Question for those opposed to same sex marriage

[LightHorseman]

OK, so I'm sure its been asked before, but since the subject seems to be able to wander away from the OP pretty quickly, I thought I'd try to ask something highly specific, in the hope of getting a specific answer.

I'm not asking for Biblical justification, I'm not interested in a semantic debate over what is "natural" or not, heck, for the purpose of this discussion, we can even take it as a given that homosexual marriage is wrong so far as God is concerned.

But here is the question... Again and again we hear that the reason secular homosexual marriage can't be allowed is because it would "damage marriage" or "devalue the institution" or similar. So, what I'd really like to hear is an explanation of how, exactly, homosexuals getting married would have any impact on anyone else's relationship?

So, to people who are against recognition of same sex marriage, imagine that same sex marriage will be recognised by the secular government in your jurisdiction tomorrow. From tommorrow onwards, homosexuals can get married and have the exact same rights and responsibilities as any heterosexual married couple. So... how will this in anyway effect your marriage, or your future marriage?

 

[sidhe]

I just want to do this...

*Ripple of Evil*

If gay marriage is allowed, that means lesbian marriage is allowed. Some of these lesbian couples will be hot lesbian couples. Heterosexual men will be so distracted by the increased number of public hot lesbian couples that they will forget about their own relationships. Marriages will crumble, and as their personal lives erode, so will the professional lives of countless heterosexuals, creating a vacuum of power that will be filled by the more stable homosexuals. An increase in the number of homosexuals in positions of political power will lead to a liberalization of government policies, including more protections for animals as part of anti-animal abuse legislation. This will lead to greater genetic diversity among the wild boar population in America. These boars will begin to evolve at an accelerated rate, accentuating the already considerable intelligence of the Sus genus. Ultimately, we will be subjugated by our new porcine masters who will consider our ribs a delicacy and craft shoes from our hides. I, for one, take comfort in this.

*End Ripple of Evil*

I'll be impressed if any serious response to this thread makes even as much sense as that did.

 

[LightHorseman]

I just want to do this...

*Ripple of Evil*

If gay marriage is allowed, that means lesbian marriage is allowed. Some of these lesbian couples will be hot lesbian couples. Heterosexual men will be so distracted by the increased number of public hot lesbian couples that they will forget about their own relationships. Marriages will crumble, and as their personal lives erode, so will the professional lives of countless heterosexuals, creating a vacuum of power that will be filled by the more stable homosexuals. An increase in the number of homosexuals in positions of political power will lead to a liberalization of government policies, including more protections for animals as part of anti-animal abuse legislation. This will lead to greater genetic diversity among the wild boar population in America. These boars will begin to evolve at an accelerated rate, accentuating the already considerable intelligence of the Sus genus. Ultimately, we will be subjugated by our new porcine masters who will consider our ribs a delicacy and craft shoes from our hides. I, for one, take comfort in this.

*End Ripple of Evil*

I'll be impressed if any serious response to this thread makes even as much sense as that did.

I am sincerely hoping we will get a serious response or two. It was a serious question.

 

[Verv]

So, what I'd really like to hear is an explanation of how, exactly, homosexuals getting married would have any impact on anyone else's relationship?

It will not have an effect on anyone else's relationship but rather an impact on society as a whole.

By condoning and normalizing abnormal behaviors the society begins losing cohesiveness and a sense of common morality and culture; the society thus begins losing its collective identity.

A society who has lost its collective identity is a society poised to go the way of Carthage, Rome & the Islamic Caliphate.

If you would like me to elaborate. please say.

 

[quatona]

OK, so I'm sure its been asked before, but since the subject seems to be able to wander away from the OP pretty quickly, I thought I'd try to ask something highly specific, in the hope of getting a specific answer.

I'm not asking for Biblical justification, I'm not interested in a semantic debate over what is "natural" or not, heck, for the purpose of this discussion, we can even take it as a given that homosexual marriage is wrong so far as God is concerned.

But here is the question... Again and again we hear that the reason secular homosexual marriage can't be allowed is because it would "damage marriage" or "devalue the institution" or similar. So, what I'd really like to hear is an explanation of how, exactly, homosexuals getting married would have any impact on anyone else's relationship?

So, to people who are against recognition of same sex marriage, imagine that same sex marriage will be recognised by the secular government in your jurisdiction tomorrow. From tommorrow onwards, homosexuals can get married and have the exact same rights and responsibilities as any heterosexual married couple. So... how will this in anyway effect your marriage, or your future marriage?

This is how I can imagine they feel about it:
Suppose you are an actor and you receive an Oscar. You are proud and feel it is the recognition of your great performance.
Next, you notice that someone who you feel acts very poorly has received an Oscar, as well.
This certainly would devalue the meaning of an Oscar, in your perception.

 

[Verv]

This is how I can imagine they feel about it:
Suppose you are an actor and you receive an Oscar. You are proud and feel it is the recognition of your great performance.
Next, you notice that someone who you feel acts very poorly has received an Oscar, as well.
This certainly would devalue the meaning of an Oscar, in your perception.

A very objective analysis and I will reputation you for this.

 

[Ellinas]

I just want to do this...

*Ripple of Evil*

If gay marriage is allowed, that means lesbian marriage is allowed. Some of these lesbian couples will be hot lesbian couples. Heterosexual men will be so distracted by the increased number of public hot lesbian couples that they will forget about their own relationships. Marriages will crumble, and as their personal lives erode, so will the professional lives of countless heterosexuals, creating a vacuum of power that will be filled by the more stable homosexuals. An increase in the number of homosexuals in positions of political power will lead to a liberalization of government policies, including more protections for animals as part of anti-animal abuse legislation. This will lead to greater genetic diversity among the wild boar population in America. These boars will begin to evolve at an accelerated rate, accentuating the already considerable intelligence of the Sus genus. Ultimately, we will be subjugated by our new porcine masters who will consider our ribs a delicacy and craft shoes from our hides. I, for one, take comfort in this.

*End Ripple of Evil*

I'll be impressed if any serious response to this thread makes even as much sense as that did.

Only lipstick lesbians are hot. The Oregon butch lesbians are as attractive as bathing in lava!

 

[quatona]

By condoning and normalizing abnormal behaviors the society begins losing cohesiveness and a sense of common morality and culture; the society thus begins losing its collective identity.

Then again the mere fact that people have "abnormal" desires, perform "abnormal" behaviours and seek the condoning and normalizing of "abnormal" desires and behaviours already would already mean that society has lost its "collective identity".
If a considerable percentage of society wants "abnormal" behaviour to be accepted, and a considerable percentage of society disapproves of it, the "collective identity" has already gone, either way.
Our societal systems work by majority vote - and this renders the concept of a "collective identity" obsolete.

 

[AllForJesus]

Birth, the continuity of the race

 

[Ellinas]

I wonder what the proponents of same sex marriage think of the following:

Child marriages
<staff edit>
paedophile marriages

Basically any sexual tendency could demand the right to marriage! 60 year old marrying 12 year old sort of thing.

What you do in bed should have nothing to do with marriage. Heck if gays want to be married then by all means let them, but Adopting children is a NO! NO!

Don't mess with a child's psychology!

 

[moonkitty]

A very objective analysis and I will reputation you for this.

So getting married = winning a prestigious award?

So does that mean Briney Spear's little--what was it 24 or 48 hour (?) marriage in Las Vegas means she is in the same class as all other married couples? She should get a gold star too because she married a male?

But a homosexual couple who has been together for many, many years getting married some how cheapens a heterosexual marriage? The longtime life partners getting married are gong to somehow put a tarnish on Spear's little gold star there? OH NOES!

Any two village idiots can figure out how to get married, so I do not see how that means that marriage is some sort of prestigious anything. Staying together for a life time, now that should be recognized--whether homo/heterosexual.

Winning an award is, usually, for past deeds--not banking on the possibility of maybe being able to stay together for longer than a couple of months.

 

[LightHorseman]

It will not have an effect on anyone else's relationship but rather an impact on society as a whole.

By condoning and normalizing abnormal behaviors the society begins losing cohesiveness and a sense of common morality and culture; the society thus begins losing its collective identity.

A society who has lost its collective identity is a society poised to go the way of Carthage, Rome & the Islamic Caliphate.

If you would like me to elaborate. please say.

Yes please.

How does homosexual marriage make society any less cohesive?

 

[LightHorseman]

This is how I can imagine they feel about it:
Suppose you are an actor and you receive an Oscar. You are proud and feel it is the recognition of your great performance.
Next, you notice that someone who you feel acts very poorly has received an Oscar, as well.
This certainly would devalue the meaning of an Oscar, in your perception.

In your analogy, you cite the acting ability of the newcommer. What about homosexual marriage makes you think homosexuals would "act very poorly"?

I mean, what makes a successful marriage? Love, care, commitment, mutual interests? What makes you think homosexuals are incapable of achieving these?

Further, the difference between marriage and the oscars is that there is no merrit involved in marriage. I would contend that Vritney Spears 30 hour "just for fun" marriage is far more "devaluing" merrit-wise than a homosexual couple who marry for life.

 

[LightHorseman]

Birth, the continuity of the race

So... by denyong homosexuals the right to marry, you think this will somehow encourage them to engage in heterosexual relationships?

Do you know of any part of the world that is in danger of running out of people any time soon? To the point that we need to force homosexuals into becomming parents?

 

[AllForJesus]

So... by denyong homosexuals the right to marry, you think this will somehow encourage them to engage in heterosexual relationships?

Do you know of any part of the world that is in danger of running out of people any time soon? To the point that we need to force homosexuals into becomming parents?

I don't blame you for not seeing a point in what i said

 

[quatona]

In your analogy, you cite the acting ability of the newcommer. What about homosexual marriage makes you think homosexuals would "act very poorly"?

Firstly, this is not about what I think (I have no problem with homosexual marriage whatsoever).
Secondly, it´s an analogy, and an analogy is about a certain communality. In order to take the analogy for what it is, you must not confuse the frames of the real thing and the analogy. The frame of the analogy is acting - this isn´t meant to imply that marriage is about acting.
Thirdly, all I tried was to imagine how the people in question feel about it. It´s about emotions, not - as Verve suggested - about rational analysis.

I mean, what makes a successful marriage? Love, care, commitment, mutual interests? What makes you think homosexuals are incapable of achieving these?

Again, this is not about what I think. It is about how I imagine the people in question feeling about it.
I´m not even going so far as to answer for them what they think makes a good marriage.
I was merely trying to explain how someone can get the feeling that allowing something they (for whatever reason) consider less worthy than what they themselves are doing to "play in the same league" devalues their own concept.

Further, the difference between marriage and the oscars is that there is no merrit involved in marriage.

Yes, there are differences between an analogy and the real thing. This difference, however, is not essential to what I was trying to explain to myself. If, instead of Oscars, you think of a beauty contest, there´s no merit involved. The point remains the same.

I would contend that Vritney Spears 30 hour "just for fun" marriage is far more "devaluing" merrit-wise than a homosexual couple who marry for life.

I´m not sure that those persons we are talking about don´t feel that such a marriage devalues the institution of marriage - as they conceptualize it - either (with or without looking at it under the aspect "merit").

 

[LightHorseman]

I don't blame you for not seeing a point in what i said

So maybe explain your point? Given that homosexuals aren't likely to have kids whether married or not, what does procreation have to do with the OP?

 

[lawtonfogle]

This is how I can imagine they feel about it:
Suppose you are an actor and you receive an Oscar. You are proud and feel it is the recognition of your great performance.
Next, you notice that someone who you feel acts very poorly has received an Oscar, as well.
This certainly would devalue the meaning of an Oscar, in your perception.

Assuming they see it that way...

I think I would find the <1 month marriages that some people perform knowing it will not last the month far more damaging than allowing a group who has been in a political fight for their ability to marry finally get married.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Birth, the continuity of the race

We got plenty enough people already continuing the race. P.S. Should be ban staying single, as it means the only way to have children is sex outside of marriage, so either they sin, or they don't have children, which you seem to be suggesting is a pretty bad thing.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I wonder what the proponents of same sex marriage think of the following:

Child marriages

Already allowed in the US, just thankfully very rare.

<staff edit>

paedophile marriages

Already allowed, once again, thankfully, very rare.

Basically any sexual tendency could demand the right to marriage! 60 year old marrying 12 year old sort of thing.

What you do in bed should have nothing to do with marriage. Heck if gays want to be married then by all means let them, but Adopting children is a NO! NO!

Don't mess with a child's psychology!

How sad, this thread ALMOST made it to an grand total of 1 page before this argument was brought up.