 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Are there any serious reasons against gay marriage? The only two I've ever been told is the "society will collapse" twaddle (see above) and the "God said no" twaddle (note: we never elected God as president.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
 |
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:29
|
|
quote:
Are there any serious reasons against gay marriage? The only two I've ever been told is the "society will collapse" twaddle (see above) and the "God said no" twaddle (note: we never elected God as president.) |
Let's not forget these hoary chestnuts:
- Marriage should not be changed because it is an inalterable tradition, and has always been just exactly the way it was in the USA circa 1953.
- Marriage is about procreation (except for sterile or elderly straight couples), and gay people cannot make babies (raising them doesn't matter, only siring them)
- Straight people will be forced to support innumerable benefits for gay spouses (just like those gay people who have no choice in supporting the benefits of our spouses and offspring)
- Gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married because they are promiscuous, always having sex outside of marriage.
- It would encourage young people to decide to change their sexual orientation.
- Granting gay people the right to marry will open the door to polygamy, just like giving the vote to women and blacks will inevitably lead to multiple-voting.
- Gay people don't want equal rights, they want special rights, like being able to get married to a guy.
- I, personally, could never fall in love with a person of the same gender, so we should not, as a society, condone it.
- Allowing gay people to get married will in some indefinable manner cheapen my own marriage.
- Gay people are incapable of forming permanent relationships. They won't respect marriage the way we straights with our 50% divorce rate do.
- It would send the the wrong message, that gay people are just as good as the rest of us.
Last edited by mindseye on 07-07-2003 at 02:53
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mindseye
quote:
yavoon asks:
[q] u demand the tax benefits that badly?. |
Is there some place in the US where there is a tax incentive to get married? Then what's with the arguments for getting rid of the "marriage penalty"? Besides, to frame the argument over gay marriage in terms of taxes is to utterly miss the point.
|
there are lots of tax and healthcare benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
|
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:29
|
|
quote:
there are lots of tax (...) benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion. |
Tell that to the "marriage penalty" folks, not me! (Hint: do an internet search on "marriage penalty" and "tax" for further information. I found 173 sites using Vivisimo).
I edited out "and healthcare" from your post because your earlier comments were about taxes, not healthcare.
Hey, I'll be the first to agree that there are many, many benefits to getting married - healthcare, legal, and otherwise (how about visiting your spouse in hospital emergency room?). I guess the point where we disagree is that I don't think these rights should be unequally distributed on the basis of your spouse's gender.
Last edited by mindseye on 07-07-2003 at 03:07
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mindseye
quote:
there are lots of tax and healthcare benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion. |
Tell that to the "marriage penalty" folks, not me! (Hint: do an internet search on "marriage penalty" and "tax" for further information. I found 173 sites using Vivisimo).
Hey, I'll be the first to agree that there are many, many benefits to getting married, healthcare, legal, and otherwise (how about visiting your spouse in hospital emergency room?). I guess the point where we disagree is that I don't think these rights should be unequally distributed on the basis of the gender of your spouse. |
well first they aren't rights. they're tax benefits. and while congress can distribute them to gay couples, they don't have to. It is also worth noting that the reason that society encourages people to get and stay married. so that children can grow up w/ both a mother and a father. doesn't translate at all, or nearly as efficiently to gay couples.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
|
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:29
|
|
quote:
well first they aren't rights. |
If you re-read my post, you'll see I was not simply referring to taxes (quote: "there are many, many benefits to getting married, healthcare, legal, and otherwise "). These benefits include such rights as hospital emergency room visitation rights, control over funerals, etc.
quote:
they're tax benefits. and while congress can distribute them to gay couples, they don't have to. |
Agreed! My point is that I think they should distribute any such benefits to gay couples. I argue that such benefits should be distributed equally, without discrimination. Perhaps I'm not clear on the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that they should or should not be granted to gay couples?
quote:
It is also worth noting that the reason that society encourages people to get and stay married. so that children can grow up w/ both a mother and a father. |
If that is true, then where do you think society should be focusing that concern: on families where children are raised by two loving parents of the same gender, or families with one heterosexual parent? The latter seems to me to be a far, far larger problem, at least in in terms of sheer numbers. What you are talking about is more of an issue of heterosexual divorce rates, not gay marriage.
The point being that, given the enormous number of single parent families, it does not strike me that two-parent same-sex families in any way adds to the problem. In fact, studies to date of the thousands of gay couples successfully raising children have found such concerns to be ill-founded.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mindseye
quote:
well first they aren't rights. |
If you re-read my post, you'll see I was not simply referring to taxes (quote: "there are many, many benefits to getting married, healthcare, legal, and otherwise "). These benefits include such rights as hospital emergency room visitation rights, control over funerals, etc.
quote:
they're tax benefits. and while congress can distribute them to gay couples, they don't have to. |
Agreed! My point is that I think they should distribute any such benefits to gay couples. I argue that such benefits should be distributed equally, without discrimination. Perhaps I'm not clear on the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that they should or should not be granted to gay couples?
quote:
It is also worth noting that the reason that society encourages people to get and stay married. so that children can grow up w/ both a mother and a father. |
If that is true, then where do you think society should be focusing that concern: on families where children are raised by two loving parents of the same gender, or families with one heterosexual parent? The latter seems to me to be a far, far larger problem, at least in in terms of sheer numbers. What you are talking about is more of an issue of heterosexual divorce rates, not gay marriage.
The point being that, given the enormous number of single parent families, it does not strike me that two-parent same-sex families in any way adds to the problem. In fact, studies to date of the thousands of gay couples successfully raising children have found such concerns to be ill-founded. |
its not discrimination if there is a reason to discern. ie. we are giving the benefits in order to efficiently fulfill this societal need. we have reason to believe that handing out benefits in this manner to other people would not effectively handle this need therefore we do not need to hand them out.
and I have never talked about denying gay ppl the right to goto divorce court or sign prenuptial agreements or bury their spouses or whatever. u keep trying to broaden this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mindseye
quote:
its not discrimination if there is a reason to discern. |
Quite so. My argument is that there is no reason to discern. Question: do you think there is?
quote:
and I have never talked about denying gay ppl the right to goto divorce court or sign prenuptial agreements or bury their spouses or whatever. u keep trying to broaden this. |
I thought you broadened it when you said "there are lots of tax and healthcare benefits to getting married." Aren't hospital emergency room visitation rights a healthcare matter?
I think you did not understand my reference to divorce. You brought up parenting issues, I think that topic needs to include single parent families, don't you?
These are at any rate moot points, because as I said before, to restrict the argument to a matter of tax benefits is to utterly miss the point of equal access to marriage, unless you are arguing that marriage is solely a matter of taxes benefits. |
I'm not restricting it. there are many other issues here. not all of them I care to argue. ur just gna have to deal w/ that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mindseye
quote:
I'm not restricting it. there are many other issues here. not all of them I care to argue. ur just gna have to deal w/ that. |
Fine. Then how come you keep dodging my tax benefits question: do you think tax benefits should or should not be equally distributed? Can you answer this please? I've asked twice already, I'm still waiting for your response. |
tax benefits have never been equally distributed. they've always been incentivized. do I think thats a great idea? I'm meh about the idea. but thats how it works. the government wants a certain result out of the population and they give u tax benefits or tax hikes in order to perpetuate it.
I don't think u read my posts cuz I've already explained in fairly good detail what my stance is.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-07-2003 04:20
A marriage not only of same sex but also of three (Canada, Europe and US)??
|