Textkit Logo

Same-sex marriage

Philosophers and rhetoricians, Welcome!

Should same-sex marriage be legal?

Yes
43
68%
No
20
32%
 
Total votes : 63

Postby Scyld Scefing » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:39 pm

I think homossexual people should have the right to be legally married if they want to, I mean, they should have the right to divide their possessions if they want to, or live together according to the law etc.
Religious marriage is another matter, because they will have to convince the priests and other people that whoever God they believe in will accept their way of living.
But there are two problems:

1) gay people sometimes don't realize that heterossexuals don't like to see two men or women kissing each other in public places(I don't even like to see heterossexual couples kissing), or showing other signs of affection. Well, this is a fact. It doesn't matter my opinion here, most people I know think this way.(You may call them intolerant, I don't know.)

2) I don't think gay couples should raise kids. I don't think anyone has the right to put kids in an environment that's so apart from what is conceived to be a family(and if a family with father and mother is not natural, then what is?Everything is arbitrary?And three fathers and four mothers?Where should we draw the line?)

I really think gays should have the right to be what they are, the way they want to, I just don't think it needs to be explicit and I think also we must have limits in our society.
phpbb
User avatar
Scyld Scefing
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:02 am

Postby Marcus Regulus » Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:23 pm

bennissimus,
Since I don't believe in God or anything supernatural that is spoken of in the Bible, whatever rules are set out to us in the Bible are irrelevant to me. The result is that these arbitrary rules written therein, once enforced, oppress me and millions of other people for no logical reason.


That is undersandable given you 'religious' persuasion, it would not seem logical to you and I completely understand. But I hope you see it from my perspective that I do not feel such rules are oppressive if they are wilfully accepted which I believe they should be or they are of no benefit anyway.

I probably would use a far more limited definition of what constitutes a Christian than you. A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Jesus and beleives that he is the Messiah and has accepted him as Lord and Savior. Such a person follows the Bible and as such I don't think homosexuals are Christians in this sense. They make take the label Christian but that is often more from a family tradition or their country or whatever. To me such people are nominal 'Christians' at best.

I wholly agree with Will on this one. Scarcely anything we do in the modern world is natural, including the convention of marriage itself. When you use the word "natural", you really mean "heterosexual". Your first question suggests that love between elderly, impotent, or sterile couples is unnatural. To your second question, I answer that every type of sexual activity practiced by homosexuals is also practiced by many heterosexuals.


Well that is not surprising because my guess is that you do not believe in Natural law as that which is created by God either. I do. I guess we will ahve to agree to disagree and still talk latin. :D

The fact is in the US the homosexual movement is represented by the militants and this makes many feel that acceptence of homosexuality is being rammed down their throat. The fact is many churches have recieved threats and some pretty obscene things from the homosexual community and there is a lot of hatred toward religious people -- I know I am a pastor and have recieved some. I am not exaggerating it.

The statement you quoted was aimed at the previous poster who was speaking derogatorily about people who are merely "gay friendly". The way that person said it sounded very much like "n*gger lover" and I cannot regard that as anything other than intolerant.


Actually I knew why you said it. I however dislike the term of tolerance becase it gives another emotional label to the homosexual community of -- "Your intolerant" all the while by saying it that they don't tolerate the other point of view. To me it is nothing more than a logical impossibility -- no one is tolerant. But that is not necessary to win the case for homosexuality -- it needs to present the idea behind it rationally nad prove its case. In the US it has not done this -- it has never purposed a law at all to the legislature of any state -- rather it has saught to get its way through judgements in the courts by a small group of people. People don't like that. If you going to have democracy -- win in the arena of ideas first and people will vote your way. Homosexuality will not even try to do this and being that only 2% of the population of the US is homosexual they don't have the votes either. There may come a point where this might be culturally acceptable -- but not now nad you not gonig to make it so by forcing it down others without stating something more than an emotional case. It only leads to more hatred not understanding.

To your second question, I answer that every type of sexual activity practiced by homosexuals is also practiced by many heterosexuals.


Doesn't answer that question. Because the point is that homosexuals cannot engage in one activity that heterosecual couples can -- intercourse. That is my point.

