A Simple Question for Those Are Still Opposed to Same Sex Marriage

Discussion in 'Gay & Lesbian Rights' started by ProgressivePatriot, Nov 17, 2017.

  1. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    https://www.indifferentlanguages.com/words/marriage
    So exactly how are words like "brak","avioliitto", "santuoka", and 'sib yuav", just to name a few, derviced from "mater"? These are all words that mean marriage. Or do those words not matter? Words come from a lot of sources across many languages. Marriage is an institution, and the word associated with it varies. It is the institution that is more relevant than any one given word. The use of the word source is a red herring.
     
  2. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Given that time range, has included same sex marriages, polygamous marriages, incestuous marriages, ghost marriages and so much more. A majority of people entering into one given type of marriage does not invalidate or dismiss the existence of these other types of marriage.
     
  3. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    This is going right back to the argument that marriage is only for the purpose of having children, which on a legal level simply is not true. Having protections with in the legal context of marriage for any children produced is different from the overall purpose of marriage. On a legal basis, the ability or inability to have children is not a factor to who should or should not be allowed to enter into the legal institution.
     
  4. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,343
    Likes Received:
    212
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Which is false
    Irrelivant
    Which is false, there are numerous instances where the biological father is not liable
    There is no reason to deny same sex couples the protections and benifits of marriage which is why you never directly address it.
     
  5. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,725
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Are you aware of a child having been produced from two persons of the same sex? I think it would have resulted in quite a news story.


    I'm aware of same sex relations having existed long ago but were they called marriages?
     
  6. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    It did.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sc...6/Sperm-cells-created-from-female-embryo.html

    I also remember reading an article somewhere (in a hard copy magazine) about a process where they remove the DNA from a sperm and add the DNA from one female's egg, and then use that to fertilize the egg of another female. At the time of the article, they were still doing it on animals, and it was a few years ago. But it is quite conceivable that it is doable with humans. Now mind you I am not claiming that this is common place right now or inexpensive. But like IVF and other procedures, the costs of which are dropping rapidly, the cost will become affordable. And with artificial womb technology being explored, many more choices are and will be available for homosexual couples, both men and women.

    Yes they were. And they were also denied by other cultures as well. The early Catholic church once ruled that if a couple were not married under their church, they would not consider them married. So the whole concept of one group telling another group that what they have isn't the definition of marriage is probably as old as the institution itself.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2018
  7. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,725
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    "...a remarkable breakthrough that suggests it may be possible for lesbian couples to have their own biological children."
    "coaxed male bone marrow cells to develop into primitive sperm cells have now repeated the feat with female embryonic stem cells."
    "It raises the possibility of lesbian couples one day having children"
    My question asked "Are you aware of a child having been produced from two persons of the same sex? I think it would have resulted in quite a news story.

    I've yet to see any historical evidence being presented. At best it would appear the word marriage and other supportive words to have been created as a recognition of nature.
     
  8. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Human offspring, no. I mentioned the one that was using nucleus transfer. That should be ready soon, I would believe. However my point was not that it is viable now but that it is on it's way and that these are going to be out there. If we want to be more accurate, then I can say, your assertion is not true for much longer.

    Of course none of the issues on who a child is created from biologically has anything to do with the legal state of marriage, since child bearing is not a requirement of legal marriage.

    I am going to direct you to the book Committed by Elizabeth Gilbert, author of Eat, Pray, Love. In her book she details out several different types of marriages across the world and time. All of them being marriages. Also see the thread on the Creation of Monogamy on this forum. The link there notes other types of marriages, including polyandry. I am getting ready to head off to work as of this posting. If I get time tonight I'll see if I can find more sources. However, like most who oppose anything other than one man one woman, you will probably dismiss them.
     
  9. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    48,512
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then why did they only expand marriage to include homosexuals, without extending it to all who are currently prohibited by law from marrying? Because equality wasn't the goal. Winning more "respect and dignity" for homosexuals is the goal.
     
  10. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    48,512
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Already did. Here it is again.

    consummation of marriage

    Also found in: Dictionary, Wikipedia.
    Related to consummation of marriage: consummate
    consummation of marriage
    full sexual intercourse between married persons after their marriage by the insertion of the penis into the vagina. Inability to consummate because of impotence or refusal to consummate is a ground for nullity of the marriage.
    https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/consummation+of+marriage
     
  11. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    48,512
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Physical impossibility for a man to be related by blood to his horse
     
  12. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    48,512
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only a husband is obligated by marriage to provide and care for any child that his wife gives birth to.
     
  13. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Given that science has figured out how to transfer DNA from egg to sperm or vice versa, but has yet to discover how to make two dissimilar species produce offspring, it actually does NOT logically follow that you could produce a child with your dog.
     
  14. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Like most thing dealing with the court system, only that which is challanged can be ruled upon. The courts are not empowered to go beyond the scope of what is challenged. That is why SSM was not made legal when interracial marriage was, and why incest marriage didn't get made legal. Someone would have to challenge the incest prohibition separately for that to occur. That one would probably happen over several steps with non blood related legal connections being the first to get over turned (e.g. Greg and Marsha Brady being allowed to.marry). As to age, that prohibition is drafted along the ability to give informed consent. That is already handled in the law with emancipation of a minor. So if an 8 year old can show enough maturity as to convince a judge to emancipate then to legal adult status, then the 8 year old would legally be allowed to marry. I don't for see it happening, but that is the structure of the law.
     
  15. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah saw that post after I had responded. However, while failure to do so may be grounds for nullification, such would only happen at the behest of one or both of the individuals within that marriage license. Nowhere in the law is there a requirement that a marriage be consummated lest the government nullify the marriage against the will of the couple. Additionally, just at the marriage laws are changing/have changed for the allowance of SSM, so too will that legal definition change.
     
  16. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I was making a parallexample of how the legal definition might differ from the standard definition. Incest is normally defined as sexual relations between two individuals who share a common blood bond within two to three steps of each other. However, legally incest can be defined as, in some states, being related within that two or three steps legally, even if there is no shared blood, such as step siblings. Step siblings would not normally be seen as incest.

    So while marrying a horse would not normally be beastiality, as you pointed out, the law can define it as such, as they did with incest. And since it is law we are discussing, the distinction is important.
     
  17. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,390
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Incorrect. The husband is able to contest that obligation if he can show he is actually not the father. While the law will assume he is barring any other evidence, which is proper since more often that not such will be the case, it is not the end all be all. Additionally, this shows that the law is not equating biological standing in it's obligation of children. The law would obligate a man to care for children not his if he can't show such, or fails to do so within a given time. Additionally obligation is given to those who are not the biological parents all the time. Adoption is the biggest example, although not the only one. Therefore, parental obligation is not a valid argument as to not allowing same sex couples from getting married.
     
  18. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    13,848
    Likes Received:
    3,052
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is truly sick.
     
  19. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    48,512
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I was referring to the real world in the present using currently available technologies. Producing a sperm cell isn't producing a child
     
  20. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,343
    Likes Received:
    212
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ahh, now you want to use the current year as the point of reference.
    Does that mean you are done with ancient Roman law and laws that have been deemed unconstitutional from 20+ years ago to make your “points”?

    Reproduction is not relevant to marriage and you screwing your dog is not relevant to the thread.
     
    DoctorWho likes this.

Share This Page