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.
I have gay friends (none that are married) but I dont agree with gay marriage. Does that make me homophobic? There are plenty of things about heterosexuals that I disagree with..does that make me heterophobic, lol? Not labeling certain people, there are just issues that I disagree with.
So when your "friends" get screwed legally and financially should they ever find a life partner, you'll be ok with that?
Marriage is the legal and social union between 2 people... it doesn't specify age, gender, etc... Now because it is a "legal" union, the government can choose to recognize it or not and it is up to them to provide criteria... You can call yourself "married" but the government also has a choice to recognize it or not... and if the government recognizes it, the "social" aspect can choose to recognize it or not... if the government chooses to recognize "gay marriage", I really don't care since it is the government's decision to recognize it... now YOU may choose to not recognize it but that's YOUR decision and the people really don't need to care what YOUR decision is...
But the government can not choose to recognize one marriage and not another, unless not recognizing one furthers a compelling state interest.
Quote:
State legislatures pass laws to address matters of public interest and concern. A law that sets speed limits on public highways expresses an interest in protecting public safety. A statute that requires high school students to pass competency examinations before being allowed to graduate advances the state's interest in having an educated citizenry.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
There are hundreds of laws that grant protections to married citizens. By denying marriage based on the gender of the people married the state is denying equal protection of the laws without compelling state interest.
I've heard the argument made by those in favor of gay marriage, quite a lot in recent years. It boils down to equal treatment under the law, "it's only love", "to each his own", etc. One thing that has always escaped me is where the gay marriage supporters would "draw the line"... as in, where they would stop applying that rationale when considering other types of marriage. So I have a few questions for y'all, and let's see what type of response I get.
I am a conservative who is for gay marriage
Quote:
1) Should people who wish to marry their close relatives (sisters, brothers, children, parents, first cousins, etc) be permitted to do so because only then would they be getting equal treatment under the law? After all, it's only love. It may even be heterosexual love, and the two parties may be at or beyond the age of consent! There has even been a "condition" named for some people who feel this attraction - they call it "GSA" or "Genetic Sexual Attraction".
They should be able to marry anyone except their closest family, meaning brother, sister, parents and grandparents. The reason they should not be able to marry them is because it increases the chance for genetic defects. That's not fair for the kids.
Quote:
2) Should people who wish to marry multiple spouses be permitted to do so because only then would they be getting equal treatment under the law? Heck, some people even claim that their religion commands them to do so. If they can have a happy marriage and support multiple spouses, why not? After all, it's only love, and in so doing, each spouse would be relieved from a pressure oft felt by an exclusive spouse - the pressure to singlehandedly meet all of his/her spouse's needs!
This is a more debated topic, but I am against it. I don't think most polygamy marriages are happy, and they are often forced.
I see marriage as a bond between two individuals, hence polygamy do not match that definition. But why not a bond between a man and a woman? That's because I don't see marriage as a christian institution. I just think of it as two individuals who agree to take care of each other till death do them apart.
If you are taking care of two women, then at best they get 50% of your time each. If every rich man did polygamy, then you would end up with heaps of single frustrated men. Part of the reason we have marriage is to build strong familes, and that's not the way you do it.
Quote:
3) Should people who wish to marry "children" be permitted to do so (assuming the children also want it) because only then would they be getting equal treatment under the law? Don't kid yourself... some kids know plenty about love.
Absolutely not, and you are confusing curiosity with love. Kids are curious about their bodies, and it may feel good. But they don't fall in love the same way adults do.
People change their decisions and views a lot before they get older. Kids are not ready to get married. In fact, I don't think anyone younger than 20 should be able to marry.
Quote:
4) Should people who wish to marry animals be permitted to do so, because only then would they be getting equal treatment under the law? Let's face it... animals have a pretty deep capacity for showing love. Certain types of animals are much less inclined to cause problems for people than people are. (I read this one time - "Try locking your wife, and your dog, in the trunk of your car for a few hours. When you open the lid, which one will be happy to see you?") It's only love... and how could it harm either the person or the animal?
Dog can't talk, hence they can't consent, so no.
Quote:
Now... if you answer "no" to any of these questions, I'd like an explanation as to why... and to be fair, you should know that I will be examining the explanations to see how they differ from the explanations commonly used to support gay marriage. And if you start name-calling, your post will be reported. Let's keep this civil. Obviously I am not a gay marriage supporter, but liberal-minded people who support gay marriage often use the word "tolerance". Let's apply that and be tolerant of my views, seeing as I am coming at this civilly.
