Why are some straight people so scared of gay marriage? (statistics, compare)

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by monemi

So then what part is different? The sky is limitless, your teflon roof is the limit. What's the difference between gay marriage and straight marriage?

The sky is the sky. The roof may be overhead but it's not the sky even if you call it that. A man and a woman may be married. Two gay people may be together but it's not marriage, even if you call it that.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by espizarro

Glenfield, are you suggesting real marriage is defined by sexual intercourse "compatibility"? That is not marriage. The main opposition to gay marriage is derived from religious bogus. You see, everything in the world is diverse. The only animals that insist on making things linear and rigid are humans. Two gays can "marry" and be granted all the rights and enjoy their lives much like heterosexuals. The ONLY difference is the sexual compatibility, which makes biological procreation possible. Everything else in gay marriages can be exactly the same as hetero marriages. Everything.

Only a man and a woman can be married. Two gays can be together and be granted all the rights and enjoy their lives much like heterosexuals, but they cannot be married because the are not a man and a woman. Gays can do some things like people can do in marriage but they cannot BE married.

[Red Wolf]

Many marriage laws read---------" between one man and one woman"

If the words " man" and "woman" descriminates, so does the word "one"

[2nd trick op]

Back in that crazy spring of 1968, when some nameless Paris street demonstrator proclaimed "If they give you ruled paper, write the other way! ", I was first drawn to the values of Libertarian pholosophy such as evidenced in the writings of thinkers like Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Robert Heinlein, Alan Greenspan, Karl Hess and Murray Rothbard. It was people such as these who convinced me that political and economic freedom are unitary and inseparable -- that you cannot tamper with one witout eventually damaging the other.

But unfortunately for all of us, and as evidenced by the post below:

Originally Posted by annie_himself

You sound like you would have been a mad person in 1964 in towns like Montgomery or Birmingham.

They do have a mother and father otherwise they wouldn't be alive. I didn't grow up with a father around, even though that's how nature is set up.
It's offensive? Then walk around with your eyes closed and move to Alaska. It's been around but bigots would kill them back in 1860 if they were ever found.

By the way, your post was reported.

too many of those in the LGBT community have opted for the soft, contradictory and Fascistic "thinking" passed off under the title of Political Correctness.

"We'll just lump all of our individual special wants under one agenda, convince the majority of men and women in the street that a handful of rich people -- somewhwere -- have hoarded all the wherewithall necesary to pay for them, and report anyone who dissents to Big Brother/Sister."

That, in a handful of words, is how rule by the responsible degenerates into rule by the mob, why I view Political Correctness as (currently) the biggest single threat to the parliamentary pluralism which remains fully-tested in only a handful of nations, and why, while I respect everyone's right to freedom of sexual expression, I cannot muster any enthusiasm for a movement driven mostly by the desire for access to the nation/state's legal monopoly on the power to coerce.

And power -- a very addictive drug -- has filled more graves in the last century than at any time in history.

[Nurse Bishop]

[quote=espizarro;28397331]

Originally Posted by Nurse Bishop

This is the fear I am concerned about, people.

First, based on this, we should stay away from computers, medicine, science, technology, cars, etc. since they are not natural and they have changed the way we do things in life.

I guess this assumes that all heterosexual people want to be parents and/or are good parents. It rejects the reality that some heterosexual people end up giving their offspring to adoption authorities because they can't raise them or don't want them.

Adoption agencies will not stop offering adoption services to hetero couples. But homo couples can also adopt. What is there to fear?

And again, religion is one thing, state is another.

It is neither religion or the state, it is BIOLOGY I am talking about. Children are naturally born to a male and a female who concieve them by having heterosexual sex.

[9162]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

I was a 21-year-old college senior when the first stirrings of the gay-rights movement appeared in 1971. I didn't have a problem with what went on between consrnting adults then, and I don't now.

But you seem to have a problem with gays achieving equality?

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

But when the first cases involving the legal status of same-sex unions arose (in Massachusetts, IIRC) nearly thirty years later, I could not help but notice that while both Local and national news media gave it very little attention, National Public Broadacsting immediately gve the story top billing, and continued to follow it with much greater interest than its competitors. That tells me that the effort to push the issue of same-sex unions to the front burner was both painstakingly planned and well-coordinated.

Really? You think PBS gave it "top billing?" Or, just the fact that PBS was making note of a landmark decision, many think was long overdue. You think same sex marriage should have been discussed no more than casually? If that...

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

And again, while I have no problem whatsoever with how people define their personal and conjugal lives, it must be recognized that the instituion of traditional, heterosexual marriage was recognized and suported within the legal structure because it is expected to produce the single most important component of an established, self-perpetuating society --children. With some exceptions here and there, the advocates for same-sex-civil unions have litle concern for this point.

Same sex marriage advocates have little concern over producing children? Huh, are you saying same sex marriage will contribute to less children being born? So what about all these children born out of wed lock to straight couples? What about all the divorce from straight couples; divorce which destroys families. This is strictly heterosexual. What about all the children heterosexual people have that are discarded by straight people that are denied being in loving homes because gays or gay couples can't adopt?

