Why Are You Against Same Sex Marriage?

Discussion in 'Gay & Lesbian Rights' started by learis, Oct 13, 2015.

?

Why Are You Against SSM

  1. Your Religion Says It's Wrong

    5 vote(s)
    19.2%
  2. Same Sex Couples Are Incapable of Genuinely Loving Each Other

    2 vote(s)
    7.7%
  3. Allowing SSM Will Lead to Allowing Beastiality, Polygamy, Incest, etc.

    2 vote(s)
    7.7%
  4. Other

    17 vote(s)
    65.4%
  1. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not precisely. Having read nary a word of any of the opinions, while it was yet another brazen violation of 10A, I don't even think we need to get that granular. My take is that given the Preamble, the only legitimate response to Obergefell by any court under US jurisdiction was summary dismissal along with a penalty for filing a frivolous lawsuit.
    His design is one thing; the public perception thereof, quite another.
     
  2. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why would you assume that by saying, "Christians certainly believe that marriage is God's design" that I meant, Christians certainly believe that CIVIL marriage is God's design?

    Only idiots think that using religious argument are going to work with non-religious people. I began a religious argument here with @Dayton3 because I was confident that I was talking to a Christian.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2020
  3. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,276
    Likes Received:
    18,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If people want to exclude things they need to be specific.
     
  4. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,276
    Likes Received:
    18,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Failure to draw a distinction.


    So?
     
  5. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,386
    Likes Received:
    1,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the common usage and meaning of words changes all the time

    in the case of marriage, it seems to me that this word has multiple meanings depending upon the context

    there is the legal contractual meaning
    There is a religious meaning
    There is a colloquial meaning
    And there is an interpersonal meaning

    all of these meanings can, and in fact have changed.... taking just one example... the religious meaning of marriage.... it is certainly not unchanging... nor uniform.

    If that is a fact.... why would any of us be concerned about non religious changes in the meaning of marriage? Unless, of course our true motive lies in casting implied moral approbation against those whose life choices make us uncomfortable.
     
    Maquiscat likes this.
  6. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ahhhh, gotcha. I'd be fine with that.
     
  7. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry but I have to burst this bubble.

    Many of the socially conservative, religiously based, groups also fought tooth and nail against civil unions. In Virginia a constitutional amendment was added that vociferously denied recognition of any legal arrangements between couples of the same sex.

    If these same groups had actively promoted civil unions as an alternative that may be the status quo even now. But they didn't and the push-back (which I'm pretty sure they weren't expecting) was so strong that now we have SSM.

    In my experience social-conservatives do this a lot. They go into an issue so cocksure they have the backing of the entire population that they cannot conceive they may have misjudged the sentiments of others and as a result they keep on losing.
     
  8. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, as has been pointed out by myself and others, many on the religious right actively fought against ANY legal recognition for same-sex couple whatsoever so they weren't interested in "live and let live" until after they lost.

    Hmmm!
     
  9. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The fact that people have been trying to exclude things, specifically both religious and legal marriages, from different camp, is a major theme in this thread.
     
  10. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry but I can't let that one slip. The legal argument was that same-sex couples are similarly or identically situated to heterosexual couples with respect to the administration of the marriage contract and therefore cannot be denied access to that contract without some rational basis as to why they should be so denied.

    There was no rational basis for this denial whatsoever.

    Your understanding of the case is colloquial rather than factual.
     
  11. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't think anybody has issue with that. If a particular church or sect or even anti-SSM group of atheists wants to band together and exclude same-sex married couples from their ranks they are perfectly entitled to do just that.

    On the flip side many churches etc. do support what they would see as same-sex "covenant marriages" within their ranks. I think this is causing an actual split in the Methodist Church as we speak.

    As Americans the only thing we need to have in common is the legal definition. Anything else is up to you.
     
  12. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not sure that would stand up to legal challenge but I doubt there are enough people out there who would be bothered enough to care.

    On the other hand, I just found this:

    "Covenant marriage is a legally distinct kind of marriage in three states (Arizona, Arkansas, and Louisiana) of the United States, in which the marrying spouses agree to obtain pre-marital counseling and accept more limited grounds for later seeking divorce (the least strict of which being that the couple lives apart from each other for two years). Louisiana became the first state to pass a covenant marriage law in 1997;[1][2] shortly afterwards, Arkansas[3] and Arizona[4] followed suit. Since its inception, very few couples in those states have married under covenant marriage law. As of the nationwide legalization of same-sex marriage, covenant marriages now can be contracted by either opposite- or same-sex couples."
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2020
  13. yabberefugee

    yabberefugee Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2017
    Messages:
    20,620
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is my experience that liberals, and other light in the loafer types who are for sure "cocksure" reach their level of morality based on the current morality of the collective. They have no anchor. Their morality is forever in decline.
     
  14. Colombine

    Colombine Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My morality is partly based on people being treated fairly under the law. Gay people weren't being treated fairly with respect to being able to enter a contract they were paying for with their taxes and for no apparent reason which I could discern.

    That's why I supported them.

    I wasn't in the least bit surprised when they won.
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and again, this is demonstrably false. Real marriages are also between 2 men or 2 women.

    Reality shows otherwise. Obergefell v Hodges
     
  16. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreement is in no way relevant to reality.
     
  17. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no, that is legal fact.
     
  18. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    disgusting perversions are not real marriages.
     
  19. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh well then you should easily be able.to cite a law that says religious does not exist.

    Keep in mind, the claim is is NOT that religious marriage is sufficient to obtain legal benefits. The claim is that religious marriage exists despite not being used to claim legal benefits. I am reasonably sure that you are not arguing against my claim, but what you think I am arguing. In other words you are creating a strawman.

    If you feel that at any time in this whole thread, I have made a claim that a religious marriage entitles the participants to legal benefits, cite it.
     
  20. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Under your specific religious dogma, true enough. However, other religions disagree. Furthermore, the legal version has nothing to do with any given religion's definition.
     
  21. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I noted that earlier as well. It's amazing how I'll informed these people are. Worse is having to deal with people from the other side just as I'll informed.
     
  22. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's all that counts.
     
  23. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    For you. As you think your religion trumps mine and others, so too do we think ours trumps yours. However the great part of living in America is that we all have the freedom to follow whatever religion and deity we wish and don't have to worry about the civil government punishing us for it.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2020
  24. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    +
    Bummer. I'm right and you're wrong. No offense intended. Get used to it.
     
  25. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Consider me impressed. That was a rather good rewording of what I said.
     
    Dayton3 likes this.

Share This Page