Same Sex Marriage (Poll on The Journal)

suicide_circus

Czarcasm wrote: »

Start a new thread then surely would be a better idea than derailing this one with issues that have nothing to do with marriage equality.

detailing? what is this, the 15.08 to Pickadilly? I think the point I raised has plenty to do with marriage equality, why should a girl and guy be allowed marriage, a guy and a guy but not a brother and sister? it all amounts to the state and other peoples morality dictating how people can live...are people on this thread pro equity and libertarianism or just just when it suits them?

Stark

suicide_circus wrote: »

detailing? what is this, the 15.08 to Pickadilly? I think the point I raised has plenty to do with marriage equality, why should a girl and guy be allowed marriage, a guy and a guy but not a brother and sister? it all amounts to the state and other peoples morality dictating how other people can live...

Blah blah blah

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

suicide_circus

Stark wrote: »

Blah blah blah

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

Im not saying that incest is an inevitable consequence of marriage equality, Im asking why those freedoms should.not be extended to all? Genuinely pro marriage equality her. but your bla bla bla argument was quite compelling thanks.

humanji

suicide_circus wrote: »

ok first of all Im pro marriage equality.

but Im just thinking about other forms of non traditional relationships

why should same sex marriage be permitted but incestuous marriage not?

the argument often given against homosexuality being an "unnatural" human perversion is that it occurs in the animal kingdom...but so does incest.

the argument against incest is mainly the high risk of genetic problems for resulting offspring but if we extend that logic, two people with the same genetic weaknesses/disability should also be banned from procreation due to the high risk of passing on these traits.

I am not pro insect but am struggling to find an argument against it other than me finding it yucky...which is probably the reason many people have a problem with same sex relationships.

That's a discussion for a different thread. There's already been a lot of derailing on this topic, so just stick with the actual case of same sex marriage.

suicide_circus

ok, looking forward to the day when the last taboo is tackled. but there's no lobby for it yet I guess.

on topic, of course same sex marriage should be introduced finally. why should one persons moral compass dictate anothers life? that would be nuts...

Czarcasm

suicide_circus wrote: »

detailing? what is this, the 15.08 to Pickadilly? I think the point I raised has plenty to do with marriage equality, why should a girl and guy be allowed marriage, a guy and a guy but not a brother and sister? it all amounts to the state and other peoples morality dictating how people can live...are people on this thread pro equity and libertarianism or just just when it suits them?

suicide_circus wrote: »

Im not saying that incest is an inevitable consequence of marriage equality, Im asking why those freedoms should.not be extended to all? Genuinely pro marriage equality her. but your bla bla bla argument was quite compelling thanks.

What you're actually doing there, is trying to draw the discussion off into the realms of "what is marriage?", rather than "what is marriage equality?".

You said yourself you have no interest in incest so why are you even bringing it up in a thread about LGBT people having the right to marry a person of the same sex?

They're NOT campaigning for polygamy, they're NOT campaigning for incest. They ARE campaigning to be treated the same and given the same rights and recognition as heterosexual couples in legislative matters and laws.

Anything else is just a distraction, smoke and mirrors, and bears no relation to LGBT marriage equality with heterosexual couples.

suicide_circus

oh....I didn't know I was doing any of that...I thought I was asking a fair question about extending the right to get married and equal standing before the law to all consenting adults.

OldNotWIse

suicide_circus wrote: »

oh....I didn't know I was doing any of that...I thought I was asking a fair question about extending the right to get married and equal standing before the law to all consenting adults.

All consenting adults are more than welcome to start their own marriage campaigns to bring about equality for whatever minority group they may belong too.

OldNotWIse

Czarcasm wrote: »

What you're actually doing there, is trying to draw the discussion off into the realms of "what is marriage?", rather than "what is marriage equality?".

You said yourself you have no interest in incest so why are you even bringing it up in a thread about LGBT people having the right to marry a person of the same sex?

They're NOT campaigning for polygamy, they're NOT campaigning for incest. They ARE campaigning to be treated the same and given the same rights and recognition as heterosexual couples in legislative matters and laws.

Anything else is just a distraction, smoke and mirrors, and bears no relation to LGBT marriage equality with heterosexual couples.

Indeed, and in fact I take offence at being lumped into a category that attempts to encompass issues such as polygamy, incest, bestialty (perhaps the thread hasn't got there yet but it will, trust me). Being gay does not automatically make you suportive of all the above. We are essentially being told that we need to not only accept but also campaign for equal treatment of everyone who is remotely different...just because we are. It's ok for straight people to be conservative but how dare gay peopel be so judgmental when they are so damn different themselves!

Looks around to find the nearest vegan support group so she can preach to them about the starving children in Africa....

Balaclava1991

OldNotWIse wrote: »

All consenting adults are more than welcome to start their own marriage campaigns to bring about equality for whatever minority group they may belong too.

I am pro-gay marriage.

But the logical follow on from the legalization of marriage is that incestuous and polygamous relationships would also have to be legally recognized.

I find the idea distasteful but who am I to stand in their way? It's not my business.

Incestuous relationships would allowed if both parties or multiple parties agreed to be sterilized to prevent the creation of inbred children and adoption was legally not permissible to people in incestuous relationships.

If there are polygamous relationships there should be DNA tests to prove who the parents of kids are and to prove they have a right to inheritance.

The only sexual taboos that would remain are of course having sex with animals, having sex with kids and rape.

Czarcasm

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

I am pro-gay marriage.

But the logical follow on from the legalization of marriage is that incestuous and polygamous relationships would also have to be legally recognized.

The only sexual taboos that would remain are of course having sex with animals, having sex with kids and rape.

Your logic is flawed. Marriage equality for LGBT couples is about equal rights with heterosexual couples within a monogamous marriage.

Polygamous marriage, and incestuous marriage, are two totally different concepts to monogamous marriage. There's NO "logical" follow-on nor correlation whatsoever with LGBT equality with heterosexual people.

Basically stop trying to ride the coat tails of LGBT marriage equality to introduce marriage concepts that neither side are discussing as they are not about marriage equality, they are about the definition of marriage - different concept.

I'd hope not to see this thread closed as a result of it being constantly derailed by posters trying to wedge in completely different and clearly misunderstood concepts, it's really not that hard to start another thread to discuss those issues rather than turn this thread into some academic piss pot.

Terry1985

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?
Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

Balaclava1991

Czarcasm wrote: »

Your logic is flawed. Marriage equality for LGBT couples is about equal rights with heterosexual couples within a monogamous marriage.

The majority of people have come to accept homosexuals but they are still different and among the poor the ignorant and the uneducated the instinct is to beat the crap out of gays. Education trains you to master your prejudices and to live and let live. It is folly to claim that heterosexuals will ever fully eliminate the instinct to see homosexuals as other and alien.

Polygamous marriage, and incestuous marriage, are two totally different concepts to monogamous marriage. There's NO "logical" follow-on nor correlation whatsoever with LGBT equality with heterosexual people.

For much of the history of Western Judeo-Christian civilization homosexuality was beyond the pale. Many people have given in to the acceptance of homosexuality because the alternatives - a theocratic police state and of course Dachau have been tried. So now if you are homophobic and homosexuals revolt you you have the option of leaving them to their own devices and ignoring them.
Attacking and persecuting gays is just exhausting and time could be better spent enjoying one's own life.

Basically stop trying to ride the coat tails of LGBT marriage equality to introduce marriage concepts that neither side are discussing as they are not about marriage equality, they are about the definition of marriage - different concept.

Gay marriage is about people of the same sex who love each other and want to live together with their relationship recognized by the state.
I have no doubt that people in incestuous relationship or in polygamous relationships will be inspired to seek equality too.
It is so obvious I cannot for the life me see why you can't see that.

I'd hope not to see this thread closed as a result of it being constantly derailed by posters trying to wedge in completely different and clearly misunderstood concepts, it's really not that hard to start another thread to discuss those issues rather than turn this thread into some academic piss pot.

The legalization of homosexual marriage is being compared to the legalization of inter-racial relationships or interfaith relationships or relationships between different social classes.
In the past it would be unheard of for someone of high birth to marry a commoner.
Black men who even so much as looked at white women in the Deep South once risked being lynched.
Homosexuals were mercilessly persecuted by the Nazis.

I have no doubt that there are people who are related who live together who are in incestuous relationships. I have no doubt that there were people who have polygamous relationships - quite a few men have multiple girlfriends and multiple children and many women have babies by different fathers who they sleep with.

Why should these people also be excluded?

NuMarvel

Terry1985 wrote: »

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?
Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

Allowing same sex couples to marry will have as much impact on the Catholic Church and on other people's religious beliefs as allowing divorced people to remarry. Which doesn't seem to be much at all.

There is currently no obligation on the Catholic Church to marry anyone. They are free to refuse to marry anyone on any basis, and that won't change when gay and lesbian couples can marry.

Czarcasm

Terry1985 wrote: »

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?

Marriage equality has nothing to do with being as black and white as "liberal" or "conservative". Those are the silly notions used to denigrate people whose opinion just happens to differ from your own on this one specific issue. There is no "Next", because other issues are separate and distinct issues from this one.

Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

I'm not sure if you're aware of the fact, but there are LGBT people who also happen to be Roman Catholic. That little tidbit aside, marriage equality for LGBT couples is about equality within the Law, legislation, nothing to do with religion.

Czarcasm

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

Why should these people also be excluded?

Because those issues have nothing to do with this discussion.

That's as far as I'll entertain you now because you're clearly not all that interested in discussing these issues when you can't even be bothered to start a new thread.

I'd rather not risk Moderator infractions for going off-topic just to entertain your merely academic but off-topic assertions. Start a new thread and I'll be only too delighted to get into it with you.*



*Not really.

OldNotWIse

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

I am pro-gay marriage.

But the logical follow on from the legalization of marriage is that incestuous and polygamous relationships would also have to be legally recognized.

I find the idea distasteful but who am I to stand in their way? It's not my business.

Incestuous relationships would allowed if both parties or multiple parties agreed to be sterilized to prevent the creation of inbred children and adoption was legally not permissible to people in incestuous relationships.

If there are polygamous relationships there should be DNA tests to prove who the parents of kids are and to prove they have a right to inheritance.

The only sexual taboos that would remain are of course having sex with animals, having sex with kids and rape.

Wrong. They are only a "follow on" if they follow as a result of gay marriage, so unless you are trying to insinuate that this is what us gays will be up to next, then theya are not, at all, a "follow on". They are, at best, an aside.

OldNotWIse

Terry1985 wrote: »

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?
Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

I didn't know homosexuality is now a religion. Thats mad altogether.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Terry1985 wrote: »

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?
Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

By "liberal nonsense" you mean "equal rights and sensible tolerant thinking appropriate to a modern society", right?

Why am I even asking? You're only going to post-and-run, fail to reply to my responce (or anyone else's) and then come back in a few times to stir things up again, aren't you?

I beleive the correct definiton is a "troll".

Terry1985

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

By "liberal nonsense" you mean "equal rights and sensible tolerant thinking appropriate to a modern society", right?

Why am I even asking? You're only going to post-and-run, fail to reply to my responce (or anyone else's) and then come back in a few times to stir things up again, aren't you?

I beleive the correct definiton is a "troll".

Just because i can't post all the time doesn't give you the right to acuse me off being a troll.

Some of us can only post at lunchtime.
I'm not impressed with that tactic at all!!

OldNotWIse

Terry1985 wrote: »

Just because i can't post all the time doesn't give you the right to acuse me off being a troll.

Some of us can only post at lunchtime.
I'm not impressed with that tactic at all!!

I'd say the troll accusation derived more from the content of your posts than their timing!

hansfrei

Czarcasm wrote: »

Marriage equality has nothing to do with being as black and white as "liberal" or "conservative". Those are the silly notions used to denigrate people whose opinion just happens to differ from your own on this one specific issue. There is no "Next", because other issues are separate and distinct issues from this one.





I'm not sure if you're aware of the fact, but there are LGBT people who also happen to be Roman Catholic. That little tidbit aside, marriage equality for LGBT couples is about equality within the Law, legislation, nothing to do with religion.

LGBT people are also against gay marriage. Are their opinions invalid too. Is everyone who disagrees with you trying to denegrate people?


Mad stuff.

Czarcasm

hansfrei wrote: »

LGBT people are also against gay marriage. Are their opinions invalid too. Is everyone who disagrees with you trying to denegrate people?


Mad stuff.

Please by all means point out to me anywhere in this thread where I said anyone's opinion was invalid? You won't be able to, because I haven't said it.

I also haven't said anyone who disagrees with me is trying to denigrate people, I have said that the issue isn't one about "liberal" nor "conservative" notions.

It's not so mad stuff when you take the time to read what is written instead of making it up as you go along and throwing down the first thing that comes into your head because, because, because, if, if, if, but, but, but...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Terry1985 wrote: »

Just because i can't post all the time doesn't give you the right to acuse me off being a troll.

Some of us can only post at lunchtime.
I'm not impressed with that tactic at all!!

Fair enough, but that's what it looks like when you ignore the repsonce to our posts: indeed, you didn't deal with the core point of mine that liberal attitudes are more toelrant and more modern and will ultimately lead to more contentment.

Billy86

Terry1985 wrote: »

If this liberal nonsense goes through, what next?
Will they try suing the Catholic church for discrimination if/when they are refused a wedding in their local church?
Or will they respect other peoples religious beliefs?

Well with your thorough understanding of marriage, you should know all about respect.

Here's the scary thing Terry - it's already happened!! http://www.charismanews.com/world/40685-millionaire-gay-couple-sues-to-force-church-wedding

Welcome to the liberal future buddy, hope you enjoy it!

PopePalpatine

hansfrei wrote: »

LGBT people are also against gay marriage. Are their opinions invalid too. Is everyone who disagrees with you trying to denegrate people?


Mad stuff.

Zillah has already covered this:

Zillah wrote: »

3) I'm gay and don't feel discriminated against

- Not relevant to the fact that others want marriage rights extended to them. In every civil rights struggle there have been people on the oppressed side who defended the status quo.
=

Czarcasm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Fair enough, but that's what it looks like when you ignore the repsonce to our posts: indeed, you didn't deal with the core point of mine that liberal attitudes are more toelrant and more modern and will ultimately lead to more contentment.

Why does the issue have to be about liberal or conservative at all? Those kinds of ridiculous and boxed in labels are what allows for just plain intolerant people to fester. There are people who consider themselves conservative who are intolerant, and there are people who consider themselves liberal who are intolerant. It just depends on the issue at hand as to whether other people can box a person off as being "liberal" or "conservative".

Both idealisms are as old as time itself btw, nothing modern about considering oneself liberal, and as long as either idealism continues to be intolerant of the other, there will ultimately be no such contentment because both idealisms will always be at loggerheads with each other.

Maybe instead of trying to label and box people off based on the labels we assign to them, we should concentrate our efforts on trying to understand each other as people rather than bitching and arguing against each other's ideas about people.

tomdempsey200

whats the next frontier after gay marriage?

Zubeneschamali

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

whats the next frontier after gay marriage?

Penguins!

Czarcasm

tomdempsey200 wrote: »

whats the next frontier after gay marriage?

What do you mean by frontier "after" gay marriage? Once LGBT couples are given the same rights and recognition as heterosexual couples, that's all campaigners wanted, end of.

You could say it's the final frontier for LGBT couples to have achieved equal recognition as heterosexual couples, but that's it... There are no other issues that correlate or causate with the issue of LGBT marriage equality.