Poll: Gay Marriage

[Buccura]

I'm bisexual so of course I say it should be legal.

 

[Lightnr]

[

New research into the human genome is now supporting the theory that there is a biological component to homosexuality. The most likely culprit is a DNA sequence during the maturation of the fetus in the womb becoming conflicted and wiring the brain of the fetus incorrectly, forcing it to be attracted to the same gender instead of the opposite. I'm confident that within the next fifty years we will know, without a shadow of a doubt, exactly what causes homosexuality. Then we have to deal with the whack-jobs trying to fix it, but that's for another discussion.

Legalizing gay marriage will not make anyone gay because homosexuality is a BORN trait not a learned one.

Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as humanity has done with any other mutation/disorder that are curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

To illustrate my point better:
Say I am a new breed of many people that like to take dumps outdoors. The police catch me and fine me and beat me up. I lobby and get rights and now am free to take dumps in the outdoors. However now I am not satisfied and I continue to pursue my cause. I want to be able to take dumps not just in the woods but were other people who are not like me gather, say public transport. Are people ok to be against that? Will I be "free" enough only when I am able to take a dump on the president's desk without anyone saying anything?

The difference is this.

Gays do not have sex in the public eye (well, I guess sometimes they do- but those are arrested as they should be for public fornication).

Taking a crap in public disturbs actually effects others (indecent exposer, unsanitary, smells bad).

Actually, as I illustrated in my previous post, it will affect others. Not in the same way, of course, but that's why it's an analogy: it's not the same, it's simply similar in application and concept.

How would it effect others. I fail to see that illustrated in the post that I quoted. I may have missed another post in which you laid out your argument- but I didn't see it either way.

Check out what I wrote earlier. Societal acceptance of anything affects others. Look at evolution: regardless of your stance on whether or not it is true, it has unquestionably become something that is forced on people, in that it and it alone is required to learn in school and you are ridiculed and persecuted if you do not believe it. This is how these things always turn out.

Evolution is taught instead of creationism for similar reasons as to why we don't teach the viewpoint that the earth is flat or that the universe is geocentric.

One is science. One isn't. There's nothing wrong with believing creationism. But it's religion and therefore isn't taught because of separation of church and state.

I, myself, would be happy to eventually live in a world were everyone tolerates everyone regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion- whatever. I doubt that will happen though.

That was exactly what I was hoping to avoid: not because I'm not willing to discuss it, but because it's off-topic. But suffice it to say that separation of church and state is a good concept that has been twisted from its original purpose in order to effectively remove the church not just from government, but from the entire society.

Point is, the analogy was meant to say that once a concept is socially accepted, it is forced as the only way of thinking: for instance, if it is socially accepted that gay marriage is no different from heterosexual marriage, those who believe otherwise will be looked down upon (as you can already see on this thread) and their viewpoint will be effectively ignored, something I believe is not a sign of a healthy society.

I guess you do make a good point. While I disagree with you I do believe your opinion should be considered. Everyone has something to bring to the table.

Okay, the respectfulness and calmness displayed in that answer says a lot. Thanks for not being the same as most of the other idiots on the internet.

I try not to start flame wars as I stated in the OP. They won't accomplish anything.

Thank you for your respect as well.

 

[Ninja_X]

To be honest, this thread will go no-where new and will give you the same insight as all of the other threads about this. People on the Escapist are all fine with gay marriage, yes gays should be allowed to marry, no the country has no right to tell them they can't and yes religion does get in the way as silly as it may be.

Did you seriously just try to quell a discussion by essentially saying "I'm right, everyone else here agrees with me, so why talk about it?"

I do believe that's what he did.

Indeed he did.

How charming.

Yes quite.

Yep

*blows bubbles out of pipe*

*brings out own bubble pipe*

That does seem to be the gist of it my good chap.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

[

New research into the human genome is now supporting the theory that there is a biological component to homosexuality. The most likely culprit is a DNA sequence during the maturation of the fetus in the womb becoming conflicted and wiring the brain of the fetus incorrectly, forcing it to be attracted to the same gender instead of the opposite. I'm confident that within the next fifty years we will know, without a shadow of a doubt, exactly what causes homosexuality. Then we have to deal with the whack-jobs trying to fix it, but that's for another discussion.

Legalizing gay marriage will not make anyone gay because homosexuality is a BORN trait not a learned one.