Well, I didn't use any of the same reasons. I said marriage is a bond between two individuals. Hence polygamy is not acceptable. In addition polygamy has damaging effects, especially if everyone does it. I really don't see any good reason to legalize it.
Marrying relatives is okay with me, except very close family because of genetic mutations. Marrying children and animals is not okay because they cannot give consent.
But I will ask you, why is it so horrible if gays can marry. Gays are not going to take your women. There are really no damaging effects, and the only reason to forbid gay marriage is because its not acceptable in Christianity. But marriage is not a christian institution, so why should we follow christian rules for marriage. Why can't it just be a contract between two individuals. Gays experience love too, why shouldn't they be allowed to marry like everyone else.
I think if you want to preserve the institution of marriage, then do something about all the divorces happening in America. Bad divorces destroy families, and discourage people from getting married.
The comparison is that the "Moral Majority" finds each and every last one of those marriage or relationship conditions to be "wrong". I would state that I personally don't find gay marriage to be as bad as bestiality, child abuse (which is not one of the things I mentioned by the way) or necrophilia, but the fact remains that I, and many others out there, find all of the aforementioned conditions to be "wrong". That's the similarity.
I think that people who don't have the intelligence, morality, or sanity to discern the difference between a loving committed gay or lesbian couple and people who have sex with animals, children or corpses, should not be able to get married. Or be allowed anywhere near children or helpless animals as they are clearly mentally ill and potentially dangerous to society.
I would state that I personally don't find the idea of these mentally challenged irrational people getting married to be as bad as having sex with corpses- more like having sex with a brain dead person in a coma.
Wow, how about that...it is that simple. I was merely expressing my opinion that one is not homophobic because they do not agree with same sex marriage. I could go on and express why I disagree but that would be getting off topic.
I would not say that just because one does not agree with same sex marriage, they are homophobic. However being a straight guy that is an advocate and educator for gay inclusion in athletics, I find in most "not all" cases one is either pro-gay or anti-gay. I have seen very few athletes for example who would support a gay teammate or appear in an anti-gay bullying video that would not support SSM.
Not everyone agrees with "nobody chooses to be homosexual". I, personally, could produce plenty of counterexamples. But that would derail this thread.
Everybody who is homosexual "agrees"; it is the anti-gay contingent who insist that sexual orientation is a choice, in order to rationalize and justify discrimination against gays.
Obviously I am not a gay marriage supporter, but liberal-minded people who support gay marriage often use the word "tolerance". Let's apply that and be tolerant of my views, seeing as I am coming at this civilly.
I'm not liberal minded, but nobody should be tolerant of stupidity. The questions you posed are largely silly. Here's what you don't get.
Marriage was always between two people. Historically, gays were heavily discriminated against as were people of color and people of different religions. Thus, marriage was typically between a man and a woman of the same race with the same religion. Basically, it existed how it was due to prejudices.
Sorry, but a real conservative wouldn't want the government telling people what gender they can and can't marry.
That's one reason why labels like "conservative" and "liberal" should be banned from all conversations - they're meaningless words, used only to deceive, generally. They do nothing to make anyone's position clearer.
Just for grins and giggles I took a little trip to the poli board to see what was up. Haven't been here for a while.
I read a title of a thread called "Questions for people who support gay marriage" and I thought, Wow, wouldn't it be funny if this person was dragging out the same old tired nonsensical, illogical, unbaseable, slippery slope bull**** that people were trying to months ago?
Nah, I told myself, there can't possibly be anyone who could still think that anyone would go "I support gay marriage....wait a minute, this poster is right, two adults getting married IS the exact same thing as a guy marrying a goat or a woman marrying her 3 underage nephews and 4 uncles. Wow, how did I not see that before!?!?!"
When I read some of the posts on here from OP I worry that he's looking for an out to be able to commit crimes against children, and no I'm not joking.
Think about it
"To everyone who supports SSM (which is the majority in this country) isn't that really the same as marrying children?" He asks.
Then people say "No, you idiot, it's not"
Then he starts making his case for why we should legalize marrying children. "No, c'mon think about it, who's to say a 9 year old can't consent? Who makes that decision?"
I hope I'm off base, but if I'm not, OP please seek help, do not victimize a child (or an animal for that matter).
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.
