Same-Sex Marriage!

Started by Elandra, May 15, 2008, 08:39:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Elandra

Split from https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=15176.0 on Trieste's suggestion. Thank you hun. *hugs*

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 08:30:00 PM
Replying to Goblin- I have a number of gay friends. Their orientation doesn't bother me, nor does their relationship. If they wanted to marry, I'd probably be happy for them. It's just the practice of gay marriage on the whole that worries me because of how it may further weaken the family structure of America's youth.

I would like to point out that gay unions tend to last MUCH longer than heterosexual ones and hence in many case would be a better family structure than the 50% of heterosexual marriages that end in divorce.
~~~ ONs & OFFs ~~~ Requests ~~~

ZK

Don't tell that to my mom, she's had problems with both cases. >.> Then again, she ends up finding the craziest psycho she can and latches on. *laughs and sweat-drops* x.x
On's/Off's --- Game Reviews

"Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may judge what is sane."

Trieste

Woohoo! Yeah! *does a dance* Welcome to the new millenium, Cali! *salutes from across the country* God, I hope more states follow this example. The ban on same-sex marriages is ridiculous and a violation of the civil rights of those who are attracted to their own sex. You want to bring religion into it, bring it to your church... but sexuality is no reason to stand in the way of the rights of a legal spouse. It's ludicrous. Good for them!

Elvi

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 08:30:00 PM
Replying to Goblin- I have a number of gay friends. Their orientation doesn't bother me, nor does their relationship. If they wanted to marry, I'd probably be happy for them. It's just the practice of gay marriage on the whole that worries me because of how it may further weaken the family structure of America's youth.

OOOOOOO.....Haven't seen the 'some of my best friends are' cop out in ages.
Please, tell me, how would a gay couples marrying 'weaken the family structure of American youth'?

Same sex 'marriages' are legal here and have been for a while and I really haven't seen any terrible impact, caused by that in our 'youth'.
It's been fun, but Elvi has now left the building

Moondazed

The family structure of the American family is, I believe, a political tool used to scare people into fear-based behavior.  What is this mythical beast?  Should divorce be outlawed, because I suspect it's had a hell of an affect on the mythical beast.  Maybe we shouldn't allow remarriage?  Surely step-parenting is bad for the beast as well.  I'm sorry, but I find the mythical structure of the American family to be nothing more than a political construct.
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Trieste

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 09:14:41 PM
I wasn't referring to a mythical beast, and I'm sure as hell not going to perpetuate such a lame metaphor.

As for Elvi- I apologize if I used some sort of banal excuse. I'm only explaining the way I feel. If it's a cop-out, so be it. I could care less if other people use it as an excuse. I'm not saying I'm right. I do, however, apologize for speaking on a subject that I wasn't fully informed on. I went with the gut-reaction that I had to it, when I should have waited to think on it more.

It's a subject my fiancee and I have discussed at length in the past. I should have clarified this before-- homosexual couples raising children could undermine the traditional mother/father roles and values of our society. Gays marrying wasn't my issue, sorry.

Now I'll wait for someone to argue about how I'm wrong about that too.

I did a quick Google for disvorce stats. Couldn't find hard numbers because I don't have time to sort through all the info I found. I DID find a report from the CDC (again, don't have the time to hunt down census info, so I'm going with the data I found) here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_022.pdf

I'm going to leave the divorce rate out of it since I couldn't find the hard numbers to back up that argument, but I will call attention to table C on that report, noting that 49% of the women interviewed are married but not cohabitating. That is a huge percentage of women who have husbands and don't live with them. I wonder what that does to traditional mother/father relationships?

Second, I'm the product of a single-parent household. I first met my biological father at age 14 - and my parents divorced by the time I was 4. They had separated by the time I was 3. My mother remarried when I was 16... that's 12 years without a solid father figure in the traditional sense. Yeah, it was hard, but what exactly are you implying that I'm missing? Where am I damaged so much that you would call into question a whole demographic's civil rights?

I'd also encourage you to take a look at the demographics of convicted criminals. They have roughly the same demographic of single-parent versus two-parent households as others of their socioeconomic standing.

I'm not saying there are no merits to the arguments against same-sex marriage. I am saying that you are making vague stabs in the dark in an attempt to argue against it. Your personal opinion is yours, and you are allowed to it; I would never ever say otherwise. But you are trying to couch personal opinion in facts and oblique references, and that is where you're wrong.

Caeli

I'm glad that California (my state <3) has followed Massachusett's example. I've always rather thought that the ban on same-sex marriage was kind of ridiculous - what's wrong with two people of the same sex who want to get married? If you don't get into the "Bible says it's wrong" argument, there is very few valid arguments against it.

-shrugs-
ʙᴜᴛᴛᴇʀғʟɪᴇs ᴀʀᴇ ɢᴏᴅ's ᴘʀᴏᴏғ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴡᴇ ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴀ sᴇᴄᴏɴᴅ ᴄʜᴀɴᴄᴇ ᴀᴛ ʟɪғᴇ
ᴠᴇʀʏ sᴇʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇʟʏ ᴀᴠᴀɪʟᴀʙʟᴇ ғᴏʀ ɴᴇᴡ ʀᴏʟᴇᴘʟᴀʏs

ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ❋ ғᴏʀ ɪᴅᴇᴀs; 'ø' ғᴏʀ ᴏɴs&ᴏғғs, ᴏʀ ᴘᴍ ᴍᴇ.
{ø 𝕨 
  𝕒 }
»  ᴇʟʟɪᴡʀɪᴍᴏ
»  ᴄʜᴏᴏsᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴏᴡɴ ᴀᴅᴠᴇɴᴛᴜʀᴇ: ᴛʜᴇ ғɪғᴛʜ sᴄʜᴏʟᴀʀʟʏ ᴀʀᴛ
»  ひらひらと舞い散る桜に 手を伸ばすよ
»  ᴘʟᴏᴛ ʙᴜɴɴɪᴇs × sᴛᴏʀʏ sᴇᴇᴅs × ᴄʜᴀʀᴀᴄᴛᴇʀ ɪɴsᴘɪʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴs

Elvi

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 09:14:41 PM
I wasn't referring to a mythical beast, and I'm sure as hell not going to perpetuate such a lame metaphor.

As for Elvi- I apologize if I used some sort of banal excuse. I'm only explaining the way I feel. If it's a cop-out, so be it. I could care less if other people use it as an excuse. I'm not saying I'm right. I do, however, apologize for speaking on a subject that I wasn't fully informed on. I went with the gut-reaction that I had to it, when I should have waited to think on it more.

It's a subject my fiancee and I have discussed at length in the past. I should have clarified this before-- homosexual couples raising children could undermine the traditional mother/father roles and values of our society. Gays marrying wasn't my issue, sorry.

Now I'll wait for someone to argue about how I'm wrong about that too.

In what way do you believe it will undermine mother/father roles?

And if you don't mind me asking, how old are you exactly?
(Yes it is relavent as I am interested in seeing what age group actually thinks this)
It's been fun, but Elvi has now left the building

Trieste

All age groups, Elvi. I live in Massachusetts, and I've heard the same argument from schoolmates in high school all the way up to older people I've worked/talked with... and that's in the first state to actually recognize this. *helpless shrug* At least older people remember when the same thing was said about allowing interracial marriage. Younger people don't even have that experience to fall back on.

Elvi

*nods*
Yes hypocrisy and ignorance is an all age encompassing pastime.

I actually meant to say:

(Yes it is relevant as I am interested in seeing what age group you are to actually thinks this.)
It's been fun, but Elvi has now left the building

Moondazed

Forgive me if my analogy offended.  I guess a relevant question would be, what is your concept of the American family structure?
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Moondazed

Thank you for the clear clarification :)  I can offer examples with different outcomes, but I'm sure you know that they exist. 
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Moondazed

:)  Well... I'm sorry if you took my post as saying that you're an ignorant bigot.  I think that the art of debate is one that's dying, sadly.  I think it's a good thing to state your views, just know that someone is going to ask why you have them :)  To be honest, I very much like to hear from people with different views from mine because they offer me an opportunity to see things from a different perspective.  Not that they'll change my mind ;)  Seriously, though, respectful discourse is a beautiful thing :)
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Trieste

I got heated, and I sincerely apologize if you felt personally attacked. Anything further I offer up as an explanation is going to sound like shallow justification, so I won't get into it other than this: show me facts. Show me figures. Show me the 'fancy statistics' that show what a detriment same-sex marriage or couples are to children's upbringing. Show me that you're coming from a place other than sitting back in your chair, shaking your head and saying "That just isn't right". It's difficult to assume you're not putting up just a knee-jerk reaction to this when all you're posting is "This is a detriment to children" but not where that's coming from.

Moondazed

OMG, I absolutely agree that political correctness is the cause!  Clear, factual, non-confrontational discourse is SO hard to find!  Trust me, I can get heated in a heartbeat and I've posted in that state before, but in the end the only thing that stops us/them mentality is trying to understand who 'them' is on a personal level.

Not to hijack :) 

I'm curious, do you have the same issues with other relationship structures, such as polyamory?
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Moondazed

She's not the only one who asks for proof :)  Generally speaking, it's good to have factual information behind one's decisions.  I won't be hijacking this thread by answering your comments about my question.  If anyone would like to discuss it, it should be a new thread ;)
~*~ Sexual Orientation: bi ~*~ BDSM Orientation: switch ~*~ Ons and Offs ~*~ Active Stories ~*~

Cherri Tart

*Hugs Joeseph*  that was just because my knee jerk reaction was to attack you too, and that's not right - thanks for sticking it out and trying to clarify your opinion - mine happens to differ, but that doesn't mean we can't talk civily here like family - we might disagree, but that doesn't mean we don't love one another.  :) 

ok, that said, please don't consider this an attack, either, but it really clarifies my feeling so the subject of gay parents... you stated:

As for the children, they're confused as to which parent has what role in the family, and given the transient nature of some homosexual relationships, some of them haven't even had the same parents for their entire childhood. That's a problem all single parent households have when it comes to bringing a new lover into the equation. When it happens in homosexual households, it just makes it worse because the new partner may not be feminine like the old one was, suddenly resulting in two father figures that are actually women instead of the previous mother and father figure that was actually a woman.

In my circle of friends, i know too many who would answer this with the following - it's easy to tell which parent has what role in the family... the father is the one raping you when your 11 while the mother has the role of making excues for him.  Sorry if that was a bit graphic, but no maybe you can see why i tend to disagree with your statement.  Also, my best friend in the world has been with the same man for 8 years now, despite his being terminally ill with AIDS, something that requires an incredible amount of commitment and love.  Something, i know from experience, doesn't always happen in heterosexual relationships.   

Respectfully,
Cherri
you were never able to keep me breathing as the water rises up again



O/O, Cherri Flavored

Trieste

#17
Mirroring moondazed's question, and...

Okay. So you don't want to dig through piles of statistics, despite the fact that you're getting a degree in them. (As a fellow student, I want cosmic credit for not commenting on that one. I'll ask you why you're minoring in something you don't enjoy some other time. :P) But where is your advocacy for more stringent multi-sex regulation? Where is the cry for a waiting period or a screening process for giving birth? The civil union debate brings in the spectre of good ol' Jim Crow, but you're not even advocating separate but equal... you're advocating stricter standards for someone based on orientation. Not drug use. Not parental competency. Not patience. Not love. Not any of the qualities one needs to give a child a safe and happy home.

