Same Sex Marrriage

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
My good man I am married to a WOMAN! To me this really is a turn off this same sex marriage.
 
Yeah, here is a question:

If two beautiful women are making out...it is great and arousing.
if two beautiful guys are at it...it is the most hideous thing since the worlds ugliest dog...and the precursor to ED.

Honestly, it is the sex. The sex is what turns people off. Two guys can have a mutual love for each other...what is friendship then?
 
I don't really agree with homosexual marriage from a personal stand point, but with that being said, as an American they should be afforded the same rights I do. Even if I don't necessarily agree with it, I am no better than them and equality should take precedence despite my views. We should be a republic first such that the rights of the minority are not tread upon by the majority, this is where democracy fails us.

I wouldn't want someone legislating my freedoms away either...
 



Well said.. and highlights what many miss. Granting rights to others for their personal choice is part of their freedom. It does not infringe upon another individuals right to disagree with a lifestyle.

Not sure what odd defintion of "freedom" people are using when they inhibit others from living their life the way they want when it has no impact on someone else.
 


Thank you, I don't think it's a conclusion that you can come to unless you properly empathize with those people and put yourself in their shoes. It's simple though, treat others the same way you want to be treated.

You're right though, your "freedoms" end when they start to affect another's. This situation is a prime example as gay marriage does not effect heterosexual freedoms, but preventing one group to marry does.
 



http://www.usdebtclock.org/

I agree.
Gay "marriage", is not the root problem anyways.
 
Sexual orientation is a self described identity for anyone who seeks out a specific sex.

Let us say you are a guy and change yourself female. You like females, does that make you gay? Only is you say.

What is you are still a dude, who likes dudes, and say you are not gay for other dudes? Are you gay? Only if you says so.

We think that if a guy likes another guy, he it automatically gay. What if he likes guys, but is not gay?

Too many deep questions.

Everyone entitled to their own opinion.
 


Yes and no. The government should absolutely not stand in the way of some person writing up a document saying that two people of the same sex can now officially be "pair-bonded" and that they can have sex in private. That would be the government grossly overstepping their Constitutional bounds. However I am absolutely opposed to the government allowing anybody from gaining special benefits (including men married to women) from simply being married. I am married, why should I be able to have more benefits/lower taxes in the eyes of the government than my single co-workers? In that vein, why should my wife and I who do not have children pay more taxes than my colleagues with children? I also am disgusted by people- homosexual or heterosexual- being publicly lewd and/or making their sexuality THE defining characteristic of themselves. I don't want to see it or hear about it. Keep your sexual exploits private and have the government tax/penalize us all the same no matter if we are homosexual, heterosexual, asexual, married, single, divorced, etc. etc. and I am perfectly fine.

 


EXACTLY!! Distract people from the real issues- excessive debt, spending, and size/scope of government. Those are very uncomfortable issues as dealing with them WILL tee off people. The real solution is to drastically slash present and future entitlements. That will make the >50% of people who pay no federal income taxes very mad as their free ride will end and politicians WILL get voted out of office as a result. Riots are also a certainty- look at Spain, Greece, and Italy. Everybody with half a brain knows this will happen but hopes that the absolute collapse will happen AFTER their election. This goes for both parties- neither one is truly willing to deal with the spending/entitlements problem. Democrats are worse in this regard as they continue to create new vote-buying entitlement programs but Republicans aren't much better as they are not willing to touch the "third rails" of Medicare and Social Security despite these being the major programs driving us deeper into the red. There are plenty of us willing to take the job of doing what is needed but the entrenched powers bought by government handouts are too strong to reasonably fight- otherwise this problem would have been dealt with already. The media is part of those entrenched powers.

I get asked with some regularity why I have such a poor outlook on life. I respond that I am a somewhat younger adult and pay attention to what is going on and know some history. The economy sucks, the government is onerous, and we have made our bed for a massive economic collapse with the unrestrained spending. This isn't new and we aren't the first to go through this. Look at the Romans in the 300s AD and Europe from about 1900 through today. Difficult stuff happens, people get all socialist, a brief period of decency happens as the debt gets run up to give people free crap, and then economic collapse. There are NO signs that this will improve in fewer than several decades as EVERY SINGLE ELECTION CYCLE shows an unwillingness to deal with these issues. We are also so huge that things move slowly and we will very likely languish for several decades before we really do reach rock bottom. Then it will be a decade or three before we re-emerge. I will very likely be an old man at that time and will lived the majority of my life in a disaster that others have largely caused. And you wonder why I am angry... :fou:
 
I agree the government should not interfere when it comes to personnel matters like this with same sex marriages and abortions and other birth control.I am not an advocate of gay marriages myself but each has a right to do what they want in life.
 
^^ You mentioned birth control. You are right, the government should not interfere with that either. That includes not forcing private companies to pay for their employees to have it. The whole Obama manufactured "Romney war on women" crap solely deals with Obama saying Romney hates women because Romney doesn't want to force private companies to pay for birth control. Romney does not want to ban birth control. Birth control can be had for a whopping four bucks at many pharmacies. (Generic oral contraceptive pills- look for "generic Spintec $4 list" online if you want to see where you can buy them.) Is it really worth getting the government involved in something that costs less than a tank of gas per year? I guarantee it will cost those of us who pay taxes/pay for insurance at least five times that per year...
 


Some people even have children and grandchild but still gay. I am thinking of hypersexuality and not born with gay character. They discover later about them for hypersex maybe.

musical marv said:

I agree the government should not interfere when it comes to personnel matters like this with same sex marriages and abortions and other birth control.I am not an advocate of gay marriages myself but each has a right to do what they want in life.
Click to expand...

Government may should not interfere with same sex marriages but should interfere with abortions as it is pre-stage of human life form killing.
 
