Gay Marriages

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kianier
Actually... "marriage" was invented and given by God and not by man... it's in the Bible... if you're not Christain then you don't agree, but this is coming from the Christain perspective.

---

But this is a discussion about the legal institution. If a Christian church doesn't want to marry people, fine. How does that have anything to do with the law?

Malvolio, aren't you making a big assumption about marriage? Of course one of the big advantages of marriage is that it can provide a stable environment for children, but is that its only function? To me marriage is more about the couple involved than the children they may potentially have at a later date.

But really this seems semantic to me. There's nothing in your position that suggests a civil union of <i>some</i> kind wouldn't be desirable, one that gives the legal benefits that married, childless couples enjoy.

Quote:

---

I'm not trying to say gays are materialistic like this, but what I am saying is that the sanctity of marriage for the purpose of binding two people together for the reason of raising a family is not served by allowing gays to do this.

---

Marriage is not solely about raising a family. I have an Aunt and Uncle who have never wanted children and have never had children. They have no intention of raising a family. To me, Marriage is solely a stronger bond between two people. A bond that is –suppose- to bind two people for a lifetime. There is simply more power and commitment when someone says, “Here’s my Husband,” then when they say, “Here’s my Boyfriend of 30 years,”.

Regardless of which, Gay couples can and have in the past raised families.

Quote:

---

Yes, there is holy matrimony and lawful matrimony... and who gave us both of these.... God? God says in the bible, Marriage is between man and woman... no man/man not woman/woman.

---

Your argument may hold more weight if you actually quoted directly from the bible.

However, whether or not Marriage was given to us by ‘God’ our State has still officiated and granted special privileges to married couples. Since a married couple is recognized by the state there is no reason why a couple, regardless of their sex, can not be married absent of religion and granted those special privileges therein.

Quote:

---

On a side note though this conversation can probably go on forever...

---

I highly doubt it. I predict that Gay marriages –WILL- become a reality within the semi-near future.

As Wyden said, it’s pretty sad it hasn’t happened already.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Eorick
Unfortunately, this argument is often used as a red herring by conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage and who try to argue that legalizing it would force churches into performing same-sex marriage ceremonies (not that I think you are making this argument, of course).

---

Ah, but see, the opposite is also true. This argument is often turned on its head by liberals who call Christians racist and hatemongering when they express such an opinion. Personally, I think that gays should be free to marry in a non-religious ceremony if they so choose, but churches should not be subjected to heaps of verbal abuse either when they refuse to recognize such marriages.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Malvolio
I don't believe it's fair to give up the sanctity and seriousness of marriage to gays so their rights are equal, but I'm sure if you're gay, you would not at all see it that way, which is understandable. Wanting to be married for the sake of being able to get health insurance like your other married co-workers, whom you have the equal rights of is not a legit cause. I pick health insurance, simply because it's an example of a benefit of marriage that people take for granted. I'm not trying to say gays are materialistic like this, but what I am saying is that the sanctity of marriage for the purpose of binding two people together for the reason of raising a family is not served by allowing gays to do this.

---

Unless I was sorely misled in my biology classes, there's nothing preventing lesbians from having and raising children within a same-sex marriage. There is also nothing preventing gay men from adopting children and raising them within a same-sex marriage. Or maybe marriage should only be reserved for people who are both willing and capable of producing there own progeny without resort to adoption or outside assistance? If that is the case, though, why only subject gays and lesbians to such a restriction? Perhaps heterosexual couples should also be required to provide proof that they both intend to have children within the marriage and that they are both physically capable of doing so.

Quote:

---

I just believe marriage is a socialogical tool to hold back the moral decay of society, and thus it must have sanctity to be able to do so.

---

Heterosexual couples currently have the right to marry for whatever reason they choose. They also have the right to live however they choose once they are married, considering those states with anti-adultery laws no longer enforce them. From a legal perspective, marriage (for heterosexual couples, at least) has long ceased to be the sacrosanct institution that conservatives would try to have us believe it is (and probably never really was such an institution to begin with). Yet, for whatever reasons, people try to argue that somehow allowing same-sex couples to wed would degrade this institutition. I'm still not quite sure how Bill and Bob getting married is supposed to have an effect on the value and worth of the marriage of Charlie Church and his appropriately submissive wife. If you (that's the general you here, not Malvolio in particular) don't believe in same-sex marriages, don't have one. If you believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman who do all their business with the lights out and their nightshirts on, go find yourself an appropriately modest and boring wife. The point is, people decide what works for them and what they want from a marriage. My idea of a good marriage would not be many other Americans' idea of a good marriage, yet as long as I marry someone of the opposite sex, the law doesn't care one bit. Why should choosing to marry someone of the same sex make such a difference?

Gay marriage is a good thing. Why should heterosexuals have to suffer all the pain?

Well the last few posts I don't think are entirely true. Gay marriages who want to have children are missing one entirely powerful factor: A mother figure. I'm not bashing single parents or anything, but it's proven over and over that children do good with both parents around divorced or undivorced, rather than just one.

I know I'll get the posts saying "Why I was brought up by just my dad and I turned out great!" and things along those lines, but as a kid wouldn't you rather have had a mom kiss your bruises then for your dad to yell "Buck up kid! Be a man!" Women just have something men can never have, gay or not gay. The same thing goes for lesbian couples lacking a father figure. The fact is that both parents sexes influence the child to grow up to who they are, and without it it's a whole lot harder..not impossible but I doubt anyone would want to risk their kid growing up to have emotional problems.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sier
I'm not bashing single parents or anything, but it's proven over and over that children do good with both parents around divorced or undivorced, rather than just one.

---

So what does this have to do with gay marriage? One would assume that the child of two gay men who were married would have both parents around. Or do gay people move to opposite sides of the planet when they get married? Sheesh, there's so much I don't know.

Quote:

---

I know I'll get the posts saying "Why I was brought up by just my dad and I turned out great!" and things along those lines, but as a kid wouldn't you rather have had a mom kiss your bruises then for your dad to yell "Buck up kid! Be a man!"

---

So, basically, your basing your opposition on some horribly regressive attitudes about gender roles? Wake up to the 21st Century, man.

Quote:

---

The fact is that both parents sexes influence the child to grow up to who they are, and without it it's a whole lot harder..not impossible but I doubt anyone would want to risk their kid growing up to have emotional problems.

---

Both parents genders do have some influence on children, particularly with regards to providing children with gender role models. However, the more research that is done in this area, the more researchers are beginning to discover that there are usually deeper and more complex reasons for the "problems" experienced by children raised in single-parent households. For example, researches have long known that girls raised without a father were statistically more likely to become sexually active at a younger age. More recent research though has shown that this is not a direct result of not having a father to provide some sort of positive role, but has more to do with the mother's lifestyle (i.e., single mothers tend to have more sexual partners than mothers in committed relationships). Obviously, this wouldn't even be an issue in a two mother family.

Most importantly though, your arguments fail to address the issue of equality. Your arguments would still hold people seeking same-sex marriages to a higher standard than those seeking a more traditional marriage arrangement. Heterosexual couples are allowed to marry and have children without ever providing any guarantee that the children will be raised in a two parent family. And, in fact, close to half of them will not provide such a family for at least part of their children's lives.

Personally, I have absolutely no problems with Gay Marriages, but I voted for the second option because I think it's the only way that a conclusion that is satisfactory to all sides could occur.

I think that there should be a union that the government and all businesses recognize such as a DP (domestic partner), or whatever. These are people who are legally joined as a unit. The word "marriage" is what is being used now, but that could easily be changed.

Then, marriages can be considered religious, and if a religion refuses to acknowledge "gay marriage", then the couple should just dump that church and find one that IS accepting.

Eorick, find me a man who can do every single job that a mother can do. Men and women deserve equal rights like you said yes, but they are hardly equal. It's why women don't play football, and men don't do ballet. Yes, there are exceptions but, I've never seen a male kindergarden teacher, or a female nfl star. Want to know why? Each do have a set of qualities from those special chemicals called estrogen and testosterone. They help define who we are, and while there are exceptions, males tend to be more aggresive and domanding while women tend to be more sensitive and caring when it comes to parenting. Even if a gay fathering couple comes close..they won't ever fill that gap.

Take any given person who's come from a family with a husband and a wife. If they have a son, the son takes an enourmous amount of qualities from the father, and the daughter tends to take many of the qualities from the mother. If you are in a same sex marriage, lets say two guys..where does a girl get the qualities from? You see, she is stuck without a role model aside from TV, friends, and her dads. And I would probably myself have hated being brought up by two mothers, I wouldn't be remotely close to the person I am today.

What you are preaching isn't equal rights, you are preaching that its ok to take one role model out of the picture, and a parent is the most powerful role model you will ever have.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sier
It's why women don't play football, and men don't do ballet. Yes, there are exceptions but, I've never seen a male kindergarden teacher, or a female nfl star. Want to know why? Each do have a set of qualities from those special chemicals called estrogen and testosterone. They help define who we are, and while there are exceptions, males tend to be more aggresive and domanding while women tend to be more sensitive and caring when it comes to parenting.

---

Actually, these qualities have nothing (or at least, very little) to do with out biological makeup (including hormones). It's all about how we're socialized as children. Women are taught by their parents, friends, media, etc that they should be motherly, caring, domestic, sensitive, etc. Men are taught by society to be agressive, goal-oriented, physical, etc. It's not that men are naturally better at this, but rather they're taught from day one to develop those qualities. In fact, there's been some studies recently that suggest the reason women are more talkative and have better communication skills is because they're talked to more as infants.

Your next paragraph even discusses this whole socialization process!! That's not biology at all!

Now then, as far as the issue of gay marriage goes, I have mixed feeling regarding it. I find the argument that a child with two parents of the same sex is going to be ill-developed because they lack a parental figure of the other sex a bit problematic. 1) It's not necessarily the parents that will fail to raise them as much as it is the rest of society giving the kid grief that would cause any emotional problems. And 2) Just from the gay and lesbian friends I've been around, they don't exactly fit the typical gender roles anyhow. So therefore, a gay or lesbian couple would probably possess enough of both gender role traits to adequately raise a child (if adequately raising them involves the expression of these traits, anyhow).

Okay, so given that, I think gay/lesbian couple can raise children. And let's face it, marriage has historically been used as a means of promoting child-rearing. The Roman Emperor Augstus rewarded families with several children and even penalized unmarried persons. Gee, we don't do that anymore today do we? However, I do agree that in today's society, such means of insuring future generations are raised are not *quite* as necessary so I can't see the issue of children really even being a concern in gay/lesbian marriages.