The reason why homosexuals want the right ot marry

[Flystripper]

Multiple times over the past couple of days the question has been posed, "Why do homosexuals want to call their unions marriage?" Nobody has come right out and stated the reason, although we all know the answer. It is the answer to this question that is at the root of this debate.

The answer is that they want marriage in order to increase their acceptance by society. It is as simple as that. There are other ways to gain the legal benefits of marriage (ie. Civil unions, beneficiary designations, power of attorney etc.) and gay people will love who they want to love. Marriage is not the keyto love nor is it the key to gaining legal rights and benefits that may not be afforded to them. However, it IS the key to gaining greater social acceptance and reducing bigotry and hate over time. Which in my opinion, is a good thing.

People that fight against gay marriage do so out of the irrational fear that society's eventual acceptance of gay marriage will somehow harm their family or harm society. Some of the reasons for their fear are listed below:

1. They believe social acceptance of gay marriage will lead to more people becoming gay. Thus we argue on choice vs non choice. If it is not a choice there is nothing to fear.

2. They believe that social acceptance of gay marriage will lead to causing people to believe that homosexual acts are ok and accepted by god. These people are not very confident in their ability to teach their children. In addition, they believe that an easy lesson to a child is more important than reducing the overall levels of bigotry and hate in our society.

3. They believe that adoption will become easier for homosexuals and that homosexual homes are not good for children. They feel that it will result in more gay children...thus the debate on choice continues. They also believe that gays are more likely to abuse their adopted children. This belief is a holdover from people believing that gays are the result of abuse and those that were abused tend to abuse. While the latter belief is definitely true the former belief has not been shown to be true.

I am sure there are other reasons that will be pointed out to me. This list is obviously not all encompassing. I just don't see valid reasons to be afraid of homosexual marriage. In fact, I think that the long term benefits to our society outwiegh the potential negatives if any.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

Multiple times over the past couple of days the question has been posed, "Why do homosexuals want to call their unions marriage?" Nobody has come right out and stated the reason, although we all know the answer. It is the answer to this question that is at the root of this debate.

The answer is that they want marriage in order to increase their acceptance by society. It is as simple as that. There are other ways to gain the legal benefits of marriage (ie. Civil unions, beneficiary designations, power of attorney etc.) and gay people will love who they want to love. Marriage is not the keyto love nor is it the key to gaining legal rights and benefits that may not be afforded to them. However, it IS the key to gaining greater social acceptance and reducing bigotry and hate over time. Which in my opinion, is a good thing.

People that fight against gay marriage do so out of the irrational fear that society's eventual acceptance of gay marriage will somehow harm their family or harm society. Some of the reasons for their fear are listed below:

1. They believe social acceptance of gay marriage will lead to more people becoming gay. Thus we argue on choice vs non choice. If it is not a choice there is nothing to fear.

2. They believe that social acceptance of gay marriage will lead to causing people to believe that homosexual acts are ok and accepted by god. These people are not very confident in their ability to teach their children. In addition, they believe that an easy lesson to a child is more important than reducing the overall levels of bigotry and hate in our society.

3. They believe that adoption will become easier for homosexuals and that homosexual homes are not good for children. They feel that it will result in more gay children...thus the debate on choice continues. They also believe that gays are more likely to abuse their adopted children. This belief is a holdover from people believing that gays are the result of abuse and those that were abused tend to abuse. While the latter belief is definitely true the former belief has not been shown to be true.

I am sure there are other reasons that will be pointed out to me. This list is obviously not all encompassing. I just don't see valid reasons to be afraid of homosexual marriage. In fact, I think that the long term benefits to our society outwiegh the potential negatives if any.

The reason why I wouldn't get so upset about it becoming law, gays being able to marry, is because marriage already is considered a joke in many settings.

