Same sex marriages. Your opinion?

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Rokenn: Here is a bone for anti-homosexual marriage folks. If a law was passed that gave homosexual couples all the rights of a married couple (hospital visitation, inheritance, etc..) but they called it a civil union, since marriage is after all a religous term. Would you be happy to let them live in peace? Or would you still feel compelled to force your morals onto them?

Further.... are you in support of outright outlawing homosexual relationships, such as proposed in the suggested constitutional amendment? Should we be jailing people for sodomy? And, finally, if we should be jailing people for sodomy, does that apply to hetero couples too (i.e. is contact between genetalia and mouth/anus equally bad for hetero couples as for homo couples)??

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: Here is a bone for anti-homosexual marriage folks. If a law was passed that gave homosexual couples all the rights of a married couple (hospital visitation, inheritance, etc..) but they called it a civil union, since marriage is after all a religous term. Would you be happy to let them live in peace? Or would you still feel compelled to force your morals onto them?

Further.... are you in support of outright outlawing homosexual relationships, such as proposed in the suggested constitutional amendment? Should we be jailing people for sodomy? And, finally, if we should be jailing people for sodomy, does that apply to hetero couples too (i.e. is contact between genetalia and mouth/anus equally bad for hetero couples as for homo couples)?? [/QUOTE]Sounds a lot like The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. Where the only time sex was allowed was strictly for making babies and nothing else.

If you have not read it do so. It is an excellent book.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Rokenn: How am I missing the point? According to Yorick the bible states any sex that is not intended to produce offspring within a marriage is wrong. So by that reasoning couples where one of the partners is sertile should never have sex.

Not exactly. What he said was "The Christian moral ethic is that sex is to ONLY be expressed within the context of a committed male-female family building lifepartnership."

That means you are to choose one opposite-sex partner with whom you want to build a family and share the rest of your life, and only have sex with that person...not that you can only have sex to produce offspring.

Most men who have vasectomies already have children. The same is true for women who have their tubes tied. The purpose is to avoid having any more children. This can be based on health or financial issues and not just for the sake of convenience for the partners.

The point is that most men or women who choose these "sterilization procedures" have already "produced offspring" long before the procedure was done.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: If you, living in NYC, can't recognize the obvious validity of the statement that fags/lesbos are richer from your daily experiences, then I guess at some point me or someone else will go do the research for you. Maybe later I'll post something on it.

I lived in Sydney, with one of the highest homosexual ratios in the world. I lived and worked near Oxford Street, the capital of Gay Sydney. As you pointed out, I now live in New York, and do spend time in the West Villiage, and have numerous homosexual friends. Two girlfriends of mine were lesbians prior to being with me. I am not unfamiliar with homosexual culture.

Consequently, I have not seen any evidence that homosexuals are any richer than hetrosexuals. Until I see statistics, it remains a concept I first heard when you posted it.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: are you in support of outright outlawing homosexual relationships, such as proposed in the suggested constitutional amendment? Should we be jailing people for sodomy? And, finally, if we should be jailing people for sodomy, does that apply to hetero couples too

Of course not
Of course not
Of course not

[Timber Loftis]

Not exactly. What he said was "The Christian moral ethic is that sex is to ONLY be expressed within the context of a committed male-female family building lifepartnership."

I think this is a fair interpretation of the Christian moral ethic, and I wholeheartedly disagree with it. Other than Dolphins, we are the only species that has sex for fun -- and BOY IS IT FUN!! Therefore, relgating the enjoyment of this wonderful thing to those who have married for the purpose of raising a family is morally repugnant to my main ethic -- which is that EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE GOOD THINGS IN LIFE.

Also, I'll note that while we're talking about "nature/natural" the very idea of monogomy is interjected by religion as a DERROGATION from the natural order. Humans are by nature not monogomous. But, because monogomy supports society better, the ancient Jews developed the laws of Jahweh (which later became the laws of Christianity) in a way to preserve monogomous relationships as a supporting social structure. But, as any 19-yr-old college freshman can tell you, his loins are constantly communicating human nature to him -- and it ain't monogomous.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Rokenn: Or would you still feel compelled to force your morals onto them?

How am I forcing my morals onto anyone? Since when is discussion use of force? Are you reading what I'm writing? I would not keep homosexual friends if I forced my morals onto them.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Yorick: As you pointed out, I now live in New York, and do spend time in the West Villiage, and have numerous homosexual friends. Two girlfriends of mine were lesbians prior to being with me. I am not unfamiliar with homosexual culture.

I am always amazed when someone brings up the fact they have 'friends' they wish to deny rights to.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: Or would you still feel compelled to force your morals onto them?

How am I forcing my morals onto anyone? Since when is discussion use of force? Are you reading what I'm writing? I would not keep homosexual friends if I forced my morals onto them. [/QUOTE]You are forcing your morals on them when you tell them they can not enter in to a social rocognized pair-bonding because the book you believe in says it is evil and immoral.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Not exactly. What he said was "The Christian moral ethic is that sex is to ONLY be expressed within the context of a committed male-female family building lifepartnership."

I think this is a fair interpretation of the Christian moral ethic, and I wholeheartedly disagree with it. Other than Dolphins, we are the only species that has sex for fun -- and BOY IS IT FUN!! Therefore, relgating the enjoyment of this wonderful thing to those who have married for the purpose of raising a family is morally repugnant to my main ethic -- which is that EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE GOOD THINGS IN LIFE.

Also, I'll note that while we're talking about "nature/natural" the very idea of monogomy is interjected by religion as a DERROGATION from the natural order. Humans are by nature not monogomous. But, because monogomy supports society better, the ancient Jews developed the laws of Jahweh (which later became the laws of Christianity) in a way to preserve monogomous relationships as a supporting social structure. But, as any 19-yr-old college freshman can tell you, his loins are constantly communicating human nature to him -- and it ain't monogomous. [/QUOTE]The point has been made repeatedly, that what is 'natural' is not always beneficial. It is 'natural' to want to punch someone in the face. You may get killed because of it. Controlling your instincts is a key part of humanity. The person with greater self control actually has more power, more choices, and more time.

As to sex being enjoyed, in my experience, the sex got better the longer we were together. In my experience, monogamy made sex better, safer and more fun.

I was with her 10 years. The sex - even when we were at odds - was always good.

We didn't have children either. She was on birth control. Desiring to build a familiy - a family can be 2 - does not equate only having sex for procreational purposes.