Unless you are a homosexual, I don't think you can have the slightest idea what homosexual love feels like. Homosexuals are not attracted at all to members of the opposite sex - it takes more than being burned by a woman (or man) to do that. A lot, if not most, of homosexuals know or suspect they are homosexuals before they ever have a relationship, which evades your explanation that most are reactionary. Even reactionary relationships are common among heterosexuals.


Actually while I have never been a homosexual, I have talked with many who have been (past tense) they are the ones that had the observation I just reported it to you. They left homosexuality because they relaized the sham of love they were experiencing. I just wanted you to know that it was not my observation it was theirs.

I don't think anyone here wants to force you to marry gay couples. There are plenty of religion-neutral methods for obtaining legal marriage. I doubt you would even have to recognize it, like the Catholic church with second marriages. It really does not affect you in any way, so why are you forcing other people to adhere to your beliefs? Why don't you yourself respect the First Amendment?


Marriage is a God given institution to me and should be respected as such. I simply stated it not as slam on what homosexuals beleive but that the state really isn't the authority over what constitutes a marriage the church is. I simply look at it as the state would be crossing the line of seperation of church and state on this issue. States recognize marriage but they did not create it and the one who created or who are in stewardship over it (the church) should be the one that define it and decide who benefit from it. I don't beleive I have stated that people couldn't believe that should have the right of marriage (my view of human freedom is such that they can believe whatever they want and say so) , but I just don't see it as a state's issue. The fact is civil union accomplish the same thing legally as a marriage. The reason homosexual 'Christians' want the term marraige applied is religious not legal. They want their behavior to no longer be defined as a sin by the church. That is what I mean by forcing the issue on the church.

It is good that you do not think of homosexuality as a crime, but what about homosexual sex? It is pretty hard to have an intimate relationship without sex, so by forbidding someone sex you detract a large part from their relationship.


I guess I don't have a problem with that from a legal point of view, but not all sex is legal in any case. Prostitution, sex with minors, sexual abuse etc. all carry legal penalties. If the homosexuals engage in these activities for their experience they should be prosecuted as well under the same laws.

Religiously, I find the idea repugnant but not everyone shares those views.

Let's see how much tolerance I get from the tolerant people now.


I hope you don't regard anything I said above as intolerant. If so, I would like to know which.


Actually, I expected a rational discussion. My comment was a lightheated jab as indicated by the smile. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

My guess is that in this issue, because of some very different worldviews, we will fall on different sides of the fence, but that is OK as far as I am concerned. Your all still better at latin than me. :D

annis,
I support free speech, but have no problem with the idea that shouting "fire" in a crouded theater is punishable. So other civic virtues for which I have some respect aren't absolute, either.


True, but it remains to be seen and accepted by many that homosexuality is such an issue. The homosexual community would like it to be so, but that has not been determined through the course of time and through debate. Legislating from the court room is not a good way to win over the masses as the abortion issue has proved in that now there are even more people against abortion than before at least based on the latest polls in the US. People want to be part of the decision making process on such issues and this is where the homosexual community has failed in their efforts. The have sought to circumvent process and that causes many to question their intentions.
phpbb
Marcus Regulus
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:51 pm
Location: Michigan

Postby benissimus » Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:49 am

flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Postby Bert » Tue Mar 15, 2005 3:31 am

[quote="Emma_85].....I suppose it is a private school, but I would have thought it would be like private companies - even if you have a private company you still just can't discriminate people that work in your company, that's just illegal... :?
[/quote]
I quess you can compare it to being member of a private club, like a golf club.
You agree to abide by its rules. If one of the rules is to not wear blue jeans, you are likely to get kicked out of the club if you ignore that rule.
It is not a matter of discrimination but a matter of abiding by the rules that you have agreed to.
Bert
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Postby Emma_85 » Tue Mar 15, 2005 9:20 am

Bert wrote:[quote="Emma_85].....I suppose it is a private school, but I would have thought it would be like private companies - even if you have a private company you still just can't discriminate people that work in your company, that's just illegal... :?

