Gay Marriage?

Some that has absolutely baffled me over the last few years is gay marriage. As most of you know, I'm sure, California has done something to make gay marriage legal in that state in the next 30 days, unless the people make it not happen. Or something like that. I'm honestly not entirely sure.

But I see these people protesting gay marriage and thing: "What? What is wrong with you?" I admit, there may be a smidgen of bias, because I am gay and proud, but in all honesty, if I weren't, I'd feel the same way.

I mean, are gays THAT much of a threat to heterosexual marriage? What's the problem?

And I keep hearing people say: "Oh, well what's going to happen next, polygamy?"

AND I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW WHY POLYGAMY IS ILLEGAL EITHER.

The sanctity of marriage doesn't exist. It hasn't for a long time. Look at this.

Married adults now divorce two-and-a-half times as often as adults did 20 years ago and four times as often as they did 50 years ago... between 40% and 60% of new marriages will eventually end in divorce. The probability within... the first five years is 20%, and the probability of its ending within the first 10 years is 33%... Perhaps 25% of children ages 16 and under live with a stepparent.

SO WHY? I feel really strongly about this issue, because it sickens me, as a homosexual. It just sickens me.

Please, anyone. Give me one logical argument against it. I have yet to find one!

Almost the entire debate against same-gendered marriage (let's not forget the lesbians), is biblically based. A scewed translation of Romans which states that "men shall not leave the natural use of women". It is explained in later verses that this "natural use" is treating women as property.

Somewhere during the 15th Century, when the Roman Catholic Church stopped giving same-gendered marriage cerimonies, the idea that this "natural use" had to do with procreation came into being, leaving the "leave the natural use of women" to indicate something homosexual in nature.

Don't ask me why, religion is rarely logical.

Since a large portion of US citizens are Christian, some 72% and falling, many view the idea of equality of marriage for the GLBT community as an attack on their religion.

What these detractors DON"T realize is that our Constitution forbids laws created soley on religious doctrine. And since there is no secular reasoning to deny same-gendered marriage, they cry foul and attempt to amend the California Constitution to disallow same gendered marriage. Of course they don't realize that the justice system can knock this down as well, and apperently don't realize that they do not have the super-majority to date to force such an amendment into place anyways.

Fundamentalist organizations tend to forget that they do not speak for the entire population.

Figured as much.

I seriously hate that stuff. Fucking religion. It just bothers the piss of me. I think I'll write a letter.

Dear Religion,

Go away. You are not wanted.

Hate,

~Tazzlyn.

A person's sexual choices are their own and no one should take away that right.

Like i have said time and time again, if they are going to do it anyways let them get married.

I still have yet to find a logical argument, though I'm still looking.

Good luck finding it. Anything anyone will say will be cut down and destroyed.. religion doesnt like it.. and religion is embedded within politics, however secular they claim to be. Once you accept homosexuality is not some sick perverted sexuality but something natural then there is no logical reason to not allow marriage, so the problem is that homosexuality is tolerated but not accepted by everyone, we havent moved on that far yet. So I'll repeat, bloody good luck ever finding one that you will be able to accept, your sexuality makes you even less likely to accept it, that is only natural. Oh btw, i dont see why polygamy is illegal either. Its all stupid, unnatural laws conflict with the natural.

The world just doesn't make sense. It just doesn't anymore, at all.

And that's why I'm going to let this dissatisfaction with the whole gay marriage issue go. Because the world just doesn't make sense enough, and people don't seem to care that it doesn't make sense.

quote:

---

It just doesn't anymore, at all.

---

Im actaully intersted in what made you say "anymore."
Is this a revelation in your life that you have not had up to now?

P.s. when I reread this, it occured to me I may sound as if Im trolling. Im not. I am just curious about the way things could make sense to someone for so long then all of a sudden stop in one moment. The things that could make a person feel this way. Wether its thier sexuality, thier feeling of persecution or somthing else.

