Should Gay Marriage Exist?

I don't see a problem with gay folks getting married....

Why should they be spared the pain, torment and anguish married straight people have to endure?

originally posted by: ColeYounger
I believe that until they find a cure for homosexuality, they should be afforded all the same rights as regular people.

Can't you Pray the Gay away?

a reply to: olaru12

nope

But a good whupping might work.

a reply to: Phage

It goes without saying that rugby is a rough sport, but size, force, and power-producing advantages are conferred by testosterone during puberty. I don't have the details of the incident I was talking about to know for sure, but I imagine this transwoman player had at least a little of those advantages that a woman would not have. I had read an article with a transwoman golfer saying something about male-bodied people competing in women's sports is a slap in the face to women. Based on that, I do not believe that I have a strictly heterosexual opinion on this.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Gothmog

If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce

Seems pretty simple to me. Don't like your wife? Kick her out of the house with a letter saying you're divorced and now you're divorced.

Stop it . You are showing very little knowledge of Christianity .
Or any other custom for that matter
In Wales , all a couple had to do is jump over a broomstick backwards .
Now , think before you reply .
Is that still recognized legally today ?

(The best lesson learned is one the student learns on their own)

Hint : Folks don't have to sacrifice an unblemished lamb today . They can eat veal instead.

You said:

How easy do you think it is in a pure biblical sense ?

In response, I quoted the Bible. Biblically, getting a divorce was extremely easy if you were a man.

I thought is was a dead issue too. It was for me.

But it isnt. Many of the most outspoken ones (i tried to get along with) view it like their civil rights issues left to confront. Like right after desegregation. They are still not equal yet. Accepted, but not by enough.

The most common anger held on to even after SCOTUS liberation is the remnent memory of their childhoods.

Anger that society made them feel broken and a desire to change the indoctrination of children to make sure no future kids feel bad because they are different. Still minds to change.

That is a legitimate effort. That's why Disney wants their characters to be The United Rainbow of Benetton. The new "Meme" of society is to change the initial (pre school) imprinting with things that promote tolerance. To make sure no kid feels broken anymore.

To me, thats all well and good, but it's kind of arrogant of people to think all people are going to be complicit. Or that its backwards to resist. Or that a switch of worldview can be flipped. Or that they are morally superior to those who still see it as an abnormality of a dichotomic species.

No one likes being told how to think, and especially how their children should be taught to think. And Floridian consensus says its still an issue.

I personally see it as a litigious pandoras box of lawsuits and declaration of identity. All kinds of straw trapped identities to cause discomfort. I want to be a horse! For all we know in today's world Catherine The Great would identify as equine? For being primarily attracted to horses she could identify as trans-species and demand surgury to match what she feels. It spirals into a world of endless diversity workshops.

Frankly, im not sold (non-hermaphroditic) trans-identities or homosexual tendencies are anything more than a prenatal hormone imbalance, early life imprinting (ENVIRONMENT), or trauma. With the strongest influence that of culture.

Like for example: The ENVIRONMENT of the sexual proclivities of Ancient Rome and Greece.

a reply to: tamusan

Anecdotes are a thing. Indeed.

But this thread isn't really about that.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: Phage
...but I imagine...

well that's the whole crux of the issue, isn't it? you don't know, you imagine. but you don't let that stop you talking authoritatively on subjects you have zero personal experience of.

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n

When I was a boy gay meant mentally ill and gay sex was a criminal offence. Gay marriage was not an option. Not being blackmailed, murdered or locked up was a higher priority than marriage. The very real pandemic of AIDS in the 80s made marriage essential for our survival. People were dropping like flies and we had no legal right. Partners were locked out of loved ones hospital rooms. Insurance companies refused to honor these same sex partnerships etc. Before aids decimated us in north america marriage wasn't a hugely important issue. Yes, gay marriage should exist. When my partner of 19 years was in decline our in-name-only marriage could have been problematic but thankfully we were a lot scarier than any policies we came up against. We didn't have to marry so chose to live in sin which suited our nature. Millions do need that protection and should never have been denied. We're not under sharia law yet.

a reply to: Phage

I'll make an on-topic post for you. It seems to me that the only ones who really have a problem with it are those with deep-seated religious beliefs that go against gay marriage. My personal feeling on this is that freedom of religion also means freedom from any religion a person does not want to take part in. Even in the New Testament, it says not to meddle in other people's affairs.

a reply to: tamusan

That would seem to be a truly "Christian" approach, wouldn't it?

