Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument against Gays getting married yet?

[bozack]

This is mildly off topic but something you said intrigued me, and I wanted to post before I forgot....

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, that could very well happen, esp. with the way women are dramatically increasing their rate of cheating on their spouses.

Personally I think this is a bigger, and more radical change than homosexual marriage and it is being completely ignored...I totally agree that the tables are turning, and it was only an old social/power structure that kept women repressed for so long...I mean women have always been "in demand" with men whereas I rarely hear women talk about how they go out of their way to get a guy, even in the days of my parents talk was always of how the man had to make all of the moves for the woman....they realize that they hold all the cards, and why shouldn't they cheat if they are in high demand and public perception places guys having done it for years.....

I could easily see some of the anandtech guy "winners" agreeing to be in polyandrous relationships with women due to low self esteem, along with many other men who don't think highly of themselves...whereas I cannot see an equal amount of low esteem women doing this as they would rather have cats (I know this is a blatant generalization but I still think I am on the mark)....

men should be the ones who are worried as we are the ones that will have to completely evolve into something else in order to satisfy women as they will be truly calling all of the shots when before they were just calling most of them 🙂

With the multiple spouses thing honestly I thought you had a conviction against it due to your arguments, personally while I would think it is odd, I don't know how much I would care as long as it was classified a union under the law, just like everything else should be....heck if people want to do it then why not 🙂

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bozack
This is mildly off topic but something you said intrigued me, and I wanted to post before I forgot....

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, that could very well happen, esp. with the way women are dramatically increasing their rate of cheating on their spouses.

Personally I think this is a bigger, and more radical change than homosexual marriage and it is being completely ignored...I totally agree that the tables are turning, and it was only an old social/power structure that kept women repressed for so long...I mean women have always been "in demand" with men whereas I rarely hear women talk about how they go out of their way to get a guy, even in the days of my parents talk was always of how the man had to make all of the moves for the woman....they realize that they hold all the cards, and why shouldn't they cheat if they are in high demand and public perception places guys having done it for years.....

I could easily see some of the anandtech guy "winners" agreeing to be in polyandrous relationships with women due to low self esteem, along with many other men who don't think highly of themselves...whereas I cannot see an equal amount of low esteem women doing this as they would rather have cats (I know this is a blatant generalization but I still think I am on the mark)....

men should be the ones who are worried as we are the ones that will have to completely evolve into something else in order to satisfy women as they will be truly calling all of the shots when before they were just calling most of them 🙂

I'm with ya, for the most part. Even in some of the YAGT threads in ATOT and at my site, yagt.org, there's a pattern of women no longer feeling that "spark" of love and thinking they are no longer in love and looking for something else. Blame it on magazines, Lifetime channel, Oprah, or just women reaching more and more equality in general but there's something afoot that has changed the mindset of women into no longer realizing what a mature relationship means.

With the multiple spouses thing honestly I thought you had a conviction against it due to your arguments, personally while I would think it is odd, I don't know how much I would care as long as it was classified a union under the law, just like everything else should be....heck if people want to do it then why not 🙂

🙂

I was really on the fence on the issue, I was just looking for some persuasive arguments for it. 🙂

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: conjur
I'm with ya, for the most part. Even in some of the YAGT threads in ATOT and at my site, yagt.org, there's a pattern of women no longer feeling that "spark" of love and thinking they are no longer in love and looking for something else. Blame it on magazines, Lifetime channel, Oprah, or just women reaching more and more equality in general but there's something afoot that has changed the mindset of women into no longer realizing what a mature relationship means.

Never knew that was "your" site, I have been by there a few times, and yes I do see what you mean, there are also a few other relationship sites that exhibit the same thing, nowadays it is really rare for a guy to "fall out of love" either they were never in love in the first place, or they still love the person yet the like to sleep around or they are faithful...with women once it is done, it is done.

Another interesting thread was that on the Public forum dealing with the show, average joe...seems as if they have yet to have a woman pick a regular guy, instead opting for the ringers even though personality wise they are a better match with the regular guys...

I think women realize that they no longer need just one man, that there are plenty of guys out there that will take them and why should they have to put up with something that they don't like...as I said historically the guys have done the courting, heck I know women who aren't even that attractive/smart/ or nice who have guys that chase after them whereas all of the ugly/dumb...etc guys I know couldn't get a date without paying...

Not to mention what TV is doing to the image of the "desired" male, heck you pretty much have to become a metrosexual for many women of intelligence to even consider you...gone are the days of watching sports and drinking beer, hello to the days of knowing fine wine, cheese, and enjoying bed bath and beyond....luckily for me I like wine and cheese 🙂

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bozack

Never knew that was "your" site, I have been by there a few times, and yes I do see what you mean, there are also a few other relationship sites that exhibit the same thing, nowadays it is really rare for a guy to "fall out of love" either they were never in love in the first place, or they still love the person yet the like to sleep around or they are faithful...with women once it is done, it is done.