This McCAin thing. Most analysts said if the Times story was true, him cheating on his wife wasn't the big deal, it was he would have done it with a lobbyist. Look at Hollywood. I don't know how many of the couples there with kids are married and which ones aren't. There isn't the stigma of divorce anymore.

The highest level of being a mormon doesn't really give a crap about marriage either. The Temple marriage is so much more important than the civil marriage that the church encourages leaving unworthy members or non members out in the street while the marriage is being performed.

When I really think about it, I am against gay marriage to protect the sanctity of marriage. Thinking again, what sanctity of marriage is there?

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

1. They believe social acceptance of gay marriage will lead to more people becoming gay. Thus we argue on choice vs non choice. If it is not a choice there is nothing to fear.

Here is the key question for a heterosexual male who thinks that gay marriage will destroy "traditional" marriage: How much would someone have to pay you to abandon sex with women forever, marry a gay man, and make flippity flop with him 3 times per week for the rest of your life?

If the answer is more than 1 million dollars, then you shouldn't worry about gay marriage destroying traditional marriage.

[smokymountainrain]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Here is the key question for a heterosexual male who thinks that gay marriage will destroy "traditional" marriage: How much would someone have to pay you to abandon sex with women forever, marry a gay man, and make flippity flop with him 3 times per week for the rest of your life?

If the answer is more than 1 million dollars, then you shouldn't worry about gay marriage destroying traditional marriage.

If your answer is anything besides "there isn't enough money in the world", you may need to go change your answer in the gay/straight spectrum poll.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by smokymountainrain

If your answer is anything besides "there isn't enough money in the world", you may need to go change your answer in the gay/straight spectrum poll.

I set the bar at 1 million dollars for the people in the middle of the spectrum who still prefer women and are therefore heterosexual.

[MikeWaters]

Then I say call their bluff. When CA for a time had gay marriage, the city of SF (?) immediately removed (or announced they would, can't remember) domestic benefits. It was limited to only married people.

[T Blue]

I suppose this is somewhere along the line of thinking of the blacks and the priesthood, that eventually the brethren will come correct and see the gays line of thinking, and then all will be well in Zion?

After all who are they hurting, correct?

Surely God can see past the fact that his whole plan was set up around us being together thru eternities as a family unit, now just because some people choose to get divorced and not stick it out, doesn't mean that Gods intent was to have Bill and Ted together thru eternity.

The mere thought of 2 males doing what they do makes my stomach want to turn over, but hey I guess that this is about "LOVE" and not the act itself, right?

[Spaz]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Then I say call their bluff. When CA for a time had gay marriage, the city of SF (?) immediately removed (or announced they would, can't remember) domestic benefits. It was limited to only married people.

I don't understand this. SF removed domestic benefits to whom? And it was limited to only married people meaning hetero or homo?

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by T Blue

I suppose this is somewhere along the line of thinking of the blacks and the priesthood, that eventually the brethren will come correct and see the gays line of thinking, and then all will be well in Zion?

After all who are they hurting, correct?

Surely God can see past the fact that his whole plan was set up around us being together thru eternities as a family unit, now just because some people choose to get divorced and not stick it out, doesn't mean that Gods intent was to have Bill and Ted together thru eternity.

The mere thought of 2 males doing what they do makes my stomach want to turn over, but hey I guess that this is about "LOVE" and not the act itself, right?

I think it is a biological response, your getting sick, not a spiritual response.

I am not so sure about God's intent like I used to be. I was sure homosexuality was a choice, now I am not. I was sure a man couldn't be born who was really a woman. Now I know that stuff happens. How can I condemn a baby born that way. I guess I could be pissed at God for letting it happen, but I prefer just not to think I know God's intent.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Spaz

I don't understand this. SF removed domestic benefits to whom? And it was limited to only married people meaning hetero or homo?

domestic partner benefits i.e. "person I live with". That's a way that you can include gay partners.

But once marriage was legal, they changed it to benefits only to spouses. no more benefits for unofficial partners.