General Chat / GAY MARRIAGE

I for one say we homos start dismantling the entire moral core of society. After brunch, of course.

 

Can I just say being a straight man.... A lot of people don't actually care or think why not, me included.... fair play to equal marriage. but apart from devout religious people which only like 1.2 million people go to church on a Sunday in the UK who may or may not agree. Even tho I know this is about US gay marriage. If LGBT people want to be apart of this so called marriage and be as miserable as alot of other married people then I say HERE HERE.

 

Its 2015... I couldn't care less because it doesn't affect my life in anyway. Good luck to you i say

I think the point I'm most trying to make is that I value my beliefs enough to give at least some argument against this case which, based on my upbringing and formation of beliefs, is morally wrong. I'm not going to silently let it slide. Because I believe that it's not right. Any of you would do the same in my boat. 

And I think I speak on behalf of all the heathens when I say that your faith has to reconcile a lot of magical thinking, logical fallacies, contradictions both within the text and the people who interpret it, and the hypocrisy of its followers before you can even begin to use it as a basis of any moral argument. You seem like a pretty reasonable person, much moreso than I would have expected, given how you entered this conversation, but I'm not going to argue anything philosophical with you if you're unwilling to think critically and challenge your beliefs. 

"Because it says so in the scripture" is not an argument.  It's a citation, and tells me little about what *you* think about the subject.
 

Robbie, Louis doesn't even have the decency to reject my marriage proposal.  So I accept your offer for brunch date, even though I will only get bottomless mimosas instead of that sweet, sweet healthcare.

Ooooh brunch, I'll go but only if inthemanual buys me food

Why am I buying? I thought it was your turn.

When have I said "because it says so in the scripture"? I agree that that's not an argument. I think there are plenty of good things in the Bible, but there's also a lot of not-so-good things: the barbaric sections of the Old Testament, the boring stories of the Jewish kings, and the strange account of an apocalyptic vision in Revelation, to name a few. Believe it or not, I'm not a Bible-thumping wacko. It is an archaic book, I'll give you that, but don't act like it's 100% fairy tales and fantasy. 

 

Also. Anyone who interprets the bible literally is doing as much good as not reading it at all. Let's just say if every book was interpreted literally there really wouldn't be much point to literature. There is a lot of metaphorical and allegorical language in the Bible that hundreds of scholars have devoted their lives to unraveling. It's like any other well-written book in its intricacy, times 1000. 

 

I suppose that's the difference between you and me. I have faith in things that you don't. Simple as that. If you see it as "magical thinking" and "logical fallacies" that's fine. But that's not what I see. 

 

I assume you've done some research/thinking about the subject that has led you to the conclusion that it is "magical thinking, logical fallacies, contradictions" and "hypocrisy". I'm interested to hear why you think this. 

 

 

 

Edit: realized this is off-topic, hope its okay?

It's not off topic.  You want to wrap this antihomosexuality in your cloak of "It's my belief so I'm okay to think this." and then want the benefit of me not addressing just how ass backwards your beliefs are.  You haven't directly quoted the bible, but reference Christian talking points almost exclusively.  I'll guess I'll have to disagree with you on it being a well written book, but let's go ahead answer your question:

Magical thinking is almost the entire book, dude. God, virgin births, water into wine, people living hundreds of years, talking snakes, etc... You're messing with me, right?

Contradictions are easy, seeing as someone made a nice interactive graphic of 400+ annotated contradictions within the book. http://www.project-r...eContra_big.pdf

Logical fallacies, I was more referring to the followers of the religion, but you got me there.  So I googled it and this was the first entry: http://biblesnippets...l-fallacies.png

Hypocrisy?  Again, are you messing with me?  Gay marriage bad, divorce good.  Abortion bad, execution and war good. no shellfish? linens? mixed fabrics? Do it anyway.  Oh, how about ignoring everything Jesus says in favor of the Old Testament while still calling themselves Christian?
 

MA, this thread wasn't hostile until you got here. You're going to get absolutely nowhere by blatantly insulting someone who thus far has been peaceable.

 

 

 

The issue with the Bible is that it shouldn't even enter the conversation. Neither should the Quran, Book of Mormon, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Iliad, or any other work of fiction. You can get your morals from anywhere, and religious texts don't have any ground to hold when it comes to accurately representing..... well, anything. So when it comes to a modern societal issue like this, they're simply irrelevant. They might form the basis of your beliefs, but that doesn't lend your beliefs any more credence.

 

It comes down to what we can test. Is there a provable negative impact on society by doing this thing? If you have some peer-reviewed studies to suggest so, then there is a conversation to be had. Otherwise it's like the moon landing hoaxes or the government poisoning the water supply - sure you can find something on the internet to agree with you but it doesn't mean it's accurate.

 

Calling for there to be research into the statements you are making doesn't really make any sense. The logical fallacies are not beliefs, you either are making them or you are not - it's tautological. You can simply not care that your argument is resting on unsound foundations, but that doesn't make your argument more correct. A good (if slightly cartoonish) website on the subject is this one. Hypocrisy is another thing that is tautological - you are either being hypocritical, or you are not. I admit I haven't read every post of yours in this thread, so I'm not going to try to deconstruct the post(s) paragraph by paragraph, but it's something you should think about if you intend to turn others to your way of thinking.

I don't disagree that my tone is hostile, but I do disagree that a discussion in which someone baselessly shits on a large portion of the population wasn't hostile before I came in with some bad words and pointed statements, no matter how pleasantly and peaceably he addressed it.

If I was in your boat I'd get the hell out of the boat.

Edit: directed at csw on the previous page

MA I'm concerned that our marriage would be based on lies and you would only be using me for the perks the UK has to offer.

Which is a shame because I've waited for the day for you to declare your love for me and ask for my hand in marriage.

I don't want to give people on this site the idea that reading the bible or being religious is wrong. You kind of make it sound that way MA. 

I think his point was that you can read the bible all day long, you just should think yourself about the morality of ertain things and not repeat what the catholic church says.

Hi CSW, I thought I should give a reply outlining just what I find so problematic with your reply to the whole topic. Perhaps my reply was a little harsh and I apologise for that, but many of the fine people in my life are gay.

 

I'm not going to use the quote function as it was doing my head in.

 

"I believe that this decision is a big step backwards for the American society." - a big step backwards? regardless of what you might say, that is hurtful. 

 

"Marriage institutes the family. You can't have a proper family without marriage" - my parents are divorced. the families of most of my friends are divorced and now their parents live with other people they are more happy with without being married. are they not families? I thought a family was a loving unit that cared for each other? you are implying that i do not have a "proper" family. regardless of what you might say, that is hurtful.

 

"[on adoption] But you're still cobbling together a "family" that just doesn't have the bonds that your average family does." - just straight up offensive. how dare you. Adopted children are capable of being loved and love their adopted families every ounce as much as a genetic family. guess what? sometimes genetic families hate each other! they do not function at all!

 

"but who's to say where it will go next? Marrying multiple spouses? Marrying an animal? Marrying an object? Who knows where the new line will be drawn, if at all" - you are literally comparing two consenting adults in a loving relationship to marrying animals. just absurd. truly absurd.

 

"[on expanding the definition of marriage] What's so bad about that? I'd rather not find out, but centuries of proper marriage and tradition can't be wrong." - lots of things that we have done for centuries were wrong. for millennia, we believed that the sun and the celestial bodies revolved around the earth. for millennia we believed that people of other ethnicities were superior/inferior. slavery was very traditional, csw. slavery is still around today. a tradition that has gone on as long as slavery [much, MUCH longer than your definition of marriage] can't be all bad, right?

 

"But choosing to defile the institution of marriage, the basis of our society, can only lead to bad things." - your use of the word defile is very interesting. are gays disgusting to you? 

 

"There's nothing wrong with love. You can't stop it, control it. But you can control yourself." ahh, finally some sense! oh wait, you're telling gays to control themselves? to stop loving who you love? this entire quote contradicts itself. you say it is fine, then you say they should stop. which one is it? 

 

"The problem lies within the sexual act. There's more to love than that." - this is where it gets truly hurtful for me. sex is a VITAL expression of intimacy for people across the globe. i have never felt closer to certain people in my life than when i've shared my body with them and exposed myself and they did the same so we can gain powerful mutual gratification (MIGHT I ADD, AT THE EXPENSE OF NOBODY) you are completely correct in saying there is more to love than that, but you are insinuating that it is not a MASSIVE part of a healthy relationship in a VAST number of cases.

 

"Not getting physical gratification from someone else, that's selfish." - it gets sad at this point. seeing as you are a big catholic, I am going to presume that you are not married and therefore have never had sex.(this is so totally fine to me. the more power to you. i admire your faith, and i admire that you would live your life in such a way as to carry yourself to what you believe is the best end.) its at this point that i know that you've never shared in a healthy sexual relationship. it is the belief of many people that sex is all about the man taking and the woman giving, often with the male behaving violently or aggressively to get his satisfaction. this is totally ignorant and totally wrong. some might follow from the previous point that sex is an intrinsically violent or hurtful act, and in loving a woman, you would not have sex with her as you would not want to hurt her or ever make her feel that way. 

 

this is a false premise. i have partaken in many a sex in my days. and it has always been an event in which a great deal of gratification was shared, a great deal of stress was relieved and a great deal of bodily fluids were exchanged. fun, fun times for all involved. i loved those people. sex was an important part of that. we wanted to do that to each other. they wanted to jump my bones and i wholeheartedly let them. i wanted to rock their world and they wholeheartedly let me. because we loved one another. it was a strong bond which only grew stronger thanks to sharing ourselves. 

 

you hope to say that those times we shared were somehow selfish and not an expression of love? how dare you? this is very hurtful and belittling!

 

"If a homosexual couple really cares for each other, they won't turn to physical gratification" - like i have said, this is hurtful and condescending. you do not understand how adult relationships work. you'll learn in time though!

 

"But when the focus turns to the sexual act it becomes backwards. " - same as above. wrong and hurtful statement to make.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

next part analyses your replies to others.

 

"[in regards to children] Couples with fertility issues can at least try." - erm, you do realise that lesbian couples have literally double the baby making potential, right? if its all about trying, surely lesbians can go to the sperm bank and get pregnant and have twice the children? why have we been wasting our time with heterosexual relations for all this time!?!??!!

 

"Also, just because they both consent doesn't mean they're right, either. " - hurtful and dehumanizing. saying that adults aren't capable of doing this is really, truly condescending.

 

"But it's impossible to deny that there are homosexuals who are all about the act.." -  has it ever struck you that maybe those aren't the ones who will be getting married? it might be the ones who love and adore one another that will be getting married? what a dumb statement. ALSO: there are straight couples that are all about the act! but that's fine because its straight, right? come on, man! seriously?!

 

"The fact that heterosexuals can marry but homosexuals cannot is a part of our society that has been around for so long that it's going to be hard to change the opinion of everyone. Including me. I suppose it's the harsh reality." - again, this point is really stupid. i'll refer you to earlier in the post. slavery was pretty ingrained as well. you might remember that people kinda went to war over the issue.

 

"I'm not saying it's better or worse, just that its different. There's something integrally different about gay marriage from traditional marriage. " - please read this earlier quote from someone you may be aware of called.. erm... who was it? oh yeah: CSW: "But choosing to defile the institution of marriage, the basis of our society, can only lead to bad things." - you said here it was objectively worse. not only worse, but so much worse, that it had "DEFILED" the institution. man, those gays sure are icky.

 

Please, CSW, help me see this from your POV, because i seriously hope you mis-spoke on half this stuff.

 

Edits: Missing "I"

MA, come up to Canada. Socialized healthcare and great brunch. First round of mimosas for the NE Brunch are on me.

I'm glad MA has brought up this Bible discussion and said everything I was thinking and wanted to say earlier. Thank you. I think stuff like this is truly interesting and I hope the conversation goes further.

 

Robbo, I want a mimosa.

Not gonna respond to MA. There's no changing your opinion that I'm crazy if you've already made up your mind. Maybe later because there are definitely some things wrong with your argument. Sorry to disappoint, Steve. 

 

A few things to Sammy:

 

 the families of most of my friends are divorced and now their parents live with other people they are more happy with without being married. are they not families?

 

Were they not once married? In order to have a divorce, doesn't couple have to be married first? Also, my intention isn't to disrespect your family, as I have said. I apologize if you've taken offense. Many of my good friends have divorced parents. In fact, one of my good friends was my worst enemy in grade school because he bullied me nonstop. And I found out this year that he was taking out his emotions from his parents' divorce on me. So I know the consequences of it and the emotions involved. 

 

What I mean about divorced families/single parent families/etc. is that a lot of the time, they don't have happy endings. It may be different in your experience. It may be different in a lot of peoples' experiences. But divorce does have a lot of negative repercussions, a lot of which can tear a family apart. 

 

 it is the belief of many people that sex is all about the man taking and the woman giving, often with the male behaving violently or aggressively to get his satisfaction. this is totally ignorant and totally wrong. 

 

Maybe so. But there are plenty of people out there who are all about getting theirs and not caring for the partner.

 

 you hope to say that those times we shared were somehow selfish and not an expression of love? how dare you? this is very hurtful and belittling!

 

When did I call you out specifically? 

 

I think my point about sex is this: A lot of people in our society (not necessarily you, but some people!) do use it to get satisfaction from another as their SOLE purpose. And I think (I think! opinion) that it's more likely to happen with a homosexual couple that a straight couple because there's no chance of conceiving a child. Knowing you can't conceive a child there's a lot more...room for activities. You're right. I wouldn't know. But I'm not completely ignorant and uneducated on anything sex-related. 

 

 if its all about trying, surely lesbians can go to the sperm bank and get pregnant and have twice the children? 

 

Where does sperm come from again? I forget. 

 

"Also, just because they both consent doesn't mean they're right, either. " - hurtful and dehumanizing. saying that adults aren't capable of doing this is really, truly condescending.

 

Adulthood does not equal maturity..

 

I find your repulsion to the word "defile" interesting. I don't think of it as an "icky" word. Probably could have used a different word but I'm trying to keep my walls of text somewhat interesting. 

 

Hopefully this clarifies some things...nothing I have said is an attempt to attack someone else, just trying to make my opinion clear..

What I mean about divorced families/single parent families/etc. is that a lot of the time, they don't have happy endings. It may be different in your experience. It may be different in a lot of peoples' experiences. But divorce does have a lot of negative repercussions, a lot of which can tear a family apart.

 

Having two parents is pretty much always better than one - less stress for everybody and a more balanced upbringing for the child. I have yet to read a study that suggests the sex of the parents has an effect on this, however.

 

Maybe so. But there are plenty of people out there who are all about getting theirs and not caring for the partner.

 

Yes, but this isn't uniquely male, female, heterosexual, homosexual, etc... I don't understand how this is relevant.

 

I think my point about sex is this: A lot of people in our society (not necessarily you, but some people!) do use it to get satisfaction from another as their SOLE purpose. And I think that it's more likely to happen with a homosexual couple that a straight couple because there's no chance of conceiving a child. Knowing you can't conceive a child there's a lot more...room for activities. You're right. I wouldn't know. But I'm not completely ignorant and uneducated on anything sex-related.

 

I think you're mis-attributing a human instinct to a relatively small community. Most people use sex for satisfaction. We are biologically wired for it to be pleasurable. Even in long-term, committed heterosexual relationships, sexual satisfaction plays a pretty big role. Check out /r/relationships, /r/sex, or /r/deadbedrooms for pages and pages of proof on this.

 

Where does sperm come from again? I forget.

 

Let's not pretend we're not at a point in society where "continuing the species" is our #1 priority. We have no shortage of children. If a homosexual couple (or infertile heterosexual couple) want to adopt or pursue other avenues of conception, who are you to stop them? This is a personal, legal issue and I don't see how "you still need a man and a woman" is any kind of counter-argument.

 

Adulthood does not equal maturity...

Are you implying that homosexuals/bisexuals/whathaveyou are inherently less mature than hetero people? You have no proof here.

 

I find your repulsion to the word "defile" interesting. I don't think of it as an "icky" word. Probably could have used a different word but I'm trying to keep my walls of text somewhat interesting.

 

This is tautological, again. Defile *literally* means "to make dirty or unclean".

A bit of clarification: when I say "people" or reference "adulthood" it means everyone! Not just homosexuals/heterosexuals. If I mean to talk specifically about one group of people I will designate it. Hopefully that clears up some of your confusion, Ling. 

MA clearly is the most reasonable guy here so far.

The religious impulse of finding comfort in not being in control of one self is pure self-enslavement. The concept of religion alone has already cost humans such an enormous chunk of the species' potential, it's not even funny.