Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Aloha and welcome to The Halo Social!

We're just some people who want to talk more than just Halo since life is a big part of living too. :D You are all welcome, no matter how you found us so feel free to look around a bit. We'd love it if you stayed a while though so go on and register, you know you want to...Simply use your GamerTag as your login then wander on over to Introductions, say hello, and join in the fun!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Gay marriage; Anyone give a fuck?
Topic Started: May 26 2012, 09:24 AM (207 Views)
Scruff 815
Member Avatar
The Arbiter
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Just curious - seems to be a burning issue in the States right now so I'm wondering where y'all stand.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
porottaja
Member Avatar
Top 3 Oddball
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I don't give a rat's ass if gay people marry or not.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Braythor
Member Avatar
Dumped Scruff's mum
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I don't even care enough to finish this sente
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
crazybydefault
Member Avatar
Grenade Honker
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It's kind of an interesting topic for me.

Having grown up in a fairly conservative household, the vast majority of my family doesn't think that gays should marry. Obviously, growing up has shifted my views towards the moderate side, so I'm not quite the die-hard "OBAMA'S THE ANTICHRIST" person that nearly every older individual of my family is. Sure, that upbringing has definitely remained with me; I'm actually a registered Republican, although after this next election, I'll likely change that to "No party" for various reasons (which can simply be put like this: partisanship is full of shit).

Many of my views against it are belief-based, which many people disagree with, and for an understandable reason. It's hard to base an argument on something that's completely subjective and up to the individual, especially in a country where a separation of church and state exists (which I'm quite grateful for, regardless of whether I hold belief or not). However, like I said, I'm not a hard-core right-winger and my values tend to more or less lie in the middle of the spectrum; I think gays definitely deserve respect and rights that heterosexuals currently have.

Gay marriage, though, is a bit of a grey area for me. I don't like the argument of "allowing gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage", as I'd say the "sanctity" of marriage is pretty much destroyed already. People can get drunkenly married in Vegas, The Hangover style, and we've all seen the news of celebrities getting a divorce shortly after getting married. Yet, I hold my beliefs above all else, and those beliefs are that homosexuality is immoral.

So honestly, I really don't know what to think of it. I don't want to blindly follow a belief without hard facts behind it, and I don't want to simply throw all that I believe away. Chalk it up to being young and still discovering who I really am, I suppose...

<Yellowlengthpost>
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gengo
Member Avatar
Captain
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
It is my opinion that homosexuality is a biological anomaly. Sure, it instances of homosexual behavior occurs in numerous other mammals, but it still does not naturally lead to children - the biological purpose for our reproductive organs.

THAT SAID - in the United States anyway (I don't know the laws in other nations well enough to comment), marriage is a contract entered into by two people. This is why it is not solely a "go to the church and declare your love before your family and God" thing - you must first get registered by the government, and you must have the signature of a witness.

Currently, these two actions (the "spiritual" church side and the "contractual" government side) are seamlessly intertwined.

I think the quickest and most legitimate way to solve this issue is to separate them.

Here is how:

1) A church can choose to "spiritually" marry whomever they choose. If a particular denomination is against it, then they don't have to do it. However, others (Unitarian Universalists, some Episcopalians, some Methodists, some others perhaps) who do have a problem with two people joining themselves in the eyes of their spiritual creator are free do perform the ceremony. Many do this now, even though it has no legal standing.

2) From a contractual standpoint, the sole purpose of the government being involved is because they may have to become involved if there is a breach of contract, or either party decides to nullify the contract. In this case, the gender/sexual orientation of either party does not matter at all. The only thing that matters is that both parties are consenting adults.

I posted this on facebook earlier, but this (to me) is exactly the kind of intolerance that does Christianity an injustice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2n7vSPwhSU&feature=share

I understand he doesn't agree with homosexuality. I understand that he believes it to be against what his particular god wants. But he takes it too far when he speak like this - in a house of God of all places. I just don't get it. If two adults have a consensual relationship, and he have a problem with their particular arrangement (which doesn't really concern him in any way), then by all means he should talk to them from a place of compassion about how he is concerned for their everlasting souls. But to spew such hatred because he can't "imagine kissing a man" . . . what a disservice to the Christian ministry.

The ignorance (which fuels most if not all of the intolerance) is striking.

That man suggests we suspend the necessary laws to allow our government the authority to round up all known homosexuals (what does he plan to do with those not yet "out of the closet"?), and then place them in cages to allow them to "die off". Because "they can't reproduce".

Does he not understand that homosexuals are born into and raised by heterosexuals? What a joke.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Scruff 815
Member Avatar
The Arbiter
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mad props to Crazy and Gengo for some proper long postings! As far as the UK goes we have "civil partnerships" which are gay marriages in everything but name, and they obviously can't be held in a church.

We are however a pretty religion-less country; if you pushed people they may say they're Christians but you'd struggle to find anyone under the age of 60 who goes to church for any reason other than funerals or christenings. I think, perhaps because of our lack of strong religion, we're also a lot more liberal with homosexuality.

The morality of the whole thing in terms of "that's not what your penis is for" doesn't really enter into it for me; humans have sex for pleasure as well as reproduction, so I don't think you can really consider "THAT'S NOT NATURAL!" as an argument. If you never looked at porn and only ever had unprotected sex in the missionary position with a view to making babies then maybe you'd have a leg to stand on, but I'm pretty sure there isn't a man on the planet who hasn't tried to get onto Redtube at least once in his life.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Gengo
Member Avatar
Captain
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sorry for the grammar errors littered throughout my previous post. I'd fix them now if I could, but hopefully the point I was trying to make was clear enough. Specifically:
Quote:
 

However, others (Unitarian Universalists, some Episcopalians, some Methodists, some others perhaps) who do have a problem with two people joining themselves in the eyes of their spiritual creator are free do perform the ceremony. Many do this now, even though it has no legal standing.


Should have conveyed that those denominations do NOT have a problem with two people joining themselves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CallUpChuck
Member Avatar
Brigadier
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
My beliefs lie on the right in the political spectrum. Yes, being in a gay marriage is a reproductive cul de sac, but I don't care for any of the counter arguments. However, I don't have enough interest in promoting it. It's the economy, stupid.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ASLANS R0AR
Member Avatar
Spartan Pops
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
My own views are belief-based (similar to Crazy's above), but the "discussion climate" here in the US (at least for me) is so volatile that you have to really pick and choose carefully where and when you enter into the discussion!

What troubles me the most about the issue is that the extreme positions are dominating the stage (e.g., the video that Gengo referenced above).

I found this blogger most closely reflects my own stance on the matter (though speaking generally of homosexuality and not same-sex marriage) How I Wish the Homosexuality Debate Would Go
Edited by ASLANS R0AR, May 29 2012, 05:38 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deadpool Psycko
Member Avatar
The Meta
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
First and foremost - Very much FOR, for many reasons.

1. My sister is gay and I'll support her rights in this country 120%

2. Marriage isn't exactly a "sacred ritual" anymore. Here's all that needs to be said on that - Weirdest Marriages

3. Riding off the above - America is the Land of Freedom and Equality. If two people want to legally "live together"....WHAT THE FUCK IS THE PROBLEM!??!?!?!!?

Marriage is and always has been a farce that bears upon social status' and benefits within said society. The Church just decided to monopolize that as well when they could.
That aside, my #2 should cover that in just a percentage. Look at how Celebrities have decimated the idea of marriage.

In the easiest way of understanding - Much like everything else in this world that people flip out about like sad, pathetic, sensitive sallies - If it doesn't bother you in your day to day life or directly affect the way your day/life proceeds, it shouldn't matter to you one fucking bit.
Even with a gay sister, who you'd never suspect was anyway, I'm not even a big fan of the Flamboyancy most of the males exhibit. Does it bother me? Yes. Do I condemn them to hell and quote The Almighty as to hating them? No. I have much more important and rational things to deal with. If God has something against them, that's his plate of bacon to deal with but if he does exist, you can bet damn well I'm going to put up an argument as to what's wrong with two people just wanting to be happy together??
The idea that being gay is some sort of mystical portal to bring hell on earth is just a laughable outdated sort of thinking that ought to take a side seat with the medical procedure of "a good Bleeding"

It's one of the main reasons why I despise the idea of being a "Proud American". This land was founded on the same ways of bloodshed and the ideas of swindling the original inhabitants for our own advantage. People should be able to do what they want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone or literally create a downward spiral.

Jim and Jack sucking each others bananas or Molly and Mindy chowing on the others cabbage isn't going to crumble society. If Two Girls One Cup has survived this long without causing mass upheaval and chaos, Gay Marriage isn't going to do a damn thing.

Were it a true religious matter (because Religion is man-made and Bullshit) - It's states specifically in the Bible that "God will judge so and so upon Judgement day" so whether you like it or not - YOU Have no official say. Dislike it, but keep it to yourself. Gay people don't rub it in other peoples faces that "you SHOULD be gay".

Marriage may be between a man and a woman and while it doesn't further the species, gay sex shouldn't be so looked down upon. Scientifically, we were all born from some asexual goop. Things reproduce asexually or other bizarre ways since the beginning of time.

Let Life Live and mind your own damn business is what I say.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Enfinit
Member Avatar
Warrant Officer
[ *  *  *  * ]
In all honesty, I couldn't care less. If you love someone, you love someone; that's all there is to it.

My closest uncle is gay, and was married two years ago. The only thing that peaks my interest (of which I've talked about this with him before) is using the term "marriage" when it comes to joining two men or two women. By definition, the term "marriage" is applied to specifically one man and one woman; I don't think it's the correct term to be applied to gay couples. However, there isn't another word to be used in this case, so "marriage" stands.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deadpool Psycko
Member Avatar
The Meta
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest#Cousin_relationships

Two quotes stick out like sore thumbs:

1. Marriages and sexual relationships between first cousins are stigmatized as incest in western cultures. In modern secular law, notably some US states, prohibit marriages between first cousins. Currently, 24 states prohibit such marriages, and another seven permit them only under special circumstances.

So more than half the country is fine with your brother fucking your sister instead of your sister kissing your sister. As if there's a "Grey area". HA!

2. "In Slate Magazine, William Saletan drew a legal connection between gay sex and incest between consenting adults. As he described in his article, in 2003, U.S. Senator Rick Santorum commented on a pending U.S. Supreme Court case involving sodomy laws (primarily as a matter of Constitutional rights to Privacy and Equal Protection under the Law). He stated: "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery." However, David Smith of the Human Rights Campaign professed outrage that Santorum placed being gay on the same moral and legal level as someone engaging in incest. Saletan argued that, legally and morally, there is essentially no difference between the two, and went on to support incest between consenting adults being covered by a legal right to privacy.UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh has made similar arguments. In a more recent article, Saletan said that incest is wrong because it introduces the possibility of irreparably damaging family units by introducing "a notoriously incendiary dynamic—sexual tension—into the mix"

Hmm, so consent of sexual activity between family is fine behind closed doors and can lead to, for lack of a better word - Mutants (respectively).
But two consenting adults behind closed doors with NO harm and NO reproduction (ie nobody gets hurt in any way) is the sign of the devil?
Once again - Trust some ridiculous 2000 year old Best Seller or your own intuition?

I'll stick with my Gut over God there.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SgtMaj AJJ
Recruit
[ * ]
When these questions/topics come up, I get really curious what the conversations were like 50 years ago. I wonder if Pastors in Churches preached that Blacks sure enough belong in the back of the bus. Or in 1913 if it was preached that Woman are incapable of making an educated decision and voting.


A comment of mine from another thread, relevant to this conversation.

Quote:
 
An overarching perspective I've attempted to maintain over the past couple of years, is relating those misguided delusional brothers and sisters to an earlier time in history. At one time, people swore up and down that the world was flat. At one time, people swore up and down that the Sun rotated around the Earth.

Gay Marriage is no different than Abortion, or any other fundamental human right that's distorted and in the name of god used to divide societies. (The US isn't alone in the share of backwoods ignorance)

Standing against Gay Marriage, or any other fundamental human right, is no different to me than thinking the world is flat. It's just wrong and over time shift happens.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deadpool Psycko
Member Avatar
The Meta
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I've used the same examples in my defenses of the subject. Also being that those two examples were heavily enforced by The Church which was considered, at a time, like the Batphone to God. That's two very major things that God was "incorrect" about. Rather than think like that, I would like to hope that most fanatics of religion would come to the conclusion that maybe the two millennium old book MIGHT have some mistranslations or embellishments?

What about how "The Great Castration" by Pope Pius IX when reacted to nude male statues, removed ALL the penises and added fig leaves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SgtMaj AJJ
Recruit
[ * ]
OMFG You guys...

I'm convinced there need be only one long run on "controversial jargon" thread.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deadpool Psycko
Member Avatar
The Meta
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

LOL yeah but can we really trust the original Zombie???
Edited by Deadpool Psycko, Aug 3 2012, 02:28 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Braythor
Member Avatar
Dumped Scruff's mum
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Marriage is so gay.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deadpool Psycko
Member Avatar
The Meta
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

"Well the Pope's in charge of this whole big mess - How can he put up with this pedophile sex? - He's wearing Prada shoes and a designer dress - Hellllll yes! - Thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not lie - And don't drop the soap when the Pope is nearby - Because they may hate gays but they do love guys - Ooooh-ho my!" - Dr Denis Leary
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SgtMaj AJJ
Recruit
[ * ]
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Current Events · Next Topic »
Add Reply