What's wrong with Gay Marriage?

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Kramer

Didn't read through the whole thread but:
1) If people were born gay due to some genetic thing wouldn't that gene have died off forever ago? (Due to not being able to pass it on)

-The genetics of homosexuality is probably multi-factorial -diff genes, mutations, prenatal environment may all play a role.
-The siblings of homosexuals still carry the gene and can pass it on to offspring
-There are animals in many species who have members who don't mate and still get their genes passed on. Certain individuals increase their fitness by forgoing reproduction and cooperatively caring for the offspring of their siblings.

It's complicated but read up on eusocialism and kin selection. Some evolutionary biologist hypothesize this is why homosexuality is so prevalent in nature.

How many times have you seen or heard of dudes coming out the closest way late in their lives, after they already had a wife and kids? Genes passed.

There is a reason why we specify a difference between familial and non-familial genetic diseases, (I am certainly not stating being gay is a disease please don't take it that way, it's only an example) which can describe how a disease came to be genetically in one individual.
Describing whether or not there was a predisposition for the disease or whether it is arose from later genetic mutations/aberrations. Being homosexual could maybe be a gene that is passed down, but it might also spontaneously arise in random individuals. Maybe a highly variable region in the genome, which is why we see it so much.

IF homosexuality is indeed hardwired into our genes, like all other genetic abnormalities, environmental (physical and mental) effects will play a large role in the progression and phenotypic expression of these genes. Whether or not they act, well... gay.

 

[pleasurephd]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Kramer

Didn't read through the whole thread but:
1) If people were born gay due to some genetic thing wouldn't that gene have died off forever ago? (Due to not being able to pass it on)

-The genetics of homosexuality is probably multi-factorial -diff genes, mutations, prenatal environment may all play a role.
-The siblings of homosexuals still carry the gene and can pass it on to offspring
-There are animals in many species who have members who don't mate and still get their genes passed on. Certain individuals increase their fitness by forgoing reproduction and cooperatively caring for the offspring of their siblings.

It's complicated but read up on eusocialism and kin selection. Some evolutionary biologist hypothesize this is why homosexuality is so prevalent in nature.

How many times have you seen or heard of dudes coming out the closest way late in their lives, after they already had a wife and kids? Genes passed.

There is a reason why we specify a difference between familial and non-familial genetic diseases, (I am certainly not stating being gay is a disease please don't take it that way, it's only an example) which can describe how a disease came to be genetically in one individual.
Describing whether or not there was a predisposition for the disease or whether it is arose from later genetic mutations/aberrations. Being homosexual could maybe be a gene that is passed down, but it might also spontaneously arise in random individuals. Maybe a highly variable region in the genome, which is why we see it so much.

IF homosexuality is indeed hardwired into our genes, like all other genetic abnormalities, environmental (physical and mental) effects will play a large role in the progression and phenotypic expression of these genes. Whether or not they act, well... gay.

 

[timcity2000]

we could put to rest a lot of misconceptions with a simple survey:

state whether you are gay or straight. then state whether or not you chose to be that way.

i'll start: i'm gay. i did not choose to be this way.


next....

 

[timcity2000]

we could put to rest a lot of misconceptions with a simple survey:

state whether you are gay or straight. then state whether or not you chose to be that way.

i'll start: i'm gay. i did not choose to be this way.


next....

 

[hankmoody]

Ruh-roh.

 

[hankmoody]

Ruh-roh.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 

[tkthafm]

If and when science breaks down what "gay" actually is & why exactly it develops, it still doesn't forcibly deem society responsible to cater to/accept/support how it is manifested (IE: marriage). I don't think discovering strong genetic vs environmental determining factors should have much bearing on how we view it. It's all relative, what you call an abnormality or deviation, someone may call a defect, flaw or disease state. Science alone cannot enter this realm and adjudicate the differences. That's where a society's moral/ethical values come into play. It would be a mistake to think that not accepting something like marriage between homosexuals means inherently viewing them as inferior beings. It's obvious that the tide has shifted towards supporting it, at least in the West. In other places the attitude is still strongly negative. My question is basically a mirror image of the OP... what makes the view opposing it wrong ? If a society (which collectively defines marriage) deems homosexual marriage as "wrong" (or homosexuality in and of itself as a defect, flaw or disease state) how do they have any less backing to their claim than a society that supports it ?

Before someone makes the "what about if X race is viewed as inferior" argument... this is not an issue of fundamental human rights or again, if the person is even viewed as "equal". It's a question of how society defines the boundaries of what actions human beings make are acceptable/allowed within THAT society. The source for most of the opposition comes from religious belief, so let's look at Islam & Judaism as examples. Both hold that all races/humans are equal. Interracial marriage is acceptable. In a society that ascribes to these teachings, what then should force them to allow gay marriage ? a self-righteous belief that they should, just because that person/society has deemed it "RIGHT" ? I don't think so, homie.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 

[tkthafm]

If and when science breaks down what "gay" actually is & why exactly it develops, it still doesn't forcibly deem society responsible to cater to/accept/support how it is manifested (IE: marriage). I don't think discovering strong genetic vs environmental determining factors should have much bearing on how we view it. It's all relative, what you call an abnormality or deviation, someone may call a defect, flaw or disease state. Science alone cannot enter this realm and adjudicate the differences. That's where a society's moral/ethical values come into play. It would be a mistake to think that not accepting something like marriage between homosexuals means inherently viewing them as inferior beings. It's obvious that the tide has shifted towards supporting it, at least in the West. In other places the attitude is still strongly negative. My question is basically a mirror image of the OP... what makes the view opposing it wrong ? If a society (which collectively defines marriage) deems homosexual marriage as "wrong" (or homosexuality in and of itself as a defect, flaw or disease state) how do they have any less backing to their claim than a society that supports it ?

Before someone makes the "what about if X race is viewed as inferior" argument... this is not an issue of fundamental human rights or again, if the person is even viewed as "equal". It's a question of how society defines the boundaries of what actions human beings make are acceptable/allowed within THAT society. The source for most of the opposition comes from religious belief, so let's look at Islam & Judaism as examples. Both hold that all races/humans are equal. Interracial marriage is acceptable. In a society that ascribes to these teachings, what then should force them to allow gay marriage ? a self-righteous belief that they should, just because that person/society has deemed it "RIGHT" ? I don't think so, homie.

 

[diego]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

Could you also talk to us about the fact that we could go to Vegas and have an Elvis impersonator marry a man and a woman and how that's also blatant disrespect on the religious ideas attached to marriage? Marriage lost it's sanctity a long time ago bro, I've no clue what you're trying to protect. Let me guess...apples and oranges.

 

[diego]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

Could you also talk to us about the fact that we could go to Vegas and have an Elvis impersonator marry a man and a woman and how that's also blatant disrespect on the religious ideas attached to marriage? Marriage lost it's sanctity a long time ago bro, I've no clue what you're trying to protect. Let me guess...apples and oranges.

 

[proper english]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

For me it's the concept of marriage.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 these dudes a picking and choosing which posts to argue against. 

 

[proper english]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

For me it's the concept of marriage.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

 these dudes a picking and choosing which posts to argue against. 

 

[deuce king]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

I'm against divorce as well, when you marry someone you take a vow to them before God for the institution of marriage.  I understand how and why some divorces do occur however, that doesn't mean I'm for divorce though.  

     

 

[deuce king]

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by melofan15

for those that are anti-gay marriage, are you against gay relationships or is the concept of marriage the determining factor in your beliefs?

For me it's the concept of marriage.

   For someone who's always preaching that "give a black man a chance" you making the same argument a slave master wouldve made when blacks were trying to fight for their freedom.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

I'm against divorce as well, when you marry someone you take a vow to them before God for the institution of marriage.  I understand how and why some divorces do occur however, that doesn't mean I'm for divorce though.  

     

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

For me it's the concept of marriage.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

I'm against divorce as well, when you marry someone you take a vow to them before God for the institution of marriage.  I understand how and why some divorces do occur however, that doesn't mean I'm for divorce though.  

     

and that's my point. you're against it the same way you're against gay marriage. but how come one is illegal and the other is not only legal, but highly prevalent in our society. personally, i don't care if gay people want to get married or not, but they should have the right to get married and have it recognized by the law.

 

[do work son]

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by do work son

Originally Posted by Deuce King

For me it's the concept of marriage.

Apples and oranges champ, apples and oranges.  If gay people want to unite, then by all means have a civil union.  However, whether folks on here or anywhere else want to believe it or not the term "marriage" has religion or religious components to it.        

if you don't want for gay marriage because it disrespects your religious views of marriage, should divorce too be illegal?

I'm against divorce as well, when you marry someone you take a vow to them before God for the institution of marriage.  I understand how and why some divorces do occur however, that doesn't mean I'm for divorce though.  

     

and that's my point. you're against it the same way you're against gay marriage. but how come one is illegal and the other is not only legal, but highly prevalent in our society. personally, i don't care if gay people want to get married or not, but they should have the right to get married and have it recognized by the law.

 

[eugenile gts]

i dont think anything is wrong with it.

Doesn't effect me, they aren't a threat to me. So it's all good.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by tkthafm

If and when science breaks down what "gay" actually is & why exactly it develops, it still doesn't forcibly deem society responsible to cater to/accept/support how it is manifested (IE: marriage). I don't think discovering strong genetic vs environmental determining factors should have much bearing on how we view it. It's all relative, what you call an abnormality or deviation, someone may call a defect, flaw or disease state. Science alone cannot enter this realm and adjudicate the differences. That's where a society's moral/ethical values come into play. It would be a mistake to think that not accepting something like marriage between homosexuals means inherently viewing them as inferior beings. It's obvious that the tide has shifted towards supporting it, at least in the West. In other places the attitude is still strongly negative. My question is basically a mirror image of the OP... what makes the view opposing it wrong ? If a society (which collectively defines marriage) deems homosexual marriage as "wrong" (or homosexuality in and of itself as a defect, flaw or disease state) how do they have any less backing to their claim than a society that supports it ?

Before someone makes the "what about if X race is viewed as inferior" argument... this is not an issue of fundamental human rights or again, if the person is even viewed as "equal". It's a question of how society defines the boundaries of what actions human beings make are acceptable/allowed within THAT society. The source for most of the opposition comes from religious belief, so let's look at Islam & Judaism as examples. Both hold that all races/humans are equal. Interracial marriage is acceptable. In a society that ascribes to these teachings, what then should force them to allow gay marriage ? a self-righteous belief that they should, just because that person/society has deemed it "RIGHT" ? I don't think so, homie.

I suppose you're right, if a society thinks its right to stone women for engaging in beauty pageants and punish homosexuality with death, who the hell am I do impose my views on them. If it were up to certain people we would be living in the dark ages. I simply think this is one more progressive step for humanity as a whole, and like other struggles for human rights there will be resistance.


The homosexuality is "natural" argument should NOT have to be made. Whether or not we have found whatever gene makes them the way they are is completely irrelevant. At the end of the day, they wake up every morning feeling a certain way and having a sexual inclination toward the same sex. I am gay and I can't help it should be enough to justify letting homosexuals be themselves but it isn't enough for society.


There are many immoral thought processes throughout history and presently that are perpetuated by the majority of society. Doesn't make it right. At a time people thought human beings that didn't look like them were animals to be bred and sold. Those societies COLLECTIVELY thought it was the correct thing to do.

 

[eugenile gts]

i dont think anything is wrong with it.

Doesn't effect me, they aren't a threat to me. So it's all good.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by tkthafm

If and when science breaks down what "gay" actually is & why exactly it develops, it still doesn't forcibly deem society responsible to cater to/accept/support how it is manifested (IE: marriage). I don't think discovering strong genetic vs environmental determining factors should have much bearing on how we view it. It's all relative, what you call an abnormality or deviation, someone may call a defect, flaw or disease state. Science alone cannot enter this realm and adjudicate the differences. That's where a society's moral/ethical values come into play. It would be a mistake to think that not accepting something like marriage between homosexuals means inherently viewing them as inferior beings. It's obvious that the tide has shifted towards supporting it, at least in the West. In other places the attitude is still strongly negative. My question is basically a mirror image of the OP... what makes the view opposing it wrong ? If a society (which collectively defines marriage) deems homosexual marriage as "wrong" (or homosexuality in and of itself as a defect, flaw or disease state) how do they have any less backing to their claim than a society that supports it ?

Before someone makes the "what about if X race is viewed as inferior" argument... this is not an issue of fundamental human rights or again, if the person is even viewed as "equal". It's a question of how society defines the boundaries of what actions human beings make are acceptable/allowed within THAT society. The source for most of the opposition comes from religious belief, so let's look at Islam & Judaism as examples. Both hold that all races/humans are equal. Interracial marriage is acceptable. In a society that ascribes to these teachings, what then should force them to allow gay marriage ? a self-righteous belief that they should, just because that person/society has deemed it "RIGHT" ? I don't think so, homie.

I suppose you're right, if a society thinks its right to stone women for engaging in beauty pageants and punish homosexuality with death, who the hell am I do impose my views on them. If it were up to certain people we would be living in the dark ages. I simply think this is one more progressive step for humanity as a whole, and like other struggles for human rights there will be resistance.


The homosexuality is "natural" argument should NOT have to be made. Whether or not we have found whatever gene makes them the way they are is completely irrelevant. At the end of the day, they wake up every morning feeling a certain way and having a sexual inclination toward the same sex. I am gay and I can't help it should be enough to justify letting homosexuals be themselves but it isn't enough for society.


There are many immoral thought processes throughout history and presently that are perpetuated by the majority of society. Doesn't make it right. At a time people thought human beings that didn't look like them were animals to be bred and sold. Those societies COLLECTIVELY thought it was the correct thing to do.

 

[rko2004]

You know what would solve a lot. Dirty said before to leave Marriage to religious people and civil unions to un-religious so then everyone could be unionized.