I quess you can compare it to being member of a private club, like a golf club.
You agree to abide by its rules. If one of the rules is to not wear blue jeans, you are likely to get kicked out of the club if you ignore that rule.
It is not a matter of discrimination but a matter of abiding by the rules that you have agreed to.
[/quote]
I don't agree there... you can choose whether or not to wear blue jeans, but you cannot choose to be gay or straight or choose the colour of your skin (unless you're called Michal Jackson).
It's like having a golf club that doesn't allow blacks to join up and play there - if there was a gold club like that in the US I'm sure there would be a huge protest, because it is discrimination.
phpbb
User avatar
Emma_85
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:01 pm
Location: London

Postby Cédric » Fri May 13, 2005 12:44 pm

Episcopus wrote:Anyway the point is homosexuals should not be allowed to marry themselves since it is ODD and ABNORMAL and UNNATURAL and REPULSIVE and even though I don't mind lesbians I believe that marriages between such beings are wrong as are those between males who for some reason are attracted to eachother. Now didn't THAT sound odd? Try and sing that song the boys watch the girls bla bla bla the boys watch the girls go by 'the boys watch the boys watch the boys watch the boys watch the boys go by' argh doesn't work.


Episcopus wrote:I am also happy that most blacks marry blacks and most whites marry whites here. If they all mixed then the purer races of each would disappear that's to say we would have no blacks, we would have no whites, two races which are different and this is a good thing. We would just have a mixture which is boring as less people would be visibly different. Michael Moore's idea of 'let's mix to stop racism!' is foolish and would cause pandemonium in our society.


:shock: You cannot be serious writing this, are u? I mean, i thought religion was all about respect and love...
I am gay, proud to be so and loving to be so! :D

Yet there's something u seem to forget, like most of the people against us. It seems u see us as lustful demons thinking only in sex, and doing it, as much as we can, as often as we can so we kill more and more people helping the spread of AIDS... no need to tell u what I think of this! Of course there are people acting like devils, going barebacking and helping the spread of the disease. But dont send us all to Hell because of those few assholes (sorry for it!), i'm always safe, always have condoms with me, for me and to give away to whoever might need one... i wish our late Pope and his newly elected successor would be more sensible... maybe if Church allowed the use of condom, the epidemy in Africa and Asia wouldnt be so developped, because let us keep in mind that the spread of the disease there is not due to gay people but to heterosexual people who going there on holiday will have unprotected sexual intercourse with local girls who are forced into selling their body to tourists so they can get money to their pimp, who dont care at all the girls getting pregnant or AIDS as long as they can earn money. Those tourists, after coming back from their summer break would go on having intercourse with several partners and so the disease spreads... I'm not saying gay people are not to blame, but let's not be blind, it's not a problem of being gay or hetero, it's a problem of being sensible and responsible for one's acts, and heterosexual guys can be very senseless too :x

But let's try to consider it another way. Dont u think we too can love, have passionate feelings to other people, the same way u, heterosexuals have? I really dont like using the word "straight" because it would mean that I am twisted, and I AM neither ABNORMAL, nor ODD, nor doing anything UNATURAL. May i remind u that heterosexual folks also can masturbate, give bj and sodomize their partners, without considering as abnormal nor odd nor unatural, just as another way of getting pleasure or getting extra pleasure. As for the repulusiveness of those practices, it shouldnt been taken into account because it's just a subjective point of view (it's like saying "this or this colour is repulsive", it's irrelevant!

As for the issue of this thread, i havent forgotten it, i'm not against it, since i think that not being different from heterosexual people, we must have the same rights as they have. This being said, i'm not willing to get married, i never wanted to even when i was dating girls (yes i used to be one of those awful bisexual men :evil:). I dont want to because i dont believe in it, i gave up religion (and the more i grow old the more i think i made a good choice, this statement being also subjective and the fruit of quite a lot of years of thinking, shouldnt be posted here because it's also irrelevant [face=SPIonic]o)fqalmo\n a)nti o)fqalmou=, o)do/nta a)nti o)do/ntoj[/face] OMG, did i touch Septuaginta with my filthy gay hands... I DID!!!)

I dont intend to be mean nor to offend anyone, but this place is the last place i was thinking i could find gay-bashing posts... and yes saying we're abnormal, odd, unatural IS gay-bashing! I thought scholars as we are would be more open minded... could i have been wrong, or am i just unable to see irony when i read messages? (hopefully i am!)

Take care anyways,

Cédric.
phpbb
User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France

Postby thomas » Fri May 13, 2005 2:32 pm

Episcopus, how on earth you could have become a Bishop is beyond me. Then again Religion does have a flair for unnaceptance, control and closed minded biggorty so not that supprised I suppose.
Its the 21st century and some people are still thinking like its the dark ages (y'know, the good ole days where you could burn a person with hot pokers if they did'nt do exactly as the church wanted).
God teaches love and forgiveness (well the bible does but its the same thing I suppose), somethinsg your apparently lacking Father. God forgives all yadda yadda yadda so in the end it does'nt matter what we do, provided we forgive ourselves first. But seeing as there is nothing wrong with homosexuality it looks like im getting into heaven one way or another.
I also love the irony of this little tid bit, a gay painted one of the most recognizable religious buildings in the world. I dount that it would have been allowed if out heavely father really did'nt like gays (in case your wondering who im on about, you all probably know but no harm in making sure, its the Sistine Chapel painted by the wonderfully gay Michelangelo).

Being able to marry is a fair "request" from gay people. Why should'nt they be allowed to get married, having children is'nt the only point of marriage, actually the love for the two partners is what makes them want to get married and guess what, gay people can love.

I think its time that people learned to actually accept one another for who they are. Im shocked that someone with Hitler-like views of purity and unnaceptance can be allowed to teach the children of this earth values, which religion claims to do.

Now if you'll excuse me im off to plow a fellow deviant.
thomas
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 1:54 pm

Postby Benedarius » Sun Jun 05, 2005 11:46 pm

Gay marrige as a civil union and as a right set down by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but also by the moral standards. Religious marrige, i cant ever see being allowed, well it is set against in the Bible, and to do that would simply make the whole idea of marrige a joke.

But even though I say that, I voted "No" in the poll. Why, well, the reason of marrige, as set down by law I believe, is to give an easier financial home for the raising of a child. Not that it is required to have a child, but to have that as an option, would be unfair to the child.

Charlie is born and adopted by a gay couple. They are the best parents in the world, mind him better than most straight couples, and then he goes through the older levels of school. He would be an outsider, due to his parentage, here in Ireland anyway, no matter how loving his parents. Should he be a strong willed person, he would survive and his life would be no different to anyone elses, expect for his possible children only having one grandfather and three grandmothers, or the other way around, or in an extreme case, no grandfather of mother, but that is not the point.

But if the bulling wore him down, and I have been bullied for enjoying school and learning, and for learning long dead languages that no one else had heard of, he could be scarred for life. He might have been bullied anyway, but that likelyhood would increase. In the early years anyway, in other words, in the first fifty to a hunderd years anyway,

But as for the view that any sort of intimate between any human being, whatever their sexual orientation, is absurd and in its own right is repulsive, that anyone decide they should play God in such a fashion. It is certainly not up to people who do not know these things, and do not, therefore, understand, to pass judgement. It will always take society time to change, as the Catholic Church has forced the world to believe its ideals. But that time it seems is coming to an end, but that is for another post.
Benedarius
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:06 am
Location: Ireland

Postby Episcopus » Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:13 pm

I was out of order.

Still, everything has a purpose. I can not help it, as most other males, if being around a homosexual male disturbs me. I believe that everything in the world as the human body has been designed so well, and the pieces that females and males possess indeed fit. I do not know why there exists homosexuals, I do not believe them to be inferior just an irregularity. Since most people are not so, and the design of us is not for homosexual purposes.

There are so many 'normal'/'straight' people who are simply evil and/or uncurably stupid. I do not believe that a good gay person is by any means automatically inferior, it can not be helped, but I am merely stating my opinion that when I am close to a female it seems becoming. There seems a balance, for I am ripped to shreds and am drenched in pectoral scents whereas a girl smells like flowers. It is hard to explain but I tried.
phpbb
User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Postby Cédric » Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:47 pm

Episcopus wrote:
I believe that everything in the world as the human body has been designed so well, and the pieces that females and males possess indeed fit. I do not know why there exists homosexuals, I do not believe them to be inferior just an irregularity. [...]

There are so many 'normal'/'straight' people who are simply evil and/or uncurably stupid. I do not believe that a good gay person is by any means automatically inferior, it can not be helped, but I am merely stating my opinion that when I am close to a female it seems becoming. There seems a balance, for I am ripped to shreds and am drenched in pectoral scents whereas a girl smells like flowers. It is hard to explain but I tried.



:shock: Jesus man!!! How can u be so thick!!! :x
Cant u think of us as HUMAN BEINGS!!!! Stop thinking in respect of sexual life! For Whoever sake!!! I'm no different from u! Neither is Thomas who posted above nor any of my gay friends who saw ur post or to whom i told about!!! (yes i'm moding a gay forum and we talk a lot of how "straight" ppl see us :) )
U think we're different, i really pity u!
There are things u seem to be aware of... so i'll tell u!
1) We dont "choose" being gay or (so called) "straight" (i wont tell again that to me i'm straight and u are twisted - if any difference should be made between us). We ARE gay, i AM gay that's it! Its hic et nunc ; today 6th of june 2006 at 20.30 i am gay loving it and really wishing i live a happy life with my boy friend. It doesnt mean that tomorrow same time i wont have met a wonderful girl whom i'll marry next. It's not a definition, neither is it a choice. It's a matter of circumstances and of ppl. Maybe if i hadnt known my first bf, i would still be dating girls... but really who gives a damn what would have happen if?! I dont!
2) I already wrote it but it seems u havent read my post well (or maybe my english is not good enough, but u'll have to deal with it, coz i cant do much better, it's not my mother language!). Being gay is not being lustful. Do u want me to tell u names of famous twisted and lustful heterosexual guys? What about Sade (if u think this one is soft, i recommand u go have a look at "Les Cent-Un jours de Sodome et Gommorhe", u'll then see what PERVERSION is! and it's not gay!)? What about Nero? what about Martial? examples are so numerous!!! So being gay is not all about sex. We do have sex (and trust me two guys bodies fit in perfectly too), but there's no difference between a man and a woman having sex, it's just about sharing more intimity, having closest insight of one another feelings . What u could say about heterosexual sex can be said too for homosexual sex. And no it's not disgusting, and no it's not scat sex, and no it's not unnatural. Then if u want to see what true men love can be, i also recommend u have a look at Philippe Besson's novels esp. "In the Absence of Men" (dont worry if u dont read French, it's been translated into English), or what about some Proust to cite just two (or even better, go have a glance at this site - made unclickable, i dunno if it's done or not here... - h**p://eu.nifty.org/nifty/gay/).
Read more, see and speak to more gay/lesbian folks, start opening ur mind up a bit (this can happen to anyone, i guess my parents didnt expect it, but they'll have to live with me being gay, coz i'm not going against my nature to 'fit' with social or familial criteria!), and think of us as being natural human beings, just like u are... unless we truly are human beings and u're not! :roll:

Cédric
phpbb
User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France

Postby ThomasGR » Mon Jun 06, 2005 7:50 pm

OK, I'll post my question, even if it has been answered before, but there are already 5 pages full of all kind of ramble, and I don't like to spend my whole day reading. :?


Why on earth would a gay want to marry another gay?
Cannot they just live together and be happy?
ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Postby Cédric » Tue Jun 07, 2005 7:45 am

ThomasGR wrote:OK, I'll post my question, even if it has been answered before, but there are already 5 pages full of all kind of ramble, and I don't like to spend my whole day reading. :?


Why on earth would a gay want to marry another gay?
Cannot they just live together and be happy?


Damn! I was pretty sure i answered u ThomasGR... i must have forgotten to press the "submit" button then :? Nevermind. I remember my answer very well for it was not long at all.
I was telling u this.

Try to answer the two questions i'll put below and u'll have an answer to yours :
Why on earth would a "straight" want to marry another "straight"?
Cannot they just live together and be happy?

I'm very serious doing this! Dont think i'm making any fun of you!
I DO NOT want a religious marriage (i never wanted even when i hadnt accepted my 'gayness' for the simple reason that I DONT BELIEVE IN GOD! Or at least i dont believe in Him/Her/It (whoever can tell which to use is a liar!) the way the 3 revealed religions (Judaism, Christianism and its avatars and islam) want us to believe. Consider me as Theist the same way Voltaire was (what calling me unmodest, i call myself sensitive!).
So yeah, i dont claim for a religious marriage and would even try to dissuade anyone straight or gay to get married at church just to fit with some folkloric uses (not talking abt ppl who have faith - whom i'll try to convert anyway to a natural religion instead). Let's make it clear and plain. It's true that most of us want CIVIL marriage as a right to live "normally" with the same taxes rights (let's be honnest, it's more or less all abt it, like any civil union for straight couples btw!). We do want to be able to speak our heart out too, be able to be recognized as a regular couple with all it implies. That's as simple as this.
So u see why i ask u the very same questions as those you posted ; because the issues in getting married are not different being gay or straight!
Hope that helps :)

Take care,

Cédric.
phpbb
User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France

Postby ThomasGR » Tue Jun 07, 2005 8:43 am

As a "straight", I will marry a straight woman for no other reasons than getting children and give them the opportunity and ability to have propper care inside a healthy family. Just living together does this not provide.

Yes, I know, it is so old fashioned, but so is the world, and you must have an experience by first hand. So, since gay couples cannot make kids, and adopting some are out of any question, marriage is out of any question as well.

All that stuff about taxes I do not buy, and though I am not an accounter, I don't think the advantage you get from fiscal system is that great. Just buy your properties signing an extra paper where it is stated that that house you have bought belongs fifty-fifty.

Recognition as a couple? Is there a marriage needed for that? In societies that think about gay marriage possibilities, this has already happen, and a (real) marriage will be only a step backwards. Strange enough, but people who fight customs of the burgois so vigorously, are the first one who adopt such habits.

That leads to the only solution, live together and be happy as much as you can.
Last edited by ThomasGR on Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Postby Misopogon » Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:13 pm

[quote="ThomasGR"]As a "straight", I will marry a straight woman for no other reasons than getting children and give them the opportunity and ability to have propper care inside a healthy family. Just living together does this not provide.

Thomas, I hope that love for your wife is important as well! :wink:

Back to your question, being not gay myself, I cannot answer from a personal point of view, but I can see a lot of reasons for gays to get married.
Taxes can be a good reason but, we should say that they aren't the same in any country.
In most countries of Roman Law (e.g. Italy, France or Germany), but I think also otherwhere , married people got rights and duties towards each other.
Just for example:
Inheritance: well you could write a will, but in many countries is not the same as to be married. For example in Italy, by law, you have right to a fixed part of the goods of you spouse (id died, of course) and a married person cannot give it away with a will (i.d. you cannot leave nothing your spouse in favour of a third party).
Assistance: if you are not married to person and don't have any blood tie with him, you haven't any right e.g. in case he/she is ill, wounded etc and someone has to take a decision about a surgery. There have been case in which parents or relative have keep away the lover in this situation. The other face of the medal is that you must assist spouse or relatives in case of difficulties.

Many of the above and other problems cannot avoid legally in many countries, that's why gay people want to "marry" . I think that such unions should exist, even if I don't agree to give them all the same rights of an eterosexual married couple.
Misopogon
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 11:05 am
Location: Treviso, Italy

Postby ThomasGR » Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:21 pm

Well, to clarify my position to those who'd die to know :) If there was an option saying that I would get married but children are out of any question, than... NO, I don't see any reason why on earth I should get married. Freedom and Marriage don't walk together. Let us be friends and live together happily as long as we can. Tomorrow is another day to capture the opportunity and say a loud "fair well"...
ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Postby Cédric » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:26 pm

ThomasGR wrote:As a "straight", I will marry a straight woman for no other reasons than getting children and give them the opportunity and ability to have propper care inside a healthy family. Just living together does this not provide.


I think i'll have to go and ask a few questions to my colleagues biology teachers so they explain to me in what respect marriage is a sine qua non condition to having kids :shock:
Well as for not being able to have any of my own being with a man, thanks for enlightening me, i was not quite aware of this. As for adoption... i dont want to be as peremptory as u are. You see, when u accept, eventually, being gay, and all it implies, being able to accept not to have kids, is very tough, esp. when u were raised in a large family and that everyone there expects u to have lots of urself. But that's part of the choice of accepting being gay (there's no choice in the sexuality, just one to be made knowing if yes or no i want to live my sexuality out or 'pretend' all my life... obviously i choosed!).
Now i'd like to know ur reasons for being against adoption for gay couple (i dont want to adopt myself, i want kids of my own if ever possible and even this i'm not sure if it's to raise them in such an intolerant and stupid world, no thanks!). Do u think gay couple (would it be gay or lesbian) would be worse parents than "straight" couples? What makes u think so? Is it because it's not the "society" expects kids to be raised? But u know, society, as being human, evolves just as humans do... If u're here it's because u're a learned one and u've got some interest in ancient cultures, and u can obviously see that our societies are far different from Greek and Roman ones (which were already, though neigbours, very different one from the other). We should really stop thinking as Euro/US centrism, there are other cultures worldwide, and nowadays, who think of homosexuality another way than u do. Would u doubt it, i'll be more than pleased to enlighten u and giving u references to ethnological works, or just go browsing Wikipedia s.v. "homosexuality"... i'm sure u'll learn a lot there.

take care,

Cédric.
phpbb
User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France

Postby ThomasGR » Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:53 pm

The reasons against adoption of homosexual couple you have already mentioned. As you set so correctly, it took you (and continues to do so) a huge amount of energy and determination to fight all kind of pre-justices in the society you are raised and still live. This has its costs to be paid, and it does have reflections in your mental health. But please, at this point I don’t want you to misunderstand my arguments. Having to make all these fights, which I understand completely and you may have all my compassion, some how you are over-sensitive to some issues and like a trained hound you smell the attitude of people in advance. English is not my native language, but still I try to express my thoughts as well as I can. Now back to these fights and the impacts on your psyche health, do you think this will create a healthy environment for a child to be raised? One may be as strong as he wished, and I wish you sincerely my best, but the surrounding world and our society is really harsh and very difficult to survive. Sooner or later, you will collapse. Very few homosexuals are able to survive, and none are couples. At those moments you’ll wished to be dead, and the child will have to go a traumatic experience. It is already difficult for normal couples, now be sincere for one moment to your self and think about your situation. All heroes at the end collapse and die. There isn’t any exception.

Please don’t judge my post too hard. The few gays I met in real life where really remarkable people, with higher education and really admirable (at least I do admire them, sincerely!). But… these fights have to go on a daily basis; there isn’t any time for relaxation spare. Under these conditions one has to become either tough like stone, or will end soft like soap. Either ways are not healthy conditions to raise kids.
ThomasGR
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm

Postby Cédric » Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:12 pm

Be reassured ThomasGR, English is not my native language either (i'm French, maybe if u're french speaker, we could exchange more efficiently in French, maybe not here but anyway) and i can understand u very well. Hope it's the same for u :)

I dont think that when we gay come to a full acceptance of what we trully are and stop pretend, we're as balanced (and maybe more) as straight ppl. Why? I dont think we're superior in any way, no-one is superior to anyone or he who would think this would soon be leading an army to stalk us (in the wrong way) to get us all in camps as another famous freak did not so far ago (but unfortunately this side of the Nazi history and policy has been occulted :(). So why? because, as i said it's quite difficult to accept being gay and being aside, unvoluntarily, of society. Yet, once u're cool with it, u can live ur life out as everyone not hiding from anyone. I'm not ashamed of being gay. There's no reason to be but some, who are not out and who didnt accept it, are ashamed. But really do u think these guys/girls living in the closet still would get married, go live in the same house as their partner? No they wouldnt, they dont want any attention drawn to them. I draw attention to me, i dont give a damn. But dont get me wrong i'm not a 'queen' nor a 'sissy', i'm just the boy next door. i could be ur neighbour, ur classmate, colleague, whoever. I dont advertise being gay (do straight ppl advertise?), but if ppl ask me i'll tell "yes". So you see, i consider myself very well balanced. And so are all gay folks i know who are out of the closet, living as couples, got married as well. I think it's easier for us to live our lives out coz we're "different", when it seems to me that most of the straight ppl and still closeted gays pretend often, to fit in social criteria. How many gays try to pass as straight? How many reject their gayness and turn out the most absolute gaybashers coz they are so hungry we accept what we are and they cant?
Life is tough for us? But isnt it as tough for u? We'll collapse, but will u last forever because u're straight? Should i be afraid of gaybashers? let them come, i wont let them take anything from me without fighting very hard trust me!
I'll tell u, i'll fight with all my strengths against prejudgements and ignorance (or why would have i been posting this much on this thread?)
I think u're a man of intelligence that's why i happily answer ur posts. And i regret the sarcastic tone of the first sentence of my first answer to u (but i'm stubborn too and i'll stick to what i wrote coz they will be other thinking like u and not as smart as u are) :)

Take care,

Cédric.
phpbb
User avatar
Cédric
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 10:03 am
Location: France

Previous

Return to The Academy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests