29-01-2004 19:14									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi If it's about minority rights, why not force churches to do gay marriages, because churches ought not to discriminate? Surely discrimination takes precedence over religious freedom. How does defining marriage as one man and one woman discriminate against homosexuals? You have precisely the same rights as I do, to marry a woman of your choice, should she also consent. Unless you can show me why the old definition violates section 15, then I cannot agree with your argument.

I'm getting real tired of your attempts to deliberately distort the issue that gays have.

The point is not that we want to marry someone of the opposite gender, but that we want to be able to marry another person of the same gender.

Stop twisting this around.

	29-01-2004 19:18									#92
	Increase Your PM Length

I'm still trying to understand what people have against gay marriage besides just religious beliefs and bigotry.

If BK is against it for purely religious beliefs, that's fine by me. His religion doesn't have to perform or recognize them... their right.

But all the "logical" arguments people bring up against aren't really logical at all... and are just weak rationales for supporting their bigotry or religious beliefs.

Let's review some of those lame arguments against it...

1) It cheapens the institution of marriage.

HUH? Are people really saying that the love two people have for each other and the bond they share by getting married is at all effected because of what other people do? That allowing gays to get married has an actual effect on non gay marriages? Please explain what effect it will have beyond simple religious beliefs.

2) Marriage is meant for having children/family and that wouldn't be the case for gays.

HUH? Couples who can't have children are allowed to get married... and EVERY RELIGION I KNOW OF allows that and doesn't see it as a sin. Marriage is about love and commitment... You don't have to prove you can have children to get married.

3) Effecting the birth rate seems to have come up...

HUH... what does this have to do with anything.

4) Since gays aren't necessarily getting married to have/adopt children, they don't need the special legal rights that are granted to those that do.

Bull... Marriage has evolved beyond just having a family. It provides legal protections that are important to people who plan on spending their lives together and taking care of each other. Why should they not be allowed the same protection as other couples in love.

I have yet to hear any logical argument against it... Only religious beliefs (which is fine) or simple bigotry (which isn't)

	29-01-2004 19:29									#93
	Got spare money?

Ming is the smartest person in this thread.

The government should have equal rights under law. Period. That means two gay dudes (or women) can enter into a legal contract of property, hospital visitation rights, or insurance coverage... basically, everything a marriage has. I don't give a **** what people call it. And religions don't have to perform or recognize such unions... but the LAW DOES!

And with all the problems in the world? Why is the government wasting it's time worrying about weddings? Give me a ****ing break.

	29-01-2004 19:34									#94
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ming I'm still trying to understand what people have against gay marriage besides just religious beliefs and bigotry. If BK is against it for purely religious beliefs, that's fine by me. His religion doesn't have to perform or recognize them... their right. But all the "logical" arguments people bring up against aren't really logical at all... and are just weak rationales for supporting their bigotry or religious beliefs. Let's review some of those lame arguments against it... 1) It cheapens the institution of marriage. HUH? Are people really saying that the love two people have for each other and the bond they share by getting married is at all effected because of what other people do? That allowing gays to get married has an actual effect on non gay marriages? Please explain what effect it will have beyond simple religious beliefs. 2) Marriage is meant for having children/family and that wouldn't be the case for gays. HUH? Couples who can't have children are allowed to get married... and EVERY RELIGION I KNOW OF allows that and doesn't see it as a sin. Marriage is about love and commitment... You don't have to prove you can have children to get married. 3) Effecting the birth rate seems to have come up... HUH... what does this have to do with anything. 4) Since gays aren't necessarily getting married to have/adopt children, they don't need the special legal rights that are granted to those that do. Bull... Marriage has evolved beyond just having a family. It provides legal protections that are important to people who plan on spending their lives together and taking care of each other. Why should they not be allowed the same protection as other couples in love. I have yet to hear any logical argument against it... Only religious beliefs (which is fine) or simple bigotry (which isn't)

Oh, and just to add to your bit about the illogical argument that gay marriage would desacralize conventional marriage:

the fact is that marriage has not been sacred for many, many years now thanks to high divorce rate, Jerry Springer shows, Las Vegas drive-through weddings, and so on.

In this aspect, conservative heteros who adhere to the illogical argument you mentioned want to scapegoat gays for what are perceived as problems, that straight people have created.

	29-01-2004 19:42									#95
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Folks, you'd have more success trying to get Colmes to stand up to Hannity than you would arguing gay marriage with Ben Kenobi.

	29-01-2004 19:47									#96
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, I want Bennie to at least stop distorting this issue by trying to state that gays are upset that we are not allowed to marry someone of the opposite gender.

That is not what we're upset about.

	29-01-2004 20:03									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Starchild Hell, if it wanted to, the Canadian Parliament could define marriage to be exclusively between a man and an oak tree.

Trust you to think of something so perverted .............


and yet, I have heard a siren call from my garden

	29-01-2004 20:13									#98
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Trust you to think of something so perverted ............. and yet, I have heard a siren call from my garden

Watch out for woodpeckers.

	30-01-2004 03:43									#99
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: and yet, I have heard a siren call from my garden

Yeah, its the 3 minute warning.

-Jam

	30-01-2004 03:58									#100
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

There is just one thing I want to say about gay marriage:

My girlfriend and I have lived happily for one year now. We have very little strife, and our couple just works perfectly.
My girlfriend and I have wild plans, about getting married, about having kids, about living together with a simple happiness everybody will understand and sympathetize with.

Such plans are common. Every longlasting couple draws them. It is a simple game, a simple happiness of life in a couple. Not only a simple one, but also an obvious one.

I can not understand why gays should be barred from experiencing this happiness.

	30-01-2004 03:59									#101
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi 1) Marriage, as an institution, cannot be redefined or limited by parliament, because parliament does not have the authority to redefine or limit marraige. This would render this change null and void, as well as ruling out gay marraige.

Same sex marriage is in full accord with the traditional definition of marriage as a union of two loving humans. Any attempt to outlaw it is a limitation of it by parliament.

quote: 3) What are the benefits society expects from marriage? There cannot be shown any reasonable difference between interracial and other married couples, therefore there can be no justification for the ban. The same cannot be said for gay marriage.

Yes, it can. There is no reasonable difference between samesex and other married couples. Both provide an increased tax base and a stable environment for the rearing of children.

	30-01-2004 04:05									#102
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Starchild Hell, if it wanted to, the Canadian Parliament could define marriage to be exclusively between a man and an oak tree.

It could also extend it to that. I mean - we're right on course for such!

	30-01-2004 04:07									#103
	hmm Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by St Leo Same sex marriage is in full accord with the traditional definition of marriage as a union of two loving humans. Any attempt to outlaw it is a limitation of it by parliament.

Sorry - I try not to give a **** about this issue all too much. But where exactly is this "traditional" definition you've outlined from??

	30-01-2004 04:08									#104
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Zylka It could also extend it to that. I mean - we're right on course for such!

No, we are not. An oak tree cannot consent.

I don't see a woman and a dolphin happenning anytime soon either.

	30-01-2004 04:10									#105
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

So, consent is your parameter. Good to see we're all adhering to arbitrary self opinion in legal definition, now!

	30-01-2004 04:17									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Show me a liberal who would object to consent being used as the parameter.

	30-01-2004 04:19									#107
	on your precious legality Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

What does that have to do with anything, at all?

	30-01-2004 07:58									#108
	Re: on your precious legality Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Zylka What does that have to do with anything, at all?

Well, for one, it ended the practice of men marrying pre-pubescent girls. In 1889 California lead the nation in raising the age of consent, which at that time in CA was ten.

	30-01-2004 08:02									#109
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Why shouldn't men be able to marry ten-year olds? Seems like an arbitrary decision to me...

	30-01-2004 08:13									#110
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ming I'm still trying to understand what people have against gay marriage besides just religious beliefs and bigotry. If BK is against it for purely religious beliefs, that's fine by me. His religion doesn't have to perform or recognize them... their right.

But the problem with religious morality is that it is universalist in scope. If you believe it, then you are morally bound to oppose homosexuality and to attempt to prevent it. There really isn't any possibility of a rational compromise if you are a committed Christian.

For a Christian like Ben, belief in Christianity is akin to other people's belief in political liberalism - it's a universalist moral prescription.

One might as well ask why we should believe in Millsian liberalism as the basis for organizing society. The only response I have seen from people is question begging, they believe that it is better because it doesn't interfere in others' private lives. But that just assumes the theory to prove it.

quote: But all the "logical" arguments people bring up against aren't really logical at all... and are just weak rationales for supporting their bigotry or religious beliefs.

Some of them are. Religious people have a teleological view of the world. They believe that God created sex for the purpose of procreation. Anything other than this is perversion.

Of course we can believe they are wrong but agree to tolerate their beliefs if they don't harm others. The problem is that such beliefs are by nature intolerant of dissenters. So are ours (it's just that different people count as "dissenters").
.

	30-01-2004 08:14									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Why shouldn't men be able to marry ten-year olds? Seems like an arbitrary decision to me...

Another member of the Jerry Lee Lewis fan club.

	30-01-2004 09:03									#112
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Why shouldn't men be able to marry ten-year olds? Seems like an arbitrary decision to me...

Why shouldn't women be able to marry ten-year olds?

	30-01-2004 10:28									#113
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Why shouldn't women be able to marry ten-year olds?

I don't see why they shouldn't be able to. Any attempt to stop such a practice would just be a blatant attempt to force a subjective moral standard onto the populace. This must not stand; morality should not be legislated.

	30-01-2004 10:42									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Children are neither biologically mature nor emotionally mature enough to be having sex, much less sex with adults. While stopping teenagers from having sex with each other is an exercise in futility, stopping adults from manipulating children and cooercing them into having sex is a standard of morality we can enforce.

	30-01-2004 10:48									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Children are neither biologically mature nor emotionally mature enough to be having sex, much less sex with adults.

That's just your opinion. I fail to see how you can objectively prove that children aren't "emotionally mature" enough to be having sex with adults.

	30-01-2004 10:50									#116
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Agathon But the problem with religious morality is that it is universalist in scope. If you believe it, then you are morally bound to oppose homosexuality and to attempt to prevent it. There really isn't any possibility of a rational compromise if you are a committed Christian.

Are you saying that clergy and congregations from Christian churches in Canada who want to perform marriage ceremonies for gays are not committed Christians? Not Catholic, or Orthodox maybe, but how do you get not Christian?

Would there even be an issue about this if there were not churches willing and wanting to perform this sacrament for gay couples? I think not since no one, no where has proposed that clergy be forced to perform marriages for gay couples in churches which disavow it.

This issue is a lot bigger than just rights for gay people. This issue is also about whether churches are free to decide their own course based on the consciences of thier own congregants.

	30-01-2004 10:52									#117
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten quote: Children are neither biologically mature nor emotionally mature enough to be having sex, much less sex with adults. That's just your opinion. I fail to see how you can objectively prove that children aren't "emotionally mature" enough to be having sex with adults.

According to your troll, we should be able to kill people on whim too, right? After all, there is no objective 'right' or 'wrong' is there?

	30-01-2004 10:54									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither According to your troll, we should be able to kill people on whim too, right? After all, there is no objective 'right' or 'wrong' is there?

That's his point. He's trying to draw a parallel into saying how everything can be judged simply as people forcing morals onto other people.

It's stupid, and I'm sure he knows that but is trolling it for fun.

	30-01-2004 10:56									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: According to your troll, we should be able to kill people on whim too, right? After all, there is no objective 'right' or 'wrong' is there?

Yes, according to my troll. If there is no objective morality, then all things are permissable.

	30-01-2004 10:58									#120
	Increase Your PM Length

Tell that to the judge.