Same sex Marriage

You don´t need scientific studies for this, just look at the Republican party.

 

What made the US a strong country?

Immigration.
Slavery.
Military power.
The $ used as a global trade currency.

Almost exactly the same things which created the British Empire before it. Religion plays a very minute role in all of this. If religion and faith were the driving force of creating a great country, why is Italy not running the show?

In addition, the USA actually isn't that strong. When you look at the consistently poor international rankings of the USA when it comes to Education, Healthcare, Equality, Democracy, Press Freedom, Human Rights, Economic Disparity, Corruption etc, the USA is consistently beaten by several European countries who do it much better.

So, I guess it depends what criteria you use to suggest "strength". Does the USA spend billions on military power? Yes. But is it the strongest nation for social mobility, justice and quality of life for its citizens? Absolutely not.

Religion and homophobia have nothing at all to do with what made America strong. Those who colonized North America may have originally arrived there to escape religious persecution, but the US was not a strong country until the use of slavery and the mass immigration of incredibly diverse people.

Again, you seem to be claiming something that simply isn't true, giving the impression that religious beliefs made America "strong". Clearly, anyone with a reasonable intelligence can see that this is factually incorrect.

 

What on earth are you talking about? Where did I say that the "religious own everything"?

The homophobia, bigot, religious people are stupid nonsense does not help your argument in any way - it just makes you sound more and more ignorant.

Ha ha. . . I love the walls of insensible garble, so please do continue to post.

I was more so pointing to the strength of family. As opposed to a society that promotes polygamy and to screw everything that has a pulse.

We have been a multi-cultural society for quite some time now. . . . But,

I have increased the font size to help improve the readability.


* Why do people keeping bringing up the divorce rate as if this helps their argument in anyway? Same-sex marriage does not help or solve that in any way.

 

Your opposition to it is built on the argument that marriage is traditionally a religious union between a man and a woman. You have repeatedly argued that this traditional interpretation is the correct one, because your religious beliefs dictate this.

Lets not suddenly try to claim something different now that someone has presented a clear argument proving you wrong, anyone can go back through this thread and read your nonsense for themselves.

The fact is clear - you claim that gay couples should not be married in an equal sense because you believe that Marriage is a religious concept or a traditionally Christian idea. You are factually wrong. Traditional interpretation is very selective. How about we go back to marriage before Christianity, would you argue that this is not traditional marriage? Why is your translation of it, sandwiched in time, the correct "traditional translation" to accept?

And when it comes to religion, no religion on this planet owns marriage. No religious group has the right to dictate what marriage means.

I rest my case.

 

Because it clearly shows that the "strength of the family" is farcical, at best. The only difference between modern day society, and that of the past, is that society (at large) no longer chooses to ostracize divorcees, or imprison them within walls of shame - even against the fact that one spouse may be abusive! People have not really changed at any point in history. And again, if the most vocal supporters of "traditional" marriage can't get it right amongst themselves, why should they deny everyone else from being afforded the same privilege of disgracing marriage?

There is absolutely NO good argument for straight people to have a stranglehold on the definition of marriage. If you want to be intellectually honest, and just admit that you are a member of a group of society who argues against all logic on the matter, that would be more than acceptable. Or, if you want to admit that you don't want it, because you just don't like it, that would just make the whole matter easier.

 

I think same sex marriage should be legal. Same sex couples don't have negative effects on me or anyone I know. If a heterosexual couple is aloud to marry, I think same sex couple should be aloud to. If they will be happier married then they should be able to. Also marriage gives certain benefits, same sex couples that aren't able to get married aren't able to share those benefits.

 

Nope. That is a role jealously guarded by the government.

I find it rather humorous that the "Marriage Equality" crowd doesn't seem to be behind "marriage equality" at all, if there is such a thing. Most of the same sex marriage crowd looks down their noses at polygamy and cousin marriage as if it is somehow morally inferior to their own brand of "morality", and is more than happy to simply join the dictatorship of those with the stranglehold on the definition of marriage. If they were truly behind not having the state dictate morality, they would be pushing "marriage equality" for any group of consenting adults, not just themselves.

In the same spirit, there now seems to be a consensus among the scientific community that pedophilia is a sexual orientation like homosexuality, and unlikely to change no matter how long we incarcerate these people. They are born that way. Curious how some sexual orientations merit treatment, where the scientific community tries to "cure" you of your illness, but mentioning a "cure" in connection to homosexuality and you are deemed a homophobic bigot.

What we really need to do is let anyone who wants be married, and take away the government sponsored benefits of marriage from anyone who doesn't have children, regardless of sexual orientation or blood relationship to your "spouse". Why does the government discriminate against single people so? It has everything to do with children.

 

You have said, yourself, exactly why government defined marriage is a bad idea, and why the government shouldn't be dictating it. Sorry to say, but you brilliantly stated every reason that the definition of marriage is best left in the non-secular world, and given no standing in the eyes of the law.

I agree that homsexuality is a condition. Not a mental condition. More like a birth defect. If chromosomes can get swapped, or improper cell division occurs that results in things like having androgynous sex features, why can't they also cause hormonal (or other) defects that result in misplaced sexual preference? Of course, to acknowledge such a possibility would be the beginning of understanding, and the beginning of the end of stigmatising. (Can't have that, now can we?)

As for paedophiles... Didn't know that had a place in this conversation. But to compare acts committed against an unwilling child to acts committed consensually between like-minded individuals. Hmmm. That's desperation. We don't cull imperfect specimens in our society, so that's certainly a debate in itself. Same for those who are criminally insane.

I couldn't care less about polygamy, either, for what it's worth. So long as there is no special tax status granted. It sure as hell isn't a crime, though, and not one dollar should be spent to enforce laws that will put parents in jail for nothing more than wanting a few bits of scenery! Once people have started a family, leave them the fuck alone.

 

Just curious - are you a psych major or in the medical field?

 

It would be medical.

By the way, are you a major in Philosophy or Politics?

 

And for what it's worth... Don't ever be so condescending as to assume that only people with a degree know anything about anything. The world is chock full of educated idiots.

 

No need to pout, it was a simple question. You are right though, only you and others standing up for same-sex marriage can be condescending about the topic.. . .

I happen to think it's a mental health condition..

 

No, I don't think that I'm being condescending. But if I mistook your intent, then you have my sincerest apologies. I don't speak for the others, I respect their right to take whatever position they like, but this is mine.

I am an engineer with a medical background. I choose to believe that it's a defect caused by one of the millions of billions of variables that can (and DO!) go wrong in utero. As per my previous example, of hermaphrodites. If anatomy can go wrong, there's no reason to believe that biological chemistry cannot. (in fact, it would be supremely foolish to believe that our mechanical systems can be rearranged, but not our biochemical systems) For me, that's the first step in developing the theory - the observation that we sometimes come out physically imperfect. Personally, for the sake of understanding, I wish that more homosexual people would voluntarily allow themselves to be tested for ambiguous sexuality traits, (both physical and chemical) in hopes of trying to put this debate to rest. Unfortunately, there's probably more money to be made in extending the debate, rather than solving it.

 

Firstly I don't see anyone mocking morals or traditional marriage, stating facts about the divorce rate is not mocking (although it seems to make a mockery of) traditional marriage.
Free will should be considered when it comes to same sex marriage and comparing SSM to pedophillia, rape and murder is laughable. How can anyone with half a brain compare consensual sex between adults to an adult 'forcing themselves' on a child? How is consensual sex between adult comparable to being held down and raped? and what it has to do with murder is beyong me!!
If not Why? I cannot believe that you even have to ask that!!
Why is it that all insecure guys feel the need to hide behind an arguement that if SSM is legalised then all laws should be scrapped? BITCH PLEASE!!

 

Up until 1973, the American Psychological Association agreed with you. The other forms of sexual orientation, such as Pedophilia are still listed as mental disorders, as well as all gender identity disorders. In a single magic day in 1973 millions of "sick" people were instantly cured by the stroke of the APA's pen.

Popular medical opinion aside, I can guarantee you that there are a boatload of research projects going on in identifying the markers and causes of gender and sexual orientation, and drugs to change the formerly unchangeable. What our society does with pedophiles at the moment is a bit of a human rights crisis. On the one hand, they absolutely cannot do a thing about their sexual orientation. On the other, nobody feels safe having them roam free in a society with children. What we are left with is either people who repeat offend after being released, or people incarcerated for life based on how they were born.

Personally, I think its pathetic that our medical community has cowed to political pressure. Politics has no place in science. Studies have found psychopathic traits to be a common thread of some of the most successful people on the planet. Should they get together and apply pressure on the APA to delist ASPD as a mental illness? Its idiotic.

 

Yup, I was talking to my wife about it (she's a PA) and she said it magically "disappeared from the DSM". lol... Pretty amazing.

 

Like that magic day in 1522 when Magellan returned home from the opposite direction, and sensible people of the day stopped believing the Earth was flat? Hooray, progress!

By the way - the APA is a committee. Nothing is decided by a decree. The decision to re-classify homosexuality was ratified by a MAJORITY of the board.

Do you really want to distract this discussion by falling back on historically held views by "professionals"?

Identifying markers, you say? Hmm.. As in biochemical? As in defect, not disorder?

Surely you can't be so ridiculous as to think that just because something can be altered by medication, suggests that it's actually a real problem? Are you suggesting that pharmacology can only fix a real problem, and not simply create the desired effect of its creator? Because there are a whole lot of drugs that miraculously cure people of their love for life, and even turn them into homicidal/suicidal maniacs. That must mean that the people taking the drugs are repressed psychopaths?

You make no sense at all!

 

I don't see it as any different from when scientists reclassified Pluto to "not a planet". Pretty amazing that, too. Because they taught me in grade school that Pluto was a planet. Now, it's just a Disney character.

 

You wouldn't think that was amazing because you probably predicted it would happen, right?

You honestly don't believe it was removed due to political pressure?

 

Do you have any statistics for this, or are you just preaching your own opinion as fact in an effort to bolster your argument? Personally (and every LGBT person I have ever discussed this with) I believe in the freedom of any adults to enter any partnership they want with other consenting adults. Perhaps, if you believe that Polygamy should also be recognized in legal form you should start a campaign and argue for it? You know, just as same sex couples have had to do for several decades now.

Ah, the last bastion of the anti-gay - compare homosexuality to child molestation! Of course, should have seen that irrational tripe arriving before it did, it seems to always rear its ugly head when the anti-equality crowd are argued against effectively in every rational way. When rational and fact-based debate proves a side, the loser always resorts to trying to use propaganda and fear to gain the radicals and ignorant buffoons to their side.

The difference that you are not mentioning is, of course, the FACT that a same-sex relationship of adults is CONSENSUAL. The abuse of child is exactly that; an adult abusing someone.

Do you have statistics for your belief that the scientific community has reached a consensus on this? No, I'm guessing not.

Either way, pedophilia is recognized as criminal because it involves the sexual abuse of a minor. Those who abuse others are generally deemed to be mentally defective, rightly so.

Comparing the consensual relationships of adults to the abuse of minors is sickening, and for that you should be ashamed of yourself. However, I fully expect you to come back to this thread and suggest "What next? People marrying Goats?"

And of course, lets not forget the third stereotypical right-wing nonsense of comparing homosexuality to bestiality too, that's the usual path this nonsense takes, isn't it?