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

Regardless of our personal economic values, most of us recognize that for the vast majority, daily life is sustained, paycheck to paycheck, by a slender thread, and relatively few will progress from entry-level to a secure retirement without a few bumps in the road. The recognition of same-sex unions adds considerable stress to that social "safety net", and a large proportion of the expected beneficiairies are viewed by many of us as having skirted the self-deprivation and hard choices which often accompany family responsibilities in early adulthood.

So you think its acceptable for gays to not be allowed to marry, thereby not enjoying any of the "privileges" of marriage because their benefit would be disproportionate? Are you suggesting that the quality of life would be better for same sex couples under legalized marriage? Clearly, you seem to view having children as a dreaded responsibility, with very little reward. It is not our fault that so many heterosexuals have children, then later on "secretly" regret it.

What about the disproportionate amount of taxes gays pay by being forced to file single, rather than jointly? Paying for the schools, WIC, etc.

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

As with the AIDS crisis, the embrace of the same-sex unions issue by some of the most outspoken and militiant segments of the LGBT community, and the behaviors by which they sometimes demonize, harrass, and display their deep contempt for those who espouse traditional values -- in short, their cry for a place much closer to the head of a long line -- is what has caused a great deal of the backlash they mistakenly characterize as simple bigotry.

More hyperbole. Same sex marriage supporters do not have deep contempt for anyone. Traditional values are not being threatened in any way. One main problem is, that the critics have yet to come up with a valid, rational argument against same sex marriage. Their main claim, is that some how same sex marriage will severely affect traditional marriage in a very negative way. The radical homophobes work day and night spreading their lies and hate to keep homosexuals in the closet, without any of the same equalities they enjoy. The hate against homosexuals has been nothing short of highly irrational, and hateful, very rightfully deserving of backlash. Homosexuals deserve to be treated with the same dignity as everyone else. Yet, in the 21st century we still have states that routinely discriminate against gays, and often treat them as if they are sub-human.

And as far as the AIDS crisis, the early activists from the 80's were right. The disease did spread needlessly, particularly into other communities, because the Reagan/Bush Sr administrations completely ignored it

[Nurse Bishop]

See what happens? if you even engage in a discussion of homosexual rights they all come out of the woodwork and endlessly peck peck peck and whine.

[geos]

Originally Posted by shadowwalker

What I have against the gay thing. Isn't the act between two people, it's the way they seem to always act. Most of them throw their lifestyle up in every ones face at every opportunity and want a confrontation about it. To show their constant fight against the homophobes I guess to their friends. They do not miss a opportunity to flaunt it on social places or in the streets. Yet when a confrontation goes bad they play the "poor me-look what happened to me" to get sympathy or media attention, again. Their going into grade or high schools and holding huge crowds of children hostage "explaining" their lifestyle to already confused or kids lashing out at their parents. Is not good practice to me anyway.

I constantly miss opportunities to flaunt my homosexuality. Maybe I should get some Tshirts: "Hi, I'm gay, in your face." Homophobes see any mention of gay issues as "flaunting". Personally the Kardashians and Britney Speers and countless other hetero-bimbos flaunting their booty all over the place makes me nauseous but hey it's free country and I just ignore it. Try doing the same or isn't that an option for hate mongers?

[stressedCollegeGirl89]

Originally Posted by TotallyTam

I disagree that there are "some exceptions here and there" among the LGBT community about children. Most LGBT people I know are pretty family-oriented and want to adopt and raise children. So they cannot physically make a baby---so what? Plenty of LGBT couples would love to adopt and raise children that their hetero counterparts cannot (or do not want). But look at the big stink that follows when gay people want to adopt kids? It's like they're damned either way! I have no idea how many homeless children there are in the world, but I can damn well be sure that these kids would LOVE being welcomed into a loving LGBT family. So....nice try on the "children" aspect, but I am not buying it.

In my opinion, the same-sex marriage debate is about politics and nothing more. It's a voting issue and yet one more nasty tactic employed by politicians and their moneyed handlers to pit people against one another. As long as we' (the 99%) are all fighting amongst ourselves, the more the established power mongers (1%) running the world can get away with murder. When are the 99% EVER going to see this?

I am so glad that I'm not the only one who notices this. I say, let there be gay marriage! Who am I to stop two consenting adults of the same-sex wanting to commit themselves to each other for life?

1) It does not have any negative impact on my life.
2) More chances for children to be adopted into loving homes by loving same-sex families. (Last time I checked, children aren't necessarily thrilled about living in orphanages, unloving homes and such.)

Just like the big argument around marijuana legalization.....as a US citizen, I have better things to worry about, like the lack of job creation (across all worker classes), the heavy dependence on entitlement programs and the up-and-coming sequestration this year. Legalize both marijuana and gay marriage and make them okay for consenting adults to partake in. Jobs created. A portion of the population is happier to have more freedoms. Wins for everyone! NEXT!...

[geos]

Originally Posted by Nurse Bishop

See what happens? if you even engage in a discussion of homosexual rights they all come out of the woodwork and endlessly peck peck peck and whine.

See what happens when you vomit your venom all over the place, people are just disgusted by it. Stop whining already will you.