10 Reasons why Gay Marriage is Wrong!!

[Arrian]

Same arguments, why is one right, and the other wrong?

Probably because the world isn't black and white, Ben. In THEORY, there isn't anything wrong with Polygamy (other than God says don't do it, which as you know I have zero respect for). In PRACTICE, however, there are serious issues with it. If we as a society decide that we've sorted those issues, then I see no reason why polygamy cannot some day be legalized.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

I am unsure whether a society can function if one believes in absolute personal autonomy as the primary good.

Why do you hate freedom?

Absolute personal autonomy, however, is yet another strawman by you. Personal freedom w/o harming others or unduly restricting their freedom. That's the idea. Obviously, reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes harm or undue restriction.

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi




No, but my question is how do you argue against those particular arguments employed by those who want polygamy and at the same time, accept them from gay people?

Same arguments, why is one right, and the other wrong?

Actually You can make a number of different arguments around polygamy. The first and foremost is that the benefits of marriage are between two people. My argument is that any person should be able to have things like pension benefits flow to their spouse whether they be married, gay married or variations of common law. To give additional rights to 3rd and 4th and 5th personsisn't equality but more rights.


I actually don't care if a person wants to have a continuing relationship with 3 or 5 or 8 women. Thats their business. But don't expect state benefits to accrue to all of your 8 "widows"



Gay marriage is actually the same as regular marriage-- Both are a legal linking of two people with certain rights and reponsibilities.

[Ben Kenobi]

I didn't specify a particular religion, Ben. Further, in the context of the current debate, the overwhelming majority of those in opposition to gay marriage oppose it on religious grounds, or "traditional" grounds (which is simply another way of saying Christianity).

That's question begging. I'm disappointed. The point I was making is that the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman predates Christianity, and that it is held in common by different religions. If the reasons were solely religious, one would expect to see different religious societies holding different beliefs. What if society as a whole does better when it keeps marriage as one man and one woman, and the common agreement is a testimony?

Is that the best you can do?!

The parents will answer that question easily, Ben. If the kid was adopted, they will explain what adoption means. To the extent the child has difficulty with the idea that their "real" parents gave them up, that is no different from children adopted by heterosexuals having the same reaction.

Ok, but that misses part of what I was getting at. The child who is adopted has no clue that she has been adopted, unless someone tells her that her dad is not her real dad. And even then the child is likely not to believe that she has in fact been adopted unless the adoptive parents make the point of telling her from the start.

Secondly, why didn't I write, "where is my mom?" which is the natural question associated with someone who has been told that she is adopted. I wrote 'where is my dad' for the very specific reason that this occasion is different from being adopted.

To the extent that it was artificial insemination that did the trick, mommies ( ) can explain that too. How hard is that, really?

Okay, so you are going to explain to an 8 year old how artificial insemination works? Right. All she understands is that she doesn't have a father, and no one will tell her why.

Any harder than explaining why the teacher just gave a lesson about the Theory of Evolution and the child coming homing and asking "Mommy, why do we think the Earth is 6000yrs old and that people are all from Adam and Eve?"

Depends on the age of the child. I'm assuming a child of 8 or 9, and I don't know why they would teach children evolution at that age.

[Ben Kenobi]

Actually You can make a number of different arguments around polygamy. The first and foremost is that the benefits of marriage are between two people. My argument is that any person should be able to have things like pension benefits flow to their spouse whether they be married, gay married or variations of common law. To give additional rights to 3rd and 4th and 5th personsisn't equality but more rights.

I actually don't care if a person wants to have a continuing relationship with 3 or 5 or 8 women. Thats their business. But don't expect state benefits to accrue to all of your 8 "widows"

Gay marriage is actually the same as regular marriage-- Both are a legal linking of two people with certain rights and reponsibilities.

I have to laugh. I have made the same argument myself when I say that society derives a benefit through marriage between a man and a woman. You are right that there are certain legal obligations implied, but the difference is that marriage between a man and a woman can reasonably be expected to pay for itself if the couples have children.

Why should society encourage actions that increase their costs without the intrinsic benefits?

You are quite right about polygamy accruing benefits, and you fall upon the fact that society has a particular expectation from the marriage benefits they provide, such that it doesn't make sense to provide the benefit to everyone.

[Arrian]

If the reasons were solely religious, one would expect to see different religious societies holding different beliefs.

With regard to marriage, they do (see: Polygamy). I'm not positive about gay marriage, but suffice it to say that even if most or even all religions all agree that gays shouldn't marry, I do not concede that they are right. Just like Tradition isn't always right.

Ok, but that misses part of what I was getting at. The child who is adopted has no clue that she has been adopted, unless someone tells her that her dad is not her real dad. And even then the child is likely not to believe that she has in fact been adopted unless the adoptive parents make the point of telling her from the start.

Secondly, why didn't I write, "where is my mom?" which is the natural question associated with someone who has been told that she is adopted. I wrote 'where is my dad' for the very specific reason that this occasion is different from being adopted.

This is just silly. A child is going to ask questions - lots of them. That's what kids do. Parents have to answer (or dodge, as the case may be) such questions early and often. A child who has been adopted will find our sooner or later depending on their specific circumstances... so what? What is your point?

Basically, are you against adoption? Because you aren't saying anything that specifically applies to adoption by gays.

Okay, so you are going to explain to an 8 year old how artificial insemination works? Right. All she understands is that she doesn't have a father, and no one will tell her why.

Yes. You don't have to give them a full-on technical description complete with video, but you can explain the concept.

Do you actually believe that gay adotive parents haven't thought that through?? These are people going out of their way (waaaaay out of their way) to be parents.

Depends on the age of the child. I'm assuming a child of 8 or 9, and I don't know why they would teach children evolution at that age.

Yep, you assume all sorts of ****.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

There is a difference, by the way, between RIGHTS and BENIFITS.

Personally, I don't really see why marriage should get you benifits. Parenthood, yes, that makes sense. Marriage w/o parenthood... why? Done properly, the gay guy in my office who has 2 adopted daughers would get benifits whereas my wife and I would not unless/until we have a child. That would actually make some sense.

RIGHTS, otoh, are another matter. It's not about cost.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

But be honest, Ben. Your opposition to gay marriage has nothing to do with cost to the state.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The concept predates Christianity, and is by no means exclusive to Christianity. .

Its based on Roman marriage law, which the Christians adopted. Jewish marriage law said that marriage was betweem one man and any number of women. Though by at least Mishnaic times plural marriage was uncommon, and virtually unknown among the rabbis, and was discouraged. It was outlawed for ashkenazic Jews by the decree of Rabbi Gershom (circa 1000 CE) It was outlawed for Sephardic Jews only in our own century. And even so a remnant of it survives in Jewish law. A Jewish divorce requires the consent (even if under pressure) of both parties. If a woman refuses her husband a divorce (one granted by a rabbinical court, that is) , a rabbincal courty can grant the husband a leniency from the decree of Rabbi Gerson, and allow him to marry. In the case of a man who refuses his wife a divorce, the legal remedies are rather more difficult.

[Ben Kenobi]

This is just silly. A child is going to ask questions - lots of them. That's what kids do. Parents have to answer (or dodge, as the case may be) such questions early and often. A child who has been adopted will find our sooner or later depending on their specific circumstances... so what? What is your point?

Well I don't see a kid just going out and asking, am I adopted? I would think they assume that their parents are their parents, unless someone, like a cousin or something told them that they were adopted.

Basically, are you against adoption? Because you aren't saying anything that specifically applies to adoption by gays.

That was what I was trying to clarify here. The specific issue of where is my father cannot be ignored. I've been rather charitable in having the issue delayed until school, but the reality is when the kids see other families they are going to wonder why they don't have a father. Now for couples that have adopted, they can say that you are adopted, here is your real mother and father.

Yes. You don't have to give them a full-on technical description complete with video, but you can explain the concept.

How could it be done in any meaningful sense to an 8 year old?

This is what I think would be more likely. They would tell the kid that their daddy is dead/ran off rather then get into the details of artificial insemination.

If I knew what gay adoptive parents planned to tell the kids, (if they conceived through insemination), I wouldn't be asking these questions.

[Ben Kenobi]

But be honest, Ben. Your opposition to gay marriage has nothing to do with cost to the state.

Always a very good question. Rather then assuming, you should ask someone why they believe what they do.

Ming has said that it's my religion. You say the same, but no one has actually bothered to ask, they just assume.

If you really want to know, I think gay marriage is a bum deal for the participants. We are not doing them favours by encouraging them to stay in relationships that are harmful to their physical well-being, when they have better alternatives.

That is why I changed my mind on gay marriage, I used to think that encouraging gay men to stay committed to each other would reduce some of the health problems, but only because I believed that they could not change. When I examined the question as to whether gay people could change, I came across the argument that everyone is born with certain predispositions, but we choose whether to act on them or not. That made sense to me, and explained how one could say that he has the desire, yet for whatever reason choose not to act.

[Arrian]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

That was what I was trying to clarify here. The specific issue of where is my father cannot be ignored. I've been rather charitable in having the issue delayed until school

Um, so? So the issue must be dealt with. Your point?

How could it be done in any meaningful sense to an 8 year old?

You give the 8 year old little credit. Further, there are lots of things that you must explain to small children that they may not "get" at first. So?

This is what I think would be more likely. They would tell the kid that their daddy is dead/ran off rather then get into the details of artificial insemination.

Another "likely hypothetical" from you. Could it be that you assume such a thing because you attach a stigma to the honest answer? Hmm? Might it be possible that parents who do not attach such a stigma could manage to answer simply but without ridiculous deception??

If I knew what gay adoptive parents planned to tell the kids, (if they conceived through insemination), I wouldn't be asking these questions.

Yup. You don't know, so you just pull something out of your ass.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

If you really want to know, I think gay marriage is a bum deal for the participants. We are not doing them favours by encouraging them to stay in relationships that are harmful to their physical well-being, when they have better alternatives.

Do you have any idea how arrogant this is?

It all comes down to wanting them to change, because homosexuality is bad. Why is it bad, Ben? I'm bettin' we're back to religion there.

-Arrian

p.s. Good pun, though.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

. That made sense to me, and explained how one could say that he has the desire, yet for whatever reason choose not to act.

well yeah, for years many of them chose to enter hetero marriages, that often didnt work out to well. And today of course they choose to live gay lives, but without marriage.


(BTW, Im not advocating legalization of gay marriage by the above - my position is Burkean - we dont know all the consequences, so lets proceed with caution - here in the states lets see how civil unions in Vermont and Mass actually work in practice, and then determine whether to go further - which position puts me in something of a dilemma here in Virginia, as I dont want the Commonwealth YET to change the def of marriage, or even adopt civil unions, but I also dont want what the fundies are calling for - an amendment to the commonwealth constitution enshrining the current def of marriage)

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi



Okay, so you are going to explain to an 8 year old how artificial insemination works? Right. All she understands is that she doesn't have a father, and no one will tell her why.

Kids accept as normal what is presented as normal. At very early ages children will accept that one person has a mom and no dad, a dad and no mom, two moms, two dads, or even more in the cases of remarriages. They don't think there's anything odd about that since they don't have anyone telling them there is anything wrong with that