www.ditl.org

I'm a supporter of gay marriage - as well as thinking that it is right and proper, I think it's simply an idea whose time has come, and is essentially inevitable.

Do we have anybody here who thinks differently? I've never heard anybody give good arguments against gay marriage, so if we have folks ho have some I'd be interested to discuss it.

Even most of the people who are against it, IMHO, don't have a good argument. They have bumper sticker phrases like "sanctity of marriage" or "family values." I have not really ever encountered anyone who put forth any respectable argument against it; for most people the "ick, I don't like it" reaction is reason enough to oppose it legally. That, and innuendos and shared biases that gay people are somehow inherently destructive, immoral, or out to corrupt society in some way, and thus should simply be opposed on everything. Doing otherwise would set the impression that society "accepts" this behavior.

GrahamKennedy wrote:I'm a supporter of gay marriage - as well as thinking that it is right and proper, I think it's simply an idea whose time has come, and is essentially inevitable.

Do we have anybody here who thinks differently? I've never heard anybody give good arguments against gay marriage, so if we have folks ho have some I'd be interested to discuss it.

New York just legalized it, and I couldn't be happier that people who actually love one another can finally get all the benefits and privileges "normal" married couples do. I really can't see any valid argument against it.

Now, if they'd just work on legalizing a few... other things, I'd be really happy...

New York just legalized it, and I couldn't be happier that people who actually love one another can finally get all the benefits and privileges "normal" married couples do. I really can't see any valid argument against it.

Now, if they'd just work on legalizing a few... other things, I'd be really happy...

Good for you/your State, Tsuki. Heck I don't even know where you live, are you in NY presently? Or did you just mention that as a news item? At any rate, I think sometimes people who don't like gay people view it as giving them "benefits and privileges." I view it more in terms of ending a second class citizen status for someone just because they don't share the mainstream's sexual preferences. Of course that seems semantical but I think people are more resistant to the idea of what they perceive as "giving rights", until you explain to them that in fact what you're doing is ending an unjust withholding of equal rights, which is precisely what has been going on in the U.S.

I guess I worded that badly, or something. I meant that they'd finally recieve the same treatment as everyone else. Gay and lesbian couples who've been together for decades can't even visit each other in the hospital, for f*ck's sake. It's a complete violation of constitutional civil rights.

I live in Houston, Texas. Not likely that we'll see a major shift in opinion about the subject here any time soon, though it's the Christians, not the rednecks who are more influential in maintaining policies like that. And, other things that should be legal...

I'm all for gay marriages, and everything that goes with it (like gay divorces). If they love each other, or for whatever other reasons they're getting married, why stop them? It's not like stopping them from getting married is going to stop them from being gay.

I'm for it, for obvious reasons.
Really, the whole "sanctity of marriage" group are on a par with those claiming that modern society is going to bring the Armaggedon down on us all.

Yeah, like one day, god is going to wake up and decide we're too immoral to exist. If that is the case, what's it waiting for? A worldwide swinger orgy? What about all the truly immoral things going on daily that haven't brought it's wrath? If genocide and torture and rape and senseless murders aren't enough to draw it's judgement, then I don't imagine anything would.

If the holocaust didn't bring God's wrath down on the Nazis, then it's hard to imagine what possibly could bring his wrath down on anybody.

It's almost as if he didn't actually exist... in fact it's exactly like he doesn't exist.

GrahamKennedy wrote:If the holocaust didn't bring God's wrath down on the Nazis, then it's hard to imagine what possibly could bring his wrath down on anybody.

It's almost as if he didn't actually exist... in fact it's exactly like he doesn't exist.

Or, at the very least, doesn't give a sh*t about general human affairs one way or the other.

Ah, the problem of evil. He can help, and chooses not to, in which case he's not omnibenevolent. Or he can't help, in which case he's not omnipotent. Or he doesn't realise there is a problem, in which case he's not omniscient.

Still a puzzler for the believers.

GrahamKennedy wrote:Ah, the problem of evil. He can help, and chooses not to, in which case he's not omnibenevolent. Or he can't help, in which case he's not omnipotent. Or he doesn't realise there is a problem, in which case he's not omniscient.

Still a puzzler for the believers.

No doubt. If it exists, it is certainly not omnibenevolent (is that a word, or did you coin that there, GK?), and true omnipotence is precluded by free will. Two strikes for the traditionally interpreted belief in a higher power.

As for whether it could help, I believe it could, but if it does, it sure chooses beneficiaries arbitrarily.

For reference I think the national discourse has moved on from "gays can't see each other in the hospital" to debating whether to have "civil unions" or actually let them get "married" the only difference being a word. Not that some people wouldn't like to not see civil unions either, but I think everyone realizes that position isn't going to hold.

I think people against gay marriage are mostly scared. Homosexuality doesn't seem to be a simple binary state. There are bisexuals, and beyond that there seems to be a spectrum. And there is whatever went down in Greece, unless you believe for a certain period of time there was a flourishing of a gay/bisexual gene that since went recesive.

So they are scared their kid might be bi, or a little gay, and would chose to go that way.

Some have the religion thing. And genuinly believe it is an inherently imoral practice. Simple as that. Some more are probably Christians not opposed to it, but they feel the anti Christian assault that tends to come up, as in this thread, with the subject. And of course there is the perceived (and I think somewhat factual) rampant promiscuity etc associated. They begin to fear the LGBTA community really does hate them whether they support gay marriage or not.

Others fear being the new members of the second class. Honestly sometimes Ifeel this. Having a daughter is FREAKING HARD. Especially at my age. Granted I could have just told my wife to let her ovaries rot and we'll just adopt when we're finally well off. But that would involve a lot of crying. Also a lot of people wind up with kids they didn't plan on. Yeah Yeah abortions. Well support that being legal or not it isn't just something to go out and do before going to the movies.

Anyway the point is all other things being equal I'd expect gays to make more money and have more power than straight couples. So there is some fear of winding up outside the gay equivalent of the "old boys club".

Now I don't know how valid or not those concerns are. Nor is it fair to deny others equality because you fear it'll put you at a disadvantage. But I think those are the emotions and the reasons.

Tsukiyumi wrote:I guess I worded that badly, or something. I meant that they'd finally recieve the same treatment as everyone else. Gay and lesbian couples who've been together for decades can't even visit each other in the hospital, for f*ck's sake. It's a complete violation of constitutional civil rights.

I live in Houston, Texas. Not likely that we'll see a major shift in opinion about the subject here any time soon, though it's the Christians, not the rednecks who are more influential in maintaining policies like that. And, other things that should be legal...

No not at all, you worded it very well. I just took the phrase you use and twisted it into what the anti-gay crowd perceives all of this as... "special rights" for gay people. The problem with that is that what they call "special rights" are things everyone else takes for granted: that you won't be beaten down on the street with a lead pipe JUST because of who or what you are, that you can visit a dying or sick life partner in the hospital, that if you have a child together the surviving partner has rights as a parent, that if you own a house together and one partner dies the other can't be evicted by the dead partner's vindictive family, etc. It really is basically second class citizen status for millions of Americans out there, and it's been lawful for far too long.

Tsukiyumi wrote:

GrahamKennedy wrote:Ah, the problem of evil. He can help, and chooses not to, in which case he's not omnibenevolent. Or he can't help, in which case he's not omnipotent. Or he doesn't realise there is a problem, in which case he's not omniscient.

Still a puzzler for the believers.

No doubt. If it exists, it is certainly not omnibenevolent (is that a word, or did you coin that there, GK?), and true omnipotence is precluded by free will. Two strikes for the traditionally interpreted belief in a higher power.

As for whether it could help, I believe it could, but if it does, it sure chooses beneficiaries arbitrarily.

No, it's a real word. Or at least it's one I've seen used many times!

These questions are of course highly hypothetical for me; I see no reason to think there is a god there at all. I am with Richard Dawkins when he says "In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."