Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why are people so afraid of gay marriage?

Options
1…7891113

Comments

  • Options
    #302
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I am absolutely 100% in favour of gay marriage (to be honest I think all social "taboos" which affect only those who willingly participate should not be state regulated) but I have to confess that I am concerned about the idea of gay adoption. Humans are designed to be raised by a male and female parent and I think they should have a right to this. I also feel that a lot of children would bitterly resent being "different", especially during the teen years when unfortunately homosexuality turns into a derogatory label.

    I'm not in any way condoning this, I think it's disgusting how intolerant people are, but society has to change before we put children through that ordeal (and IMO, the sooner it does the better)


  • Options
    #303
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    I don't think humans are "designed" to be raised by a male and female parent. There is ample evidence of tribes in the Amazon, Papua New Guinea, etc where the duties of child-rearing are left to the women of the tribe. A child there would have several different "mothers" (and "fathers" for that matter). In some languages therein, the same word is used for "mother" as "aunt", and "father" as "uncle" - there is no difference in the child's eyes. This is how it used be in the old days. The nuclear family is a modern construct.


  • Options
    #304
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Aard wrote: »
    I don't think humans are "designed" to be raised by a male and female parent. There is ample evidence of tribes in the Amazon, Papua New Guinea, etc where the duties of child-rearing are left to the women of the tribe. A child there would have several different "mothers" (and "fathers" for that matter). In some languages therein, the same word is used for "mother" as "aunt", and "father" as "uncle" - there is no difference in the child's eyes. This is how it used be in the old days. The nuclear family is a modern construct.
    What relevence has that to a child being depraved of any male or female role modal at home ?


  • Options
    #305
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I'm not in any way condoning this, I think it's disgusting how intolerant people are, but society has to change before we put children through that ordeal (and IMO, the sooner it does the better)
    Why ?


  • Options
    #306
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    What relevence has that to a child being depraved of any male or female role modal at home ?
    It's not a case of children being deprived of a male or female, rather that there is proof that in many cultures it is normal for a child to be raised by a number of females, some of whom may not be biologically related to the child.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #307
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Aard wrote: »
    It's not a case of children being deprived of a male or female, rather that there is proof that in many cultures it is normal for a child to be raised by a number of females, some of whom may not be biologically related to the child.
    But those children still have fathers who come home after the hunt and will go hunting with them when they are older.


  • Options
    #308
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    But those children still have fathers who come home after the hunt and will go hunting with them when they are older.
    Yes, their fathers, uncles and other men will come home after a day's work, and the boys will go hunting with them when they are older. This is similar to the modern boy being raised by two men. The only difference is that there would be no woman to look after them during the day - it would be their father. I think a man can cook for and look after a child as well as a woman.


    The issue is more blurred for me when it is two men raising a girl, or two women raising a boy. In those cases, I believe the girl would turn out more "masculine", and vice-versa. Something tells me this isn't right, but I have a feeling that it is just a modern Western upbringing that is telling me this. There are plenty of cultures around the world where males assume "female" roles, and women assume "male" roles. In the West, there is much more definition in the respective roles: men should be the bread-winners, women should be the home-makers. I don't agree with this, but find it hard to shake off the prejudices I have.


  • Options
    #309
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Aard wrote: »
    Yes, their fathers, uncles and other men will come home after a day's work, and the boys will go hunting with them when they are older. This is similar to the modern boy being raised by two men. The only difference is that there would be no woman to look after them during the day - it would be their father. I think a man can cook for and look after a child as well as a woman.
    There is a huge difference, in the tribe the child is exposed to both sexes and knows how a man or women should act. This is much more rigid then our society.
    Aard wrote: »
    The issue is more blurred for me when it is two men raising a girl, or two women raising a boy. In those cases, I believe the girl would turn out more "masculine", and vice-versa. Something tells me this isn't right, but I have a feeling that it is just a modern Western upbringing that is telling me this.
    Just because they can doesn't mena they should.
    Aard wrote: »
    There are plenty of cultures around the world where males assume "female" roles, and women assume "male" roles. In the West, there is much more definition in the respective roles: men should be the bread-winners, women should be the home-makers. I don't agree with this, but find it hard to shake off the prejudices I have.
    And it makes it alright because other people do it ? What makes you think their society is any better then our own ?


  • Options
    #310
    jaffa20
    Registered Users Posts: 4,523 ✭✭✭jaffa20


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    But we are assuming that the son is an adult, and as an adult shouldn't he be entitled to marry whomever he wants ?

    I'm sorry but i thought you were bringing insest into a discussion about gay marriage there for a second:rolleyes:

    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    What relevence has that to a child being depraved of any male or female role modal at home ?

    What relevance has a child being depraved of a male or female role models got to do with gay marriage or adoption:confused: Plenty of children are brought up by single parents or same sex couples already. They will have plently of role models surrounding them of friends and family of the parents.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Why ?

    Why not?
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    But those children still have fathers who come home after the hunt and will go hunting with them when they are older.

    Not all. And it is the same in our society. See above.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »

    Just because they can doesn't mena they should.

    And it makes it alright because other people do it ? What makes you think their society is any better then our own ?

    Just because you think it is wrong doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. No society is better than another. Each have their own respective beliefs and mindset. We just has a lot of catching up to do.


  • Options
    #311
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    jaffa20 wrote: »
    I'm sorry but i thought you were bringing insest into a discussion about gay marriage there for a second:rolleyes:
    Yes it is, if we give Gay marriage a go then what is to stop a Son saying that they love their father. The main arguement by pro- Gay marriage bodies is that we must allow any two people marry if they love each other.
    In this case there is no difference between Incest and Sodemy.
    jaffa20 wrote: »
    What relevance has a child being depraved of a male or female role models got to do with gay marriage or adoption:confused: Plenty of children are brought up by single parents or same sex couples already. They will have plently of role models surrounding them of friends and family of the parents.
    But that's not the same is it ? Children must be brought up in a stable marraige when able. Single people shouldn't be allowed to adopt either.
    jaffa20 wrote: »
    Why not?
    Because I've never met such Hypocrites as liberals, don't you find it odd that in the futuristic liberal utopia anti-Homosexuality isn't allowed ?
    I have no time for such people.
    jaffa20 wrote: »
    Not all. And it is the same in our society. See above.
    See above where ?
    jaffa20 wrote: »
    Just because you think it is wrong doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. No society is better than another. Each have their own respective beliefs and mindset. We just has a lot of catching up to do.
    Are you trying to say that we have catching up to do with primitive societies ? That is laughable, they have adopted such systems to survive.
    Here in the 21st century we don't have to adopt such systems and as such were able to develope the perfect system of child raising.
    Funny how for every 1 society you point out in your support of gay marraige I can point out 100 more advanced societies for my defence of the nuclear family.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #312
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    And it makes it alright because other people do it ? What makes you think their society is any better then our own ?
    There are two ways of thinking on this.


    The first is the belief that our modern Western society is right, and better than others (either ancient societies, or modern-primitive societies). The second is that we should take our cues from tradition, which is essentially from some historic society.


    You say that homosexuals shouldn't rear children because it is the Western way not to. That is harkening back centuries. You then say that an ancient or modern-primitive society should have no bearing on our own.


    There is a disconnect there: either you believe in tradition or you don't. If you believe in tradition, then you have to accept that homosexuals have had a place in society, and that there are societies with children who are raised almost entirely by women. If you don't believe in tradition - which you seem to, by wondering why we should take our cues from other societies - then you accept that societies are dynamic, and the most dynamic societies in our world allow marriage and adoption for homosexuals.


    So which are you? A traditionalist, or a non-traditionalist.


  • Options
    #313
    jaffa20
    Registered Users Posts: 4,523 ✭✭✭jaffa20


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Yes it is, if we give Gay marriage a go then what is to stop a Son saying that they love their father. The main arguement by pro- Gay marriage bodies is that we must allow any two people marry if they love each other.
    In this case there is no difference between Incest and Sodemy.

    oh right, so because two straight love people love each other then we should allow a daughter to marry their father. After all, it's the same:rolleyes:
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »


    But that's not the same is it ? Children must be brought up in a stable marraige when able. Single people shouldn't be allowed to adopt either.

    Why must:confused: Will the children end up as mutants or something. i fail to your see your reasoning or is it that you just don't have one.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »

    Because I've never met such Hypocrites as liberals, don't you find it odd that in the futuristic liberal utopia anti-Homosexuality isn't allowed ?
    I have no time for such people.

    Then why are you here:confused: Isn't that what is happening right now anyway.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »

    Are you trying to say that we have catching up to do with primitive societies ? That is laughable, they have adopted such systems to survive.
    Here in the 21st century we don't have to adopt such systems and as such were able to develope the perfect system of child raising.
    Funny how for every 1 society you point out in your support of gay marraige I can point out 100 more advanced societies for my defence of the nuclear family.