I think the world makes sense, alot of sense, but its that either we have not discorvered the truth of reality yet or that it just does not please us. E.g, religion was constructed by humans, it makes sense now, its just displeasing and i used to think it didnt make sense, now I see it makes perfect sense but i just didnt like it.

quote:

---

and people don't seem to care that it doesn't make sense.

---

If that were true, captaincynic would have no members regulars here seem to be obsessed with all of the nonsensical wrongdoings and injustices of our world. Myself included.

And the point above me is very telling. Truth is often very difficult to accept once it's discovered.

As far as gay marriage is concerned, it is very difficult to accept that the world we live in right now does not fully embrace and allow it because we feel as though we are free to make our own choices, when in fact we are very often herded along like sheep. Going against the herd causes you to become an outcast. Everyone feels like an outcast when they have a thought or action that goes against the norm. Gay marriage is not a norm in our world.

To Chained Wings: I didn't mean the world itself, I mean my perception of the world. All my life, I'd typically only really cared about myself, my close friends and family. But lately, I've been getting into politics and life more than usual. I'm beginning to see the big picture, the world and everything. Gradually, I've begun to realize how bad things really are and how little people do, much less, care, about it. And these things are directly affecting people, but they still do nothing. This does not make sense to me, as a person.

To her: Gradually, I've begun to realize how bad things really are and how little people do, much less, care, about it. And these things are directly affecting people, but they still do nothing. This does not make sense to me, as a person. Same statement as before.

To Wyote: I didn't mean everyone. I meant in general. I think the people here on CC are awesome for coming and talking like we do here. But on your latter comments, I understand it isn't the norm, but don't you think it's time for society to move past the idea of 'normal'?

Is it time for socity to move past what the idea of what is normal?

Of course it is IF it conflicts what contempary society wants. It will do, just not today, its getting there, it takes society a long time to change so dramatically. Its like when i studied miniorty influence in psychology, it takes place slowly, unlike majority influence which produces instant results. For socity to actually change an ideological change must take place first before it is practically manifested on a massive scale. It needs to change its entire viewpoint, that doesnt take place in fifty years completely.
Slowly but surely homosexuality will be accepted and will become a norm, once people start thinking differently.

In 500 years time I would love to come back and see how things such as polygamy, paedophilia, animal sex and celibacy will become accepted, if not that atleast tolerated. You might now look at me and say how could i even compare homosexuality to paedophilia, thats disgusting and homosexualtiy is natural,.. ect..
that may be because that it does not fit in with what your idea of normal, or acceptable is and we can have a huge rant which would be uselesss because we would most probably hold the same view...

I am no way justifying that its not accepted yet but its changed alot, look in the 1960 they still believed it was some illness they could cure.. could they really? of course not, it was silly, so all in good time, by teaching our children, and spreading what we believe is correct in time it will be established that homosexuality is fine, and it should not jus be tolerated but accepted. And it should be entitiled the same righst as hetrosexuality

I heard a story once about date trees;

A man planted a date tree and when was asked whats the point as he'll never see it, he replied for future generations as the people in the past did it for me.

I believe we have to do the same thing, if we believe something we should do our part in bringing it about by teaching our children and working hard to change it, if it means enough to us. Then we'll be like the man who planted the tree, if we never see it, our grandchildren will, and we hope they will be proud of us and benefit as we do from the struggles of those before us.

"I believe we have to do the same thing, if we believe something we should do our part in bringing it about by teaching our children and working hard to change it, if it means enough to us. Then we'll be like the man who planted the tree, if we never see it, our grandchildren will, and we hope they will be proud of us and benefit as we do from the struggles of those before us."

Pretty much.

I once made the argument that a holy marriage is the binding of two people its gods eyes. And that if gay people want to be married they should take it up with the church and that the government should have nothing to do with it because they dont belong in the bedrooms of their citizens. And that the legal and finacial benefits that "married" couples get should be given to all couples that intend on building families and futures for the future citizens of this country. Whenther it is called mariage or not should be up to the church, whether or not individuals can be joined together legaly should be determined on the seriousness of the relationship. not and the gender preference.

Who sees somethign wrong with this?