Opponents. How has gay marriage negatively effected your life?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Turin, Oct 29, 2020.

  1. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,379
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No I am reasonable. You don't have to test them every month. You have to make a sincere effort to keep straights from defacing the institution of marriage when soooo many of them do it every single year for decades. The costs need not be costs borne by the govt, they can be costs borne by those who seek the license, and those who do not want their license revoked after several years of childless marriage. I am not even asking that they be fined or for them to repay for the marriage loophole that they used designed for child rearing when they did not actually raise a child. If you are really worried about the economics, start a charity for those who cannot afford the tests. Maybe we could consider a govt program to help finance for low income couples. Gays are 5 % percent of the population and less than half are married. Married straight persons without a child in their home are a much much bigger problem. They undermine the very principles on which this institution was founded constantly, you just have to learn to care about it.

    Those who find it intrusive or expensive, need not bother with the license. Its a choice to marry or not. It is not a choice to undermine marriage itself for literally decades after ones own children have reach majority, or before they are even born. Its sick and straights who really want to protect marriage, should do so from the largest threat which numerically means married couples who are not raising a kid, or who stopped raising kids
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
  2. peacelate

    peacelate Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2020
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    2,963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's not really a linear example. When the government subsidizes green energy for research, that money has to actually go towards research in a certain amount of time. In other words, those green companies can't just sit on that money and they have to be actually using it for the purpose stated. When married couples get tax deductions, are they actively trying to have a kid or are they sitting on that money? Wouldn't you be upset if your tax dollars were being used to subsidize companies who were using it for other purposes?
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
  3. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I understand you want to pick and choose traditions.
     
  4. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You’re not going to get any argument from me on any of that because as I’ve said I don’t believe anyone should receive marriage benefits. So I’m certainly fine in cutting down on the fraud. But just because you have some fraud doesn’t mean you allow a bunch of others to do the same.

    Even if you could make the argument some Heterosexuals should not receive marriage benefits, that still doesn’t justify why homosexuals should.
     
  5. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure it is. A large percentage of the time the reason a couple who wants a child doesn’t have one yet is because they do not feel financially secure. Part of the benefits of marriage are meant to alleviate that concern and give them the ability to get in a more financially stable condition so they can procreate. You can’t wait until AFTER they do so because that undermines the purpose.
     
  6. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,133
    Likes Received:
    16,080
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And you can follow the traditions you like. That is not the same as changing what they are and pretending they apply to you as they do by the established history.
     
  7. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The core traditions of marriage are that two people who love each other affirm their a hopefully lifelong commitment to each other. All else is window dressing.
     
  8. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,379
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If your concern is simply that marriage is debased by those who exploit it for purposes other than child rearing, then you should act to stop those who exploit it most by being wed, staying wed without raising children. You obsess about this miniscule breach in this wall of marital integrity, and come up with excuse after excuse to do nothing about the boulder sized hole by people who get married and remain married without raising children. Marriage is not about supporting people who want to be married. Its about supporting the children to be raised in the union. Now its time for you to put forth concrete steps to end the debasing of marriage by couples who get married prior to pregnancy, and those who stay married without minors living in that marital home to justify that contract. If there are no minors in the home to be supported, the marriage contract should be void until there are.

    Stop making excuses for straight people. Come up with a plan to fight straight abuse of this institution. At the very least we should annul childless marriage among straightsand post parenting marriage among older straights who no longer use this institution consistent with its purpose. I am waiting.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
    cd8ed likes this.
  9. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No my position is that is not a feasible course of action. Therefore if you think it is, you should provide how you think that would work.
     
  10. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,379
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course it is. You don't even need to worry about fertility. The minor living in the family home to benefit from the marriage, validates the existence of the contract not the license from 4 years ago.. Minor turns 18, minor moves out, the marriage is annulled. Its incredibly simple.

    Nobody is married without a minor child to directly benefit from that union, and only for as long as that minor child receives that benefit. So unless gays have a minor child living with them, they will not be married, and neither will straights. Its a great success for the sanctity of your definition of marriage. You should be thrilled.

    Now unless this is whole line of yours is disingenuous garbage to hide blatant unadulterated discrimination, you will work as hard to stop straights from demeaning the institution as you do gays. Straights are the big culprit by any standard.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
  11. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again you can’t do that, as I explained the other individual it undermines the entire purpose. The marriage benefits are intended to create an environment in which procreation is more likely. We aren’t giving people rewards for having children lol
     
  12. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,379
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh I get it! Then the benefits should be anulled when the likelihood is statistically low based on the GROUP ( nope those three 70 year old mothers do not justify marriage for all straights through the seventies because the rest weaken and debase the institution of marriage . Its your duty to prove you are fertile on your dime, using an expert in the field before you file for a license, ) and the benefits should stop after the procreation has happened. Its job fulfilled, the marriage is annulled upon birth. That's even easier. You got your baby, now govt ditches the marriage.

    Its entirely feasible as long as the responsibility rests with the couple requesting the license. nobody gives a **** how feasible it is for them.

    Or do you have even more excuses why you are fine with straights who are not having kids or want to have kids or can have kids are still debasing marriage?.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
  13. peacelate

    peacelate Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2020
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    2,963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And to get those benefits they have to get married? People save up for years to get married. It's not cheap. Getting married takes a chunk out of what can spend on a child.
     
  14. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol if nobody gave a **** then they wouldn’t be receiving benefits in the first place.

    Given the scotus declared that the purpose of marriage is procreation I’m not sure why this is even a discussion.

    But regardless, I would be fine with taking all marriage benefits away. But no matter how much you stomp your feet and flail... NOTHING you’ve said, or ever will say, justifies the money being spent on homosexual marriage. Because there is no justification.
     
  15. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If it were legal for your neighbors to own slaves, how would it negatively effect your life?
     
  16. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1,853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    This is a stupid argument. Slavery has a physical and emotional harm on people. Gay marriage does not.
     
  17. Turin

    Turin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1,853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    About the only thing you have demonstrated is that you approve of using the state to discriminate against people you dont like who have no impact on your life what so ever.
     
    cd8ed likes this.
  18. TheImmortal

    TheImmortal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    11,876
    Likes Received:
    2,865
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only a liberal would think me not wanting you to steal my money and give it to someone else is discriminatory.

    But anyway, we discriminate against incestuous and polygamous couples too according to your definition. Why should homosexuals be any different? Or more appropriate, why should incestuous and polygamous marriages be discriminated against if homosexuality is not?
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2020
  19. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,133
    Likes Received:
    16,080
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    On the contrary. While that is a key component of a sound relationship, the primary objective of life is continuity; meaning procreation and the development of healthy, capable offspring prepared to manage life.
    No gay marriage procreates, and many people believe it's not possible to raise children with an understanding of conventional love and relationships growing up in a gay marriage, where they lack the role model of a traditional mother or father.

    A gay union may adopt or use some other way to obtain possession of children not their own.... but they cannot procreate. Thus, it is in that respect an indulgence in self. That's ok, and I have no problem identifying that as a civil union or by whatever new label they want to invent. But the usurpation of an entity and it's name that you do not conform to is a dilution of a respected standard, for personal satisfaction.... and reducing the sanctity of that relationship for all who are truly part of one one. I realize many people don't see that, but then- we have a growing percentage of our population raised without being taught to respect other people and traditions, but rather to think selfishly and indifferently to the way their actions impact others.

    You may endorse that self-serving license to abuse such a sacred tradition- I do not.
     
  20. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

    9) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
     
  21. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You dodged my question, how would slavery harm YOU? I say homosexuality also has a physical and emotional harm on people.
     
  22. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No it doesn't.
     
  23. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,133
    Likes Received:
    16,080
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Why not try using some common sense and logic here, rather than ignoring the obvious truth and chasing splinter rationalizations?
    I doubt you really don't understand the point- you just don't want to recognize it.
     
  24. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Common sense and logic say there's no problem with same-sex marriage, Because again the core traditions of marriage are that two people who love each other affirm their a hopefully lifelong commitment to each other. All else is window dressing.
     
  25. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,023
    Likes Received:
    19,311
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not the same issue. You have to come up with examples that do not involve victims. Gay marriage does not make victims.
     

Share This Page