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.
An extra benefit is not about equality, thats why its called a benefit. The hetro marriage is a symbol, example and means by which the species survives. This surviving value is a benefit to society, so where funds are available the progressive system returns the value in the form of a benefit. Benefit in return for the benefit of the achieved union. If there was equality there would be zero consideration or benefit for the value in the hetro contribution, example and family unit.
In addition, marriage is a way to protect women and children.
In traditional societies, women do not go out to work and they need to take care of children (usually a lot of children in old days). Marriage can force men to be bonded with their women and children, and take responsibilities.
Same sex couples do not have exact the same problem, and because they lack social approval and refuse to conform, their relationship is heavily based on sexual attraction... We all know strong attraction decays pretty fast: some scientists say three years to die.
It really shakes the foundation of family.
In addition, marriage is a way to protect women and children.
In traditional societies, women do not go out to work and they need to take care of children (usually a lot of children in old days). Marriage can force men to be bonded with their women and children, and take responsibilities.
Same sex couples do not have exact the same problem, and because they lack social approval and refuse to conform, their relationship is heavily based on sexual attraction... We all know strong attraction decays pretty fast: some scientists say three years to die.
It really shakes the foundation of family.
But you're forgetting the worst aspect of group number 1. They go and try to legislate their beliefs to compel others via legislation to do as they wish. Not marry, not be able to teach children, not join the military, not have survivor benefits. So they aren't as harmless as you see them.
Obviously you disagree with their opinions. That's not really the point. The people who simply believe that homosexual actions are wrong don't spend much time thinking about it. They "legislate morality" because they think that's what is best for the country. Maybe it's the "wrong" position to have, but it's not motivated out of negative feelings towards gay people themselves.
Otherwise, the logical extension of your position would be that churches should be forced to marry same-sex couples. I don't think most people take it that far.
Finally, I completely agree with Trimac20 and bchris02 that the strongest homophobes aren't usually the most religious - they're the most insecure and need something to justify their "immoral" behaviors.
In addition, marriage is a way to protect women and children.
In traditional societies, women do not go out to work and they need to take care of children (usually a lot of children in old days). Marriage can force men to be bonded with their women and children, and take responsibilities.
Same sex couples do not have exact the same problem, and because they lack social approval and refuse to conform, their relationship is heavily based on sexual attraction... We all know strong attraction decays pretty fast: some scientists say three years to die.
It really shakes the foundation of family.
I agree. The sole purpose of marriage was to protect women and children. Also, it is beneficial for children to have their father in their home. Marriage ties the family together in a legal and societal bond that comes with expectations.
It's kind of an antiquated idea now since we have DNA tests and a legal system to force fathers to care for their offspring and the mothers of their offspring and women actually have the option of supporting themselves these days but children benefit from being in a stable family with a mother and a father so it still has some use beyond the original intentions. My children know their father and I are married and would have to divorce to split up. We're not in a casual relationship.
If marriage meant nothing to children, then divorce would not hurt children. We know divorce does. Soi while women no longer need protection, children still need the security of knowing their parents are in a committed relationship.
Honestly, I don't see the point in gays marrying, however, I also don't care if they marry. It means nothing to me if they marry. I say let them pay the marriage penalty tax too...
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,034,272 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bettafish
In addition, marriage is a way to protect women and children. In traditional societies, women do not go out to work and they need to take care of children (usually a lot of children in old days). Marriage can force men to be bonded with their women and children, and take responsibilities.
Same sex couples do not have exact the same problem, and because they lack social approval and refuse to conform, their relationship is heavily based on sexual attraction... We all know strong attraction decays pretty fast: some scientists say three years to die.
It really shakes the foundation of family.
What traditional societies are you talking about, in the vast majority of traditional societies women rear children AND do the work, whether that be gathering, working in the fields, carrying water, even hunting small game, cooking and housework.
What traditional societies are you talking about, in the vast majority of traditional societies women rear children AND do the work, whether that be gathering, working in the fields, carrying water, even hunting small game, cooking and housework.
Not in our traditional society. In our society, women who stay home aren't out in the field, water comes out of the tap and hunting is finding a bargain at the grocery store (both paid for by the husband). They are, financially, dependent on their husband's income and their time out of the work force impacts their lifetime earning both present and future. While you're correct that yesterday's SAHM worked, today's SAHM doesn't. She's kept by her husband and, in time, her options become more and more limited. Back in pioneer days, a man needed a wife as much as a woman needed a husband because it took both of them working to support and feed a family. That mutual dependency doesn't exist today. Men don't need SAHW's. The "work" women do at home can be had for a few hundred dollars a week (cost of day care and a house keeper). That's why we now have to have laws to protect women. In pioneer days, the man needed his wife and that need kept the family together. Today, he doesn't need a wife. Hence laws to protect women and children.
I have a sister who is recently divorced who SAH for umpteen years. She is SOL when her alimony runs out. She's 52 years old and trying to reinvent herself and finding she can't. So she's, desperately, looking for husband #2 to support her. It's all she knows. While I can say she did this to herself by making the choices she did, I still feel sorry for her. What an awful place to be in.
Almost every homophobe I've ever met has been religious. Religion is the driving force behind anti-gay sentiment based on the butchering and abuse of the English Bible. Gays are treated like modern day witches.
When you base reality on the depiction of religious people that you see in movies, what do you expect?
something can only contribute to the community or not contribute, something can only be a negative example or a positive example suggesting a potential to contribute a value to the community....how is a gay couple a good example to a community where people can only live so long and need to be replaced by the hetro couple... and seen in the community, an example of a real surviving value and contribution. A value also in its example of compliance with existence, which allows the human race to be what it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazzer
An extra benefit is not about equality, thats why its called a benefit. The hetro marriage is a symbol, example and means by which the species survives. This surviving value is a benefit to society, so where funds are available the progressive system returns the value in the form of a benefit. Benefit in return for the benefit of the achieved union. If there was equality there would be zero consideration or benefit for the value in the hetro contribution, example and family unit.
In the U.S. population would be growing very slowly and in some cases declining if not for immigration, so the idea that more children can help our society, has potential value.
In places like India and China, Bangladesh, they don't need more people, except to care for their elders in old age.
Regarding what is beneficial for society...Earth doesn't need more people, on average. The healthiest thing for human society, on average, would be for many, many more homosexuals to form, which would lead to much less procreation, and for as many of them as possible to adopt children.
Poverty seems to increase the number of children being given birth to in many nations. (If most may not live to adulthood, you'd better have a lot to care for you into your old age...also less access to birth control.) These same impoverished nations probably won't have best orphanages.
Thank a homosexual for helping to preserve humanity for awhile longer
Haha! I win! You lose! (lots and lots of smug snickering)
Obviously the bigotry is in the rejection and intolerance of the naturally intended, not the one who simply notice's.
You mean like left-handedness is 'bigoted and intolerant' because it 'rejects' right-handedness which is more common?
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.