Another interesting thread was that on the Public forum dealing with the show, average joe...seems as if they have yet to have a woman pick a regular guy, instead opting for the ringers even though personality wise they are a better match with the regular guys...

I think women realize that they no longer need just one man, that there are plenty of guys out there that will take them and why should they have to put up with something that they don't like...as I said historically the guys have done the courting, heck I know women who aren't even that attractive/smart/ or nice who have guys that chase after them whereas all of the ugly/dumb...etc guys I know couldn't get a date without paying...

Not to mention what TV is doing to the image of the "desired" male, heck you pretty much have to become a metrosexual for many women of intelligence to even consider you...gone are the days of watching sports and drinking beer, hello to the days of knowing fine wine, cheese, and enjoying bed bath and beyond....luckily for me I like wine and cheese 🙂

And, lucky for me, my sheets are 300 threadcount!

😉

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bozack
This is mildly off topic but something you said intrigued me, and I wanted to post before I forgot....

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, that could very well happen, esp. with the way women are dramatically increasing their rate of cheating on their spouses.

Personally I think this is a bigger, and more radical change than homosexual marriage and it is being completely ignored...I totally agree that the tables are turning, and it was only an old social/power structure that kept women repressed for so long...I mean women have always been "in demand" with men whereas I rarely hear women talk about how they go out of their way to get a guy, even in the days of my parents talk was always of how the man had to make all of the moves for the woman....they realize that they hold all the cards, and why shouldn't they cheat if they are in high demand and public perception places guys having done it for years.....

I could easily see some of the anandtech guy "winners" agreeing to be in polyandrous relationships with women due to low self esteem, along with many other men who don't think highly of themselves...whereas I cannot see an equal amount of low esteem women doing this as they would rather have cats (I know this is a blatant generalization but I still think I am on the mark)....

men should be the ones who are worried as we are the ones that will have to completely evolve into something else in order to satisfy women as they will be truly calling all of the shots when before they were just calling most of them 🙂

With the multiple spouses thing honestly I thought you had a conviction against it due to your arguments, personally while I would think it is odd, I don't know how much I would care as long as it was classified a union under the law, just like everything else should be....heck if people want to do it then why not 🙂

Yup, before you know it the only people who will form long term stable marriages will be gay. The heteros will all be at the orgy hoping to get laid.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Stonewall

Nope. Read your Bible, Monogamy was less common than you think. It wasn't even mandated or enforced.

I never mentioned how common polygamy was--Solomon had 700 wives I believe--I'm just qualifying the types of marriage.

700 !?!

 

[lavaman]

Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for Gays getting married yet?

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: XZeroII

1. Marriage is a religious thing. Basically you are just spitting in the face of religious people.

Marriage laws were known first in ancient Egypt. The goddess Isis was the one who had marriage under her portfolio.
Do you want to acknowledge the ancient Egyptian gods as existing, or do you just follow their rituals?

P.S. Marriage was mostly for social and economical reasons there too.

Marriage under Judeo-Christian dogma is quite a bit different from anything performed in ancient Egypt. The ceremony for instance. and im pretty sure that the egyptians didnt call it marriage, marriage got attached to the egyptian ceremnoy because it was the closest thing we could relate that ceremony to.

So, no, I wont recognize that Egyptian gods exist outside mythology, and I do not follow their rituals.



PS, since libs love to argue speration of church and state, I argue that government get its grubby hands out marriage and leave that to the religious. All others [atheists, homos, and whomever else] get civil unions as performed in front of a judge. Then through virtue of the full faith and credit clause, both shall be recognized with all the same rights and privileges under the law

 

[skyking]

it won't take long under your plan for churches to start marrying gays, then.

 

[EXman]

Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for Gays getting married yet?

nope just more name calling.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: EXman

Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for Gays getting married yet?

nope just more name calling.

A bigot can only see his bigotry. The reasons have been given over and over. This similar question may be one you can see. Just don't try to see how they are exactly parallel. You will be blind to that:

"Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for the abolition of slavery yet?"

And please, again, just imagine you were presented with that question. Don't try to see the parallel. You can't do that yet. It takes time to grow out of the blindness of bigotry.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: EXman

Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for Gays getting married yet?

nope just more name calling.

A bigot can only see his bigotry. The reasons have been given over and over. This similar question may be one you can see. Just don't try to see how they are exactly parallel. You will be blind to that:

"Has Anyone Made a Convincing Argument for the abolition of slavery yet?"

And please, again, just imagine you were presented with that question. Don't try to see the parallel. You can't do that yet. It takes time to grow out of the blindness of bigotry.

And you are not being called names. You are being properly identified. You require some truth in order to see yourself.

There's a saying for this: If the shoe fits....

 

[LadyJessica]

There's a saying for this: If the shoe fits....

...then you must acquit!

But seriously, now that gay marriage is on the block, every lesbian and her mother is wanting me to marry them. I'm already taken, so leave me alone! And I'm not a lesbian.

But really seriously, I don't think marriage should be acknowledged by the government at all.

 

[Sahakiel]

Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

 

[Sahakiel]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

Yay... your way or the highway...
Too bad you're the only one who doesn't pick highway.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Sahakiel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

Yay... your way or the highway...
Too bad you're the only one who doesn't pick highway.

Good thing you're not the one who decides either.

The world could do without bigots.

It would be a much nicer place to live.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Sahakiel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

Yay... your way or the highway...
Too bad you're the only one who doesn't pick highway.

So are you opposed to homosexual 'marriages'? If the government replaced it with civil unions and 'marriage' was only for religious purposes, then homosexual marriages could still happen.

Note: I'm for same sex marriages, but just wondering why some people say this if they oppose homosexual marriages.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Sahakiel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

Yay... your way or the highway...
Too bad you're the only one who doesn't pick highway.

You fail to consider that your opinion is bigoted and his is not. It's not like opinions are all of equal value or born out of intelligence. But bigotry is a form of blindness that makes this impossible for you to see. It's important to try though because blindness can bring lots of misery.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

So are you opposed to homosexual 'marriages'? If the government replaced it with civil unions and 'marriage' was only for religious purposes, then homosexual marriages could still happen.

Note: I'm for same sex marriages, but just wondering why some people say this if they oppose homosexual marriages.

the church's business is the church's business, that is why they don't mind if the church is marrying homosexuals, but they do mind if gov't is doing it. you don't have to belong the church, but its really hard to leave the country

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

So are you opposed to homosexual 'marriages'? If the government replaced it with civil unions and 'marriage' was only for religious purposes, then homosexual marriages could still happen.

Note: I'm for same sex marriages, but just wondering why some people say this if they oppose homosexual marriages.

the church's business is the church's business, that is why they don't mind if the church is marrying homosexuals, but they do mind if gov't is doing it. you don't have to belong the church, but its really hard to leave the country

I'm not sure if I understand you. Does the church think that it owns the word 'marriage'? I mean other religions have marriages, too. Doesn't one of the branches have a homosexual priest or whatever? They might not even mind to marry homosexual people if they have homosexual priests

I'm not sure if I got what you're saying.

 

[Sahakiel]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Sahakiel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Simple solution :

Strike marriage from the law books, replace with civil unions and call it a day.

Simple solution:

Everyone gets over their hangup with the word marriage and allows all to be married.

Yay... your way or the highway...
Too bad you're the only one who doesn't pick highway.

You fail to consider that your opinion is bigoted and his is not. It's not like opinions are all of equal value or born out of intelligence. But bigotry is a form of blindness that makes this impossible for you to see. It's important to try though because blindness can bring lots of misery.

On the contrary, what you failed to see is that my "opinion" has not been stated anywhere. Your anti-bigotry campaign has resulted in your own bigotry being brought to the forefront of your posting. It's a shame to see the blind attempt to teach others how to see.

 

[element]

An argument against gay marraige is simple. What I can't seem to figure out, is whether Moonbeam really thinks it's that convoluted or whether he's just trying to confuse everyone on purpose because he can't offer a simple argument for his cause.

The simple fact is buggery (anal sex) between 2 males is disgusting and as a society we don't like condoning disgusting acts. With the small exception of buggerer's of course who do condone such acts. But then pedofiles condone sex with kids too. Not that one has anything to do with the other, besides being condoned by the minority.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: element®
An argument against gay marraige is simple. What I can't seem to figure out, is whether Moonbeam really thinks it's that convoluted or whether he's just trying to confuse everyone on purpose because he can't offer a simple argument for his cause.

The simple fact is buggery (anal sex) between 2 males is disgusting and as a society we don't like condoning disgusting acts. With the small exception of buggerer's of course who do condone such acts. But then pedofiles condone sex with kids too. Not that one has anything to do with the other, besides being condoned by the minority.

Oysters are disgusting too, let's ban them!

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: element®
An argument against gay marraige is simple. What I can't seem to figure out, is whether Moonbeam really thinks it's that convoluted or whether he's just trying to confuse everyone on purpose because he can't offer a simple argument for his cause.

The simple fact is buggery (anal sex) between 2 males is disgusting and as a society we don't like condoning disgusting acts. With the small exception of buggerer's of course who do condone such acts. But then pedofiles condone sex with kids too. Not that one has anything to do with the other, besides being condoned by the minority.

Do you realize that heterosexuals are the majority (by far) of pedophiles?

And, what about heterosexuals who engage in anal sex? What about lesbians?

And, fwiw, sodomy laws have been overturned in courts in this country. Some may find it disgusting, but what happens between two consenting adults is no real concern of yours.