How would gay marriage affect your life?

Recommended Videos

Harbinger_

New member
Jan 8, 2009
1,050
0
0
101flyboy said:
Harbinger_ said:
101flyboy said:
Harbinger_ said:
AfriXan said:
Harbinger_ said:
Kingsman said:
Can I ask what the point of posting in this topic is if you're just going to say the exact same thing as everyone else? Just look at all the answers on the first page. Good grief. You'd think that one guy had ten accounts or something.

Might as well drop the controversy bomb here and make a different post:
You ask what gay marriage being legalized would do to affect my life.
Can I ask what eliminating the drinking age would do to affect your life if you were over 21?
Can I ask what eliminating all the drug bans would do if you don't take any of them?
Can I ask what legalizing abuse of females would do if you're a male?
Can I ask what abolishing the speed limit would do if you had no license, or walked/biked/etc. to work instead?
Can I ask what making meat illegal would do if you were already a vegetarian?
Can I ask what legalizing pedophilia and child abuse would do to you if you were an adult?

If you say "nothing" to all of the above but STILL found the concepts more than objectionable, you now know that just because homosexuality does NOT affect heterosexuals, does not mean they cannot find it against their own ethics/morals/opinions/whatever.

I agree with your post 100% sir.
I disagree. All the things listed are damaging people who don't choose to be involved. Gays aren't forcing me to attend their weddings and their weddings do not negatively impact on my life in the same way as drunks, druggies, rapists, car accidents and paedophiles.

The only similar one is the meat one and that is in fact arguing for gay marriage rather than against.
If you aren't around drunks, druggies, rapists, or pedophiles then would it? Regardless your ethics and morals still are affected, You can disagree all you want and I'll agree all I want. I have friends that are homosexual and I agree they should have equal rights however that doesn't mean that I'm completely comfortable around them or comfortable watching say two guys or two women kissing or holding hands. It bothers me to my very core. I still support my friends decision because they are my friends and I respect them however I don't have to like the lifestyle. I have friends that smoke and do drugs and I support them for their decisions because it is their decision. This is no different. Its the way that my morals are, the way that my mind works and the way that I am. If I'm to be discriminated against for the way I am which isn't harming anyone then why can't a homosexual couple discriminated against for the very same reason.
Because your "morals" are harming others by condemning individuals for who they are, and your "discomfort" around gay people is ridiculous. If you have discomfort around a human being simply for who that human being is, you are irrational in your way of thinking. What anti-gays like you fail to grasp is, not all positions are equally valid. Just like the KKK v human rights groups. Well, the same thing applies here. You basically are saying you believe what you believe, just because you believe it. I disagree with homosexuality, because it makes me feel icky. That is illogical, and, once again, irrational in it's core. Comparing something harmful like smoking to homosexuality, which in no way is harmful in any way, is illogical. You have absolutely no principals or justification. Sexual orientation is not a lifestyle, it's a sexual attraction, and unless you can come up with a PRINCIPLED reason as to why you are "against the lifestyle", then that shows us all you don't have any reason whatsoever. Using talking points like my morals say ___________ is simply empty rhetoric. If you have gay friends, you either support them for who they are, or you don't, and you don't. No-one is discriminating against you. You CHOOSE to hold a view point that more and more people recognize is bigoted. Well, there are consequences for that. Same-sex couples are legal couples protected by the constitution from discrimination, and they are not actually believing or doing things actively against others, like you are. So, please, stop playing the victim card, you aren't one. You made your bed. Now, you have to lay in it.
I follow a specific religion and even without that religion my morals and how I feel deem it as disgusting whether other people might deem it as attractive or not. If that is illogical then beauty is also illogical is it not? It's called the human condition. You know nothing about me. You want me to stop playing the victim card? I was molested as a child by homosexuals. I find what they do disgusting. I have friends that are homosexual and I accept that they are the way they are but that doesn't mean that I have to like what they do. I have friends that do cocaine and I accept them for what they do and who they are but I don't like what they do. It's not bigotry to simply say I don't like this but if you do then thats fine for you. Yes they should have equal rights. I agree that they should but under no circumstances should I have to shut up about something I don't enjoy just to make someone feel more comfortable about themselves. That is illogical. If you want to continue to spew empty rhetoric then go ahead. There are no consequences for someone simply voicing their opinion and if there are then by all means proceed with your threats sir because thats exactly what they are and I will not take them any more. Yes they are couples under law but that doesn't make them any more or any less free from discrimination than you or I.
Illogical is not having a principled reason for what you think, believe, etc. When you believe something but the dots don't connect. It has nothing to do with the human condition. Once again, you choose the bed you lay in now. I don't have to know you, you said enough. You gave your opinion openly, and, on a discussion board, you have to realize that not everyone will agree with your opinions, and when it comes to gay rights, as more people are realizing it's perfectly OK, that most people will not accept your viewpoints as reasonable. By accepting people for who they are, that means you ACCEPT THEM. I mean, duh. You either accept or you don't accept. You don't accept anything, you at the most tolerate. If you think something is wrong, that means you don't accept it as not wrong, use common sense please. What do "they" do? Are you gay? If not, how do you know what is disgusting and what isn't? What is disgusting? I mean, I could talk about how oral sex is EXTREMELY dirty in terms of bacteria, so, is that disgusting? I'm assuming you have had oral, of course. Mouth is the dirtiest part of the body, but I never hear people complaining about that.

So, let's get to the real factor of why you are anti-gay. It's because you were raped as a child. Which is tragic, and I am sorry for you. Still ABSOLUTELY no excuse for your actions now. I'm sorry for what you went through, and clearly are still going through, but you can't just pull that card out and beat me or any gay man over the head with it, and think that absolves you from responsibility of your actions and beliefs. That IS playing the victim card, and you are a victim, but you also aren't going to be allowed to just take advantage of that status. Gay men don't rape kids. People who rape kids are people with an attraction towards kids. That's called PEDOPHILIA. I've in fact talked to SEVERAL people just like you, who are anti-gay, because they were raped as kids. It's damage control. You can't allow that one terrible experience shape your entire view of an entire group of people. That IS illogical and irrational. Because it isn't a principled decision, it's an EMOTIONAL one. You can't say you don't enjoy homosexuality, since you aren't a homosexual, so you are simply making baseless judgments, on one specific thing that happened to you. That isn't logical, sorry. Unlike cocaine, homosexuality harms no-one. You can make all of the comparisons you want. Your entire mindset is inherently wrong in itself, so everything you say will be wrong accordingly. Yes, it is bigoted to think who someone is or what someone does is wrong because of a PERSONAL situation, when what that person is and does doesn't actually affect you or anyone else negatively. No religious book or unfortunate childhood stories change that.

No-one is telling you to shut-up. No-one is forcing you to believe anything. I certainly haven't threatened you. What did I say? Simple. Gay/lesbian people are protected under the constitution from discrimination. You have freedom of speech to say what you believe on this subject. But, you are not protected under freedom of speech laws when it comes to taking responsibility of said speech. Nothing I have said is empty rhetoric. You want paint all gay people with a wide brush because of your tragic experience, OK. And people will call you out and call you a bigot accordingly. If you don't like that, then don't hold positions more and more people see as bigoted. If you can't take the heat, get out the kitchen.
You keep thinking in black and white. Heres some more things that'll make your head spin.
I love explosions but don't like loud noises.
I love my friends and family but hate humanity.
I hate heights but love flying.
I am disgusted with celebrity drama but love the idea of being an actor.
I enjoy hunting but hate animal cruelty.
I love pets but would never get a dog.
I enjoy the company of others but love solitude.
I love helping people but hate call centers.
I love the internet but am disgusted by everyone it.

Oh and by the by. Who are you to judge whats right or wrong any more than I am? Who is anyone living on this earth? By what right do they decide for all of us? Its a good thing I don't worship you because otherwise I'd be switching religions. I have my own tastes, my own interests and my own disinterests as well as my own beliefs and disbeliefs as do you and as does everyone else. I'm not going to convince you of anything and you're not going to convince me. You can keep talking but don't expect me to reply. I've said all I need to say and I don't need to explain or justify myself to a faceless entity in front of a computer screen who knows how far away that I will never meet or after this post more than likely have any communication with. I pray that you'll get everything in life that you deserve and nothing more and nothing less.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Harbinger_ said:
101flyboy said:
Harbinger_ said:
101flyboy said:
Harbinger_ said:
AfriXan said:
Harbinger_ said:
Kingsman said:
Can I ask what the point of posting in this topic is if you're just going to say the exact same thing as everyone else? Just look at all the answers on the first page. Good grief. You'd think that one guy had ten accounts or something.

Might as well drop the controversy bomb here and make a different post:
You ask what gay marriage being legalized would do to affect my life.
Can I ask what eliminating the drinking age would do to affect your life if you were over 21?
Can I ask what eliminating all the drug bans would do if you don't take any of them?
Can I ask what legalizing abuse of females would do if you're a male?
Can I ask what abolishing the speed limit would do if you had no license, or walked/biked/etc. to work instead?
Can I ask what making meat illegal would do if you were already a vegetarian?
Can I ask what legalizing pedophilia and child abuse would do to you if you were an adult?

If you say "nothing" to all of the above but STILL found the concepts more than objectionable, you now know that just because homosexuality does NOT affect heterosexuals, does not mean they cannot find it against their own ethics/morals/opinions/whatever.

I agree with your post 100% sir.
I disagree. All the things listed are damaging people who don't choose to be involved. Gays aren't forcing me to attend their weddings and their weddings do not negatively impact on my life in the same way as drunks, druggies, rapists, car accidents and paedophiles.

The only similar one is the meat one and that is in fact arguing for gay marriage rather than against.
If you aren't around drunks, druggies, rapists, or pedophiles then would it? Regardless your ethics and morals still are affected, You can disagree all you want and I'll agree all I want. I have friends that are homosexual and I agree they should have equal rights however that doesn't mean that I'm completely comfortable around them or comfortable watching say two guys or two women kissing or holding hands. It bothers me to my very core. I still support my friends decision because they are my friends and I respect them however I don't have to like the lifestyle. I have friends that smoke and do drugs and I support them for their decisions because it is their decision. This is no different. Its the way that my morals are, the way that my mind works and the way that I am. If I'm to be discriminated against for the way I am which isn't harming anyone then why can't a homosexual couple discriminated against for the very same reason.
Because your "morals" are harming others by condemning individuals for who they are, and your "discomfort" around gay people is ridiculous. If you have discomfort around a human being simply for who that human being is, you are irrational in your way of thinking. What anti-gays like you fail to grasp is, not all positions are equally valid. Just like the KKK v human rights groups. Well, the same thing applies here. You basically are saying you believe what you believe, just because you believe it. I disagree with homosexuality, because it makes me feel icky. That is illogical, and, once again, irrational in it's core. Comparing something harmful like smoking to homosexuality, which in no way is harmful in any way, is illogical. You have absolutely no principals or justification. Sexual orientation is not a lifestyle, it's a sexual attraction, and unless you can come up with a PRINCIPLED reason as to why you are "against the lifestyle", then that shows us all you don't have any reason whatsoever. Using talking points like my morals say ___________ is simply empty rhetoric. If you have gay friends, you either support them for who they are, or you don't, and you don't. No-one is discriminating against you. You CHOOSE to hold a view point that more and more people recognize is bigoted. Well, there are consequences for that. Same-sex couples are legal couples protected by the constitution from discrimination, and they are not actually believing or doing things actively against others, like you are. So, please, stop playing the victim card, you aren't one. You made your bed. Now, you have to lay in it.
I follow a specific religion and even without that religion my morals and how I feel deem it as disgusting whether other people might deem it as attractive or not. If that is illogical then beauty is also illogical is it not? It's called the human condition. You know nothing about me. You want me to stop playing the victim card? I was molested as a child by homosexuals. I find what they do disgusting. I have friends that are homosexual and I accept that they are the way they are but that doesn't mean that I have to like what they do. I have friends that do cocaine and I accept them for what they do and who they are but I don't like what they do. It's not bigotry to simply say I don't like this but if you do then thats fine for you. Yes they should have equal rights. I agree that they should but under no circumstances should I have to shut up about something I don't enjoy just to make someone feel more comfortable about themselves. That is illogical. If you want to continue to spew empty rhetoric then go ahead. There are no consequences for someone simply voicing their opinion and if there are then by all means proceed with your threats sir because thats exactly what they are and I will not take them any more. Yes they are couples under law but that doesn't make them any more or any less free from discrimination than you or I.
Illogical is not having a principled reason for what you think, believe, etc. When you believe something but the dots don't connect. It has nothing to do with the human condition. Once again, you choose the bed you lay in now. I don't have to know you, you said enough. You gave your opinion openly, and, on a discussion board, you have to realize that not everyone will agree with your opinions, and when it comes to gay rights, as more people are realizing it's perfectly OK, that most people will not accept your viewpoints as reasonable. By accepting people for who they are, that means you ACCEPT THEM. I mean, duh. You either accept or you don't accept. You don't accept anything, you at the most tolerate. If you think something is wrong, that means you don't accept it as not wrong, use common sense please. What do "they" do? Are you gay? If not, how do you know what is disgusting and what isn't? What is disgusting? I mean, I could talk about how oral sex is EXTREMELY dirty in terms of bacteria, so, is that disgusting? I'm assuming you have had oral, of course. Mouth is the dirtiest part of the body, but I never hear people complaining about that.

So, let's get to the real factor of why you are anti-gay. It's because you were raped as a child. Which is tragic, and I am sorry for you. Still ABSOLUTELY no excuse for your actions now. I'm sorry for what you went through, and clearly are still going through, but you can't just pull that card out and beat me or any gay man over the head with it, and think that absolves you from responsibility of your actions and beliefs. That IS playing the victim card, and you are a victim, but you also aren't going to be allowed to just take advantage of that status. Gay men don't rape kids. People who rape kids are people with an attraction towards kids. That's called PEDOPHILIA. I've in fact talked to SEVERAL people just like you, who are anti-gay, because they were raped as kids. It's damage control. You can't allow that one terrible experience shape your entire view of an entire group of people. That IS illogical and irrational. Because it isn't a principled decision, it's an EMOTIONAL one. You can't say you don't enjoy homosexuality, since you aren't a homosexual, so you are simply making baseless judgments, on one specific thing that happened to you. That isn't logical, sorry. Unlike cocaine, homosexuality harms no-one. You can make all of the comparisons you want. Your entire mindset is inherently wrong in itself, so everything you say will be wrong accordingly. Yes, it is bigoted to think who someone is or what someone does is wrong because of a PERSONAL situation, when what that person is and does doesn't actually affect you or anyone else negatively. No religious book or unfortunate childhood stories change that.

No-one is telling you to shut-up. No-one is forcing you to believe anything. I certainly haven't threatened you. What did I say? Simple. Gay/lesbian people are protected under the constitution from discrimination. You have freedom of speech to say what you believe on this subject. But, you are not protected under freedom of speech laws when it comes to taking responsibility of said speech. Nothing I have said is empty rhetoric. You want paint all gay people with a wide brush because of your tragic experience, OK. And people will call you out and call you a bigot accordingly. If you don't like that, then don't hold positions more and more people see as bigoted. If you can't take the heat, get out the kitchen.
You keep thinking in black and white. Heres some more things that'll make your head spin.
I love explosions but don't like loud noises.
I love my friends and family but hate humanity.
I hate heights but love flying.
I am disgusted with celebrity drama but love the idea of being an actor.
I enjoy hunting but hate animal cruelty.
I love pets but would never get a dog.
I enjoy the company of others but love solitude.
I love helping people but hate call centers.
I love the internet but am disgusted by everyone it.

Oh and by the by. Who are you to judge whats right or wrong any more than I am? Who is anyone living on this earth? By what right do they decide for all of us? Its a good thing I don't worship you because otherwise I'd be switching religions. I have my own tastes, my own interests and my own disinterests as well as my own beliefs and disbeliefs as do you and as does everyone else. I'm not going to convince you of anything and you're not going to convince me. You can keep talking but don't expect me to reply. I've said all I need to say and I don't need to explain or justify myself to a faceless entity in front of a computer screen who knows how far away that I will never meet or after this post more than likely have any communication with. I pray that you'll get everything in life that you deserve and nothing more and nothing less.
Typical response of someone putting up a strong front, thinking they have "won" the debate, when instead they are just running away because they cannot defend their position and don't like being disagreed with.
 

Tron-tonian

New member
Mar 19, 2009
244
0
0
Cain_Zeros said:
Well, living in Canada where it's legal, it hasn't affected my life at all.
Hell, my aunts have the longest current marriage amongst my family. Hasn't affected me at all either. My aunts - they get to pay more in taxes (it's actually cheaper to file as a single person, y'know).
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
Kids? So, if having a gay child is a "freak"(drop the connotations of the word, i have no better to describe what I mean) occurance, at around 5% I believe, and you have more than one, aren't the odds shit for that?

It's made out to be a d20 roll every time on birth

Makes me think that the environment plays at least some part in determining someone's eventual sexual identity.

I need a lot of statistical data, though, to identify this, but right now, it's looking like the odds of two gay children are higher than 1/2500

Please, correct me with stats if I'm wrong, I'm a hardcore libertarian, not trying to argue against personal choice, just the argument that it's purely genetic random chance.

I initially quoted someone who i thought had multiple gay children, it was tongue in cheek, so it's kinda confused at the start.
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
jboking said:
Carlston said:
So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.
What I just read was gay marriage could solve overpopulation by encouraging closeted me to break out of their false relationships and stop producing fucking children.
Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.
Then the same should be done for straight couples. Until you have a kid, no tax breaks. I know approximately 4 straight married couples that do not have children and have no interest in having children, yet still get the benefits of the tax break. That would be unjust, don't you think?
Thing is the married tax break is still thinking a woman won't be working, and in this day in age they sure hell can and do... so it's out date so your solution might very well be sound. But then again people having kids just for a tax breaks a bad idea...remember the welfare problems...
 

Luke5515

New member
Aug 25, 2008
1,197
0
0
Well my math teacher might get married.
Actually, I'm not sure if he has a significant other.
That's about maybe it.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Baneat said:
Kids? So, if having a gay child is a "freak"(drop the connotations of the word, i have no better to describe what I mean) occurance, at around 5% I believe, and you have more than one, aren't the odds shit for that?

It's made out to be a d20 roll every time on birth

Makes me think that the environment plays at least some part in determining someone's eventual sexual identity.

I need a lot of statistical data, though, to identify this, but right now, it's looking like the odds of two gay children are higher than 1/2500

Please, correct me with stats if I'm wrong, I'm a hardcore libertarian, not trying to argue against personal choice, just the argument that it's purely genetic random chance.

I initially quoted someone who i thought had multiple gay children, it was tongue in cheek, so it's kinda confused at the start.
Replace freak occurrence with "not the norm" or "rare". And it's not that rare, when you look at it.

We will never know the exact number of LGBT citizens in the world, because that is something that can't really be proven without people admitting it in one way or another, and a lot of people are uncomfortable and unwilling to do so. Also, a lot of people don't actually realize their sexuality until their later years. Most guesstimates have it at 6-12%.

Sexual orientation is not purely genetic, and genetics don't work the way you described. Just because one kid is gay, doesn't mean every other kid a mom/dad produce also end up gay. However, it is known that the more kids one has, the higher chance one of the kids will be gay. Also, that twins have a higher chance to be duel gay that other kids.

http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/06/30/genetics-and-environment-shape-sexual-orientation/2522.html

Read and learn.
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
101flyboy said:
Baneat said:
Kids? So, if having a gay child is a "freak"(drop the connotations of the word, i have no better to describe what I mean) occurance, at around 5% I believe, and you have more than one, aren't the odds shit for that?

It's made out to be a d20 roll every time on birth

Makes me think that the environment plays at least some part in determining someone's eventual sexual identity.

I need a lot of statistical data, though, to identify this, but right now, it's looking like the odds of two gay children are higher than 1/2500

Please, correct me with stats if I'm wrong, I'm a hardcore libertarian, not trying to argue against personal choice, just the argument that it's purely genetic random chance.

I initially quoted someone who i thought had multiple gay children, it was tongue in cheek, so it's kinda confused at the start.
Replace freak occurrence with "not the norm" or "rare". And it's not that rare, when you look at it.

We will never know the exact number of LGBT citizens in the world, because that is something that can't really be proven without people admitting it in one way or another, and a lot of people are uncomfortable and unwilling to do so. Also, a lot of people don't actually realize their sexuality until their later years. Most guesstimates have it at 6-12%.

Sexual orientation is not purely genetic, and genetics don't work the way you described. Just because one kid is gay, doesn't mean every other kid a mom/dad produce also end up gay. However, it is known that the more kids one has, the higher chance one of the kids will be gay. Also, that twins have a higher chance to be duel gay that other kids.

http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/06/30/genetics-and-environment-shape-sexual-orientation/2522.html

Read and learn.
I've been told more than once that it was pure random chance every time, and there is no environmental component to it whatsoever. I didn't believe it though, thanks for some form of evidence.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Carlston said:
jboking said:
Carlston said:
So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.
What I just read was gay marriage could solve overpopulation by encouraging closeted me to break out of their false relationships and stop producing fucking children.
Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.
Then the same should be done for straight couples. Until you have a kid, no tax breaks. I know approximately 4 straight married couples that do not have children and have no interest in having children, yet still get the benefits of the tax break. That would be unjust, don't you think?
Thing is the married tax break is still thinking a woman won't be working, and in this day in age they sure hell can and do... so it's out date so your solution might very well be sound. But then again people having kids just for a tax breaks a bad idea...remember the welfare problems...
Since procreation in itself is not in any way a requirement for marriage, any debate on the subject whatsoever is irrelevant.
 

jboking

New member
Oct 10, 2008
2,694
0
0
Carlston said:
jboking said:
Carlston said:
So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.
What I just read was gay marriage could solve overpopulation by encouraging closeted me to break out of their false relationships and stop producing fucking children.
Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.
Then the same should be done for straight couples. Until you have a kid, no tax breaks. I know approximately 4 straight married couples that do not have children and have no interest in having children, yet still get the benefits of the tax break. That would be unjust, don't you think?
Thing is the married tax break is still thinking a woman won't be working, and in this day in age they sure hell can and do... so it's out date so your solution might very well be sound. But then again people having kids just for a tax breaks a bad idea...remember the welfare problems...
Right, and gay couples adopting a ridiculous number of kids for the tax break is a bad idea too. Instead, we could recognize that the new tax break is simply for being married and give it to every married couple no matter the sex of the partners.
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
101flyboy said:
Carlston said:
jboking said:
Carlston said:
So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.
What I just read was gay marriage could solve overpopulation by encouraging closeted me to break out of their false relationships and stop producing fucking children.
Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.
Then the same should be done for straight couples. Until you have a kid, no tax breaks. I know approximately 4 straight married couples that do not have children and have no interest in having children, yet still get the benefits of the tax break. That would be unjust, don't you think?
Thing is the married tax break is still thinking a woman won't be working, and in this day in age they sure hell can and do... so it's out date so your solution might very well be sound. But then again people having kids just for a tax breaks a bad idea...remember the welfare problems...
Since procreation in itself is not in any way a requirement for marriage, any debate on the subject whatsoever is irrelevant.
Wrong as the laws of modern marriage were not written for love, or the requirement of children. It was written for the chance of a potential increased population hence work force. Check history on after war baby booms, the nuclear family and all that. You don't have to procreate, but same time they also discourage same sex marriages because if it is already a social taboo and this is what you "need" to be in societies eye...

Religion did it for fresh recruits in it's holy wars, lowing the changes of inscet, disease, even making sex a sin so people just didn't hump all day. In a sad twisted manner the form of control it's a matter of accepting why it was made, the situations of the time ect.

So today... it is relevant since marriage in the modern world is still from the old world. A pointless fear of homosexuals, the want to have children born 20 year later ready for the work place or war to replace the old/dead. And no matter how we pretend we are better than that.... well nothing gets done.

So make the changes relevant to the modern age, and make the old people who write the laws understand we just don't live in times that require fear mongering over population, and the world will not shut down tomorrow because everyone just stayed home having sex...

You'd be amazed how caveman like some of the law makers of today thinking is...

The question is, how do you change it constructively?
 

Carlston

New member
Apr 8, 2008
1,554
0
0
jboking said:
Carlston said:
jboking said:
Carlston said:
So least this nation, get married, don't have 20 kids you don't support around the states, keep one mate and have 2-3 kids. You get tax breaks and share benefits of the medical plans ect.

Gay couple. No self child production with out outside medical or adoption. Not helping build the populace.
What I just read was gay marriage could solve overpopulation by encouraging closeted me to break out of their false relationships and stop producing fucking children.
Want the same tax breaks? Adopt a kid as those tax breaks are for families that should grow and it would help the orphans.
Then the same should be done for straight couples. Until you have a kid, no tax breaks. I know approximately 4 straight married couples that do not have children and have no interest in having children, yet still get the benefits of the tax break. That would be unjust, don't you think?
Thing is the married tax break is still thinking a woman won't be working, and in this day in age they sure hell can and do... so it's out date so your solution might very well be sound. But then again people having kids just for a tax breaks a bad idea...remember the welfare problems...
Right, and gay couples adopting a ridiculous number of kids for the tax break is a bad idea too. Instead, we could recognize that the new tax break is simply for being married and give it to every married couple no matter the sex of the partners.
Guess helping out one kid is just to much then?
Then again families without kids tax break is nothing, with kid it's like 3k
Sure give everyone the same normal tax break, no kids no bigger one.
 

101flyboy

New member
Jul 11, 2010
649
0
0
Baneat said:
101flyboy said:
Baneat said:
Kids? So, if having a gay child is a "freak"(drop the connotations of the word, i have no better to describe what I mean) occurance, at around 5% I believe, and you have more than one, aren't the odds shit for that?

It's made out to be a d20 roll every time on birth

Makes me think that the environment plays at least some part in determining someone's eventual sexual identity.

I need a lot of statistical data, though, to identify this, but right now, it's looking like the odds of two gay children are higher than 1/2500

Please, correct me with stats if I'm wrong, I'm a hardcore libertarian, not trying to argue against personal choice, just the argument that it's purely genetic random chance.

I initially quoted someone who i thought had multiple gay children, it was tongue in cheek, so it's kinda confused at the start.
Replace freak occurrence with "not the norm" or "rare". And it's not that rare, when you look at it.

We will never know the exact number of LGBT citizens in the world, because that is something that can't really be proven without people admitting it in one way or another, and a lot of people are uncomfortable and unwilling to do so. Also, a lot of people don't actually realize their sexuality until their later years. Most guesstimates have it at 6-12%.

Sexual orientation is not purely genetic, and genetics don't work the way you described. Just because one kid is gay, doesn't mean every other kid a mom/dad produce also end up gay. However, it is known that the more kids one has, the higher chance one of the kids will be gay. Also, that twins have a higher chance to be duel gay that other kids.

http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/06/30/genetics-and-environment-shape-sexual-orientation/2522.html

Read and learn.
I've been told more than once that it was pure random chance every time, and there is no environmental component to it whatsoever. I didn't believe it though, thanks for some form of evidence.
Your welcome! It's not necessarily random chance, because it's not like people just become gay or become straight, but it's not environmental either. There are a few components, biological factors, hormonal factors, some genetic factors. The brain and sexuality itself is too complex for it to be explained away so simply.
 

ElTigreSantiago

New member
Apr 23, 2009
875
0
0
I totally support gay rights, and it would only affect me in that it would make me happier. I would have more faith in humanity. And I would love to see the looks on all the christians' faces...
 

Memor-X

New member
Oct 3, 2010
55
0
0
i live in Australia and i think i heard that this was going to be reviewed (along with the R Rating for games at last), as far as i know most of the debate has been because marriage is defined as the union between a man and a woman.........now if my knowledgeable of hypocritical phantom worshiper books which contradicts itself on every page is right they have this meaning of marriage and in Australia, all the opposition to gay marriage has been from religious groups

now if you read the bible, yes gays will go to hell, but then again following the bible will take you to hell as half of it tells you not to do stuff or go to hell and the other half says for you to do that stuff or go to hell for not doing it, but remember that god created man and free will for man, for him to say that people born gay will go to hell or going gay will send you to hell makes him hypocritical

to have things of the heart bound and forbidden by the government only because the preachers think it goes against what they stand for is crap, if priests don't like to host marriage ceremonies for gays in the house of god, then don't, send them to someone who will, since the only thing official in marriage is just some paper work, the rest is the celebration with friends and family that you found the one you love that dearly that you want to spend the rest of your life with them, it should not matter if your strait or gay, feeling are feelings and that should be shared

and just to note, i'm not gay or have any gay friends, i fine with gays and all, after all, the lady Minda does say "For he who rejects without understanding, may he be sent to my realm and be kicked and stabbed repeatedly for being a self centered junkass"
 

MikeOfThunder

New member
Jul 11, 2009
436
0
0
It would effect me as much as this:

Me: "So your married?"
Guy: "Yeahh... its awesome!"
Me: "Whats her name?"
Guy: "Err... Ben"
Me: "Ohhhhh fair play" *Pull out gun*

So not at all.