Same sex marriages. Your opinion?

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Let's keep in mind there are two events, two "marriages," in a marriage: religious ceremony and legal ceremony. Religious: if your church will marry same-sex couples, good for it, if not, so be it. See the religious tolerance thread. Legal: Call it marriage, a PAC, a civil union (VT and France seem to have VERY similar systems, btw), covorting concubines, or "Bob" for all I care, but give nontraditional couples the same legal rights of inheritance, medical benefits, tax benefits, next-of-kin status, etc as traditional couples. I remember hearing testimony in legislative committees on these issues. The lesbian who died alone because hospital personnel refused to let her partner into the ward to be with her. The lesbian who lost her child (of 10 years) when her partner who had adopted the child (absent a civil union, 2 people cannot cojointly adopt) died and the long-estranged parents came and "saved" the child from such an abomination as growing up with a loving lesbian mother. However much you hate gays, you are one cold SOB if you can't hear these stories and not think something needs to be done. Genetics of homosexuality? Up in the air. Scientists believe they have found the gay gene. All species of mammals exhibit homosexual tendancies. Whether it's nature, nurture, or (most likely) a mix, you cannot look at a male dog trying to mount another male dog and call it simply choice. Choice may be part of the factor, but it isn't all of it. In a world of increased divorce and increasing freedom to make our homes as we see fit, denying that these relationships are in fact "families" ultimately has a bad effect on the kids -- exactly the opposite of the assertion that recognizing gay relationships erode family values, I see such recognition as supporting family values. However you partner with others and make your home, please be responsible parents, and you deserve the social benefits of chosing to partner with someone and raise kids. Please, gay folks, adopt all you want -- lord knows there are plenty of children needing homes. Being raised by two fathers is better than being raised by none. More and more, families today don't look like Ward and June Cleaver's -- not recognizing that is hurting society. You can close your eyes, hold your ears, and scream "Nanananana" all you want, but when you stop, gays will still be here, as will stepparents, as will single parents, and as will children needing loving homes.

TL, I'd say "I'd kiss you"...
But on this thread that might not be wise, so good post

On the dogs: it is a dominance thing not a sex or reproduction thing, goes back to the wolf packs Only the Alpha male and female got to mate. So if dog "A" Mounts dog "B" then Dog "A" is higher in the pack then dog "B". We got 3 female dogs the newest will try to mount the old matiarch, and get her but whipped, but she's trying to move up in the pecking order.
Besides that how can you equate a dogs's or any animals reasoning with a humans? Opps scratch that you do run around with lawyers

Nature or nurture from the religious (Christain) point of view it matters not. The Bible is clear that there are certain action/activities that those who practice in such shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. It does not say that only people who participate in these actions/activities because of nurture shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. The problem in the Christain world is that there are some who wish to say: Well this action/activity applies to all who do it, but this action/activity only applies to those who by nurture do it. That point of view usally miss quotes the "He who is without sin let him cast the first stone". Taking it completly out of contex, not reconizing that the woman caught in adulty was brought to Christ IN ORDER to trick Him. The adulty was the excuse not the reason she was brought to Christ.

[ 07-31-2003, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Bardan the Slayer: Sir Kenyth, I have just one question to ask - do you consider that you *chose* to be straight, and that being straight is just a *comfortable habit* for you?

I can't answer for Sir Kenyth, but for me I chose to be straight, but then again I'm not like most people in this world. I am the master of my destiny and the captain of my fate, and I take full responsiblity for my actions and don't try to hide or run from my actions, they are what they are.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Grendal: Once again religion gets in the way again Cerek. And I have to side with Moiraine on the fertility thing. But not just fertility, what about those hetero couples that know b4 marrige that there wont be any kids in their future due to a choice of their own? Shouldn't that make them inelligable for a wedding as well? Marrige was never designed to "promote" anything. One more question for Sir Kenyth, are you gay? How would you know your not "born that way" You shouldnt try and make the rules when your not playing the game. Maybe Im looking at this wrong but to me a marrige has absolutely ZERO to do with a persons religion or political views. I believe that marrage is a pact between 2 ppl ( hetero, gay, lesbian)in which they promise to share their lives together, for better or worse, richer or poorer, kids or no kids. Its a union between 2 ppl that want to promise themselves to each other and try and make a go of survival at life together.

Exactly what does religion get in the way of, Grendal??

The question asked by Sir Kenyth was "What is your opinion of same-sex marriages?" I answered that question and gave my reasons for it. However, the fact that I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle does not mean I'm intolerant of it. In fact, I specifically listed an example of a gay couple I know personally and how they are bringing two children into the world. I don't completely agree with their decision, but I agreed that the two of them will make excellent and loving parents.

I recently had a long-time friend come to me and admit he was homosexual. He then said that he had always wanted to go on a "date" with me. Well, that was a bit awkward. I let him know that - while I may disagree with his lifestyle - I didn't think any less of him as a friend. When I saw him out in public later that same night, I still greeted him with a hug, just as I always had.

You see, Grendal - disapproval does not necessarily equate with intolerance. I can disapprove of an individuals choice or habits, but still respect their right to live their life they way they want to.

[The Hierophant]

I don't think homosexual marriages 'are good', just as I don't think heterosexual marriages 'are good'. I think certain folk are just a tad too nosy. You know it really is possible to be a functioning member of a society and to keep your goddamn nose out of other people's business.

'But they'll ruin the fabric of our established customs'. F**k that! Customs belong to know one! There's nothing more disgusting than a simpleminded little human thinking they can put a patent on social interaction. Hahaha, do some of you honestly think that allowing people of the same gender will somehow cause the familial institution to crumble? How weak do you assume people are?

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Moiraine: Cerek, I agree that a child should be raised by two people, in order to give him/her more than one viewpoint on life, I disagree that these two people should be of different genders. I believe what is the most important in raising a child is love and harmony - and since gay couples are or will going through so much more obstacles and suspiscion than hetero couples, any child given to their care is sure to get that in plenty. I do feel strongly, along with Timber, that when so many kids are in dire need of parents, it is kind of cruel to deny them love ... Besides, a loving couple, any loving couple, is composed of two people who have found a strong balance in personal characters and social backgrounds, which is the best nest a child can hope to grow into.

I've been trying to think of a way to explain my position better since making my first post. While I agree that a "two-parent" home is better than a single parent home (or having the child shuttled from one home to another in the foster home system), I still maintain that a "two-gender" union is better than a "same sex" union.

The fact is that men and women are just different in the way they react to situations. Men are problem-solvers, women are comforters. Men are analytical, women are intuitive.

If the child comes home from a bad day at school, dad will probably try to find out what made the day bad then offer a plan of action to overcome whatever happened. Mom will give the child a hug.

If the child is trying to decide between joining two different clubs, dad will make a list of the "pros and cons" for each club, mom will tell them to go with the one that "feels right to them".

Do you see what I'm saying? Men and women approach the same situations with entirely different perspectives, and this "full range" of human perspective simply cannot be recreated in a same-sex union. Granted that one of the men in the union may be more "effeminate"(sp?) and a woman may be more "masculine" in their behavior, but that still isn't the same thing. There are just certain situations that are best handled by a parent of a specific gender (puberty comes to mind - how will the couple I mentioned help their little girl cope with her first period?? While they may be very loving and nurturing, they simply cannot speak from experience to help thier daughter cope with the emotions she will be feeling).

Alright, maybe I'm "splitting hairs", and I really don't mean to. I agree that being raised by homosexual parents will likely make the child more "accepting" of alternative views and lifestyles, but I do not agree that it is a broader and more rounded perspective - just a different one.

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: The fact is that men and women are just different in the way they react to situations. Men are problem-solvers, women are comforters. Men are analytical, women are intuitive.

That's a fact is it?

Cause it kind of reads like a massive generalization based on absolutly nothing.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: The fact is that men and women are just different in the way they react to situations. Men are problem-solvers, women are comforters. Men are analytical, women are intuitive.

That's a fact is it?

Cause it kind of reads like a massive generalization based on absolutly nothing. [/QUOTE]Nothing is wrong with generaliztions, in fact generalizations, accept the fact... NO DEMAND that there are execptions to them. If the didn't they would be absoluts and not generalizations.

[Bardan the Slayer]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Bardan the Slayer: Sir Kenyth, I have just one question to ask - do you consider that you *chose* to be straight, and that being straight is just a *comfortable habit* for you?

I can't answer for Sir Kenyth, but for me I chose to be straight, but then again I'm not like most people in this world. I am the master of my destiny and the captain of my fate, and I take full responsiblity for my actions and don't try to hide or run from my actions, they are what they are. [/QUOTE]Let me just get this straight, so i know exactly what you are saying. You are attracted to women purely through choice? You could, if you so wished, choose to stop finding women attractive, and find men attractive instead? Any instinctive feelings you get when you see a pretty woman are all due to a choice you made and the habits you have developed therefrom? There is not the slightest bit of you that naturally does and always has found women attractive?

Or is it that you find women attractive but not men, and what you are saying you have choice about is your decision to date men or women?

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

posted 07-31-2003 08:24 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't think homosexual marriages 'are good', just as I don't think heterosexual marriages 'are good'. I think certain folk are just a tad too nosy. You know it really is possible to be a functioning member of a society and to keep your goddamn nose out of other people's business. 'But they'll ruin the fabric of our established customs'. F**k that! Customs belong to know one! There's nothing more disgusting than a simpleminded little human thinking they can put a patent on social interaction. Hahaha, do some of you honestly think that allowing people of the same gender will somehow cause the familial institution to crumble? How weak do you assume people are?

I couldnt agree more!!

Also to add my own opinion to the pot, the Vatican needs to get a hobby or something. According to them molesting children is O.K., but 2 consenting adults of the same gender getting married isnt. There is a NAMBLA joke in there somewhere , but I'm not gonna make it. If being gay is a sin then the Vatican should be handing out excommunications like cheap beer at a frat party. Maybe the sin doesnt come into it untill they get older or something?? To answer the last question about how weak I think people are, well IMHO only the weak minded are so threatened by the sight of 2 men or 2 women kissing that they will try to deny them the basic right to live and love as they choose.You never hear about a doctor or lawyer going out gay bashing, that job usualy goes to a couple of drunken rednecks or Rev.Phelps and his ilk.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Bardan the Slayer:

Let me just get this straight, so i know exactly what you are saying. You are attracted to women purely through choice? You could, if you so wished, choose to stop finding women attractive, and find men attractive instead? Any instinctive feelings you get when you see a pretty woman are all due to a choice you made and the habits you have developed therefrom? There is not the slightest bit of you that naturally does and always has found women attractive?

Or is it that you find women attractive but not men, and what you are saying you have choice about is your decision to date men or women? [/QUOTE]

Was it by nature or nurture? It doesn't matter once I became old enough to realize that it is my life and my choice to do with it as I want all bets where off. Where the soul and mind goes, so goes the body.

Basicly I can choose to be what I want, I try not to be ruled by my feelings, desires or instincts, I try to rule them. If I wish to be a drug user I can do that, if I wish to be a murder I can do that. For me it would be a fate worse then death to live a life where things justed happened, I live my life the way I wish. If I didn't have control over myself/actions, life would not be worth living, because it wouldn't be mine it would be somebody/something else's. Now if I choose to give my life or submit my will to somebody/something else that is still my choice.