Homosexual marriage

[TicklingDuo]

As for the religious aspect, anyone wanting to argue, to cast stones, should read what's not cool by your own faith. Readin' them tomes is very educational.

Hmmm...Might you be refering to things like...

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

"Judge not, lest ye be judged."

"Love one another as I have loved you." (unconditionally)

"Bless those who persecute you. Do good to those who hate you."

etc., etc., etc.........?

They go on and on. I refer to the Bible here since that's the book of MY faith. Take it or leave it as you wish.

Am I saying that, when we feel something is morally wrong, we should just sit back and ignore it? Absolutely not. Krokus is right to that extent. We're actually commanded to act on things. However, we're also commanded to do so IN LOVE. Call a weakness/transgretion to another persons attention. Fine. But, do so out of love and compassion for that person...NOT out of judgementalism, anger and hate. That's the part we tend to screw up on.

I see a lot of things that I feel are "wrong" morally. But, I refuse to write people off because of it. Why? Because I've prayed over and over in the Lord's Prayer that He forgive me as I forgive others. That means that, if I refuse to forgive others and constantly hit them over the head with things, that's exactly what I've asked Him to do to me. Even on a selfish level, I'm not going to do that. I've got plenty of my own to work on. I don't have time or energy to waste in condemning others.

I see differences of opinions on all sorts of topics all the time (here and elsewhere). That's cool. But, when things get this heated and personal, that's not good. Why not just agree to disagree and leave it at that? Nobody's going to change the other's opinion. So, why not get back to some of the original points of the thread? Let's look at the questions that were asked and give some POSITIVE feedback.

Ann

 

[qjakal]

Think....Debate...

"I think that somehow, we learn who we really are and then live
with that decision."
--Eleanor Roosevelt


Let's keep the low blows to a minimum here...this thread is on the edge of being either severely edited or closed. Which is NOT what we like to see. Q

 

[siamese dream]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well

-My opinion will not change, and you can go ahead and call me immature, and by the way, white people get the shaft alot as well, so don't even start to pull that "it's only minoritys" bullshit. As far as the offensive remark goes Jim, I have not, will not, and refuse to hide my views for the sake of acceptance. That is what is wrong with this country, too many refuse to fight for what they believe in, for fear of being beat up, or killed, or whatever. Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. As for the 3rd grade statement, I will make fun of anyone I want to, and my thoughts ARE NOT up for debate. As for the "rich white christian" remark...I have to be honest...I have never been more pissed off...EVER in my lifetime then I was after reading that. I get so sick and tired of all this non-stop scapegoated whining that indians, black people, jews, japanese americans, women, AND homosexuals do. Yea, we know your SO mistreated....Damn...I just feel SOOO sorry for you....yadda yadda yadda shut the hell up. Why don't they do something about it, those little whiners. There IS a reason why people are rich you know, they actually WORK for what they get. If your so friggin' unhappy with the way you are treated in America, there are 2 options, get the hell out, or stop whining and do something about it. Stand up for yourself, and make you voice be heard. I have many "Radical" opinions that I have told MANY people. My parents, friends, and others. I think that this country would benefit from a Dictator, or Tyrant, if you will. But I do not go preaching it all over the place. So, if you are mistreated, do something, don't sit and cry and moan.If you choose to insult me for my outlook on things, well, then you can get lost. There, now im done.

Woah. Chill, dude. First of all, I never called you immature, though I did get a bit snipey with the 'third grade' comment, but I didn't mean it to call YOU immature, I just felt it was an immature term to use. Secondly, when I was talking about injustices against minorities, I had meant in the PAST... such as American enslavement of black people, our slaughter of almost all the indians when Europeans landed here in North America, etc. That's why I added that I think our society has changed very much in it's tolerance towards others, I think in MODERN DAY, our people are more equally represented, but there are still a lot of issues with prejudice and mistreatment of others.

In one breath you tell me to "shut the fuck up", in the next you tell me to stop bitching and do something about it, stand up for my beliefs. And that is what I'm doing; giving my honest feelings about why the law should be changed in this case, and asking for help on ideas of how to change the laws. I don't know a lot about politics, and really the only way to change anything is through the political system, and through speaking out, standing up for your beliefs. But since you're anti-liberal, then when I do speak up for my beliefs, it's only going to anger you because you believe the opposite things. Obviously. So, anyway, next time please don't read things in my posts that aren't there; and understand that you can speak your mind in whatever way you see fit, but I have the same right.

 

[Krokus]

Ok

What would you do if you had a sibling who was gay? or a son? a daughter? Would you disown them?? No one's whining if theres a problem rest assured I as a "minority" will deal with it. A few months ago Krokus when we feuded did I EVER turn the other cheek with you?? NO. You respect strength right, well then you should damn well respect those who were born at a disadvantage wether it was because of race, religion, or sexual preferance. They all had to FIGHT, fight against hate, against laws, against what some people called the word of God. Some died fighting, some lived to see their struggle accomplish something miraculous. Now Krokus notice how I didnt insult or flame you.

You make a valid point. Ok people, I may have posted a rowdy comment, but that is how I feel, and nothing is going to change that. It was a post of passion, because Im tellin' ya, after reading that, I was pissed. Now, I would just like to add that the remark made by Haltickling and BigJim was uncalled for. As I said, if you want to make fun of me for expressing my views, then well, your the unfair one. Ok, I feel that in this day and age, you have to be aggressive with people to get thier attention. As much as you hate to hear this, I am not looking for attention, I was just merely expressing my opinions. If there is one thing that I hate, it is to not be taken seriously, and that is how some of you (with the exception of ShiningIce, thanks) have went about my post. Upon reading the replies here, it has only answered my question, that being, Is the TMF just like everywhere else?? Will I get jumped at and insulted for making a passionate statement?? Will I be taken lightly about something I feel so strongly about?? I guess the answer is yes. Now, I will be willing to carefully explain WHY I have my opinions should anyone like to know. It is now up for debate. I am editing my post to make it less hostile, but the original statement still stands.

 

[Krokus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well

Woah. Chill, dude. First of all, I never called you immature, though I did get a bit snipey with the 'third grade' comment, but I didn't mean it to call YOU immature, I just felt it was an immature term to use. Secondly, when I was talking about injustices against minorities, I had meant in the PAST... such as American enslavement of black people, our slaughter of almost all the indians when Europeans landed here in North America, etc. That's why I added that I think our society has changed very much in it's tolerance towards others, I think in MODERN DAY, our people are more equally represented, but there are still a lot of issues with prejudice and mistreatment of others.

In one breath you tell me to "shut the fuck up", in the next you tell me to stop bitching and do something about it, stand up for my beliefs. And that is what I'm doing; giving my honest feelings about why the law should be changed in this case, and asking for help on ideas of how to change the laws. I don't know a lot about politics, and really the only way to change anything is through the political system, and through speaking out, standing up for your beliefs. But since you're anti-liberal, then when I do speak up for my beliefs, it's only going to anger you because you believe the opposite things. Obviously. So, anyway, next time please don't read things in my posts that aren't there; and understand that you can speak your mind in whatever way you see fit, but I have the same right.

Siamese, I just want to clear up the fact that I was not directly talking to you with the "shut the fuck up" comment, nor the "stop bitching and do something about it" comment.

 

[siamese dream]

Okay then. Thanks for clearing that up. Lets all take a deep breath, count back from ten, smoke 'em if you got 'em, etc... hehe

 

[sceej56]

Clearly bucking the trend, I'm against state recognition of homosexual unions in any capacity - marriage, domestic partnership, etc - on biblical grounds. Seems to me a lot of people are intolerant of that position. While I would stop short of criminalizing the behavior (as was the norm almost worldwide until ver recently), I don't beleive something inherently un-natural is deserving of state recognition.

The tired (IMHO) argument that it should be recognized because it involves consenting adults and does not harm anyone can be applied equally to a number of other situations. By that logic, all drugs should be legal (and I can hardly wait for the 'amen's on that one). Suicide, assisted suicide, prostitution ... again, I suspect a lot of people who support homosexual marriage will have no problem with these. How about polygamy - three or more consenting adults choose to live together in a marriage? That one usually offends some of the female supporters of homosexual unions. How do people feel about two consenting adults agreeing to have one purchase the other's retinas, kidneys, lungs, liver, heart? Remember - consenting adults not harming anyone else! That one usually gets people talking about harm to society - notwithstanding their prior position that what consenting adults do is none of society's business! And as long as we're talking about not suppressing people's right to express their love - what about incest? Concensual love between siblings - as I suspect most of you are aware, geneticists have demonstrate that the risks of procreation even between close relatives are miniscule - and even if they hadn't, who are we as a society to judge the right of a brother and sister to express their physical love for each other ... and to marry? And if you're so intolerant you wouldn't permit this due to the risks of procreation, how about if they agreed to be sterilized in order to conform to your intolerant views?