Even abortions the government should mind their business.
 
Am I the only gay person to chime in on this? I feel lonely here. :lol:

In a sentence:, "gay people" have the right to get married and be as miserable as everybody else.

In all seriousness, I look at it this way. The religious people run around and say "Marriage is a religious institution", blah blah "it comes from the biblical name Mary" more blah blah.

Okay.. So if Marriage is a religious institution, what right does the Government have to impose the standards for which citizens should be allowed to enter into it? That would be a clear violation of the separation of church and state. Maybe the Government should be out of the business of marriage licenses altogether. As far as they're concerned, marriage has always been (and should be) a legal contract between 2 consenting adults, EX: A civil union.

How about we make everyone get a civil union? If they want their church to recognize it as a marriage that should be another issue entirely.

Furthermore, how about a young, 20ish single man who lives with and takes care of his elderly grandmother? Is the sole provider for her? Now I know some of you might have that knee jerk reaction "eww hes about to say let him marry his grandmother".. Again, as far as the Gov't is and should be concerned its a legal contract.. Why shouldn't these people in my hypothetical scenario be allowed to get a civil union for the tax benefits? The grandson is paying for her, providing for her.


I don't support abortion at all, for any reason, ever. But thats another thread entirely. And, pre-emptively don't try to appeal to my being gay and fighting for equality as somehow being on the same level as a woman fighting for control of her reproductive rights. My support comes down on the side of the child's right to live. Zygote or not, science has never proven a human soul doesn't exist, until they can, I'm not willing to take that risk.
 


But the question is, "Is it gay love or gay sex that makes people most uncomfortable with gay marriage?" as wanamingo asked.

People do marriage for love. But in gay marriage, is it same?
 
I don't think people (not just homo/bi-sexual people, but people in general) marry for just love. It's a complicated multi-factorial relationship with love as being one of the major factor. Other factors include physical attractiveness, the similarities the couple share (e.g. favourite music, hobbies, food, etc...) financial status, social status, citizenship, and of course many people decide to tie the knot because they find out they have an impending baby in 6-7 months. In fact, I argue love is a by product of the other factors I described. Love doesn't exist, it's just all the little things and qualities a person has to make them attractive to you and thus love. Apart from the sexual activity between same sex vs. opposite sex, I don't think same sex marriage is that much different from opposite sex marriage.

If we look at the matters separately:

Homosexual sex
Homosexual love
Homosexual marriage
Homosexual family

Homosexual sex: No problem if they are between adult with consent
Homosexual love: No problem, isn't bromance kind of like this but without the sex?
Homosexual marriage: Big problem! But why? The law allows homosexual love and sex so what's the big deal?
Homosexual family: The family will be unconventional, although I wouldn't oppose it. Many people say that the children will grow up with all sorts of problem. Well, who doesn't? I know there are evidence to suggest the children are worse off, but is it because homosexual parents are bad parents or is it due to the general social unacceptance of homosexual family that is causing the negative impact that was measured?
 

I don't think its anyone else's business to question it, gay or straight. It comes down to the rights of the people involved in said marriage. Its not my place to ask whether my mother loves my stepfather or not, I hope they do, but ultimately, its none of my business.
 

You are right this is her personal business about your stepdad not yours.This business about gay and straight is no ones business but the parties involved.
 

I'll also add, for the record, I just ended a relationship of 3 years about 2 months ago. Unfortunately, my ex and I had different needs and desires. He more or less decided he prefers to be alone. I was and still am very much in love with him, and we discussed marriage. I don't know what love is like for a straight person, but as far as I'd like to think I was more dedicated than the average person. I loved him more than anything, I honestly didn't even look at other people during the time I was with him. When we were apart, well I won't be too graphic, but my thoughts were of him, nobody else. I wanted to spend the rest of my life with him, grow old together, not really interested in children, but the whole 9 yards. How many straight people can say they never thought of anyone other than the person they were with I wonder?


That depends on what your definition of "is" is. 😗

Homosexual love: No problem, isn't bromance kind of like this but without the sex?
Click to expand...
Heh, well my theory on those types of situations is neither really has the stones to make the first move. Been there done that in my closet days.


Homosexual family: The family will be unconventional, although I wouldn't oppose it. Many people say that the children will grow up with all sorts of problem. Well, who doesn't? I know there are evidence to suggest the children are worse off, but is it because homosexual parents are bad parents or is it due to the general social unacceptance of homosexual family that is causing the negative impact that was measured?
Click to expand...

You know, in today's society, I can't see how kids are any worse off, and yes I've known homosexual parents, some through adoption, many through prior heterosexual marriages. I knew one in particular, the father was gay, with a live in boyfriend. This was when I was in highschool, still way in the closet myself. There were two kids a year apart a brother and a sister. The mother let the kids go out of control, into drugs, did nothing about it. The father (who happened to also be a school guidance counselor at an "alternative school") and his boyfriend were the responsible parents, the father put his foot down and the kids packed their stuff and moved in with their mother full time. Mind you I don't know the whole story, but being this was a fairly "redneck" town, I have a feeling the fact that the father was openly gay with a live in boyfriend didn't help him at the custody hearings. Nevermind the fact that the mother's live in boyfriend was this mountain man looking hillbilly who also had twin daughters about 14 at the time, one of whom I know for a fact (and he knew) was screwing around with the 26 year old married man next door neighbor. Jerry Springer couldn't make that kind of stuff up.
 
Its nice to have a gay person here with the nads to make some points.

We are all just people in the end and we all die alone.

If the quest to find fulfillment and self actualisation means you want to do it in a batman suit, a fairy dress, or with scuba gear on isn't really anyone else's business.

I tip my hat to you sir.

:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom