Homosexual Marriage - Page 6

Had an interesting dilemma occur recently which vaguely is representative of attitudes given here so I am interested to see how you would respond to the situation?

quote:

---

Birds of a feather are flocked together?

---

A day-visit with son, I enter his room to find the room mate laying in bed, nude from the waist down fondling himself.
How should I react?
We are going out & need to have him get ready so I ignore it & focus my son on getting ready. Robby (room mate) rolls over to hump the mattress. My son is ready so we leave without a word.
Understand these are institutionalized adult (?) children
When in my youth, a friend had one of little dogs that would try to mount your shoe so I understand the physical sense of the action. That it is normal (animal) instinct to find pleasure in such activities. So may be some pet owner can give me a clue as to how to deal with such incidents?

Its just masterbation... There's nothing unhealthy about it.

What IS unhealthy is that the roommate didn't stop as soon as you came in. Or that your son considered it appropriate for his roomate to do that in your presence.

Its just not respectful.

What I mean is, I would NEVER let my buddies jerk off when my parents are around.

Sorry Dt, I should be more specific. My son is autistic as is Robbie. Generally speaking these people (children) don't function (developmental disorders) with the social graces of society. Which is the crux of the dilemma.

So may be some pet owner can give me a clue as to how to deal with such incidents?


Hmmm, rolled up newspaper and a hose

That would be awkward, however luckily this wasn't your grandpa who is not autistic, whose bed you had to pass every morning to such a salute. Thankfully he was kind enough to grunt and pull covers and stop briefly when I passed, but the damage was done. Once or twice I could have handled.

Firebird.............been good man, jobs great, car is sold-screw that car! Lol...........

Anyway,
Maybe autistic people don't react because they don't feel shame the same way, or guilt, so they wouldn't react or stop because they don't see anything wrong?
Damn.......I'm sorry Left..how traumatic.

I agree Wes, in a sense I was violating his freedom, his rights.
His only privicy is confined to his room, which is shared?
After all they are incapible of providing for their own well-being.
Perhaps they have no rights as they have no true freedom of thought or will?

It is strange to read that people are "pro-gay" but not "pro-gay marriage." That is to say that they believe homosexuals deserve fair treatment just not the equal status under the law or under God. Funny that in this country were we are actually antit-gay wer are pro murderer. In this country if you pay your taxes, do community service, live crime free, vote and love your partner you can't get married if that partner has the same genetalia as you do. However, if you are a heterosexual who murders his wife, you can legally get remairried. If you are a child molestor you can get married in this country. If you are straight and you rape a woman, you can get married in this country. If you have avoided your legal responsability to pay taxes in this county you can get a reduction when you get out of jail because you are allowed to get married. I am not arguing that these men and woment shouldn't be allowed to marry, rather, that we disturbing priorities in this country.

Its not strange at all. You seem to look at people and say they are not men but gay. Others look at them and say they are men who deserve all rights under the law and respect as human beings. However they should not be classified as a different species or breed that is entitled to special rights. There is something inherently bigoted in such a view.

As a man (or women) all have the right to get married as long as they marry someone from the opposite sex, aren't already married, are of a certain age, who is not a family member and has received consent. All American men and women have this right - no one is being discriminated against unless they violate the conditions of the law. If I am already married I am not being denied the right to get married if I want to marry a second wife. If you want to marry your sister then you are not being denied your right to marry, etc.

The reason we have these legal conditions is because society has certain values that it is trying to protect and many believe that children should be raised in a household that has both a father and a mother - that both are necessary for a healthy upbringing. Many believe that altering the meaning of marriage would have negative societal consequences down the road.

"Such a belief is entirely flawed because it is not illegal for single parents to raise kids. If the "protection of a wholesome family" is the reason two men are not able to marry then single moms and single fathers should immediately have their rights to their children revoked for they also breach the definition of a wholesome family."

No the idea is not flawed because the law sets certain standards however does not necessarily impose absolutes in all cases. Yes it is not illegal for single parents to raise kids just as it is not illegal for two men to live together and have sex in the privacy of their home. Nor is it illegal for a person that is gay to adopt.

"Furthermore, the legal status of being married requiring a man and woman is indeed bigotry"

It may be discriminatory but its not bigoted. As I explained. all men and women share the equal right when it comes to marriage however none are allowed to violate that laws conditions. You may hypothetically want to marry your sister and she may want to marry you but the law says absolutely not - the law is discriminating against you in that way but it is not providing an atmosphere of bigotry nor denying you your right to marriage.

Lets try debating from another starting point. To know who can get married we must first know 'What is the purpose of marriage?'

quote:

---

All American men and women have this right - no one is being discriminated against unless they violate the conditions of the law.
The reason we have these legal conditions is because society has certain values that it is trying to protect and many believe that altering the meaning of marriage would have negative social consequences down the road.

---

Absolutely that is why genetic testing required. So they may insure breeding.

I don't disagree with it, i just feel it is wrong. if i was in government i definatley would not try to allow it! but gays are gays, are the depressed are the depressed, are the mentally sick, we are not perfect, and yes i do feel homosexual are definatly not perfect or even close to becoming. If i could explain it better and had more knowlege i would, but i thnk homosexuals yern for something different. Oh and i never heard the one about "homosexuality is in our DNA"? that was a new one.

I don't have a problem with gays. One of my best friends is gay. I do have a problem with same sex marriage. I disagree with it.

The traditional definition of marriage:
Mar.riage
Noun. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
This should be very easy to understand...one man and one woman. It's not that hard to figure out. It's been the definition for thousands of years. Why do left extremists feel the need to change it? I guess you can call it whatever you want
...except marriage! About 90% of Americans agree!
I believe in the true definition of marriage.

quote:

---

It's been the definition for thousands of years. Why do left extremists feel the need to change it?

---

Has it been that way for thousands of years because homosexuality was accepted or abhored, what tradition are you trying to hold on to, judgemental exclusiveness or understanding inclusiveness.

I'm not claiming to know the intentions of those who wrote the definition, but what I do know is that homsexuals who desire marraige desire the same marraige they grew up with, and they want to honor the tradition of the loving union. And to be forced to call it something different can be seen as a residual stain of unnacceptance.

But honestly, over the word matter, I don't really care, I just don't want people irrationally hating homosexuals and treating them less than human.

But like others have said, marriage has bigger problems then gays trying to get in on the action, namely masses of heteros wanting to divorce.