AtheostNexus.org discussion on same-sex marriage

Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Tony Carroll on April 1, 2012 at 11:33am

Oh, SB. How I envy you. To be at that stage of comfort with another person. To be past the fire works (which is GREAT by the way) to the state of total acceptance by another. Comforting, warm, all encompassing, like a down comforter on a cold December morning. You know I lost my wife a few years ago, and we were just getting to that stage. I think of you, and others who are there, and it brings a smile to my face and heart. Somewhat wistful, of course, but genuine.
Enjoy, my friend, enjoy. Peace to you, and to your partner. My best. As usual, be well. Peace.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Bryanderthal on April 1, 2012 at 10:51am

There are so many benefits to marriage: greater sexual satisfaction, better physical and mental health, less depression and alcohol problems, lower mortality risk. Married people are more likely to volunteer services, make more money, and contribute to the affluence of a neighborhood.
I don't see how keeping anybody from reaping these benefits can be justified.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Holly Blake on April 1, 2012 at 12:43pm

For it. Anything else is discrimination. I care about this particular  subject a great deal because someone very dear to me is gay and hopes someday to be able to marry. I really can't imagine how two people who care for each other enough to make a legal commitment can cause any harm to our social fabric.It would seem to me to strengthen it.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on April 19, 2012 at 8:46pm

Pro.
Plumbing is irrelevant to love.

▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by John on April 22, 2012 at 2:30am

Pro
We live in a very progressive area many Gays and Lesbians, we moved here seventeen years ago to escape small mindedness in the suburbs.
▶ Reply



http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/same-sex-marriage?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A1909012&page=3#comments







Permalink Reply by annet on March 31, 2012 at 4:08pm

Sentient expressed my reasons well.  Here is another one of my reasons for being in favor of same sex marriage:






▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Susan Stanko on March 31, 2012 at 4:47pm

Wish there was a "like" button
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Kenneth Harold Fouche' Jr. on March 31, 2012 at 9:28pm

Yea, me too
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by MB on March 31, 2012 at 7:06pm

In Australia we have had this same debate, and I finally think we may even get the laws passed within the next few years.
Sadly the debate from the conservative sides are no more enlightend.
One  prominent ex-sportwoman, now conservative christian minister left me scratching my head however. I'll paraphrase here as i cant be bothered looking for the exact quote " I mean no disrespect to gays and lesbians, but introducing same sex marriage WILL lead to a breakdown in morals".

WTF??? how can that statement be anything but disrespectful.

I do get very irritated by this whole argument. Really i just don't see how a gay or lesbian couple wanting to marry affects any else's marriage. If it does I think your marriage has bigger problems than that.

MB
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Tony Carroll on March 31, 2012 at 7:20pm

True. It doesn't affect anyone else's marriage. When over 50% of all marriages end in divorce, the problem is much deeper than gay or lesbians wanting the same thing the rest of us have, which is equality. If NOM wants to defend marriage, this is the real problem, the real breakdown of "morals".
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 31, 2012 at 8:49pm

Hmmm, let's see. The highest rates of divorce in the US are southern evangelicals. The lowest divorce rates are among non-evangelicals in the northeast. The tambourine bangers yell that gay marriage will ruin divorce. Seems to me that those that scream the loudest are doing a great job of ruining it all by themselves, without any outside help.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on April 1, 2012 at 12:08pm

The state with the largest number of people that claim to be born again Christians and also with the highest divorce rate is Oklahoma.  If the defense of marriage is so fucking important I would think the right wing theists would be marching and protesting against divorce.
I notice a total absence of any such protests.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Daniel W on April 1, 2012 at 12:36pm

Yes, but you just don't get it!  It's the fact that gay people in Massachusetts can marry, that is the cause of the high divorce rate in Oklahoma.  It's a butterfly effect- you know, the connectedness of all things, that a butterfly flapping it's wings in Costa Rica could cause hurricane Katrina.  Same thing.  Just the mere existence of gay people is the cause of the great depression, tuberculosis, and the dust bowl.

▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Richard ∑wald on March 31, 2012 at 10:20pm

I think it's simple, those who are not comfortable with the idea of same-sex marriage don't have to be part of one; other than that they should shut-the-fuck-up.

Seriously.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Tony Carroll on March 31, 2012 at 10:35pm

Hear hear, Richard. And here's my "like" button.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by James M. Martin on April 1, 2012 at 8:47am

I once thought, why mimic a failed heterosexual instititution.  Why give heterosexuals a gloat in trying to enter their exclusive club.  Why allow your tormentors to dis you for seeking something biblically sanctioned and, apparently, only for the majority?  Don't queers know 50% of all marriages end in divorce, but heterosexuals hypocritically claim that gays are "promiscuous."  I don't mince words (no pun intended).  I don't like alphabet soup (some gay sites actually have it GLBT, while some lesbian sites have it LGBT, as if it mattered: categories are inherently untrustworthy, something I learned from Buddhists).  To me, you are straight or queer.  I reserved the right to re-appropraite that word much as urban blacks during the Civil Rights movement re-appropriated and freely referred to themselves as "niggers."  Yes, niggers.  I am not going to be politically correct and type "n***r" or refer to "the 'N' word."  Queers and niggers.  The objections to use of either are themselves a form of tyranny, deathly to the artist, who must portray, say, a Southern cracker by quoting him verbatim, as in the Otto Preminger movie, Hurry Sundown, where the late Burgess Meredith, lest she once against sip from the "Sacred Chalice," actually refers to a celebrant at Mass as "an old syphilitic nigger woman."  But, I digress.

Sooner or later it dawned on me that marriage is a right.  It does not make any difference if you are doing it in a church or getting hitched by, e.g. a minister of the Universal Life Church.  (We chose the latter: a friend brought a couple of joints, we smoked them, and we exchanged vows to the most laid back non-religious, "spiritual" marriage ceremony in the 1970s.  Friends came over for drinks, a wonderful mixture of gay and straight, old and young, three or four races -- it was L.A.)  If gay men wish to emulate heterosexuals, have at it.  It isn't the business of the government to dictate that one type of people can do something and another type cannot.  The Constitution is an expansive, rather than restrictive, document.

Finally, in my early 60s, I began to see that the only possible reasons anyone would have to oppose such things (and things like contraception and abortion) is religious.  These people read no science so they would not know that Sodom was built on a time-bomb pocket of mephitic gasses left over from billions of years earlier (not six days in one week circa 5,000 BCE).  They do not educate themselves in archeology and anthropology and thus would not know that the story of Lot in Sodom illustrates not that the denizens of that city on the plain were homosexual but that their "sin" was xerophobia.  They fashioned procrustean beds to stretch nomadic tribes coming in off the desert and looking for sustenance, a meal and a wife or daughter, freely given, except in Sodom.  To claim that Sodom teaches anything justifying homophobia is just plain ignorant.  Nor do these people appear to have any problem with Lot impregnating his own daughters after his wife is turned into a delusion.  It is like saying, homosexuality is bad but incest is good.

And when the only justification one can find for one's positions on such matters as gay marriage is a biblical (Koranic, Torahnic) proscription, one's position is inherently flawed.  Either science is correct and religion is wrong, or science is wrong and religion is correct.  It's Darwin or Genesis.  I choose reason over superstition.  It's that simple.  I totally support gay marriage.  I have to, I'm a divorce lawyer.


▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Daniel W on April 1, 2012 at 9:18am

Thoughtful response James.  That last zinger made me laugh.  Friday my partner and I were at our financial planner who recommended a pre-nup.  A bit late - we've been together 15 years.  I just responded, if he leaves me I assume I'm screwed - I'll just have to work till I drop, which is probably true anyway.  And we seem to be past having any drama - but I understand the issue.  When we got together, it was less "Oh I love you so much, Oh roses and hearts and champaigne and violins" than it was "Well, we're comfortable together, it's nice, it would be more practical to combine our resources".  That is the practical midwestern farmer in me, and the practical rust-belt chinese in him.
▶ Reply
http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/same-sex-marriage?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A1909012&page=2#comments




































Same-sex Marriage.
Posted by LM Godoy on March 31, 2012 at 1:56am in Politics
View Discussions
.






What is your stand on same-sex marriage? Kindly give a reason for your stand too. Thank you. ;)


Tags: LGBT, equality, gay, homosexuality, marriage, same-sex



 Like 

.
Share   
  



Views: 512
▶ Reply to This
..


Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Richard ∑wald on March 31, 2012 at 2:02am


"What is your stand on same-sex marriage?"
If any two humans want to be married, they should be able to do so.

"Kindly give a reason for your stand too."
Human Rights.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by LM Godoy on March 31, 2012 at 5:17am

Nice, man. ;)
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 31, 2012 at 6:53am

Marriage in the 21st century has evolved to the point where it has a significant civil component, particularly as regards RIGHTS codified by civil law.  While I haven't actually looked these up, my understanding is that these rights number over 1,000, and they include most significantly rights regarding inheritance after the death of one spouse and empowerment regarding medical actions should one spouse be incapacitated (medical power-of-attorney).  Such rights should be available to ANY adult consenting couple, based on the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.
 These rights in no way have to impinge on religious attitudes regarding homosexuality. There are churches which have no problem with gay marriage, as surely as there are those that do. The fact remains that civil marriage with NO religious component is available to ANY hetero couple right now. The same should be true of gay and Lesbian couples.
 "Equal rights" should be available to ALL CITIZENS, or the term "equal" means NOTHING.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by LM Godoy on March 31, 2012 at 9:25am

Nice. I like this!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Pat on March 31, 2012 at 8:54am

Personal opinion is that the idea of "marriage" is a rather archaic and outdated term. Without going into a lengthy history, it was society's recognition of a status change regarding two individuals primarily for property distribution within and between families that had children in common. Only a few hundred years ago did the idea of "romance" enter into it in the west. It was strategic, sexually based, contract for the acquisition and protection of wealth - usually land.
Today's consequences, as Loren correctly points out, has to do with status recognition which impacts property ownership, tax consequences, inheritance, and a myriad number of other financial and legal ramifications.
Personal opinion is that if two consenting adults of any gender, sexual orientation, etc., want to enter into the status of a relationship that recognizes these right and obligations, they should be able to go to a local county courthouse, sign and register their agreement. Bingo - done. No magic incantations, no figure of authority (shaman, judge, ship captain, etc.) need approve it. If they wish to leave it, go down to the same courthouse, take a red pen, and write "cancelled" on it. If they can't agree on property distribution, debt allocation, child custody, etc., that came from the relationship, go to an arbitrator.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Napoleon Bonaparte on March 31, 2012 at 9:27am

Same sex marriage means that same thing as traditional marriage. It means money for lawyers.
A relationship which was once beautiful becomes entangled with law upon marriage or civil partnership. It is a fact that a high percentage of marriages and civil partnerships break down. Therefore specialist lawyers are already preparing to open up shop. They're waiting for it !

▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Jessica on March 31, 2012 at 9:49am

As long as no one tries to marry an animal or a child I am all for it!  We all deserve happiness!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Steph S. on April 16, 2012 at 9:12am
Wonderful Jonathan. I am also for equality. Marriage should be for everyone.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Daniel W on March 31, 2012 at 11:55am

Marriage inequality costs same sex couples up to $6,000 a year - over a marriage, how much?
Marriage inequality costs surviving partner potentially $10s of thousands at a time in life when they cant afford it and hetero married couples don't have that burden.
Married same sex couples deserve to be able to make critical care decisions when a partner is ill or dying.
"1,138 federal rights that accompany civil marriage, and some additional 300-600 per individual state. That means your run-of-the-mill-marriage-license-carrying heterosexual couple has access to over 1,400 rights, benefits, and protections."
An imprisoned serial killer has the right to marry.  A gay person does not.
Marriage discrimination is a continued insult that tells the gay person they are not deserving of even the simple human right that all other people can have.  Marriage inequality is degrading.

▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on March 31, 2012 at 12:13pm

What you said, bro!
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Tony Carroll on March 31, 2012 at 1:29pm

Completely with you. Well said.
▶ Reply

 Permalink Reply by Michael Brice on March 31, 2012 at 12:53pm


Stand? I accept same sex marriage, however I do take a stand against opposition to same sex marriage/human rights.
Reason? I have never been concerned about what other people do with their genitals, I have always been much more concerned with what my genitals are doing.
▶ Reply


‹ Previous

http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/same-sex-marriage?id=2182797%3ATopic%3A1909012&page=1#comments