If you support homosexual marriage but reject ANY of the above, I"d be interested in hearing why - and try not to spilt the hairs to finely and please address all of the behavior you're "intolerant" of

Fucking creepy, huh? But some of that's grotesque, un-natural, just plain wrong, you say? I agree and I would include homosexual unions in that category; given the choice, I'll go with hundreds of years of Judeo-Christian-Islamic history over the whims of the past thirty or forty years - for which, many would label me an unthinking bigot.

 

[qjakal]

Opinion...

See? You state an opinion, try to give a bit of supportive data, and you discuss these things...THAT'S the way you have a lively debate folks! Nice post scee, on those grounds anyway. I don't necessarily agree with you, but it was well stated and thought provoking!

Anyone indulging in polygamy gets what they deserve...be careful what you wish for!

State assisted death? Absolutely, I'm all for it...having watched my sister waste away and die a slow agonizing death, I'll be happy to work towards a reasonable system that features euthanasia when warranted.

Selling organs? Won't be much of a market when stem cell research and cloning techniques hit their stride in a decade or so, but if you think you can swing it, I won't vote against it.

Brothers and sisters marrying? Doesn't seem genetically sound, but it's a decision...assuming they're adults...whatever. If they become my neighbors I hope they don't party too late, borrow too many tools, have a barking dog or or use big fireworks that can hurt someone.

Do your views make you "an unthinking bigot"? Nope...you seem to have put some thought into your post, but you didn't really address all the issues, such as unfair taxation and insurance/medical issues that couples take for granted. I'm sure I'm missing a few too, but don't worry, someone else will be along in a minute to continue and add to the discussion! Q

 

[sceej56]

Qjakal, thanks for responding in kind. No surprise, I disagree with you - but without screaming or name calling. That said, can't be too hard on them when people get angry about topics like this and maybe cross the line - it's a provocative topic.

At the risk of hanging labels, seems to me yours is pretty much a libertarian view - laws are to provide a certain social order and stability and not to enforce or promulgate morality. I disagree but suspect I'm not going to "convert" you. Fair enough, your arguments are logical and cohesive and I respect that. Seems to me lots of people confuse the obligation to respect others right to have an opinion with an obligation to respect the opinion itself, even when it has no foundation. People like me have it a little tougher because to be honest, when you're trying to legislate and impose morality, then to an extent, you are not willing to recognize the right to a contrary opinion and behavior.

As for my failure to address the unfair taxation/medical/insurance issues; I don't recognize them as "unfair". They are not soemthign to which everyone is entitled; they are priveleges written into the tax code and legal system to reward and promote heterosexual marriage, which a majoirty of persons at one point thought was important to societal stability (unwed mothers, fatherless kids, etc). I don't recognize the right of any two (or more) persons to say "us too" because they are in a commited relationship which society has elected not to recognize (for valid reasons in my opinion). I resisted it earlier because this thread did not need any more gasoline on it but the logic that if the relationship involves only consenting adults and is not harming any person could be extended to societal recognition of necrophilia, bestiality and consensual master slave realtionships ("consensual slave" - oxymoronic?). Certainly thats the logic behind the recent Supreme Court decision on "virtual" kiddy porn - which I disagree with strongly.

One thing you mentioned intrigued me (and I want to tread lightly here because it appears this issue has touched you personally givne your sister's tragedy), and that was a reasonable system involving euthanasia where warranted. My own attitude is it's never warranted and is the ultimate slippery slope but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on it. Would you limit it "living will" type situations where a competent person delineated there wishes? In writing?

Incidentally, I'm not looking to sell any organs (still using thme) or marry any siblings (joke).

 

[BellaRisa]

So I lied, sue me

Yeah, I said I was done with this thread, but sceej56 brought up some intriguing points:

Clearly bucking the trend, I'm against state recognition of homosexual unions in any capacity - marriage, domestic partnership, etc - on biblical grounds.

<Nodding> I understand and respect your view in a friendly, conversational way. Me, I'm a huge supporter of the separation of church and state. Too many people have told me that Noah's son Ham, being darker than the brothers he was made to serve, was the father of all Dark People and that's why slavery should be legal and darker folks should obey lighter folks. Um, yeah.

"I don't beleive something inherently un-natural is deserving of state recognition."

I understand, and respect your view in a friendly, conversational way. Personally, I believe that love is the most natural thing in existence, in all of it's forms. On the legal side, if two people want to form a union, care for one another and receive the benefits and hassles of said union, why (non-biblically) should the government tell them no? If a couple do all the same life-stuff that my hubby and I do, I really think they should get the same deal.


"The tired (IMHO) argument that it should be recognized because it involves consenting adults and does not harm anyone can be applied equally to a number of other situations...If you support homosexual marriage but reject ANY of the above, I"d be interested in hearing why - and try not to spilt the hairs to finely and please address all of the behavior you're "intolerant" of"

I'm for everything you listed. Do I want those things for myself? Nope, not all of 'em anyway (I'm polyamorous and believe in multiple partner marriage very strongly). And yup, I find some of them a trifle icky. But just because something isn't right for me doesn't mean it should be illegal for others, or there would be sooo many new laws: No Tom Arnold movies, no blue eyeshadow and pink frosted lipstick, making a fake tickling video would result in jail time...

"I'll go with hundreds of years of Judeo-Christian-Islamic history over the whims of the past thirty or forty years - for which, many would label me an unthinking bigot."

Really? So if your daughter wasn't a virgin when she married, you'd allow her to be stoned to death on your doorstep? Would you sell your wife and children to the highest bidder whenever you needed the shekels? Or if you decided that your children weren't behaving the way you told them to, would you drown them all-even the newborns-and just start over? If your wife had a baby girl, would you make her stay isolated and considered unclean for 66 day?

When was the last time you showed God just how much you love Him by killing a goat?

I am NOT disrespecting the Bible-it can be a wonderful book for Christians. BUT, even for Christians it's hard to take literally, I'm sure you'll agree. Times change, and that must be recognized. I've never understood how one decides which parts of their Bible are for following to the letter and which are for ignoring.

Please tell me how you know what's for obeying and what isn't. That's an honest question, asked in a friendly and conversational way.

Then tell me how Cain found a wife, I've always wanted to know

Bella

 

[grippedchimp]

In light of Krokus' tirade, isn't it ironic he has a "Fight The System" picture on his quote profile, yet his rant seems a bit far-right? As for the "fruits" remark, I use that as a joke (admittedly) phrase to anyone who annoys me, but I wouldn't use it in a malicious context during a debate. What you need Krokus, is a few good tickling pics and clips, and put your head between your legs. That should calm you down.

I'm not an avid reader of the Bible, but does this holy book have inconsistentcies and contradictions? TicklingDuo mentioned those 4 quotes (the 4th I've lived by all my life), but I don't recall any passages mentioning the sins of homosexuality (1st or so century Romans and Greeks had plenty of homosexual relationships I was told). Perhaps some intolerant Christians rewrit the Bible like the Taliban rewrit the Koran. But I could be wrong again...

 

[qjakal]

More discussion...

How very odd to be called a liberatarian..lol! I'm a member of the Conservative Party and mostly a "hard liner" on many issues, but I guess we all have our soft sides somewhere! The fact that tax laws need to be either changed or rewritten isn't surprising...we've had to change quite a few things in the history of our country, most notably our "legal attitude" towards women and minorities.

As for euthansia, it IS a complicated subject, but if we get a few of our medically oriented brethren coming in, I'll bet they'll be able to tell you stories that would scare you into at least considering this as a viable option with proper safeguards and redundant checkoffs and such.

I shan't debate the tenets of the Bible, as it is far too easy to find supporting text for nearly ANY position within it's writings, and i suggest the rest of the thread attempt to bypass the temptation for divine approval!

Nice chatting with you, scee...we haven't really run into each other before this, I believe? Q

 

[sceej56]

Bella - good to see people can answer and challenge each other without flaming. This is going to be way to short and probably unsatisfying but most of the stuff thats thrown at the Bible to show it has no place in modern society involves the Old Testament and specifice laws and covenants between God and a particular people - the ancient Hebrews. My view is that the law has been fulfilled through Jesus (and man, ain't that gonna make me popular around here) so those laws, which governed a desert dwelling agrarian culture two thousand years ago don't apply to me today. So, the smart alecky "West Wing" monolog notwithstanding (I'm referring to an epsiode of the televisoan series), no, I don't worry about stoning my brother for planting two different crops in the same field, I don;t have any idea what would be a good price if Martin Sheen wanted to sell his daughter, and I've never slaughtered a goat for God. The injunction against homosexuality carries into the New Testament and I beleive still carries moral force today (and I'd hasten to remind you the overwhelming majority of the world apparently still agrees - many on non-biblical grounds - with me and no, I haven't polled them recently).

Gotta say, I think you ducked a couple of the tough ones with the "icky response" - would you support the right of mother and son, father and daughter, brother and sister to enter legal unions? Would you support the "right" of a junkie to sell his kidney for a pittance? Would you support the right of a person to have a legally recognized sexual relationship with a reasonably sentient animal like a chimpanzee - a sexual relationship based on love? It get's very very icky when the criteria is that if its based on love and is it harming any person then it's okay, at least in my opinion.

And, man, I have NO idea where Cain found a wife (or Abel for that matter, short of incest). Either the creation account allegorical or it's just nonsense or there's things we don't know/understand (my personal beleif is the latter)

 

[Krokus]

In light of Krokus' tirade, isn't it ironic he has a "Fight The System" picture on his quote profile, yet his rant seems a bit far-right? As for the "fruits" remark, I use that as a joke (admittedly) phrase to anyone who annoys me, but I wouldn't use it in a malicious context during a debate. What you need Krokus, is a few good tickling pics and clips, and put your head between your legs. That should calm you down.

I'm not an avid reader of the Bible, but does this holy book have inconsistentcies and contradictions? TicklingDuo mentioned those 4 quotes (the 4th I've lived by all my life), but I don't recall any passages mentioning the sins of homosexuality (1st or so century Romans and Greeks had plenty of homosexual relationships I was told). Perhaps some intolerant Christians rewrit the Bible like the Taliban rewrit the Koran. But I could be wrong again...

Yea, my Fight The System pic about sums up the way I feel about the world in general. I see things going on around me and in the news that really make me angry. I want to change things. I plan on finding a way to change things. I am a very ambitious person, and I refuse to "calm down". As I said before, half of the problems in the this country are because people afraid to take a stand, afraid to fight the system. People like you, gripped, are what drives me to feel this way. I tire of people who believe in total freedom, yet when a person comes along with a different opinion, he or she gets crucified. I am tired of alot of things, and I am a tired person. I will continue to participate in this debate, even though I am mocked and made fun of at each corner. All you are doing is proving my point.

 

[sceej56]

Q - not sure if we've ever exchnaged views before; I find I barely have time to read, much less post (have generally found your posts thought provocative, though).

On euthanasia, doubt if you could convince me. I'm rather suspicious of delegating moral issues to "experts" and am not all that reassured by redundant safeguards. I recognize a very logical argument can be made for euthanizing the brain damaged infant of an indigent mother, with or without her consent. Not gonna do it and not going to even allow society to put a toe in the water, at least to the extent that I'll consistently vote against it. Reminds me a little bit of the Brady bill by analogy - gun control advocates said just give us this, how can you be against this, etc and the minute they got it, were they satisfied? Hell, no! Now let's address the "loopholes", they said.

May have mispoke in characterizing your views; obviously, I'll defer to you on that count. As I understand them, most Libertarians are socially liberal and fiscally conservative - kinda "don't touch my stuff and I won't touch yours". Me, I guess most would lump me in with what's been called the Christian right, which is conservative but with certain distinctions. Enjoyed the exchange - reply if you want - I'll be watching for yor posts on this an other topics.

 

[qjakal]

Time and viewpoints...

