Gay marriage arguments

[Blackstar the Chakat]

As has been pointed out, civil unions and marriage are identical

Not always. I know during the last election there was a state-level bill that was going to give more rights to civil unions as they are not equal in certain rights to marriage.

And it still doesn't go as far as I suggested since I would have civil unions for other groups too - family, polygamy, whatever

This reminded me of something I've thought many times, how much easier things would be if polygamy was the norm rather then the exception. Wouldn't be as much cheating or broken homes. And I always though monogamy was really selfish.

[Aaron]

As has been pointed out, civil unions and marriage are identical

Not always. I know during the last election there was a state-level bill that was going to give more rights to civil unions as they are not equal in certain rights to marriage.

Yes, yes it doesn't apply to every case.

This reminded me of something I've thought many times, how much easier things would be if polygamy was the norm rather then the exception.

Perhaps.

Wouldn't be as much cheating or broken homes. And I always though monogamy was really selfish.

Seriously monogamy can be very difficult even between people who really are serious about each other. Polgamy would be very difficult to make work, besides seperating the usual BS that goes along with it.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Seriously monogamy can be very difficult even between people who really are serious about each other. Polgamy would be very difficult to make work, besides seperating the usual BS that goes along with it.

You might be suprised. I know several individuals in polgymist relationships that are very happy. An example of the benefits are that Many monogamous relationships are strained because the indiduals don't spend enough time with each other. With multiple partners the chances of spending time with a loved one are increased. It also allows a greater number of resources to be shared in a single household(multiple incomes, additional skills, ect).

[Aaron]

You might be suprised. I know several individuals in polgymist relationships that are very happy. An example of the benefits are that Many monogamous relationships are strained because the indiduals don't spend enough time with each other. With multiple partners the chances of spending time with a loved one are increased. It also allows a greater number of resources to be shared in a single household(multiple incomes, additional skills, ect).

Of course there are ones that work, now can you prove that if polygamy was the norm that it would work across the board? Or better then what the current practice is?

[Blackstar the Chakat]

You might be suprised. I know several individuals in polgymist relationships that are very happy. An example of the benefits are that Many monogamous relationships are strained because the indiduals don't spend enough time with each other. With multiple partners the chances of spending time with a loved one are increased. It also allows a greater number of resources to be shared in a single household(multiple incomes, additional skills, ect).

Of course there are ones that work, now can you prove that if polygamy was the norm that it would work across the board? Or better then what the current practice is?

Since polygamy hasn't been the norm in centuries there would be no way to accuratly prove it at this time. However out of the many poly realtionships I know of only one has ended unhappily.

[Aaron]

Since polygamy hasn't been the norm in centuries there would be no way to accuratly prove it at this time. However out of the many poly realtionships I know of only one has ended unhappily.

And that's balanced out (massively) by the bounty of evidence out of the flyover states that polygamy is a clusterfuck and a hotbed off abuse. Would it work outside of the religious influence, most likely and I suspect that your friends are of that stripe. You'll never sell it to the public though, they'll think Morman's.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Since polygamy hasn't been the norm in centuries there would be no way to accuratly prove it at this time. However out of the many poly realtionships I know of only one has ended unhappily.

And that's balanced out (massively) by the bounty of evidence out of the flyover states that polygamy is a clusterfuck and a hotbed off abuse. Would it work outside of the religious influence, most likely and I suspect that your friends are of that stripe. You'll never sell it to the public though, they'll think Morman's.

Agreed. Morman's have ruined the image of pologamy. Although I will always think monogamy is incredably selfish of people.

[Aaron]

Agreed. Morman's have ruined the image of pologamy. Although I will always think monogamy is incredably selfish of people.

I'm not sure I agree but I support it if it's a healthy relationship. North America doesn't have gender disparity problem like certain parts of the world so it wouldn't have a great impact, too many people on the planet anyway.

[Duskofdead]

But yeah. Organized religion bastards all of us. Gotta just lump everyone in together. Every Christian that goes to church is an Evangelical Babtist who hates gays.

Was this ever said? No, it wasn't. But for political purposes, yes, this is the way organized Christianity is. Whether or not a particular congregation is like that or not is irrelevant. The "Good Christians" that Christians love to point out as not being represented by political Christianity fail, year after year, to reclaim their religion from the people who have hijacked it and give it the bad name. And then just blame a liberal or atheist bias for the bad sentiment about your religion.

[sunnyside]

Was this ever said? No, it wasn't.

You could argue if its been said in this thread but you certainly do like to lump organized Christianity together with the most vocal members that you don't like. Even when you have people like Obama, who are very much Christian and Churchgoing, staring you in the face. I mean if all Christains in the US were the people you don't like there wouldn't even be a democratic party because they'd control 80%+ of the votes. You'd have something like the Conservative and the Fundamentalist parties or something. Remember whenever a state passes a law allowing civil unions or gay marriage it quite possibly means that a MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS many if not most of them in "organized" groups, voted to pass that law. And certainly a sizable minority have to vote it in. Similarly Bill Clinton? Voted in by Christians. If Obama wins? Voted in by Christians.

And again the ELCA Lutherans aren't just a "congregation" they represent a large chunk of Christains in the US. And I'm pretty sure a couple of the others are similar.

It isn't a matter of "reclaiming the religion." The Catholics and the Babtists are their own groups. What, are we going to make it illegal for them to speak freely? Perhaps we should go door to door just to say "hi there, we aren't going door to door to convert you" and then leave? It's just the simple deal that you're stereotyping the whole group by whoever gets on the news most obviously claiming to be part of it. Like if you thought all organized Muslims were terrorists or Jews were all covetous Zionists.

Or I guess like thinking all gays are pedophiles.

The point is that your stereotyping organized Christianity and it seems to be deeply rooted in your head. It isn't doing the LGBTA cause any favors if you're laying into its supporters, and could convince some people to stab them in the back in the ballot box out of spite or because they worry that the LGBTA community is actually "out to get them". Just say fundamentalist Christians or something even more specific like Catholics.

[Aaron]

You could argue if its been said in this thread but you certainly do like to lump organized Christianity together with the most vocal members that you don't like. Even when you have people like Obama, who are very much Christian and Churchgoing, staring you in the face. I mean if all Christains in the US were the people you don't like there wouldn't even be a democratic party because they'd control 80%+ of the votes. You'd have something like the Conservative and the Fundamentalist parties or something. Remember whenever a state passes a law allowing civil unions or gay marriage it quite possibly means that a MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS many if not most of them in "organized" groups, voted to pass that law. And certainly a sizable minority have to vote it in. Similarly Bill Clinton? Voted in by Christians. If Obama wins? Voted in by Christians.

And again the ELCA Lutherans aren't just a "congregation" they represent a large chunk of Christains in the US. And I'm pretty sure a couple of the others are similar.

It isn't a matter of "reclaiming the religion." The Catholics and the Babtists are their own groups. What, are we going to make it illegal for them to speak freely? Perhaps we should go door to door just to say "hi there, we aren't going door to door to convert you" and then leave? It's just the simple deal that you're stereotyping the whole group by whoever gets on the news most obviously claiming to be part of it. Like if you thought all organized Muslims were terrorists or Jews were all covetous Zionists.

Or I guess like thinking all gays are pedophiles.

The point is that your stereotyping organized Christianity and it seems to be deeply rooted in your head. It isn't doing the LGBTA cause any favors if you're laying into its supporters, and could convince some people to stab them in the back in the ballot box out of spite or because they worry that the LGBTA community is actually "out to get them". Just say fundamentalist Christians or something even more specific like Catholics.

FFS, the simple fact is that the public face of American christanity that the world sees is the frothing at the mouth nutcases because their the most vocal. Are there reasonable christians in America? Of course there are, just like there's reasonable muslims in Saudia Arabia. The few ruin it for the majority and it looks to remain that way until they learn to shut up. We shouldn't have to put a bloody disclaimer on our posts because we're offending you, if your secure in your faith than you should be able to take a few knocks.

[Mikey]

Going back a bit - monogamy is selfish? It's one of the biggest sacrifices you can give to someone! BTW, I wouldn't be anywhere NEAR as happy with a polygamous relationship as I am with my marriage.

*mood-lightener* It's hard enough dealing with just one wife...

[Blackstar the Chakat]

Going back a bit - monogamy is selfish? It's one of the biggest sacrifices you can give to someone!

But what if more then one person deserves your love? It seems selfish to choose only one.

BTW, I wouldn't be anywhere NEAR as happy with a polygamous relationship as I am with my marriage.

Well, to each his own of coarse. A matter of personal preference.

*mood-lightener* It's hard enough dealing with just one wife...

That's what co-husbands are for, so they can help you deal with her. It also makes it easier to find a buddy to go golfing or to watch a game.

[sunnyside]

FFS, the simple fact is that the public face of American christanity that the world sees is the frothing at the mouth nutcases because their the most vocal. Are there reasonable christians in America? Of course there are, just like there's reasonable muslims in Saudia Arabia. The few ruin it for the majority and it looks to remain that way until they learn to shut up. We shouldn't have to put a bloody disclaimer on our posts because we're offending you, if your secure in your faith than you should be able to take a few knocks.

I'm more concerned that you have it in your own heads that the majority of Christians in America don't have the LGBTA crushing issues. And that "God hates fags" crowd. While admittedly not small. Is a minority of organized Christian religion. And it isn't that the only good Christian is one that skips church.

It isn't even like in Iran or some such where the populace as a whole keeps in a government that hangs gays. We regularly elect Democrats over here, are passing more civil union type laws, and even the Republican line is softening.

[Aaron]

Chakat, if you don't mind me asking, have you been in an actual relationship before or are you going off watching your parents and friends? Because I think your going to find that things in relationships are alot different than you seem to think they are, the world is alot different as an adult than it is as an eighteen year old.