults? Or a father and son? Why or why not? Thanks
No, health risks, on top of that it would likely increase the social services burden, whereas Gay marriage pretty clearly does the opposite.
A mother marrying her daughter is as much my business as two men marrying each other. It doesn't affect me, and less than 1% of the population does it. Why the hell should I stop these people from doing what they feel in their hearts is right? The government should not uphold the traditional marriage between man and woman since it's a religious institution with obvious bias. Remove the religious aspect and the bias and let people of all mind sets enjoy the same benefits as any other happily married couple would have.
The same exact thing can be said about homosexuality until about 20 years ago, and still not in many places, but ideas change and evolve. How can you not see that everything that you just wrote about incest, was and still is said and believed about homosexuality in many places around the world? How can you be so oblivious to your own ironic post?
That is simply not true.
Unlike incest, homosexuality was both approved and encouraged by many historic civilizations, including the Greeks, Romans, English, and others. It was especially encouraged among their military forces, as the soldiers fought more fiercely to save their lovers' lives.
Among our native tribes, homosexuals were thought of as holy men who possessed both the male and female spirit. They were often the medicine men, the most admired singers and leaders of community dancing. Tribes often stole them from another tribe after losing one.
In earlier times here in the U.S., homosexuals of both sexes were simply ignored. The hetero population knew what they were but didn't care.
You are the oblivious one, mommy. You have allowed your own prejudices blind you to the fact that, as they have steadily come out of the closet, their fellow workers, acquaintances, neighbors and families are increasingly seeing them as just people. I'm not gay, but I have a couple of friends who are, and none are anything but common, everyday folks just like you and me.
I have 3 grown children, and they too, know gays of both sexes. My kids just don't care what goes on with their friends behind closed doors, and they are all in their 30's. The kids who are younger than they are care even less.
Nobody is asking you to like or accept them, but they are seeking the same rights as the rest of us, and personal liberty and freedom is not reserved for just some of us. It is a right here in America that all citizens are equal under our laws, and they are asking for nothing more than that equality.
Your ham-handed attempt at trying to equivocate homosexuality with incest is just an attempt to tar them with a very bad thing they abhor just as much as you and I do.
That is simply not true.
Unlike incest, homosexuality was both approved and encouraged by many historic civilizations, including the Greeks, Romans, English, and others. It was especially encouraged among their military forces, as the soldiers fought more fiercely to save their lovers' lives.
Among our native tribes, homosexuals were thought of as holy men who possessed both the male and female spirit. They were often the medicine men, the most admired singers and leaders of community dancing. Tribes often stole them from another tribe after losing one.
In earlier times here in the U.S., homosexuals of both sexes were simply ignored. The hetero population knew what they were but didn't care.
You are the oblivious one, mommy. You have allowed your own prejudices blind you to the fact that, as they have increasingly come out of the closet, their fellow workers, acquaintances, and families are increasingly seeing them as just people. I'm not gay, but I have a couple of friends who are, and none are anything but common, everyday folks just like you and me.
I have 3 grown children, and they too, know gays of both sexes. My kids just don't care what goes on with their friends behind closed doors, and the kids who are younger than they care even less.
Nobody is asking you to like or accept them, but they are seeking the same rights as the rest of us, and personal liberty and freedom is not reserved for just some of us. It is a right here in America that all citizens are equal under our laws, and they are asking for nothing more than that equality.
Your ham-handed attempt at trying to equivocate homosexuality with incest is just an attempt to tar them with a very bad thing they abhor just as much as you do.
Great post. Very well said.
Thank you.
And I agree about young people. I see it with my own kids and their friends and I think I heard the latest polling is that something like 81% of young people approve of same sex marriage.
I find it shocking the number of people on this thread that support incest. I certainly thought it would have been much lower. What has happened to the morals of this country? And people wonder why we are going downhill.
Are you also shocked at the number that support homosexual marriage? Or do you consider that "moral"?
There were laws against homosexuality, mixed race marriage and allowing slavery too. Just because a law is made doesn't make it "right". If same sex marriage is allowed, then people should have the right to express any sexual preference through marriage. Homosexuals are not a privileged class that can have equality while denying others theirs.
There were laws against homosexuality, mixed race marriage and allowing slavery too. Just because a law is made doesn't make it "right". If same sex marriage is allowed, then people should have the right to express any sexual preference through marriage. Homosexuals are not a privileged class that can have equality while denying others theirs.
Unrelated man and woman = ok
Unrelated man + man, woman + woman = ok
Unrelated polygamy = ok
Related man and woman = no
Related man and man, woman + woman = no
Related polygamy = no
Related or unrelated pedophilia = no
If two homosexuals were related and did not grow up together and later formed a relationship before finding out they were related then you might have a case. However, parents tend to know who their kids are and the parental relationship is vastly different than a romantic one. It is statistically implausible that 2 brothers or sisters would grow up apart, not know about each other, both become homosexual, and meet and develop a relationship.
Why is just a certain segment sooo concerned about the sex life of others?
There were laws against homosexuality, mixed race marriage and allowing slavery too. Just because a law is made doesn't make it "right". If same sex marriage is allowed, then people should have the right to express any sexual preference through marriage. Homosexuals are not a privileged class that can have equality while denying others theirs.
Nice point, but here's where you fall short:
Marriage ought to be boiled down to three requirements which are as follows:
(1) Both persons who are to be married MUST be over the age of 18. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. No waivers signed by the parent, no exceptions, no shifting on this. 18 or older, that's it.
(2) Both persons who are to be married MUST be of sound mind and judgment. This mean that they are in relatively good mental health and can, without coercion or prodding, give their consent to be married.
(3) Both persons who are to be married MUST sign a marriage certificate, which is effectively a contract, thus bounding them together until they either get an annulment, get divorced, or they become deceased, whichever happens first.
Now with those requirements this makes it to where ONLY adults can get married and ONLY those who know what they're getting into are allowed to be married. Now obviously these requirements will allow, if they really felt obligated to do so, family members to get married to one another (unless further requirements were put down to prevent this). If that's their wish, then who are we to deny them that? Sure I don't agree with such mindsets of incest-type relationships, but I won't deny them the right to be married...just so long as they keep their private lives just that: private.
You may not agree and that's fine, but is there anything inherently flawed with any of my proposed requirements?
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.
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.