    The perfect system of child raising!! That is laughable.

    i was actually referring to systems within developped societies which allow for gay marriage etc. I'd love to hear the stories of child abuse, divorce, separations within these more "advanced" societies.

    Also, you do realise that all societies adopt systems to survive. No system is perfect and indeed ours is far from that. Allowing for gay marriage even when there is the smallest chance that a few gay couples will be allowed to adopt will not affect your "perfect" system, believe me!


  • Options
    #314
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Here in the 21st century we don't have to adopt such systems and as such were able to develope the perfect system of child raising.
    Are you actually saying that the 21st century way of child-rearing is perfect?! There is so much wrong with that comment.

    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Funny how for every 1 society you point out in your support of gay marraige I can point out 100 more advanced societies for my defence of the nuclear family.
    There is no possible way that there is a ratio of 100:1 of societies who favour the "nuclear family". You really have no idea how UNcommon the nuclear family is.


  • Options
    #315
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Single people shouldn't be allowed to adopt either.
    So why are you on a crusade against gay marriage: something that hasn't even happened yet? Surely your time would be better spent trying to stop single people from adopting, which is more "damaging" absolutely than gay people atm?


  • Options
    #316
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    Aard wrote: »
    So why are you on a crusade against gay marriage: something that hasn't even happened yet? Surely your time would be better spent trying to stop single people from adopting, which is more "damaging" absolutely than gay people atm?
    Are you mad? A single person who is normal will raise the child properly with normal values and teach the child that man+woman is normal. That is natures way and not the way of people who want to make us accept that deviant ways as normal. Might sound harsh but that is the law of nature and anything that goes against nature is wrong. My brother who is the other way ,after a long hard battle with me over years, had to finally agree with me that his acts are unnatural. Hopefully he will recover soon.


  • Options
    #317
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    Are you mad? A single person who is normal will raise the child properly with normal values and teach the child that man+woman is normal. That is natures way and not the way of people who want to make us accept that deviant ways as normal. Might sound harsh but that is the law of nature and anything that goes against nature is wrong. My brother who is the other way ,after a long hard battle with me over years, had to finally agree with me that his acts are unnatural. Hopefully he will recover soon.

    Hahahaha......laws of nature? Right.

    Stop bullying your brother and show some compassion!


  • Options
    #318
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    Are you mad? A single person who is normal will raise the child properly with normal values and teach the child that man+woman is normal.
    Are you claiming that all single people raise their children properly, or just single people who get through the adoption process. If it's the former, then you must be the one who is "mad": look at the number of single mothers out there who raise delinquent children. If it's the latter, then you do realise that gay people will also go through rigourous scrutiny to determine whether they're fit or not.


    I also don't think that any gay couple have or will raise their children to believe that a "man+woman" is not normal.


  • Options
    #319
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    Aard wrote: »
    Are you claiming that all single people raise their children properly, or just single people who get through the adoption process. If it's the former, then you must be the one who is "mad": look at the number of single mothers out there who raise delinquent children. If it's the latter, then you do realise that gay people will also go through rigourous scrutiny to determine whether they're fit or not.


    I also don't think that any gay couple have or will raise their children to believe that a "man+woman" is not normal.
    Well as a normal male to see two men kissing is totally repugnant to me. Imagine if an adopted boy saw his two mammies or daddies kissing, how sickened he would be. There is also the danger that he would conside that to be "normal" think of his natural confusion and what sort of society would we have then?
    Also sometimes kids have stepped into bedrooms when normal parents are engaging in sex and imagine what that boy would think if he saw two men "at it", he would be shocked forever


  • Options
    #320
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    Hahahaha......laws of nature? Right.

    Stop bullying your brother and show some compassion!
    Not bullying at all but helping him.


  • Options
    #321
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    Not bullying at all but helping him.

    The effect is the same: To make him feel like ****, like he is less than human and not worthy of respect for who and what he is.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #322
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    The effect is the same: To make him feel like ****, like he is less than human and not worthy of respect for who and what he is.
    I am sorry but I do not respect him while he is in that state. Whne he goes back to normal I will show him respect again.


  • Options
    #323
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    Well he won't be going "back to normal", because he is gay. He was born gay and will die gay. I can barely see the point of saying it because you'll certainly cling to your own false beliefs, but science as basically proven that homosexuality is hard-wired into our brains from the moment they are formed. You didn't choose to be straight, he didn't choose to be gay; get over it and let him lead his life, stay out of his business and keep your arrogant hate to yourself. He isn't hurting you.


  • Options
    #324
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    ChocolateSauce wrote: »
    Well he won't be going "back to normal", because he is gay. He was born gay and will die gay. I can barely see the point of saying it because you'll certainly cling to your own false beliefs, but science as basically proven that homosexuality is hard-wired into our brains from the moment they are formed. You didn't choose to be straight, he didn't choose to be gay; get over it and let him lead his life, stay out of his business and keep your arrogant hate to yourself. He isn't hurting you.
    "Arrogant hate"?. I pity him and I do not hate him. I hate his abnormal life. I pity him being laughed at when he walks with a more pronounced gait than a woman, when he speaks with a strange voice, his circle of friends etc. His choice of career is also feminine. Maybe he should have been born a girl then there would have been no confusion. But to act like a woaman then it is sad and abnormal.
    Question! All the prisioners in jails who have homosexual partners are they "gay"? Actually I never use that word normally as it indicates that the person is happy when in fact 90% are not


  • Options
    #325
    BanzaiBk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,285 ✭✭✭BanzaiBk


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    Actually I never use that word normally as it indicates that the person is happy when in fact 90% are not

    Mad statistics y0


  • Options
    #326
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    "Arrogant hate"?. I pity him and I do not hate him. I hate his abnormal life. I pity him being laughed at when he walks with a more pronounced gait than a woman, when he speaks with a strange voice, his circle of friends etc. His choice of career is also feminine. Maybe he should have been born a girl then there would have been no confusion. But to act like a woaman then it is sad and abnormal.
    Question! All the prisioners in jails who have homosexual partners are they "gay"?

    Maybe he is transgender? Although aforementioned science has shown us that gay men's brains are in fact similar to a woman's, and a gay woman's brain similar to a man. There's nothing wrong with this; it's your notion of what is important in a person that is askew.

    Actually I never use that word normally as it indicates that the person is happy when in fact 90% are not

    Proof please.


  • Options
    #327
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    I pity him being laughed at when he walks with a more pronounced gait than a woman, when he speaks with a strange voice, his circle of friends etc. His choice of career is also feminine.
    So you do you hate homosexuality in general, or just effeminacy? Because not all homosexuals are effeminate, y'know - a sizable number are "straight acting".


  • Options
    #328
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    Aard wrote: »
    So you do you hate homosexuality in general, or just effeminacy? Because not all homosexuals are effeminate, y'know - a sizable number are "straight acting".
    I suppose I hate the idea of two men or two women being abnormal. Nature is balck and white. In my opinion gays are people who do not have the confidence or looks to associate with the opposite sex and so go for the easy option. Makes sense when you look at 99% of queer men and women


  • Options
    #329
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    I suppose I hate the idea of two men or two women being abnormal. Nature is balck and white. In my opinion gays are people who do not have the confidence or looks to associate with the opposite sex and so go for the easy option. Makes sense when you look at 99% of queer men and women

    I'm not sure if I would agree with you here. People in the LGBT community quite clearly have some form of attraction to one another.

    By abnormal I assume you mean that it is a behaviour that isn't prevalent in the majority?


  • Options
    #330
    itsonlywords
    Closed Accounts Posts: 339 ✭✭itsonlywords


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I'm not sure if I would agree with you here. People in the LGBT community quite clearly have some form of attraction to one another.

    By abnormal I assume you mean that it is a behaviour that isn't prevalent in the majority?
    By abnormal I mean what is not normal for our species. I am convinced that it can be sorted. Really I do. Most of those people do it for attention. Limp wristed etc. You know when I think of DIRTY men putting their privates into a ****hole really sickens me as it should sicken any normal person


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #331
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    itsonlywords wrote: »
    By abnormal I mean what is not normal for our species. I am convinced that it can be sorted. Really I do. Most of those people do it for attention. Limp wristed etc. You know when I think of DIRTY men putting their privates into a ****hole really sickens me as it should sicken any normal person

    Since about 10% of our population has been doing it since before were evolved into what we are now, I'd say it is fairly normal and natural. Homosexuality has also been well documented in hundreds of animal species.

    On behalf of my genus, people like you make me ashamed to call myself a homo.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement