|
Author
|
Topic: SAME SEX MARRIAGE-why or why not??
|
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 02:22 AM
  
long back when i first came to know about same sex marriage my thoughts were like why not?? Equality has to have a fair share! so to say i was 100% Okay with it.As time passed by My inner self was talking back to me...saying no it isnt the right thing..but i was fighting against it!
So it became 60% for it and 40% against it. I would like to share my thoughts. After the latest news about obama changing his positions on prop 8.
And on a thorough introspection..I am 90%against and 10% for it. So i would like to know viewpoints either for or against the topic 'same sex marriage' IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 02:23 AM
First and foremost
As we all know "Gay marriage" is polling better and better, but still isn't embraced by the majority,
even though, when you ask the public if it supports allowing gays to enjoy partnership rights
and responsibilities that are nearly identical to marriage partnership rights and responsibilities,
the answer is usually a solid yes.Yes i too dont deny their status in the society..their wants and urges..i understand and respect all that..
i dont mind them living together but marriage is a definite NO for me..why?
IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 02:26 AM
lets study some comparisons here related to such choices made in history
1Abolition of slavery.it does occur to me that slavery was abolished under the leadership of a president --
the sainted Abraham Lincoln -- who did not campaign as an abolitionist
(he simply said he wanted to limit the spread of slavery and was seen, therefore,
as a more electable moderate than an abolitionist candidate). In a similar manner obama is all for gay rights except marriage.
I dont see anything wrong in that. 2. Inter racial marriage..yes im all for it and dont see anything wrong in that too. Religious faggot is the word more frequently used against those who abhor gay marriage.
if i were to marry i wouldnt choose all the religious rites at all becoz marriage can be intercaste
so religion has no place for me even in case of a same sex marriage. IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 02:27 AM
below are my thoughts...
If gay marriage can be legalised..which is between two consenting adults?
why not incest between two consenting adults?
Why not legalise bigamy and polygamy too in the institution of marriage?
this is what struck me like a lightening bolt!!
so putting aside religious social and cultural dogmas,
I cited the most important barrier between them as that of biological factor!
Marriage for one cannot happen between more than two consenting adults..that is accepted.
Next comes biology..Biological male unites with a biological female to produce a biological offspring..
dont you think thats a basic fundamental concept of a definition of marriage??
When this basic genetic concept is lacking how can it be called a marriage at all?
Biology plays an important role in creation itself.
This is how i feel.
IP: Logged |
EverEvolvingSpirit
Knowflake Posts: 557
From: A Place of Pure Love <3
Registered: Feb 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 06:48 AM
I support gay marriage 100% They deserve to be able to legally bind their relationship and celebrate and profess their love to one another before God.It is two people in love. I'm partial toward this because of my own questionable sexuality, maybe. But I still feel the same  IP: Logged |
EverEvolvingSpirit
Knowflake Posts: 557
From: A Place of Pure Love <3
Registered: Feb 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 06:50 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rajji:
below are my thoughts...
If gay marriage can be legalised..which is between two consenting adults?
why not incest between two consenting adults?
Why not legalise bigamy and polygamy too in the institution of marriage?
this is what struck me like a lightening bolt!!
so putting aside religious social and cultural dogmas,
I cited the most important barrier between them as that of biological factor!
Marriage for one cannot happen between more than two consenting adults..that is accepted.
Next comes biology..Biological male unites with a biological female to produce a biological offspring..
dont you think thats a basic fundamental concept of a definition of marriage??
When this basic genetic concept is lacking how can it be called a marriage at all?
Biology plays an important role in creation itself.
This is how i feel.
Yes, but do men and women have sex with on another exclusively to create offspring? IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:17 AM
Marriage and love are entirely different
However there are chances of the two coming together which can be considered as lucky enough...
people fall in love outside their wedlock..
...sometimes marriage sex and money has nothing to do with love at all..
People very often fall in love but hardly get married!
IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:18 AM
Now ees by offspring what I mean to stress is that-
As per the definition of MARRIAGE in a broader sense-
Sexual behavior after marriage allows only for penile vaginal penetration (which is procreative). IP: Logged |
EverEvolvingSpirit
Knowflake Posts: 557
From: A Place of Pure Love <3
Registered: Feb 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:51 AM
Undesrstood, Rajii. But I think one of the main reasons why gay people want the right to marriage is so they can have the same legal rights as any other married couple.When I used to work in the hospital and I got gay patients who's procedures were covered by their partner there was almost always some sort of misunderstanding between us and the insurance companies and ultimately surgery would be delayed until the kinks were ironed out. This is different when married couples are covered by the other's insurance. Do I make sense? It's early and I'm a little cloudy IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:54 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rajji:
...........so putting aside religious social and cultural dogmas,
I cited the most important barrier between them as that of biological factor!
Marriage for one cannot happen between more than two consenting adults..that is accepted.
Next comes biology..Biological male unites with a biological female to produce a biological offspring..
dont you think thats a basic fundamental concept of a definition of marriage??
When this basic genetic concept is lacking how can it be called a marriage at all?
Biology plays an important role in creation itself.
This is how i feel.
Wow!
So if one does not make babies......
it is not a real marriage?
Well I have had over 26 lost pregnancies so by that concept of marriage=babies;
I am mostly a total failure.
Many folks choose to have no children, be it a choice or even marrying older, especially the woman, wherein she may not be able to have children.
So, a menopausal woman has no reason to marry because she cannot have children?Most of my friends are gay or lesbian.
I support their rights to be married.
Most of these relationships have lasted longer than the heterosexual marriages I knew of.
Love is love no matter what gender the people involved are!
Being a person born dual gendered, I cannot help but take offense at restrictions on marriage for adults in love!
Incest is another issue and even it is based on outmoded concepts of reproduction, ie;
have sex with your sister will produce idiot children.
What of folks who were adopted, or were the result of sperm donors?
Such do meet, fall in love, only to their horror discover they are brother and sister and so forth.
It is a complicated issue in those cases.
Same for polygamous marriage.
Both incestuous and polygamy were allowed in many cultures in ancient times.
However;
same sex marriage should be allowed!
------------------
~The present time is theirs, but the future is mine.~Nikola Tesla
~There is no box.~H♥
~I remember, therefore I am immortal~LEXX }><}}}(*> IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:57 AM
 no.. i dont get it ees.
Take your time..no hurry. IP: Logged |
EverEvolvingSpirit
Knowflake Posts: 557
From: A Place of Pure Love <3
Registered: Feb 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 07:59 AM
LoL I knew I was sounding crazy. Let me go get some food. I will be back soon to explain a bit better.GM, LEXX IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:02 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rajji:
Now ees by offspring what I mean to stress is that-
As per the definition of MARRIAGE in a broader sense-
Sexual behavior after marriage allows only for penile vaginal penetration (which is procreative).
What fraking century is this? 
OK I have just picked myself up off the floor after laughing rather hysterically at the absolute absurdity of that!
Before and after marriage, believe me, any bodily orifice is "allowable" as is mutually
agreed on! 
And so;
I am not allowed to have any sex but penile/vaginal?
No oral either?
And of course anal would just be soooo wrong!
So
I am not allowed to have sex unless I make babies?
Frake off to that crap! 
------------------
~The present time is theirs, but the future is mine.~Nikola Tesla
~There is no box.~H♥
~I remember, therefore I am immortal~LEXX }><}}}(*>
IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:08 AM
Lexx,I already explained as to what i meant by having offspring.
Now Lets say..slavery has been abolished..that dosent mean that its not being practised remotely!
AND for ages to come the basic definition of a SLAVE cannot and will not be changed to suit our needs! In a similar way if defining MARRIAGE as it has always been defined is discriminatory against those who wish it was
defined in a way more to their liking, and in a way that changes what it is and has always been into something it never was nor ever has been!instead of letting it be that as it is is also discriminatory! IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:13 AM
Slavery has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of legalizing same sex marriage!
Nor does it have anything to do with two people in love!
Nor does it have anything to do with having or not having children!
And certainly has nothing to do with how I engage in sexual relations!IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:19 AM
quote:
Originally posted by EverEvolvingSpirit:
Undesrstood, Rajii. But I think one of the main reasons why gay people want the right to marriage is so they can have the same legal rights as any other married couple.When I used to work in the hospital and I got gay patients who's procedures were covered by their partner there was almost always some sort of misunderstanding between us and the insurance companies and ultimately surgery would be delayed until the kinks were ironed out. This is different when married couples are covered by the other's insurance. Do I make sense? It's early and I'm a little cloudy
Be it hetero or gay;
if they are not married they have usually absolutely no rights under HIPPA to even see their loved one in hospital, even if dying, and have no spousal medical rights either!
It is a horrible thing to not have those rights whether hetero or gay!
Marriage should be allowed for any two consenting adults!IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:20 AM
Im stating slavery as an example to understand the meaning of the word SLAVE!And similarly Im stating a sexual act of marriage as penile vaginal penetration to understand the word MARRIAGE as that where Gender is about the only and most essential part of the institution of marriage itself! IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:24 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rajji:
Im stating slavery as an example to understand the meaning of the word SLAVE!And similarly Im stating a sexual act of marriage as penile vaginal penetration to understand the word MARRIAGE as that where Gender is about the only and most essential part of the institution of marriage itself!
That just all makes for no logical rational argument!
I do not see what a restriction of only penile penetration or gender or slavery, or having children or not, has to do with marriage betwixt two folks in love.IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:29 AM
quote:
Originally posted by EverEvolvingSpirit:
I support gay marriage 100% They deserve to be able to legally bind their relationship and celebrate and profess their love to one another before God.It is two people in love. I'm partial toward this because of my own questionable sexuality, maybe. But I still feel the same
 IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:32 AM
we are not talking about LOVE we are talking about MARRIAGE here!
LOVE dosent always lead to MARRIAGE!If marriage is being defined as a CIVIL RIGHT! what about a person who wants to marry but can't find another to agree? Can they demand they be provided a husband or wife? Wouldn't not doing so be a violation of their "civil rights"? What if that person doesn't see a problem with forced marriage? If you agree with redefining marriage to be man-man or woman-woman, you cannot argue against forced marriage. After all, it is legal in other countries!
In that case so can incest, polygamy etc be legalised also! IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by EverEvolvingSpirit:
Undesrstood, Rajii. But I think one of the main reasons why gay people want the right to marriage is so they can have the same legal rights as any other married couple.
Thanks for understanding my part ees
IP: Logged |
charmainec
Moderator Posts: 1933
From: on the other side of the rainbow
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:37 AM
Personally I have no objections to gay marriages. If two people are in love and want to spend the rest of their lives together then good for them.Why should they not have the same legal rights? Because it's a same sex marriage? We are well beyond the dark ages..will be back a bit later to add to this.. *sorry busy! IP: Logged |
rajji
Knowflake Posts: 386
From:
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by charmainec:
Personally I have no objections to gay marriages. If two people are in love and want to spend the rest of their lives together then good for them.Why should they not have the same legal rights? Because it's a same sex marriage? We are well beyond the dark ages..will be back a bit later to add to this.. *sorry busy!
Why should they not have the same legal rights? Because it's a same sex marriage?
NO! not because its a same sex marriage at all! it cannot have same legal rights because
Once you cross this line, you cannot establish a new line. The door is now open to forced marriage,incest, polygamy, polyamory (group marriage), elimination of age restrictions, abolution of adultry laws, etc. If you support gay marriage, you have no legitimate basis to deny any of these other "new" definitions of marriage!
IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 08:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by rajji:
Why should they not have the same legal rights? Because it's a same sex marriage?
NO! not because its a same sex marriage at all! it cannot have same legal rights because
Once you cross this line, you cannot establish a new line. The door is now open to forced marriage,incest, polygamy, polyamory (group marriage), elimination of age restrictions, abolution of adultry laws, etc. If you support gay marriage, you have no legitimate basis to deny any of these other "new" definitions of marriage!
I cannot believe I am reading such utter paranoia and basically a form of gay bashing bigotry by equating same sex marriage as in same league as the other things you mention here!
And geeez....
all the things you mention happen one way or other in heterosexual marriages!
Marriage betwixt one man one woman does not prevent any of it!
Being allowed to marry into other races did not open such doors, so for crying out loud.....
geeez....
same sex is not going to hurt marriage for heteros!
It is about having the exact same legal rights that hetero couples have who are married!
If hetero couples choose not to marry and not have legal rights, that is their choice!
That should be the choice for any couple!
As to forced marriage...
talk about a primitive barbaric custom!
Og beat woman over head and drag back to cave and rape her!
Oh how lovely a man woman thing!
Oh but its OK because it is one man one woman! quote:
If you agree with redefining marriage to be man-man or woman-woman, you cannot argue against forced marriage. After all, it is legal in other countries!
I damn well can and have and will continue to argue against forced marriages!
Disgusting and a stinking line which has been already crossed which perpetuates violence against women, many who would be considered minors in more civilized societies!
That is a sick abusive thing which has nothing in common with two people of any genders, race and or are of legal ages, CHOOSING to marry!
NOT FRAKING FORCED TO MARRY AND THEN BE LEGALLY RAPED AND FORCED TO BEAR CHILDREN!
AND YEAH...
SO CIVILIZED!
IF SHE CANNOT MAKE BABIES, BURN HER OR HAVE HER MURDERED!
Get over the fraking gender issue already please! IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5217
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2011 09:05 AM
quote:
Originally posted by charmainec:
Personally I have no objections to gay marriages. If two people are in love and want to spend the rest of their lives together then good for them.Why should they not have the same legal rights? Because it's a same sex marriage? We are well beyond the dark ages..will be back a bit later to add to this.. *sorry busy!
IP: Logged |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
