Your thoughts on Gay Marriage / Homosexuality?

Post Reply New Topic

They share a basis in biological urges, as do all sexual drives, on about the same level as the requirement to ingest food is also universal to humanity. That's about it. Consent is where its at, people, and everybody in a gay relationship is a) consenting and b) legally recognised as being capable of giving that consent.

Having established this, I'm still waiting to see what is exactly harmful about gay sex, or gay relationships, other than notional "parenting" from God.

So let's say a child is indeed molested by his/her parent and does get placed into foster "care," would you rather the child stay in an environment where s/he "will just end up getting raped by older kids and then have to endure pregnancy" (a rather bizarre scenario to even think up, but ok) OR be adopted by a loving homosexual couple? Hmmm, interesting predicament...

Does this make sex with a female non-human less acceptable than with a male non-human?

Well, firstly, you refused to answer my question as to what your morality is based on.
I as a utilitarian, for instance, fail to see how an act which causes happiness as opposed to suffering is wrong, which eliminates several things on your list such as orgies and (adult) incest.
Proclaiming that YOUR morals exist objectively is in laughable ignorance of the state of the world, and you managed to get an argumentum ad populum in there as well. There IS NO "global moral fabric", or the things you listed would not exist.

Arguably, if you protect your children from the realities of the world, and teach them that acts which occur in private between consenting adults are somehow "wrong", you're going to have on your hands an insulated and naieve maladjusted young adult.

A false equivocation if I ever heard one. A minor is not mentally CAPABLE of giving consent to sex in understanding of the full ramifications, and this is proven by developmental neurology.
You're making an argument from incredulity, but it fails: I have no problem with letting consenting adults of any kind marry, and you'd be hard pressed to tell me who would be harmed should that happen.

You might want to look into homosexuality in ancient Greece, or the acceptability of gay couples throughout Europe if you're so convinced that your prejudices are universally transcendant.
Since there is no societal conscience, then it is I, the individual and you the individual who judges.

Justice protects codified rights when they are violated.
What ethical rights are being violated when consenting adults have sex or marry?
While we're at it, lets liken heterosexual sex and marriage to rape and abortion. If that is not likewise an apt analogy, I would like to know why.

As a utilitarian, that is PRECISELY the goal of my morality. I see that you are wholly unschooled in philosophical ethics if you presume that there is a universal "goal of morality".

Attractions are not behaviors, and even if they were, when no ethical rights are violated by those behaviors, there stands no argument against it except your outdated religious mores.

Well you see, dear, the Bible is curiously silent on the subject of lesbians.

I'm not sure if they have any connection to Christine O'Donnel. But they and she would make great company for each other, in regard to their shared ignorance and stupidity.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Holy crap, look what this thread has degenerated to.

To the OP, the options suck. I am for neither.

Government should have no role in marriage and treat all people equal.

It really is that simple, problem solved.

With the government not involved, you can go marry a stuffed animal or your imaginary unicorn. It doesn't matter because whether you are married to your imaginary unicorn or not, the government will treat you the same.

The core problem is that governments issues special rights and privileges to those who are married. Extending the special rights and privileges to gay marriages only expands the problem. Don't expand the problem, fix it. Get rid of the special rights and privileges and treat everyone as equal.

And to preempt the freaks, removing government's role from marriage does not end other laws. Age of consent, animal cruelty, and other laws would still exist. Boning little kids or farm animals will still get you locked up.

I'm for anyone being able to marry whoever they want. This includes both same sex partners and poly groups.

Hear, hear! Personally, I did not, nor would I have marry and be intimate with a person of the same gender as I am, but I surely would not force my preferences and aversions on other folks either.

ruveyn

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

the proscription of sex before marriage (for example) is a relgious one, as is the proscription of homosexuality... so you can't remove religion from the conversation. these things aren't considered universally "immoral", except by religious groups or by governments based on religioues morality. it IS about religion.


but, we disagree that it is a "right path". why should your opinion be more valid than ours? we aren't amoral - we just have a different set of morals than you. christian morality is not universal.

age of consent, or the ability to consent, is not a matter of morality - it is a matter of protection of people who cannot fully decide for themselves. therefore, the comparison or extension does not fit.


taboos are not universal. you can marry your first cousin in some provinces of canada, and there are some cultures in ancient times that believed that homosexual experiences should be encouraged. but there are other reasons, such as safety, that some experiences are illegal. nobody is encouraging a sexual free-for-all.


this really has nothing to do with morality - it has to do with protecting the safety of children, because they cannot consent to sexual acts.

to use pedophilia as an example of immorality, and to compare it to the politics surrounding homosexuality, is illogical and inflammatory. it is rather like using cults as an example as to why all religions are bad. cults can be quite horrible, but the existence of cults does not serve as a reason as to why religions should be banned.


i don't see a reason to repeat myself. see the point about "consent", above.


not a valid example, still.

you are saying that it is NOT valid to say "you don't choose who you fall in love with"? on the flip side, if you DO pick who you fall in love with, then you must have made an active choice to be heterosexual. if that is the case, then both options should be equally valid. did you find it hard to make the choice, or are you still tempted to have sex with men?

So the 90% in favor of gay marriage in this poll seem to have common values on the subject. Is it possible that you might be "just wrong?"

Mr Russell Howard on the homophobic baker can be quoted as saying "What a dick."

Pretty much covers it.

who is claiming that pedophilia is "utterly harmless?" did i accidentally poop on my glasses this morning? i must have missed all the pro-pedobear posts....

i'm not surprised that you seem to refuse to accept that same-sex marriage advocates don't advocate f***ing little kids.

so aside from pretending that we're endorsing grownups f***ing little kids when we support equal rights for consenting adults, what do you really have to say in opposition to same-sex marriage?



tell the truth. it's your religion that tells you it's not ok. but see, here's the thing about that..... you and i live in the USA and, unless i've completely misjudged you, we are both glad that we don't live in a theocracy governed by someone else's religion. supposedly our government, here, isn't allowed to make laws regarding religion, as per the first amendment. however, there are laws that restrict some of us from marrying who we want to. unfortunately, the laws that prevent men from marrying men and women from marrying women are religious, in nature.

consenting adults having sex with members of the same sex is not illegal (anymore) because there's no reason for it to be considered a crime. they're adults and they're consenting. consenting adults having sex with multiple partners, simultaneously, is also not illegal. again, they're adults and they're consenting.
FORCING SEX ON AN ADULT WHO DOES NOT CONSENT OR A CHILD (who is not, legally, able to consent) IS ILLEGAL.

or is it that you truly see adults having consensual sex with members of the same sex as the same thing as adults having sex with little kids?

or do they just not deserve the same rights as you and i? why not?

oh wait, i remember. it's that their freedom to get married would undermine your freedom to not want them to be gay.




and that they should be more sensitive to your feelings.

I checked the "I am opposed to gay marriage" option.
I oppose it because it is against my Christian beliefs, and I don't believe that something such as foundational as marriage in a society should be rewritten because of a sexual minority.

I don't believe gays are evil, I don't hate their 'preferance,' and I am not a Republican.
I just don't want marriage rearranged for every Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along.

What about Jane, Sally, and Lisa?