As for 'transient nature', I have two words for you: Britney Spears. How about some more words: 24-hour marriage. How about the extreme overload of the foster system in the US? The point I'm trying to make is that multi-sex couples are just as transient, just as volatile, and they currently have the legal right to marry, have children, then bruise, cut, molest, and cut down their children until someone catches them and steps in. How is that anywhere close to fair and impartial, which is what our legal system swears it strives to be? If you're arguing for the sake of the children, how do you protect all of them? And on what basis do you say they won't get a good home if they live with two women (or men) instead of a man and a woman? You say you've seen it firsthand, but you must have seen the results of broken multi-sex homes, as well. Does that mean you just don't want people together at all? Where is the line?

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 11:18:12 PM
Among married individuals, yes. The entire point of marriage is to swear yourself to that person, and that person alone. If you go into a marriage with the understanding that you'll both be seeing other people, or somehow marrying more than one person, then it's not a big of a deal. On the other hand, I wouldn't call that a true marriage.

Are you trying to say that open relationships aren't 'real' marriages? Should they still then have the right to marry? Because they do, right now, under the legal system. The individual vows are also determined by the people getting married.

I ask again, where is the line?

Edit: Typos, typos, everywhere.

MadPanda

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 11:13:43 PM
I'm sorry. I go through piles of a statistics every day (minoring in sociology), so when I come online, I tend to leave that behind. As I said before, I was basing it on the experience I've had with a number of children raised in homosexual households, not an overall sampling of the population, which is why my perception of the issue could be skewed.

A few questions to consider, then:

How many children, exactly?  What's the sample size?
How in depth were these studies?  Long term?  Short term?
Were other factors considered in the results?
How complete is your experience with this?  Did you draw your sweeping conclusions only from the statistics, or have you gotten out in the field?
Got background in child development or psychology?  Social work?

This is not a social science forum, but I have a feeling that if you visited one and played devil's advocate like this, the pros would hand you your ears on a plate.
Voluptas ailuri fulgentis decretum est!
Omnis nimis, temperantia ob coenobitae.
(Jes, tiuj frazoj estas malĝustaj. Pandoj fakte ne komprenas la latinan!)

One on Ones Suggestion Box
Group Game Suggestion Box
Pandariffic Ons and Otherwise
In Memory of Bishrook

MadPanda

Your response is most illuminating.

Have you tried to learn by simply asking questions, rather than by playing devil's advocate?
Voluptas ailuri fulgentis decretum est!
Omnis nimis, temperantia ob coenobitae.
(Jes, tiuj frazoj estas malĝustaj. Pandoj fakte ne komprenas la latinan!)

One on Ones Suggestion Box
Group Game Suggestion Box
Pandariffic Ons and Otherwise
In Memory of Bishrook

RubySlippers

I frankly think with a divorce rate over 50% and so many hetro couples living out of marriage why the hell do we have marriage laws anymore? Why not keep them personal contracts and have religious ceremonies seperate if desired for the "marriage" part. I mean my folks were married many years but they are the odd ones of the people we know so I suppose it can work but why bother now just end marriage as anything more than a contract between two or more persons gay shave been doing that for years. I have a big stack of forms to give my partner and I the many benefits we need and live as a couple, just do that.

Trieste

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 11:47:15 PM
[...] something to distinguish it from a marriage involving people who have enough discipline and love to actually stay committed to one person for their entire life.

And you'd managed to get all this way without a personal attack. Bad form. For shame.

For the rest of it, if I'm following correctly, you're advocating marriage for the sake of procreation. That's the reason for it, the yardstick by which you measure fitness to marry. What, then, of those couples who will not or cannot have children? Should their marriages also be earmarked as different from a traditional one man, one woman, 2.45 children? And if your answer is to differentiate between couples who cannot have children ("not their fault") and those who will not ("their choice"), then why not have all people allowed to marry whatever consenting adult they choose, and just have a child-ed and child-free demarcation for hetero- and homosexual couples?

You're broadening the scopes, not drawing a line. You've also said nothing about multi-sex couples who are mired in drug addiction, family violence, disease, homelessness, unemployment, alcoholism... and you will see a lot of this if you go into social work.

Cherri Tart

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 11:35:30 PM
Having said that, I must point out one thing. You said "in your circle of friends". I'm sorry to hear that men are such raging assholes in your circle friends, but that's you speaking from your personal experience. I was doing the same thing with the 'children raised by gay parents' example. I wasn't saying I was right across the board; rather, I was simply explaining how I had come to form an opinion I have on the subject. Men aren't violent brutes everywhere, and children raised by homosexuals aren't always confused. You can disagree with my statement based on your personal experience, but I was referring to things on the whole, not exclusively within your circle of friends. I can definitely see why you'd disagree with it though.

*nods* i agree, this is just my personal experience at work here and my opinion, i just wanted to show that there are two sides to every coin and that it's important to take a look at both of them.  I also have had the privledge of being raised by a wonderful father in a one parent home after my mom died when i was 10.  He wasn't perfect, but he tried very hard.  I don't think that 2 moms or 2 dads are better then a mom and a dad, or just a mom or a dad - i just think that they are all potentially as good or as bad as any other combination.  It's all about the individuals.
you were never able to keep me breathing as the water rises up again



O/O, Cherri Flavored

Kazyth

Quote from: Joseph911 on May 15, 2008, 11:47:15 PM
One thing-

"Are you trying to say that open relationships aren't 'real' marriages? Should they still then have the right to marry? Because they do, right now, under the legal system. The individual vows are also determined by the people getting married."

Yes, I am saying they aren't real marriages, and no, they should not have the right to marry--not legally, anyway. If some religious ceremony would satisfy them, then so be it, but I don't think it should be a legally binding ceremony. As for the vows themselves--if you want to change the vows of marriage, then change the name as well. Or at least have the marriage certificate specify "open-ended marriage"...something to distinguish it from a marriage involving people who have enough discipline and love to actually stay committed to one person for their entire life.

What is wrong with it being a legally binding ceremony?  The aspect that involves "Love, Honor, Cherish" one person for the rest of your life isn't law related, that is religion right there.  Why does it offend enough that it  'should be' changed?  To avoid being 'lumped in with them'?  Does having two people who have room in their hearts for more than one partner for the rest of their lives get a marriage certificate somehow lessen the marriages of those who don't?  Monogamy isn't for everyone.  Discipline has nothing to do with it.  If you can love only one person like that forever, that is just how you are.  If you can't, you can't.  What gives anyone the right to tell them that their love or their marriage means less, and has to have a different title to prove it?
A rose by any other name... still has thorns you can prick someone with. - Me.


Sherona

Quote from: RubySlippers on May 15, 2008, 11:55:58 PM
I frankly think with a divorce rate over 50% and so many hetro couples living out of marriage why the hell do we have marriage laws anymore? Why not keep them personal contracts and have religious ceremonies seperate if desired for the "marriage" part. I mean my folks were married many years but they are the odd ones of the people we know so I suppose it can work but why bother now just end marriage as anything more than a contract between two or more persons gay shave been doing that for years. I have a big stack of forms to give my partner and I the many benefits we need and live as a couple, just do that.


I have to say..reading this thread (and yes I know that it is not intended in this fashion) but I guess I need to just go tell my husband that we might as well just divorce and go our separate ways.

that being said, I think screw statistics. I could give a rats ass that the divorce rate between heterocouple is 50%. I dont think thats becasue they are heterosexual...I think thats because of people jumping in too soon. Frankly I dont think Heterosexual relationships are any better then Homosexual relationships, AND vice versus.

Let them marry...why should my mother-in-law not be covered under her partners insurance the way she would have been if she had been married to a man?

In the flip side of things..Not all heterosexual couples deal with abuse, rape, etc and so forth...

I really dont think anyone was actually trying to imply that Hetero was just a horrible horrible relationship to be in rather then just proving a point...but still felt compelled to post :P