Pray for their souls if you must. Inflict your beliefs upon them, not so much.

Should gay marriage exist?

Yes. Everyone deserves the right to be miserable

Marshall Mathers

a reply to: continuousThunder

You've singled in on a lesser part of my comment where I state my opinion instead of the other points I made, which are facts. And really, I only said "I imagine" because I did not see the transwoman with my own eyes. The people quoted in the articles about the incident I was talking about called the transwoman bigger and stronger than the female players.

a reply to: tamusan

Hmm. So you heard about it, haven't seen it.

Only trans-people are bigger and stronger than those they play against?

Are you only concerned about trans women in womens' sport? Not about trans men in mens'?

How prevalent do yo reckon this "problem" is, that it requires laws about it? Or are those laws just "preemptive?"

And not much to do with the topic.

The only reason it would be beneficial for people to get married these days is because of taxes and retirement benefits and inheritance. Really, we do not need marriage, I know people who have lived together for forty years...they are doing fine. Society dictated marriage as a necessity, and religion is one of the things driving it.

Why do the gays need to get married? I have no clue, they'll probably just get divorced at the same rate as straight people do eventually. I have nothing against marriage, nor do I have anything against those who just live together. If you are raising a family, it seems logical to get married but I cannot understand why those without kids need to be married. It is set up so a person's spouse can be helped financially if a spouse dies....Inheritance is not taxed in many cases with relatives....especially if the estate is not explicit in who gets what...then it needs to be probated and the partner of the live togethers can get kicked out of the house or lose everything. Most of the people I know that lived together for many years got their partners property most times, but other times the family of the one who died got things. I am sure that if the parents do not agree with their kid being gay, they won't take care of their kids partner...just sell everything and keep the money.

Tis a weird world we have created.

a reply to: tamusan

I'll agree with you.

Even in Figureskating (The gayest male sport of all time until recently) a male has the ability to jump way higher. They made a big deal about all the russian girls pulling off quads, a first in olympic competition. Males do those as prerequisite to be competitive. A trans-athlete keeps the verticle leap. You would have to slide even the difficulty levels of the jumps to remove the competitive advantage.

I get it, its completely deflating to the transathlete to not be accepted, but a natural strength advantage is just that. It is a fairness issue, and part of my eyeroll towards the greater gay community is the moral righteousness to say letting the snowflake shine is more important then the swimmer training for years now getting blown away in the butterfly to a male wingspan.

Theres an across the board perfermance differential that even the most cross-trained XX female cant compensate for.

If Barry Bonds gets an asterisk.

a reply to: Degradation33

You seem to be conflating transexuals and homosexuals.

a reply to: Phage

Im speaking about where all those issues have morphed since the gay marriage ruling 8 years ago. Its still an issue because gay marriage is now part of a larger effort. That was just the first thing that changed. And its noticed.

The conflation is deliberate.

This topic may focus on gay marriage but its stems from the greater effort of society to rewrite the cultural narritive in a way that increadingly lacks nuance the more support it recieves.

Gay culture is just one.

50's culture did it.
Nazis did it.
Temperance culture did it.
Abolition culture did it.
Communism did it.
China does it.

Everyone does it by way of the borg. This is pretty much clash of the borg.

I'm speaking to the absurdity of what these new openminded ideals are doing with their populist status.

a reply to: Phage


Women's sports were protected by law because women once had nowhere to fairly compete in athletics, my only objection to 'trans' in women's sports is the harm it does to that forum where women can compete against themselves.

Problem is that now another group is having trouble finding somewhere with 'fair' competition.

I respectfully suggest that trans athletes avoid damaging the hard earned progress in creating forums for women to compete fairly, forcing folks born male into women's sports isn't the solution.

I don't have a problem with people of any gender or identity participating in men's sports, but I do have a problem with those born male trying to 'compete' in the much easier women's sports, because it just isn't fair to the female athletes to be forced to compete with those born with the athletic advantages of being male.

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n

No , it's an Oxymoron .