Gay people

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
nick1985

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
I dont understand why gay people are not allowed to marry in most states.

I don't get it

lol
 
Last edited:
Nemesis 1

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
I know lots of happily married people who are gay loving people . You can make a word ugily if you want . But GAY is not homosexual . Doesn't matter how many people say it or how many dictionaries printit . As long as some hang on to the true meaning . That word will never mean what people want it to . IN your minds only .
 
yllus

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
They can't get married in most states because it's illegal.

THREAD OVER
 
PJABBER

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
bamacre said:
Government is in the everything business.
Click to expand...

QFT. It is time for a change.

And, this topic has been done over and over again recently.

Why doesn't someone try to post something completely different?

I can see why society would not want to have non-reproducing pairing characterized as marriage. But what about pairings that are reproducing but not binary?

I would like to know why polygamy is not legal.
 
CrackRabbit

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,642
62
91
PJABBER said:
QFT. It is time for a change.

And, this topic has been done over and over again recently.

Why doesn't someone try to post something completely different?

I can see why society would not want to have non-reproducing pairing characterized as marriage. But what about pairings that are reproducing but not binary?

I would like to know why polygamy is not legal.
Click to expand...

In my opinion polygamy in the strictest since should be legal.
Consenting adults should be able to marry whomever they want.
There would need to be some reworking of laws to handle a divorce or death/inheritance in a polygamical situtation, but nothing that couldn't be handled.

The only issue that I have with polygamy is that the leaders some very cultish Mormon offshoots (think Warren Jeffs) tend to use it to create what are essentially harems for themselves (and the other leaders of the sect) by brainwashing young girls and then taking them as their "wives".
 
PJABBER

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
CrackRabbit said:
In my opinion polygamy in the strictest since should be legal.
Consenting adults should be able to marry whomever they want.
There would need to be some reworking of laws to handle a divorce or death/inheritance in a polygamical situtation, but nothing that couldn't be handled.

The only issue that I have with polygamy is that the leaders some very cultish Mormon offshoots (think Warren Jeffs) tend to use it to create what are essentially harems for themselves (and the other leaders of the sect) by brainwashing young girls and then taking them as their "wives".
Click to expand...

The inheritance laws won't need much reworking as the property rights and division of assets for spouses and family is already pretty clear cut.

While I can think the aspect of human jealousy would be exacerbated in a polygamous marriage, and kids would be taunted for being raised outside the mainstream, having more parents might actually be beneficial. How much quality time do any of us have to spend with the kids these days?

Cults are cults. They are outliers in many ways and the example of their enslavements is not likely to be one that will be replicated in the bulk of poly-marriages (and maybe I just invented a new word!) Same with the predisposition for underage spouses, that is legislated against separately.

Economically it makes a lot of sense. Bonded pairs should be economically more likely to survive economic disruptions like one partner being laid off. Having more in the pairing allows for even greater economic stability.

I think the purpose for marriage is only secondarily as an expression of love. The purpose for the institution is to be a mechanism for having and raising children. Homosexual relationships don't meet this test, but male/female poly-marriage does.

Maybe I read too much Heinlein when I was a kid.
 
PJABBER

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
JEDIYoda said:
hahahah what a goofball!! Bringing polygamy into the picture. Not even closely related to the topic.

rofl......
Click to expand...

I am just bored with all of the gay threads. Yadda, yadda, yadda, Yoda.

You can talk about being gay again if you like.
 
CrackRabbit

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,642
62
91
PJABBER said:
I think the purpose for marriage is only secondarily as an expression of love. The purpose for the institution is to be a mechanism for having and raising children. Homosexual relationships don't meet this test, but male/female poly-marriage does.

Maybe I read too much Heinlein when I was a kid.
Click to expand...

That is where you and I disagree, bonding between two (or even multiple ) people in general is beneficial to society even if they can't produce children.
Production of children can be done now without the actual need for a male/female relationship. Why limit marriage to that?

Heinlein had some strange views on government and society. It certainly made for good reading, but I'm not sure how well his ideas would work in practice.
 
swerus

swerus

Member
Sep 30, 2010
177
0
0
yllus said:
Because there are laws against it. (Well, actually I'm not sure if that's true. Is it the the converse - that there are no laws allowing it?)
Click to expand...

If gays would push for civil unions with all the same benefits instead of changing the laws of what traditional marriage is most wouldn't care.
 
PJABBER

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
CrackRabbit said:
That is where you and I disagree, bonding between two (or even multiple ) people in general is beneficial to society even if they can't produce children.
Click to expand...

I am not sure that an empirical case for net societal benefit can be made but it would be fun to see if one has been produced.

Production of children can be done now without the actual need for a male/female relationship. Why limit marriage to that?
Click to expand...

You mean like factory production of kids? While we may have the technology to do so, is a human being produced like that really human? They would not have the early imprinting of being carried in a womb, nor the other sensory inputs that a traditional baby would have.

Learning starts at the earliest age. What do they learn and what is the result in terms of being human rather than just a collection of cells making up an organism.

Single sex couples that have responsibility for parenting and, to much the same extent, single parents have similar issues to address.

Having two sex households and a loving relationship between the parents goes a long way toward avoiding major issues. Does adding one or more partners (and they don't have to be equal, no human relationship is ever equal) enhance or reduce the possibility that the child will be happy and well adjusted for their lifetime?

I think that biological bonding between birth parent and child is of a different character than that between a child that is adopted and a foster parent. The fostering can be wonderful and I admire those who take on such a responsibility, but I also know that the odds for failure at many levels are much higher .

Heinlein had some strange views on government and society. It certainly made for good reading, but I'm not sure how well his ideas would work in practice.
Click to expand...

He was a real libertarian and a visionary. More people should read his stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom