Does gay marriage change the definition of marriage?

Page 5 of 7 [ 112 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

18 May 2008, 5:19 pm

I can see how people would complicate it, but it need not be complicated. So two people love each other and want to show the world how much they care - I doubt anyone who has ever been in love would deny the feeling of wanting to tell the world how much they love that person. People can be as offended as they like, but at the end of the day all they're doing is caring for, looking after, and enjoying their time with someone they love - it's not harming anyone and it's not directly involving anyone else. So why should others take it upon themselves to pass judgement over whether their love is *real* or *good* or *true* or anything else?

_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...

spudnik
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,992
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada

18 May 2008, 5:21 pm

Not that there is anything wrong with people wanting to make a relationship a life long commitment, but I think it would be better if they would call it a Civil Union instead of marriage, since marriage is used in the context for man and wife, and has been for who knows how long, people should not be against a couple who love each other.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

19 May 2008, 9:53 am

peebo wrote:

looking at the situation objectively, what difference does it make to any of you if gay people are allowed to get married or not?

Because as members of society, it is our natural and rightful place to care about changes our society undergoes.
Next question.

peebo wrote:

homosexuality will exist regardless, it has existed as long as creatures with genitalia have existed.

So does terrorism. Doesn't mean we should just roll over and accept it.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

19 May 2008, 1:51 pm

Ragtime wrote:

peebo wrote:

looking at the situation objectively, what difference does it make to any of you if gay people are allowed to get married or not?

Because as members of society, it is our natural and rightful place to care about changes our society undergoes.

well, I agree there.

Quote:

So does terrorism. Doesn't mean we should just roll over and accept it.

Terrorism=homosexuality?

I didn't know that.

Logic states otherwise though.

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

19 May 2008, 2:08 pm

greenblue wrote:

Ragtime wrote:

peebo wrote:

looking at the situation objectively, what difference does it make to any of you if gay people are allowed to get married or not?

Because as members of society, it is our natural and rightful place to care about changes our society undergoes.

well, I agree there.

Quote:

So does terrorism. Doesn't mean we should just roll over and accept it.

Terrorism=homosexuality?

I didn't know that.

Logic states otherwise though.

No, I'm just saying that "It's here" is not much of an argument for something's validity.

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Last edited by Ragtime on 19 May 2008, 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,008
Location: Houston, Texas

19 May 2008, 2:09 pm

I haven't really thought about this.

_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

19 May 2008, 2:37 pm

Ragtime wrote:

No, I'm just saying that "It's here" is not much of an argument for something's validity.

It is an argument for making institutions suited to deal with the issue. For example, with terrorism, we can install more metal detectors and use more security measures in our daily lives. All that is called for is that we do a similar thing with homosexuality rather than ignore it.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 May 2008, 2:40 pm

We sure aren't ignoring homosexuality. The very existence of this discussion is proof of that.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

19 May 2008, 2:43 pm

slowmutant wrote:

We sure aren't ignoring homosexuality. The very existence of this discussion is proof of that.

Well, are you creating institutions to deal with it? No. The fact that we are arguing over it does not mean that we have made any efforts.

Teoka
Raven
Raven

Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 122
Location: Northern VA

19 May 2008, 2:46 pm

Fred2670 wrote:

In my opinion it doesnt change the definition of
the word, but merely cheapens the act. It seems
this is just another way that fags are trying to
imitate normal people. I guess I would feel sorry
for them if I valued their existance.

Dont get me wrong, I do my best to be tolerant
of others but I believe the only thing worse than
allowing fags to get married is be to allow them
to adopt children.

I also believe they should all be castrated and have
the word "HOMO" tattooed across their foreheads.

You cannot be serious.

Personally, I think that marriage should be between two consenting adults of little to no blood relation. Period. Any gender, any race, any creed. It's just about love. That sounds naive, yes, but that's what successful marriages are based on (as well as respect, etc.).

The slippery slope arguments that are seen so often are just ridiculous. Not only is it a perfect use of the slippery slope fallacy, but how is it that legalizing all intraspecies marriages between consenting adult humans lead to interspecies marriages between men and horses?

I think that the best route would be that civil marriages are defined as in the first part of this post, while churches have the right to marry whomever they want. We're about halfway there.

_________________
| C | O | S | P | L | A | Y |
My Anti-Drug

Aspie score: 159 out of 200

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 May 2008, 2:47 pm

We are not obligated to make efforts.

How is the Slippery Slope argument a fallacy?

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

19 May 2008, 3:18 pm

slowmutant wrote:

We are not obligated to make efforts.

Umm.... yeah, then you are in essence ignoring homosexuality, and then you aren't refuting my previous argument.

Quote:

How is the Slippery Slope argument a fallacy?

There are proper uses, however, it can be used fallaciously.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

19 May 2008, 3:20 pm

How can it be used fallaciously? And why is it a fallacy when used against gay marriage?

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

19 May 2008, 3:23 pm

slowmutant wrote:

How can it be used fallaciously? And why is it a fallacy when used against gay marriage?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_s ... as_fallacy

I forgot to post my link.

The reason it is a fallacy in the gay marriage argument is because it takes the form shown in the example.

Ragtime
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,927
Location: Dallas, Texas

19 May 2008, 3:55 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

We sure aren't ignoring homosexuality. The very existence of this discussion is proof of that.

Well, are you creating institutions to deal with it? No. The fact that we are arguing over it does not mean that we have made any efforts.

There is an American family-oriented organization that
helps and encourages gays to become straight,
although the exact name slips my mind at present.
Does anyone know the name of it? It's got "ex-Gay" in the actual title, I believe.
There are such organizations. Are you claiming there are not?

_________________
Christianity is different than Judaism only in people's minds -- not in the Bible.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

19 May 2008, 4:03 pm

Ragtime wrote:

Well, most gays don't want to become straight, and they don't have to become straight, just like most people don't have to change religions. I am not claiming that those organizations do not exist, and in fact, such organizations are a valid response to the issue of homosexuals, but not one that relates to the US government or its policies or that should relate to the US government or its policies.

Page 5 of 7 [ 112 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

Does gay marriage change the definition of marriage? Post Reply New Topic

Does gay marriage change the definition of marriage?