So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as we (humans) do with any other mutation/disorder that is curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

I'm straight and I would NOT "fix" my child to be straight. I am fine with homosexuality.

 

[Screamarie]

I actually had to a report on this for one of my college goverment classes and I did extensive study on it (15 sources -_- Thank you Mrs. Peterson). Anyways, from what I could find, every single argument against gay marriage is easily debated and abolished by simple common sense. There is no provable reason why gay marriage should be illegal. Knowing this, there is no legal precedent for it to be illegal.

 

[Jindrak]

So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as we (humans) do with any other mutation/disorder that is curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

Though I'm not sure if mutation is the right word, the first theory is correct. The main concern with the new discoveries into homosexuality being inborn is that early tests for homosexuality would be developed which could lead to people aborting children that would grow up to be gay.

Hm, I wonder where Christians would stand on that issue.

Also, the X-Men reference is pretty fitting. X-Men is one giant metaphor for homosexuality, in most respects. A group of people born differently than others and the rest of society hates and fears them, not wanting to give them the same rights. There are then extremists and pacifists on both sides and everything goes screwy.

 

[Sweep117]

1.Q: The Bible!
1.A: First Amendment, blah blah blah, The Bible is full of inherent contradictions and unless we're making it illegal to eat shellfish, you're not allowed to quote from it.

2.Q: It's not natural!
2.A: Over five hundred species of animals have been known to have homosexual pairings, most will do it even with a female of the same species present. One of the species being Primates, you know, our ancestors. Typically the definition of unnatural is not occurring within nature and homosexual behavior occur in nature. By the transitive property, I declare homosexuality, natural.

3.Q: It will destroy our marriages.
3.A: How? No one ever explains how a section of the population getting married will harm their marriage. They just shout it and keep shouting it until I give up, usually.

4.Q: It sickens me!
4.A: PETA sickens me, can I get them outlawed?

5.Q: It will encourage children to be gay!
5.A: No, it won't. New research into the human genome is now supporting the theory that there is a biological component to homosexuality. The most likely culprit is a DNA sequence during the maturation of the fetus in the womb becoming conflicted and wiring the brain of the fetus incorrectly, forcing it to be attracted to the same gender instead of the opposite. I'm confident that within the next fifty years we will know, without a shadow of a doubt, exactly what causes homosexuality. Then we have to deal with the whack-jobs trying to fix it, but that's for another discussion.

I agree with all your arguments except the first. It's pretty clear that if you ever read the Bible, you didn't read much. In the Old Testament(Not "Amendment"), a lot of things are banned. I mean a lot. The Old Testament is, for the lack of a better word, revised in the New Testament. For example, it's perfectly fine for me to eat shellfish but it's still wrong for me to kill. In the New Testament, homosexual acts are deemed sinful.

That being said, I, a born again Christian, think that gay marriage should be legalized. Sure, I believe it to be wrong for one person to marry another person of the same gender but as long as I'm not being made to marry a guy, do what you want. I believe it's wrong to get drunk but I'm not for the illegalization of alcohol.

The only concern I have is something they were considering here in Canada. Making it unlawful for a pastor/priest to refuse to marry a gay couple if it went against his/her beliefs. You can't compromise one person's beliefs to support another's.

I realize that Leviticus is a bad book to quote, as everything you can possibly do is met with death as a punishment, it just illustrates my point best and is a backup to the First Amendment argument. Really I believe that's all that should be required, we don't make laws based on Koran, so we shouldn't make them based on the Bible.

Good point. Laws should be equally respectful of everyone, with no "special treatment" for any group(s) of people.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

To be honest, this thread will go no-where new and will give you the same insight as all of the other threads about this. People on the Escapist are all fine with gay marriage, yes gays should be allowed to marry, no the country has no right to tell them they can't and yes religion does get in the way as silly as it may be.

Did you seriously just try to quell a discussion by essentially saying "I'm right, everyone else here agrees with me, so why talk about it?"

I do believe that's what he did.

Indeed he did.

How charming.

Yes quite.

Yep

*blows bubbles out of pipe*

*brings out own bubble pipe*

That does seem to be the gist of it my good chap.

*bubbles galore and also thinks probably this chain isn't contributing anything useful to the thread so stops. twas fun though.*

 

[Ninja_X]

^XD XD XD

So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as we (humans) do with any other mutation/disorder that is curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

Though I'm not sure if mutation is the right word, the first theory is correct. The main concern with the new discoveries into homosexuality being inborn is that early tests for homosexuality would be developed which could lead to people aborting children that would grow up to be gay.

Hm, I wonder where Christians would stand on that issue.

I think it would put those bunch of hypocrites in a tough spot.

 

[Thaius]

Don't care about gay people or their problems

The whole point of marriage is to have children so you can pass the best genes to the next generation.

I think your mistaking 'marriage' with 'Darwinian evolution.'

Honest mistake.

No

Marriage is just a tool to have children

Our Children will remember us and keep our family name alive. This proves we existed in this world without this majority of us will fade with time.

Gays cannot have children adopting children could work but unfortunately their genes do not belong to them so they can never claim full rights that this is their legacy. Without transferring your own DNA to the future will the next generation remember you? Will History remember you?

Actually, study sociology at all and you will learn that marriage is not a tool to have children: sexual intercourse is a tool to have children: a necessary one. Marriage, on the other hand, is to keep order within that need. Societies have tried allowing completely open sexuality before, and it never works. Marriage is an institution used to create the institution of the family, which many sociologists will tell you is the pillar of any society.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as we (humans) do with any other mutation/disorder that is curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

Though I'm not sure if mutation is the right word, the first theory is correct. The main concern with the new discoveries into homosexuality being inborn is that early tests for homosexuality would be developed which could lead to people aborting children that would grow up to be gay.

Hm, I wonder where Christians would stand on that issue.

Surely all hell would break loose as fundamentalists battle out whether aborting gay babies is murder- since a homosexual "surely he will die" according to Leviticus.

 

[Lightnr]

I'm straight and I would NOT "fix" my child to be straight. I am fine with homosexuality.

Excuse me good sir/mam/lady/zoanoid/nebulus but save claims such as this until you have a child of your own.

 

[Ninja_X]

Am I the only one that is looking forward to getting married for love?

Edit= to a girl

 

[Jindrak]

Am I the only one that is looking forward to getting married for love?

I am! Though I am waiting until I am financially secure before actively searching for a life-long mate.

 

[Versago]

wow, i'm impressed, total rejection of marrige actually rates higher than anti-gay views.
Huzzah for equality

 

[Sweep117]

So it IS a mutation, disease if you will. Think of the word "incorrectly" apply it to biological processes and then think of the words disease and mutation. Totally cool with that. But it would be unfair if gay people go to the XMEN academy free of charge. On a more serious note people who are against Gayness would have a mightily strong argument to "fixing" or "Curing" as we (humans) do with any other mutation/disorder that is curable. I personally see it as an option.. if you have a kid and s/he is found to be gay you have the option in correcting that in the fetus just like you would blindness when the technology is available, and then who amongst straight parents would not "cure" that? And since 99% of babies are born to straight parents we can see where that would lead...

Then there is the alternative of gayness being a choice which I see nothing wrong with. Choices like that are personal and as long as you aren't in denial about your choice and have to guts to stand by it all is cool.

Though I'm not sure if mutation is the right word, the first theory is correct. The main concern with the new discoveries into homosexuality being inborn is that early tests for homosexuality would be developed which could lead to people aborting children that would grow up to be gay.

Hm, I wonder where Christians would stand on that issue.

I'm no expert on human biology or psychology but nothing I've read/heard/watched has even begun to convince me that people are born gay. In fact, I know/have known a few gay people who told me it was their choice. But I reiterate, I'm no expert in this particular field so my opinion doesn't carry much weight.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

I'm straight and I would NOT "fix" my child to be straight. I am fine with homosexuality.

Excuse me good sir/mam/lady/zoanoid/nebulus but save claims such as this until you have a child of your own.

I don't have to have a child to know homosexuality bothers me 0.

 

[Lightnr]

Though I'm not sure if mutation is the right word, the first theory is correct. The main concern with the new discoveries into homosexuality being inborn is that early tests for homosexuality would be developed which could lead to people aborting children that would grow up to be gay.

Hm, I wonder where Christians would stand on that issue.

Also, the X-Men reference is pretty fitting. X-Men is one giant metaphor for homosexuality, in most respects. A group of people born differently than others and the rest of society hates and fears them, not wanting to give them the same rights. There are then extremists and pacifists on both sides and everything goes screwy.

Your replies were very respectful and content filled, thanks. I had a lot of jokes in there mind you. But I am off to bed.

Edit: it would be funny if the only way to deal with a gay fetus would be abortion... it would be funny what the pro life right would do hahahaha.