"It's my birthday, so vote against 'Gay Marriage'"

Post Reply New Topic

How does allowing homosexual people to marry and have family of their own "devaluate" marriage and family?

It is if redefining marriage makes marriage meaningless.


It is a legal problem as long as there are laws governing it. And there are.


It does solve it if redefining marriage strips the institution of its meaning.


I have a constitutional right to express my opinions. Merely stating my position on something harms no one.

Not a good thing when it happens? We tend to impose fines and/or incarceration when bad things happen. So that I have no right to tell people they shouldn't be able to do not-good-things is a non-sequiter. When something is harmful to society, it becomes everyone's business whether or not everyone sticks their heads in the sand and tries to ignore it--the problem doesn't go away. People may get annoyed or angry, but sometimes it's just better to deal with the elephant in the room than trying to pretend there isn't one. Armed robbery is not a good thing, and we frequently tell people not to do it and impose penalties when they do.


Agreed. Note I never said ALL divorce should be ended. I just said NFDs shouldn't be as convenient as they are.


Already explained that.

Pray tell how allowing same sex couples to marry will in any way make marriage "meaningless"

There is no law that exists that devalues marriage. You can't force people to see something your way just because you believe it's better if they do.

Strip the institution of it's meaning? How? By letting two people who love each other marry? Your arguments make no sense

Of course you have the right to your opinion. I should have been more clear. What I mean is you don't have the right to force people to not divorce. It isn't a crime to divorce, and it shouldn't be a crime. The issue is people marrying before they are ready to marry, not the divorce laws. Education is the answer, not changing the law.

Why not? Because you don't think they should be easy? What is the gain in making divorces longer and more complicated? The longer the process takes the more traumatic it will become, especially for any children involved.

Its simple: AngelRho and many others like him consider homosexuality to be both a disorder and a personal challenge that people are failing to meet and instead succumbing to "sin" that will cause them to burn in hell. Thus in a twisted way they think they are doing something positive

As I recall, it's the red states, where evangelicals hold political and social sway, and where "traditional marriage" is supposed to be so important, that you have the highest divorce rate.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

The thing that's been really bothering me about the opposition is that they haven't really proven that gay marriage (or redefining marriage) is a harm to society aside from damnation of the soul. If you're going to argue something like this and actually be serious about it, you might want real sources and research and stats instead of basing something off a book that a majority believe is fictional. I hear all this talk of gay marriage being "a harm to society" and no real evidence or stories to back it up. You need to prove that something is a harm to argue it folks.

Also there is lacking proof that "marriage" has a solid definition. Not even the bible strictly states it.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw[/youtube]

That was a riot!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Always an excellent video. Tea approves.

Most people like exclusiveness in some form or fashion. If there is something that anyone, anywhere, can do or have, it loses it's value because it's easily obtainable. If sororities and fraterinities accepted anyone who wanted to join, do you think that there would be as much competition to get in one? If Ivy League schools accepted every academically and financially qualified applicant do you think they would have as much prestige? The same kind of mentality tends to creep into everything all down the rungs of society. The guy who got his GED and went to welding school feels a little bit superior to the guy who is just as smart as him but quit school at 16 after flunking out of 9th grade for skipping school so much and so therefore didn't qualify to take the GED. It's the mentality of "If there is no mental, financial or physical ability requirements and the person in charge allows me to do this and not someone else, then I must be somewhat superior to them".

If they allow gay people to marry then it loses it's "specialness". As long as there are other committed couples in love out there, that the government will not allow to marry, those who are married have some kind of superiority.

Of course not everybody thinks this way about every topic. Some do. It's competitiveness. "Marriage belongs to we straight people! You can't have it!" mentality. I have no idea why anybody would think this way. I also don't think that it's at the root of everyone's disagreement who is against gay marriage. I do think though, that anytime something is exclusive, even if no one had given any thought before to the fact that it was exclusive, when the issue comes up of changing that, and "letting a new group of people in" that people get territorial. I also don't think that most people realize they are doing this. I don't think it's a conscious feeling. I think the territorial instinct is what drives people who are already against gay people's orientation to begin with, to become defensive and not want them to "join the club" so to speak.

I may be totally off base, but that seems like a logical explination of why some people are so rabidly against something that has nothing whatsoever to do with them and will have absolutely no effect on their lives.

Bravo, AngelRho! I support you

OK, so the little girl made a statement that few on here like. Supporting gay marriage is the 'in thing' currently, so I can see how people can get mad when someone 'goes against the crowd.'

Alright, so what?
In the '70s, people used to have this same rightious indignation and such with naysayers over disagreeing with abortion and easy divorce, and yet many years later people don't have a fit if someone disagrees with them now. And why? Because those ideas that everybody thought were 'progressive' and wouldn't hurt anybody turned out to be very bad ideas over time. And even their children dislike it, because they've gotten to see the ugly fallout first hand. Marriages barely last anymore and shacking up is common. And abortion turned out to be a bit abhorrent in actual practice, so many younger people are saying they are pro-life.

Maybe people think that having gay marriage will make gay people feel better about themselves. Does it? Even in countries that have had gay marriage and enforced tolerance around for some time, there is still a high rate of depression and drug use among the gay population. There are still a lot of unhappy gay people in these countries.

You can have gay marriage or not have it, it doesn't matter. You won't be here when the consequences hit, but your children and grandchildren will. I got to be front row center when divorces soared and 'defective' babies became no longer worthy of life, as the generation before me thought those things were 'progressive' and 'good.'

Supporting equal rights for everybody is the "in thing", and has been "in" for quite some time. It is also the moral thing and the right thing to do. Or would you make the same comment about black rights and women's rights?



I would like to see some statistics on that. Not that I doubt that gay and other LGBT people suffer from depression more often than heterosexual cisgender people, simply because they are bullied and discriminated against (and because people write all kinds of BS about them on internet forums).

How can you compare a mere sexual preferance to being discriminated on concrete physical differences? And that using that tired 'civil rights' arguement really falls flat as gays haven't been sold as property or denied the right to vote.

I've tried finding them about the UK. I just can't. Not because there is a lesser amount of depression in gays there, but because they don't seem to exist, period. I'd love to see them, heck maybe they might prove me wrong. But finding actual graph statistics instead of just quotes is very hard.

Edit: This thread is also a bit boring to stay in. It was fun while it lasted, but I really meant to say just one post and be done with it. I normally stay out of gay-themed threads because I hate endless debating. So, tootles!

Last edited by Metalwolf on 06 Feb 2012, 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

They've been tortured and executed in the past, and this is still happening as we speak.

Metalwolf, since it's only a "mere sexual preference", I suppose it wouldn't upset you if they passed a law that said you could only marry someone of your own gender. That wouldn't be discrimination at all, would it? Not over a mere sexual preference.

Is homosexuality in places where they are tortured and executed "as we speak" considered a crime and defined as such by the legal code under which they live?