All of us, even those who would have preferred not to, have learned a lot about gays and lesbians in recent years. As gays have become more visible in society, no one can pretend any more they are some kind of alien species. They are members of our families. They are friends and colleagues. They are people we love.
Most marriages may be founded on love. But there's also a whole lot of fine print. Our society has constructed a complex series of legal rights and protections around the institution of marriage.
Unmarried couples sometimes disdain marriage as "a piece of paper." But it is a piece of paper that confers valuable legal rights shared between two people regarding not only property and wealth, but sometimes even life and death decisions.
This was Canada, for Pete's sake, where men in flannel shirts and combat boots hunt, fish and wear furry, dead animals on their heads. Every year, hundreds of Wisconsin sportsmen leave their families and disappear into the Canadian wilderness together for days on end. How many of them now will emerge secretly betrothed?
Except as friends who care about one another, there's usually no reason for anyone to take a position on whom someone else chooses to marry. It's such a personal decision we don't expect our friends to do anything but wish us well. Anyone who has ever tried to reason with a friend in love knows it's pretty much a waste of time anyway.
We don't have to protect our society from love. It's not as if we were talking about some really destructive emotion. It's not like we were talking about hate.
posted on June 30, 2003 10:43:39 AM new
This is one of those laws that when all is done will have consequences nobody foresaw.
Just as older people started living together unmarried so they could collect more social security once there was no outcry from the community about them living in sin men will marry for the ability to share medical benefits or have the partner inherit for sure against the wishes of family. They will make use of the ability to not be compelled to testify against a spouse and other legal advantages that are offered a couple.
As long as there is no community shunning they will do that if they see an advantage even though they are not gay and there is no sex involved.
All these prohibitions on sexual behavior are religeous in origin. As such they have no place in secular law anymore than keeping a sabbeth or prohibiting the eating of pork should be a matter of law. The fact I find homosexual behavior offensive and shun it myself requires no support from the law. I can refrain from it and do what I wish without having a supporting law. But far too many people are fascists at heart wanting total control of everything whether it's their busuiness or not.
posted on June 30, 2003 10:47:58 AM new
Wow! What have I missed???! It took everything I had to read through all the pages before starting a response. Where to begin...
Twelve..since you seem to be one of the resident bible thumpers please enlighten us. If we, as humans were created in God's image (or likeness) doesn't that mean that god is probably more accepting than you'd care to believe?
Also, as Clarksville quoted from Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they should surely be put to death"." Now, if a man is not meant to have sex until he is married (RIGHT???!) and the specific word in that passage is MANKIND, doesn't that actual mean that if a man has sex with ANYONE (after marriage) that he is to be put to death? IT didn't say lay down with a MAN but MANKIND.
As for the spread of AIDS, women are unfortunately the fastest growing segment of infected people. The sex with a monkey is a joke. More than likely, it was due to infected monkey meat consumed by hunters or via saliva to blood transference, such as while hunting a monkey for food, the hunter was bitten and infected.
By the way Twelvepole, please clue us in on what else would be grouped in with incest and beastiality. Spanking? fellatio? pinching? Anything but missionary position with shirts on and the lights off? Have we perhaps stumbled over some of the reason for your anger?
Bigcitycollectibles....Being gay isn't a "birth defect" any more than being born with brown hair and blue eyes is. But I think I understand where you were going
Honestly, I really don't care what goes on in the bedrooms of two consenting adults. Now, I'm not a touchy feely person so seeing over the top displays of affection (from straight or gay couples) does bug me. This life is too short. If two adult people can be happy together, why not?
[ edited by clivebarkerfan on Jun 30, 2003 10:51 AM ]
posted on June 30, 2003 11:37:46 AM new
Hi clivebarkerfan! I wondered where you went to!
You're right. Instead of people talking about what a step in the right direction for people that love each other, it's become a discussion on how bad homosexuals are, like they're a type of dog. Their only excuse for these judgements are that God told them to act this way....
posted on June 30, 2003 12:48:34 PM new
Well to begin with there clivebarkerfan... When the Bible talks about MANKIND, that is exactly what it is talking about MEN... not WOMEN...
Physical relations between a MAN and a WOMAN is not the point here now is it....
We are discussing allowing marriage to people who practice deviant behavior...
Gravid... you have brought up some very valid points...
However there is now in Congress a proposal for a constitutional admendment... banning gay marriage...
If you allow gays to marry, why not allow you to marry your cat or dog or whatever animal you happen to be loving...(not implying that YOU is clivebarkerfan)
Or let those people that "love" a close family member marry... the list could go on
posted on June 30, 2003 01:21:29 PM new
As the Bible only addresses men I assume then that women are exempt from it's godly mandates and it is therefore OK for lesbians but not gays since they are not covered as they are not part of mankind.
posted on June 30, 2003 02:20:47 PM new
Look at it this way Twelve...you should be happy if two women get married. That's two less women that will try to entrap you with a kid and take your cash, since women all do those kinds of things right? And if two men get married that means they probably won't procreate either and have a child that you will feel the need to take a belt to.
[ edited by clivebarkerfan on Jun 30, 2003 02:22 PM ]
posted on June 30, 2003 03:50:31 PM newAs the Bible only addresses men I assume then that women are exempt from it's godly mandates and it is therefore OK for lesbians but not gays since they are not covered as they are not part of mankind.
It is just sinful for men to watch.....
12-pole......
Why do you have to keep acting like the poster child FOR abortion..... Such anger, such hate. It is almost like you feel you are missing something, something you really want, something you desire, something you deperately need.
As for MY take on the homosexual lifestyle:
It is wrong............FOR ME!
I believe t is not hereditary, in the genes or whatever. It is just what I believe. I think scientists have just identified a gene as the "homosexual gene" without any real idea what it really is.
It is disgusting for me to even think about. I absolutely cannot see the desire behind it.
It is NOT deviant behavior. Deviant behavior is a DEFINED truth NOT an absolute truth. A DEFINED truth can be changed when the times change. Deviant behavior used to include sex outside of marriage, but it was redefined.
IT IS NONE OF MY DAMN BUSINESS!!!
[ edited by mlecher on Jun 30, 2003 03:53 PM ]
posted on June 30, 2003 04:23:10 PM new
Where I work our client base is largely gay males with HIV/AIDS. When I first started working there two years ago, my contact with the gay community was limited to what I read in the paper or saw on TV. I was really clueless. I was rather shocked at some things at first, but then after sitting and talking with these men (and women) you get a sense of who they really are. They are human beings. They have hopes and dreams. The biggest difference (beside sexual attraction) is that they won't live long enough to realize any of their dreams. I have made some wonderful friends that I'll cherish for the rest of my life. One of my clients lives most of the year in Hawaii. I have a place to stay should I ever make it there. Another is an expert at sewing and regularly repairs clothing for me at no charge. The list goes on. I have watched as their partners have died and have cried with them. I am a much richer person for having known each and everyone of them. They are without a doubt the truest friends I have ever had.
Believe it or not, I understand how twelve feels. I once felt the same way. But, unlike twelve, I am prone to giving people a chance no matter who they are. If twelve chooses to believe that they are deviant and not worthy to walk this Earth then that's his choice. It's his loss. He'll never know what he has missed by not giving five minutes of his time to get to know someone who acts and thinks differently then himself. I feel sorry for those who cannot give another human being a chance to be a human being. JMO.
Cheryl
My religion is simple, my religion is kindness.
--Dalai Llama
[ edited by CBlev65252 on Jun 30, 2003 04:25 PM ]
posted on June 30, 2003 09:04:17 PM new
"Why dont people like you not want to believe
that gay people are born that way. Nobody chooses to be gay. "
This is debatable. It's believed through studies that gayness is a LEARNED behavior. When we see how many young men were molested and seduced by priests -- THOUSANDS!!! -- over the years, not only priests, but Scouts, and family members -- that's a learned behavior.
If you read Chastity Bono's autobio she was seduced by the nanny who was 10 years older than she was. They ended up in an adult relationship when she came of age, but that was a learned behavior.
posted on July 1, 2003 10:39:08 AM new
Wow, those are pretty antiquated laws clarksville! That's amazing!
OK, let's say that homosexuals choose to be that way... so what? Why shouldn't they be allowed to marry if they love each other? What possible difference would it make to anyone?
posted on July 2, 2003 05:38:05 AM new
Let me 1st say that I don't think that gays and lesbians should be punished for any act which is mutualy consenting and effects no other party.
I am told that it is a fact that the likelihood of partaking in homosexual acts is somewhat affected by environmental influences.
Take for example the higher incidence of the practice among men who would otherwise overtly strongly object to any association with the practice and even generally, overtly display what may once have been perceived as ‘masculine’ stereotypes traits; (rough & tumble) (spit’n) (drink’n) (cuss’n) & little apparent concern for hygiene (when compared to the wider populous).
This incidence can apparently be much higher in a certain environment, although I have never witnessed such an environment.
Perhaps someone can address the validity of this claim. Surely one of us mixes in circles which may have a higher incidence of observing such environments 1st hand. I am referring to leather wearing biker types in jails.
posted on July 2, 2003 10:32:19 AM new
Good points tomwii... none of which some people here are willing to accept.
Colin, I'd rather live in a country of homosexual decorators than a country that's run by a citizen-hating war monger with a low IQ. The Canadian economy is doing great, is yours?
posted on July 2, 2003 11:11:16 AM new
BREAKING NEWS! ..............................
pst did you know King James was a homosexual?
austbounty
I betcha you have seen Michael Moore's bit of them (Michael and homosexuals) traveling throughout the nation, particularly Wichata, Kansas (home of the homo-hater) and they went to anothe place too. Can't remember the RV's name, can you?
I thought that was hilarious LMAO throughout the piece! I had to get some super glue to reattach it.
Oh, BTW I still think Moore is an idiot but then again so am I
