Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 19 to 27 of 51

Thread: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

  1. #19

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Damn, Clone, your ability to take someone's words out of context, construct a different intended purpose/meaning for those words, then dispute it, is amazing.

    But, in short, I'll address each. It's debatable whether one's sexual orientation is an "immutable characteristic". I know several formerly gay people. I know one guy who was formerly gay, then married a lady (divorced), then gay again, then married again (to a different woman), now divorced but dating the woman he married first. Maybe he's just confused. He's told me that "sometimes I just feel gay, sometimes I don't".

    There was no subtle implication. I just noted that many African Americans do not equate their fight for civil rights with that of gays.

    It wasn't that long before my time. My high school was the first integrated high school in my home state. I would not say I "lived it" but I observed African Americans' fight from a pretty good viewpoint.

    I disagree one is an immutable characteristic and the other is not. Allowing polygamy would not bother me any more than allowing gay marriage.

    I doubt it would bother me if the state decided my marriage was invalid for some reason. I value the sacrament of marriage in my faith far more than the legal recognition from the state.

  2. #20

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Just to play devil's advocate for a moment...

    Is homsexuality really that much more "immutable" than polygamy? Even if one accepts that homosexuality is entirely genetic, one could still argue that relatively few people are genetically programmed to be attracted to the same gender, but large numbers of people are genetically programmed to be attracted to more than one person of the opposite gender. Polygamy was standard in many (most?) cultures throughout the world.... while homosexuality has probably been around as long as mankind, our generation is the first one I'm aware of that has ever had same-sex marriages. (If someone knows of any ancient cultures that did have same-sex marriage, please say so, because that would be pretty interesting).

  3. #21
    National Finalist
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    832

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    The statement that "it is an immutable charastic" and they are "born that way" is simply a lie. There are many gays that have gotten out of their practice - that is a fact. The arguement "they are born that way" has never been validated and doesn't make the practice morally correct. A pedophile could make the same claim. That doesn't make it right to engage in either practice. Sometimes I want to kill someone that I get real angry with like Osama. That doesn't make murder right simply because I want to do it. It is a deplorable destructive practice and should never to "normalized" by government.

  4. #22

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    As far as I know, we haven't pinpointed the cause of homosexuality exactly... we simply don't know if it is genetic, environmental, or what. However, my guess would be that it varies from person to person. I believe that some people who engage in homosexual activites do so by choice (I too, know people who have been on-again-off-again gay), while some are "wired that way" and will never feel fulfilled in a heterosexual relationship. What causes that wiring I don't pretend to know, but I would think that it's some combination of genetics and environment.

    Finally I'd just like to point out that the cause of homosexuality doesn't really determine the morality of it. Even if we answer without a shadow of a doubt the question "what makes a person gay"? we still haven't answered the question "is being gay morally acceptable?".

  5. #23

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyFan View Post
    At one point, I tried to equate gay marriage to polygamy and received several rebukes.
    The difference between gay marriage and polygamy is the reason two people aren't allowed to get married. Let's say Billy wants to marry Sally (they're both single and of legal age and sound mind, etc), they're allowed to. But if Susie wants to marry Sally (again both single, sane, etc) she isn't allowed to. Billy is allowed to do something (marry Sally) but Susie isn't, the two people are being treated differently by law based on nothing but their gender.

    Now let's say that Sally and Billy get married, but Billy still wants to marry Susie. He isn't allowed to, not because of anyone's gender, but because of his marrital status. The government is allowed to make laws that treat people differently due to their marital status (if the government couldn't there wouldn't be any legal difference between married and unmarried couples) but isn't supposed to treat people differently based on their gender.
    There's no such thing as a pretty good aligator wrestler.

  6. #24
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by arm-spin View Post

    Finally I'd just like to point out that the cause of homosexuality doesn't really determine the morality of it. Even if we answer without a shadow of a doubt the question "what makes a person gay"? we still haven't answered the question "is being gay morally acceptable?".
    Arm-spin, I respectfully but emphatically disagree. If homosexuality is genetically determined and not a choice, then how can it possibly be immoral? It would be no more subject to moral judgement than red hair. Furthermore, even if it is a choice, it is a sexual act between two consenting adults which harms no one. Where is the immorality? Yes, irresponsible sexual activity can harm society, but this is equally true of heterosexual behavior, and perhaps even more so since it can produce children. The ONLY indisputable argument for the immorality of homosexuality is Biblical, and that's okay as long as it is kept within the walls of the church and doesn't rear its ugly head in public.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  7. #25

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Spider, I think I agree that the only good argument against homosexuality are religious (I won't say "Biblical" per say because I believe other religions such as Islam teach against homsexuality also). But I would point out that if a religious person believes that homosexuality is wrong because their Scriptures say so, they will continue to believe that regardless of why a person is homosexual.

    I completely agree with you (as you've said before) that purely religous arguments should not apply to law, so I have no objections to legally sanctioned gay marriage.

  8. #26

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    Quote Originally Posted by FloggingSully View Post
    The difference between gay marriage and polygamy is the reason two people aren't allowed to get married. Let's say Billy wants to marry Sally (they're both single and of legal age and sound mind, etc), they're allowed to. But if Susie wants to marry Sally (again both single, sane, etc) she isn't allowed to. Billy is allowed to do something (marry Sally) but Susie isn't, the two people are being treated differently by law based on nothing but their gender.

    Now let's say that Sally and Billy get married, but Billy still wants to marry Susie. He isn't allowed to, not because of anyone's gender, but because of his marrital status. The government is allowed to make laws that treat people differently due to their marital status (if the government couldn't there wouldn't be any legal difference between married and unmarried couples) but isn't supposed to treat people differently based on their gender.
    Flogging, I appreciate the simple example. It does illustrate a difference.

    However, isn't the government denying Susie of her civil right to marry Billy (assuming Billy and Sally and Susie are sane, competent, etc.) Does Susie not have a civil right to marry the man she wants to marry? If Gay Bobby does has a civil right to marry Gay Billy, shouldn't Susie have a civil right to marry Billy (assuming Billy and Sally want Susie to join their marriage)?

  9. #27
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Calif. SCt upholds gay marriage ban

    You keep using the term civil right for something that is not established as a civil right (polygamous marriage). That's one way to confuse you audience. You haven't responded to Flogging Sully's argument as to the distinction between gay marriage and polygamy--a distinction that you asked for. Instead, you try to conflate them again, apparently asserting an unlimited right to marry.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •