Homosexuality and Gay Marriage

[ QUOTE ]
agios_katastrof said:
...I became Christian, and gave the bible a good read... which clarified things for me personally. There are parts of the bible that are open to one's intepretation. But there are other parts, which are pretty black and white.


[/ QUOTE ]

I have a small problem with the arbitrary convenience of this paragraph. I think people switch between the two stances without awareness just to make the statement "well, I'm right cause the Bible says so."

"Parts open to one's interpretation," for many people means "I don't really understand what is being said here." I find nothing disgraceful with lack of understanding - many theologians spend their lives interpreting the Bible. I accept that some people can interpret the Bible much more accurately than others based on higher education and training.

I see little difference between calling something "open to interpretation" when the interpretation benefits you and clarifies things for you and dismissing "black and white (homosexual behavior is an abomination)" as some hateful prose written by a homophobe.

 

Been skimming the thread, but I haven't seen much discussed about something I'm curious in..... The legal/political implications of legal gay marriages.

The effect it has on the legal environment and enforcement of marriages--and should gay marriages be treated as special case with its own special rules, and who's special rules?

The tax and legal benefits of marriage, as it applies to homosexuals. Same or different?

Divorce, adultery--is it an issue, and if so, how to handle it? It's always an issue whether hetero or homo, and this might pinpoint how different individuals actually see homosexual relationships. Do they believe that the majority of homosexuals, including those that would commit to marriage, lead a life that's prone to adultery? Do they believe that it's not different or at most only a little different from their own perceptions of hetero relationships? On this topic, people can actually start to realize their own views (or stereotypes) on homosexuality and its link on personality types.

BTW, it's no news to most that the divorce rates are generally on the up and up. But also, despite this, will the future provide proper treatment to homosexuals if it's ignorantly seen that they're to blame for what some might end up seeing as "the death or poison of the institution of marriage?" Will the legal system protect homosexuals and/or heterosexual marriages in the future political environment? Freedom of speech, baby.

That and many more issues. They just go on... and on... and on.... and on...

I bring this up because I think for a lot of politicians, lobbyists, lawmakers, and activitists are concerned with these issues a lot. I think it's a big factor in why the issue sort of became a war. For sure, it's a religious, ideological, and theological issue too. But amongst mortals within societies, it's an issue regarding about how we define certain relationships and the future of those relationships too. And how we as people will act to them, whether we shouldn't or shouldn't act in particular ways.

There will definitely be people fighting no matter what happens... whether they're a marriage with a special star and virtually no real-benefits, or legal marriages with all the benefits and an unfortunate few that could exploit the system.

It's one of those issues that I feel is bound for both more acceptance and more hate. A pandora's box that is necessary to open for many and necessary to keep shut by many as well. It may be easy to think on the level of how you feel about it, but it's extremely hard and complex to adjust it to become a benefit or proper right for a nation of people--especially one so legally focused on the individual level. However, at the very least, all good and bad change are generally accumpanied by fear.

It's a huge issue on the religious and beliefs level for sure, but also on a social-legal level too.

-Chanchai

 

Saying children in Japan are not exposed to bigotry and rascism is incredibly ignorant.
Racial stereotyping is in the media, on the streets on bilboards and in schoolbooks still.
You dont have to be exposed to the actual foreigners to become a bigot.

 

One name - bob sapp

 

Interesting direction to go in.

I don't see any need to change the legal components of marriage. I think homosexuals should recieve the same benefits and adhere to the same guidelines. I think divorce proceedings don't need alterations, either.

As far as poisoning the institution of marriage, I view marriage as a commitment between two people, gender non-withstanding. My marriage can not be nullified by someone else's. I think marriage is not taken all that seriously by many people. Divorce rate is high and TV shows like "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?" are popular /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

The people who take marriage seriously are the ones who want to. It will always mean something to them.

 

okay, so the latest I heard was that Bush wanted to abolish marriage, but allow 'other institutions that are similar to marriage'. Why? Why can't he just let them get married already? What's up 'semi-marriage'? Am I missing something here (like the Christian people voting for him because of his views)?

 

Bush is fucking HOMOPHOBIC!

 

With recent events in San Francisco, I've seen a bunch of letters to the editor in my newspaper. The people against these marriages (including the governor) are making analogies like this: "Well, if they just ignore the laws here, why not ignore the ban on assault weapons," or "I'm sure these relationship between a teacher and his 14 year old student can be described as 'loving,' why not allow that, too?"

People want to make homosexual love a crime. It's ludicrous to think of it that way. There are no victims in a consensual gay marriage between adults. People are being labeled as criminals because of how they were born. If not a crime then it's "the institution of marriage and all it holds dear is being threatened!" Total bullshit. If the heterosexual marriage is threatened by anything, it's the alarming divorce rate.

I've yet to see a bunch of people pissed and in the news about the 50% divorce rate.

As far as Bush is concerned, even if he thought gay marriage was ok, he doesn't have the balls to say it. How refreshing it would be if he or anyone lost an election for publically backing gay marriage. I think if Bush allows gay marriage, he won't get re-elected. Sadder still, if Kerry speaks in favor of gay marriage, he'll lose his chance to unseat Bush.

 

Maybe we can get bush a big preztle or something...or a broken Segway /versus/images/graemlins/cool.gif /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
Plague said:

With recent events in San Francisco, I've seen a bunch of letters to the editor in my newspaper. The people against these marriages (including the governor) are making analogies like this: "Well, if they just ignore the laws here, why not ignore the ban on assault weapons," or "I'm sure these relationship between a teacher and his 14 year old student can be described as 'loving,' why not allow that, too?"

People want to make homosexual love a crime. It's ludicrous to think of it that way. There are no victims in a consensual gay marriage between adults. People are being labeled as criminals because of how they were born. If not a crime then it's "the institution of marriage and all it holds dear is being threatened!" Total bullshit. If the heterosexual marriage is threatened by anything, it's the alarming divorce rate.



[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking a law is a crime. It's that simple. The people granted these marriage licenses will soon be applying to get all the benefits granted to married couples. As much as I believe homosexuality is wrong, it starts to get personal when they want to collect my tax dollars. Although, there's an endless list of government spending practices I'm against, so chalk up another one for the national debt.

 

[ QUOTE ]
SilentEmpire said:

[ QUOTE ]
Plague said:

With recent events in San Francisco, I've seen a bunch of letters to the editor in my newspaper. The people against these marriages (including the governor) are making analogies like this: "Well, if they just ignore the laws here, why not ignore the ban on assault weapons," or "I'm sure these relationship between a teacher and his 14 year old student can be described as 'loving,' why not allow that, too?"

People want to make homosexual love a crime. It's ludicrous to think of it that way. There are no victims in a consensual gay marriage between adults. People are being labeled as criminals because of how they were born. If not a crime then it's "the institution of marriage and all it holds dear is being threatened!" Total bullshit. If the heterosexual marriage is threatened by anything, it's the alarming divorce rate.



[/ QUOTE ]

Breaking a law is a crime. It's that simple. The people granted these marriage licenses will soon be applying to get all the benefits granted to married couples. As much as I believe homosexuality is wrong, it starts to get personal when they want to collect my tax dollars. Although, there's an endless list of government spending practices I'm against, so chalk up another one for the national debt.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you serious? you think homosexuality is wrong? tell that to the people born that way... tell them they were born wrong.

 

How can you say that homosexuality is wrong?
Haven't you read the rest of the thread?

Are you born "right", then? /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /versus/images/graemlins/mad.gif /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

Gods suppose to give them to the strength to cope with their 'disability' apparently.

 

[ QUOTE ]
SilentEmpire said:
Breaking a law is a crime. It's that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]
I equate this law breaking to you driving 66 mph in the slow lane in a 65 mph zone when everyone else is going 74.

[ QUOTE ]
SilentEmpire said:
The people granted these marriage licenses will soon be applying to get all the benefits granted to married couples.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good for them. They deserve it.

[ QUOTE ]
SilentEmpire said:
As much as I believe homosexuality is wrong, it starts to get personal when they want to collect my tax dollars.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's difficult for me to believe that people are born wrong. I hope you change your mind about this. If someone picks out a genetic trait of yours they don't like, I hope you don't get harassed because of it.

Also, I'm sure homosexuals are tired of hetero married couples collecting their tax dollars.

[ QUOTE ]
SilentEmpire said:
Although, there's an endless list of government spending practices I'm against, so chalk up another one for the national debt.

[/ QUOTE ]
This seems a little bizarre to me. I'd think the hundreds of billions spent on trashing Iraq kinda stomps all over your worries about gay marriage cutting into your social security.

 

[ QUOTE ]
Breaking a law is a crime. It's that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

What law, exactly, are they breaking?

GE

 

Homosexuality is just the ignorants newest witch-hunt… I mean hell they’re even called fagots… Like the cliché says: People are afraid of what they don’t understand. For those who are against it… Good luck… They’re here to stay, and personally I’m happy for them. In life you have the right to make choices, and as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone, I have no qualms with said choice.

Don’t fear what you don’t understand, fear the fact that you’re unwilling to try to understand.
Cuz

Ps. Plague lets not bring up the War in Iraq… Cuz you’ll hear my rants all that much more. /versus/images/graemlins/wink.gif I’m against the blood for oil program.

 

Correction Cuz: Anyone who's seen Eight-Mile understands this.

Homosexuals are gay, it's the groups barring them equal rights that are faggots.

 

Fear drives american minds and this is just the latest thing to be afraid of. I'm not going to go through all the things america is afraid of as opposed to what it should be afraid of but on the subject of gay marriage, WTF? If gays get married it will effect nothing more negatively than anything our current president has done. This (as most things involving our presidents) is just smoke to change the air of the coming election so the focus can be taken off the major fuckups our president has done in his past 4 years.

As somone said previously on this thread, gay marriage or homosexuality in general has NO VICTIMS (when it is consenual of course lol).

I find this whole argument to be classic of the BS that happens around election time. I don't think Bush is gonna do shit about gay marriage besides pose the question so he can have somethign to run on. He MIGHT do something about it if he wins though and I hope he doesn't win so we can have four more years of travesty in America

 

Yes, plague did present an argument. It is the view of one side, I am wondering if you are homo-sexual. I have no problem with gay people at all as long as they do not try to interfere with me. People should also be able to marry whomever they please. But if being gay is genetic then why the hell were gays almost non-existent a few hundred years ago? I am not on either side of the scope but I will provide valid arguments to represent the other side

After aids sprung up in a majority of gays it seemed to bring publicity onto gay men as a whole. Now all of a sudden we have a 2,000 percent increase in gay people because they have psychological debacles. It is safe to speculate that psychologists have proven that gay people often have mitigating circumstances when they are in their childhood that screws them up psychologically. I am no therapist, but I can draw the conclusion that it is a defense mechanism to stray away or upset the balance of what had happened to this person as a child, henceforth...Turning them gay(straying from the norm to upset someone or feel better about something, a natural human defense mechanism).

Present a more viable argument than you have, Plague. What you have stated above is a small novel of garbage. Nothing very practical but opionated drivel.
Half of these posts that agree with you are opionated and belong to negation. Perhaps it wouldn't 'sear' my eyes if you all would actually back up your arguments(when it should be debates instead of arguments) with views on both sides. Half of you are also saying how bad America is and how people's insecurities are getting the best of them. Acting as if you are the perfectly open minded people when you are only expressing one stern belief with no oscillation at all. It is creating a contradiction in itself. Please use your brain and think before you post. This is just one huge, overly opinionated thread, that should be locked because it has been butchered. If you want to debate a topic, do it right... Otherwise, shut the hell up please.

 

[ QUOTE ]
But if being gay is genetic then why the hell were gays almost non-existent a few hundred years ago?

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. i mean...just.....wow.