I've looked back at many viewpoints that I held as a younger man, and now no longer espouse, and the events that were catalysts for these apparent reversals or adjustments of what seemed to be "obviously" correct ideas, and I begin to see a pattern forming. I shan't expand upon my theories and hijack the thread, merely throw a word of advice out there regarding having a "set in stone" stance on issues. Leave some room for doubt and at least minor revisions to your cherished viewpoints...not that I'm advocating being wishy washy or soft about what you strongly believe, but rather taking into account that you/we don't have a monopoly on wisdom or experiences.

Scee, I firmly believe that if you had been standing by my side during the incidents that shaped my view on euthanasia, you might temper your position. Having said that, I sincerely hope neither yourself or anyone else have those experiences, just as I'm sure you have your own burdens and memories....more suited for a grey winters day thread, perhaps.

The world changes and yet stays the same, but I see other sides of it at times...not always of my choosing, and I realize how much I don't know.

Q

 

[sceej56]

On that one (whether observing your sister's tragedy would have changed me), I will defer to you respectfully - I wans't there and I would not presume to tell you it wouldn't affect me (my mind is not completely closed). This may sound trite but I've had some experience with prolonged familial illnesses (stroke left my father devestated but lingered three years) so I'v been there and you have my sympathy.

 

[BellaRisa]

Bella - good to see people can answer and challenge each other without flaming. This is going to be way to short and probably unsatisfying but most of the stuff thats thrown at the Bible to show it has no place in modern society involves the Old Testament and specifice laws and covenants between God and a particular people - the ancient Hebrews. My view is that the law has been fulfilled through Jesus (and man, ain't that gonna make me popular around here) so those laws, which governed a desert dwelling agrarian culture two thousand years ago don't apply to me today. So, the smart alecky "West Wing" monolog notwithstanding (I'm referring to an epsiode of the televisoan series), no, I don't worry about stoning my brother for planting two different crops in the same field, I don;t have any idea what would be a good price if Martin Sheen wanted to sell his daughter, and I've never slaughtered a goat for God. The injunction against homosexuality carries into the New Testament and I beleive still carries moral force today (and I'd hasten to remind you the overwhelming majority of the world apparently still agrees - many on non-biblical grounds - with me and no, I haven't polled them recently).

Gotta say, I think you ducked a couple of the tough ones with the "icky response" - would you support the right of mother and son, father and daughter, brother and sister to enter legal unions? Would you support the "right" of a junkie to sell his kidney for a pittance? Would you support the right of a person to have a legally recognized sexual relationship with a reasonably sentient animal like a chimpanzee - a sexual relationship based on love? It get's very very icky when the criteria is that if its based on love and is it harming any person then it's okay, at least in my opinion.

And, man, I have NO idea where Cain found a wife (or Abel for that matter, short of incest). Either the creation account allegorical or it's just nonsense or there's things we don't know/understand (my personal beleif is the latter)

First, before you read anything else I say, please go here-and please read the whole page:

http://mindprod.com/marriage.html

It's a site that says everything I want to say on this subject, and prolly better than I would 🙂.

Now as for 'ducking', just trying to be brief for once-if you know me you know I never avoid issues, too much of a big mouth for that (heh).

I don't condone unions between blood-related family members for genetic reasons, not moral ones. If a brother and sister or a mother and son want to marry, I would find it highly distasteful but I wouldn't stand in their way, it's their business. But those family members have rights *without* marriage that gay partners don't-things like staying with you in the hospital when you need them most. My husband wouldn't be forced to leave my side if I were gravely ill, but he probably would if we were both male. That's cruel, and in my opinion it's just not reasonable. As for the chimp example, I don't find them to be 'reasonably sentient'. When they start speaking clearly, building cities and writing novels, and competing with us for jobs, get back to me 😛

See, I'm coming from a very love-based standpoint. I've been a wife for nine years now. I married my best friend whom I met in college. The man has seen me through so much-getting my sorry rear through a psych degree, miscarriage and the loss of my mother, 20 HARD hours of labor with our first baby...and the little every day things that make marriage so incredible. He's my partner in every sense of the word. If any two (or more) people are lucky enough to have what we do, I can't understand why they shouldn't be allowed to marry like we did. Finding the love is the tricky part. Once you have it, gays shouldn't have to fret over the legal stuff like taxes and property anymore than straight folks. You share my crazy life for 50 yrs, when I die you get the house and my stuff, period.

Answer me this, please: let's say suddenly homosexuals were allowed to marry. How much different would life be, in your mind's eye?

Bella

 

[TickleCrazy]

A "pro" opinion based on experience

I've been thinking about the dynamics of gay and straight relationships for a long time. I've seen many more gay relationships fail than succeed. Aside from religious objections, gays' inability to maintain fidelity is often cited by straight people as a reason why gay marriage shouldn't be permitted. But I think validating gay relationships by legalizing their marriages would go a long way toward alleviating the stresses that lead some gays to try to escape their problems by behaving unfaithfully and irresponsibly.

Let me qualify my viewpoint with some background: My first long-term live-in relationship was with a woman. After we split up my ex and I joined the game of musical beds going on among our friends. They say they're looking for love but it looks to me like they're just having one sexual friendship after another. Some couplings last longer than others but they always seem to end. I eventually found love and real commitment with a man (surprise!). When I talk about lesbian old friends I wonder, "are they still together?" That thought doesn't occur to me about my straight married friends.

In addition to being denied basic rights and privileges that straight couples take for granted, I think it's hard for gay relationships to last because: You lack support from the most important people in your life. You have disappointed many of your family and straight friends. They can't find it in their hearts to be truly happy for your love. When you and your lover have a spat they may even be hopeful that it will break you up so you might now find a "normal" (straight) partner. (When a nice straight couple has a spat people think it's a tragedy and they're right there to help patch it up.) Your parents are probably not going to help you with the downpayment on a starter house for you two. Few people believe that your union will be long-lived. With "invalid!" coming from so many directions I wonder how anybody manages to be stable in gay love.

Here's a bit of news demonstrating that the times, they are a-changin'

August 16, 2002 NEW YORK (CNN) -- New York City Council voted Thursday to recognize gay marriages from other jurisdictions. http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/16/nyc.gay.partners/index.html

 

[The Godking]

just out of curiousity.... what's the point of marriage.

 

[grippedchimp]

Well Krokus, I am no way a full-on anarchist or a full-on capitalist. But what exactly do you mean by complete freedom? Besides, aren't there other issues that we should fight? Who knows, gays are fighting against different systems anyway. You're a teenager. I can tell. Perhaps it's natural to let off steam like this and feel bitter all the time...

 

[siamese dream]

There was something mentioned on here about having a view against homosexuality was going to make that person 'really popular around here' (I'm guessing that was sarcasm), and then Krokus' remark about continuing in the debate, even though he is mocked at every corner.

Nah. I think there is an extremely diverse mix of viewpoints on this thread...and while some angry feelings did come up in a few places, overall, for such a controversial topic the debate has remained remarkably civil. I think there are plenty of people on here on one side of the debate, on the opposite side of the debate, and probably many, many others who haven't even posted here that don't really care one way or the other. Krokus, I know you did get teased a little, but I think it was mainly in response to the angry and baiting nature of that one post you made, not anything against you personally or against your personal beliefs.

Meanwhile, this topic has got so huge that I can barely keep up with it anymore. Who knows...reading all this stuff has started to make me think that maybe your answer to the original question is all to do with how you were raised, what kind of attitudes you were brought up with and how you viewed those attitudes as an adult. Me, I was brought up with the attitude that homosexuality is wrong and immoral, but as I got older, I started questioning the beliefs I was taught to be true and feeling as though I did not agree with many of them. This may have a lot to do with how many gay friends I've had in my lifetime, my experiences around them, seeing how they were treated by the rest of the world and how I was treated in high school when the lesbian rumor was going around about me. It probably made me naturally more sympathetic towards homosexuality. Let me put it this way; if you have close homosexual friends/family members, or if you're gay yourself, it will probably make you more likely to support allowing homosexual couples the right to a legal union. I would guess that if you were brought up with an attitude that homosexuality is wrong/immoral, and you continued to believe that to be true into adulthood, then you likely haven't had many close homosexual friends (because I doubt many gay people would feel comfortable having a friend who viewed their sexuality as immoral) and will not feel much sympathy towards homosexuality. Perhaps neither side could ever prove themselves to be "right" or "wrong", but it does make for an interesting discussion, if not one that sometimes causes a lot of intense personal feelings to come up.

Godking, the point of marriage? I dunno, people get married for a lot of reasons. Some do it for love, some for money, some because they got pregnant and want to raise the baby as a married couple, some because they got drunk and went to Vegas 😀... but there are always people who don't believe in marriage at all and don't ever want to get married, and probably never will. My basic point is that I feel two people in love, who want to marry, should have that right regardless of what their sexuality is... which brings me to...

sceej56, on your point about brothers and sisters who want to marry. I don't really know what to say to this, except that I think most people would agree that there's a HUGE difference between two strangers who meet and fall in love, than two people who came out of the same womb. To me, it's more natural for a homosexual person to meet another homosexual person (that they are completely un-related to), fall in love, and be together, than for a brother and sister to fall in love and want to be together. But some might disagree with me, and I think you would be one of them. You do make an interesting and provacative point, and I thank you for doing so without flaming.

I might be wrong about this... but I think we've yet to hear from anyone on this thread who actually IS gay. Again, there could be, and I just missed it, but I'm not sure. Well, I'll be brave and admit something to you all.... I'm bi-curious, which means I've never been with a woman but I'd probably be open to it. When I think about the future, I imagine I will end up in a long-term relationship and married to a man... because I just love men, especially the ticklish ones! 😀 However, I feel like I could love anyone...regardless of gender, regardless of whether or not I'm gay... based on who they are on the inside. I think love is more about friendship and acceptance than anything, and while I consider myself "straight" for purposes of discussion, I think it would be possible for me to fall in love with another woman, if she was 'the right one'. Some people may not understand this, but it's just how I feel. It is probably another huge clue as to why my feelings on this debate are so. I doubt anyone who wrote back against homosexual marriage has ever felt any curiousity towards the same sex. So this whole thing may just have to do with who you are personally, and your viewpoints will be determined by that.

 

[Haltickling]

As an atheist (well, more an agnostic actually), I have problems understanding Biblical reasons to reject homosexuality.

To me, the most important parts of Christianity are the Ten Commandments and the preachings of Jesus (especially the 'Sermon of the Mount'). They are excellent rules to make any kind of society develop in peace, and even as an atheist, I try to follow them. They make a lot of sense, which can't be said for much else in the Bible. A lot of the rest is just tribal mumbo-jumbo typical for Biblical times, just like many of our 'modern' customs will be found ridiculous in 2000 years (no offense to believers intended).

However, Jesus went to great lengths to make his acceptance of social outsiders clear. He openly cared for people who were outcast by the contemporary societies: lepers, disabled people, adulterous women, prostitutes, and even tax-collectors. I'm quite sure he also cared for homosexuals, but that taboo was certainly nothing to be discussed in a Holy Scripture, written down quite a while after Jesus' already mystified death. Naturally I can't prove it, but don't you think it would have been quite typical for him, judging by his other actions?

Still, marriage is only partly a religious sacrament, and partly a matter of legal and societal matters. Many couples today don't marry in church, but they get married legally nonetheless. Religions should influence the society, but they shouldn't rule it. Therefore, religious reasons shouldn't be used as the only relevant POV when discussing homosexuality and marriage, IMHO.

 

[TickleCrazy]

I might be wrong about this... but I think we've yet to hear from anyone on this thread who actually IS gay. Again, there could be, and I just missed it, but I'm not sure. Well, I'll be brave and admit something to you all.... I'm bi-curious...

Read a couple of posts back about my experience living on the gay side of bi. I also hope to hear from someone on the deep end of the gay spectrum.

 

[shark]

You would have to discuss this with theologians and preachers,as the Bible doesn't offer many reasons for the teachings in it.Some theologians believe that homosexuality was only considered to be disgusting or distasteful rather than sin.The same ones also believe that homosexuality was not the cause of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah,but it was the practice of shrine prostitution.

Considering infidelity and divorce,the New Testament also gives two acceptable reasons for divorce:infidelity and marriage to a nonbeliever whose doubts become a problem in the marriage.Strangely enough,the Catholic Church does not recognize even these reasons.

I personally find male homosexuality to be disgusting,but have a less extreme opinion on female homosexuality.Just keep it away from me and we'll get along.