" @CollyWolly said:I'm pretty sure that fewer people are getting married nowadays. Marriage is a pretty strange concept. It definitely predates religion and, in fact, predates most recorded history. It's weird that people arbitrarily relate it to religion just because in a "holy book" it says that it should be a man and a woman only." What is the purpose of marriage? "There is none to be honest. But if us straights feel the need to validate our love through a somewhat pointless ceremony, then they at least deserve to do that as well. "
Gays should Marry?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
You need a piece of paper to receive marriage benefits. This isn't rocket science, if marriage was a religious institution, none-religious people wouldn't be able to get married. According to the law, they can, therefore its not a religious institution, therefore religious institutions should have no bearing on the definition of marriage. Feel free to define Catholic marriage, feel free to turn gay couples away at the church doors as private owners are allowed to do, but meanwhile feel free to fuck off when it comes to state issues and civil rights. Because 200 years ago, if you asked the church about slavery and women's rights they would say blacks were descended by Kain and lesser people and women only exist to serve man, so clearly their input on this is cute, quaint and all, really, but redundant." You don't need a piece of paper to prove you are married. "
Yes, why should happy people not marry?
In all seriousness, I do not see a huge problem with homosexuals who truely love each other, not to marry.
As far as I can tell, the people who oppose it seem to think priests will be forced at gunpoint to marry gay couples. And to that I answer, if you go to a Muslim church and ask for a Jewish wedding, they'll say no. Obviously. If you go to a church that chooses not to marry gay couples, they'll turn you away. You get married somewhere else by someone willing to marry you or just go to the court house and get a legal marriage document. There's a difference between allowing gays to marry and forcing all religious institutions to perform marriage ceremonies for all couples and I don't think a lot of the opposition even realizes that. Listening to, say, Fox News, you would have no idea about this nuance. We already have a huge asterisk next to "till death do you part" that says "unless you get bored or find someone better or whatever, like 50% of all marriages do", I don't know why people are so attached to this man+woman thing." The question should be, Why shouldn't they marry? They're human beings. "
There seems to be a few people confused about this - the fact is that the law gets involved whenever you live together with someone, there are different rules for de-facto relationships, marriages etc. Also what if a gay couple lives together and one of the dies, and in a will leaves the house to the other. In this case their relationship is put under legal scrutiny, and their wishes in their will could be overturned. That's why I said gays should be allowed to have their relationship recognised legally." I don't understand why the government has to get involved in marriage at all, it's just a personal ceremony. They might as well get involved in authorizing karaoke nights or dinner plans. Remove all legal significance from marriage and you'll remove any problematic legal issues. "
I also said that I don't think churches should perform gay marriages. There seems to be more confusion about this, but marriage is a 'sacred rite', and is performed by a religious institution, this is the way it has been done for thousands of years. But these days, when society is interested in hedonism and materialism above all else, few people understand what a 'sacred rite' actually is. But traditionally society and religious institutions recognise marriage as a sacred bond, and from this bond children are produced for the good of the society.
Someone here also wanted me to say why I thought gay couples shouldn't be given the same consideration as straight couples when it comes to adopting children. I think it should be obvious why a male and female parent are better role models for children than a gay couple - if you don't see why, then no debate will really help, except consider my next point.
A lot of presumably young people here seem to be quite passionate about this issue, and I know that teaching kids about gay rights and that abortion is really OK has been a feature of our educational institutions for some time now. The UN in particular wants to instruct kids all over the world, even as young as 8 about these issues as well. But really there is something sinister in all this. Our political leadership is concerned about overpopulation, and one of their solutions is to train people to think that these things are completely fine and valid choices when in fact people are being deliberately encouraged and trained so that they will not reproduce and have children at all.
By the way, I still think such posts should be considered trolling and treated as such by moderators. I know this is an "Off-Topic" area, but this is a videogame site and nobody really gives a damn what people think when they post this kind of question. They're just trying to stir things up and/or watch the post-counter on their topic spin out of control. If anyone really wanted to debate such pointless issues with brick-walls, they'd go to some ridiculous political or religious website and do their navel-gazing over there. All these "should gays be allowed to live and breath?!" and similar posts serve to do is expose the viewpoints of certain people that we would otherwise never know or care about and then sometimes it's hard to view those people the same way. This is a videogame site about gaming. Someone's narrow-minded views should never be an issue. Not to mention, I'm sure it just looks absolutely fantastic when these stupid questions show up on the front page of the website and take up a third of the forum posts on that section. I bet it gives a great impression to new or infrequent visitors.
At the absolute least, it would be really fantastic to have these threads kept from appearing on the primary index / front page. Or barring that, give people the option to filter out forums ( have Off Topic disabled in my preferences, yet it shows up on the front page of GB non-stop). Or maybe just have two off-topic section. One for silly pointless things and unrelated discussions and the second for "let's talk about gun rights, abortion, racism, religion, and homophobia in here!" so everyone can easily shove it off their radar.
" @Suicrat said:" @pirate_republic said:Well if gays can marry then why can't older men be allowed to have sex with 9 year old boys? Or younger? Why can't people marry animals? And if I want to rape and kill your entire family, why can't I do that? Where's the problem with any of those things? Who are you people to determine how I conduct my life? Don't get me wrong, I'm friends with a shit load of gays and I have no problem with gay people living their lives happily, but where is the line? Where do we set the lines for right and wrong? "Why should you have a right to determine how a person lives their life? I could just as easily (and just as arbitrarily) claim that no one should have a right to put skulls in their avatar, and if I had political enough support to throw you in jail for your avatar, you'd understand why you're a hypocrite. "" I actually voted no. But that's just a preference really: I think that marriage should be religious and traditional. I also believe that drugs (including weed) should be kept illegal. Again, that's just a preference. I'm very conservative in this respect. "
The difference is that when a homosexual marries an other homosexual, they are not forcing anyone to do something they do not want to do it is between themselves and is a testiment of their ove to each other. Where as what you describe is someone forcing their urges onto others that aren't reciprocal of their said urges......
It's really simple and your analogy doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as no one if being forced to marry a member or the same sex, it's all consensual.
As long as they don't be gay in public. (ie. Kiss or hug or hold hands)
Actually I generally hate this between straight people too.
" @natetodamax:@hunkaburningluv:@Snipzor:@CL60: I speak for myself. Simply put, I would hate to have two fathers, just one father, just one mother or two mothers. Don't tell me you don't feel the same. Just think of how a kid lives with that, being so different from all other kids. What kind of fucked family it would end up being, how some kids would mock you at school. You would have a broken childhood! "Well first off, those kids that are bullies almost always have serious home problems and as such in the grand scale of things don't matter. I understand you do (and please don't take offence here) seem to be in your formative years and as such, you will realize that those who are bullies are very sad individuals who themselves need help......
@Snail said:
" @JackiJinx said:" @Snail said:Stop being a dick okay? You can say that because you've had a mother your whole life. I remember having friends up to 6th grade whose mother had died. Don't you think they would prefer to have one? That is beyond obvious, it's not even something you take in consideration! ""You think those are happy without a mother? No. "Unless you are speaking from personal experience, you have absolutely no measurement or evidence for this claim. "
Well, first off, it's far worse to have a mother that has died when you actually have here there - of course they would prefer to have a mother when she has recently died. What a daft thing to say. I'm sorry but that isn't what we are talking about, you don't miss something that you never have, especially when you have plenty of other positive role models in your life. You are thinking about very traditional roles of what a family should be. I'm sure it may be related to your age, perhaps when you are older you will realize that it doesn't matter about what sex your parents are, or their sexual preferance, if they love you and are willing to impart their knowledge of the world to you and try and help you be the best that you can be, it doesn't matter if they are both dudes or chics....
" @baconbits33: Sophistry will get you nowhere. There is a clear, unambiguous distinction between consent and coercion. A nine year old boy is not capable of giving informed consent to sexual activity, two adult males on the other hand are just as capable of giving informed consent as an adult male and an adult female. My family will not give you consent to kill them, your rights do not extend beyond the consent of anyone with whom you wish to have interaction. A marriage contract is a legally-recognized form of consent expressed between two individuals who love one another. If you have no problem with gays living together happily, you shouldn't have a problem with them forming the bonds they choose to form, including marriage, because that is a requisite of their happiness. "No your completely wrong actually, a little boy can make decisions for himself all we gotta do is pass a little law. Like passing a little law for gays to get married.
And killing your family would make me happy. What do I care about consent? I want to kill them, why should you judge me for me wanting to make myself happy?
Not shooting for a flame war, just shooting for a logical debate, I would actually prefer it if biased people would stay out of the conv.
" @baconbits33 said:Really? That's not true, a little 9 year old boy can believe what is going on is love between him and that older man. How do you know that those two don't love you each other? You don't know that." @Suicrat said:The difference is that when a homosexual marries an other homosexual, they are not forcing anyone to do something they do not want to do it is between themselves and is a testiment of their ove to each other. Where as what you describe is someone forcing their urges onto others that aren't reciprocal of their said urges...... It's really simple and your analogy doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as no one if being forced to marry a member or the same sex, it's all consensual. "" @pirate_republic said:Well if gays can marry then why can't older men be allowed to have sex with 9 year old boys? Or younger? Why can't people marry animals? And if I want to rape and kill your entire family, why can't I do that? Where's the problem with any of those things? Who are you people to determine how I conduct my life? Don't get me wrong, I'm friends with a shit load of gays and I have no problem with gay people living their lives happily, but where is the line? Where do we set the lines for right and wrong? "Why should you have a right to determine how a person lives their life? I could just as easily (and just as arbitrarily) claim that no one should have a right to put skulls in their avatar, and if I had political enough support to throw you in jail for your avatar, you'd understand why you're a hypocrite. "" I actually voted no. But that's just a preference really: I think that marriage should be religious and traditional. I also believe that drugs (including weed) should be kept illegal. Again, that's just a preference. I'm very conservative in this respect. "
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment