Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 146
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    2,974
    Post Thanks / Like

    "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Taken from the recent thread on gay marriage.
    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    Homosexuals are entitled to equal treatment. Any gay man can marry a woman and any gay woman can marry a man. As a bisexual woman, if I wanted to marry a woman, I would not be able to. A heterosexual man could not marry another man. We are all receiving equal treatment.
    I'd like to present a hypothetical scenario, and get responses pertaining to the justice or injustice brought upon the minority:

    You are a heterosexual who has been abducted and dropped out of a plane onto a little-known independent society somewhere far away from your home country. You find that this society consists of a population that is almost entirely homosexual, with about a 2-5% heterosexual birth rate. The society has made heterosexual marriage illegal because it does not appeal to the majority opinion. Reproduction is taken care of by volunteer childbearing and artificial fertilization/adoption.

    You start to make a living in this society, but fall in love with a member of the opposite sex. You date, spend time together, and love each other so much you want to get married and start a family.

    The government says no. Everyone thinks your lifestyle is gross and distasteful. Besides, having parents of two different genders is unstable and confusing for children. It also coincidentally is forbidden by some interpretation of the local religion.

    You are offered the chance to marry someone of the equal sex just like everyone else, as the obvious solution.

    What would you think?
    Fortunately, the darkest of darkness is not as terrible as we fear.
    Unfortunately, the lightest of light, all things good, are not so wonderful as we hope for them to be.
    What, then, is left, but various shades of grey neutrality? Where are the heroes and villains? All I see are people.

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    HL - Your 'equal treatment' scenario fills me with questions and concerns. They are largely psychological, ethical and moral in nature and includes the 'straight' partner.

    1/ If a gay marrying in 'heterosexual mode', is about as attractive to them as me marrying someone of my own gender, I think it likely to be a non starter.
    2/ What are the odds of a gay who is 'out' marrying in a conventional way? Supposing he/she found someone, it would hardly be a marriage by any normal definition.
    3/ If the gay person is felt socially forced to engage in 'distasteful' subtifuge and marry in order to be 'accepted', and later 'bottles out' for emotional reasons, or reasons of conscience, then they are liable to cause ditress in the 'partner'.
    4/ Can it be right to encourage such dishonest behaviour?
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  3. #3
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Negros are entitled to equal treatment. Any negro man can marry a negro woman and any negro woman can marry a negro man. As a biracial woman, if I wanted to marry a white man, I would not be able to. A white man could not marry a black women. We are all receiving equal treatment.

    Kinda puts things into perspective, don't you think?

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Here and Now
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Fyshhed
    I'd like to present a hypothetical scenario,
    Doesn't this automatically fall into fallacy of false dilemma.

    Homosexuals are allowed to adopt. They are also allowed to hire a surrogate. So, your scenario makes it out to be worse than it is.

    If I was told I was not allowed to start a family, I would feel that is an infringement. But that is not the case in society. If I was told I was not allowed to marry because I was not conforming to the standard of the society, I would accept it.

    Let's remember that HappyLady has been twice divorced and has had to muddle through many legal processes that I didn't think were necessarily in my favor. I still accepted it as the standard of society and understand why certain processes exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fyshhed
    You start to make a living in this society, but fall in love with a member of the opposite sex. You date, spend time together, and love each other so much you want to get married and start a family.

    The government says no. Everyone thinks your lifestyle is gross and distasteful. Besides, having parents of two different genders is unstable and confusing for children. It also coincidentally is forbidden by some interpretation of the local religion.
    Honestly, I think it would be selfish of me to not take into consideration the fabric of the society. *I* want, *I* want, *I* want...screw what society wants. I want to marry a man, I want to make babies with him so they can be picked on and beat up on the playground. Me, me, me. Blech.

    I don't think homosexuals should be bludgeoned to death. I just don't think marriage should be a legal or religious option for them, because the standard of society supercedes their wants. If my fiance dies, I want the house. We have no legal document stating I should get it. Guess who gets it? His ex-wife. Do I like it? No. Do I want the house? Yes. It is my responsibility to conform to the standard of society so that I can get it. I need to get papers drawn up stating it is my house...the same ones homosexuals should and can have drawn up.
    Souls of the animal kingdom: eagle, fox, bottle-nose dolphin, octopus, house cat. Okay, let's jump this jump. -- Rod Kimble

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Fyshhed
    You are a heterosexual who has been abducted and dropped out of a plane onto a little-known independent society somewhere far away from your home country. You find that this society consists of a population that is almost entirely homosexual, with about a 2-5% heterosexual birth rate.
    Laughable. Gays do not reproduce. Most gays are simply cultural, while a tiny minority actually have the mental disorder of only being attracted to their own sex.

    You are offered the chance to marry someone of the equal sex just like everyone else, as the obvious solution.

    What would you think?
    I'd think that such a society could not exist, first of all. To satisfy your hypothetical, though, I'd not just think, but know that they were wrong, and move to a different society, although I never would have moved there in the first place.

  6. #6
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    2,974
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning
    Laughable. Gays do not reproduce. Most gays are simply cultural, while a tiny minority actually have the mental disorder of only being attracted to their own sex.



    I'd think that such a society could not exist, first of all. To satisfy your hypothetical, though, I'd not just think, but know that they were wrong, and move to a different society, although I never would have moved there in the first place.
    On both counts you failed to read the quick, even simple explanations. Do not be afraid, Kevin. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and you'd make one scary Dark Jedi.
    Fortunately, the darkest of darkness is not as terrible as we fear.
    Unfortunately, the lightest of light, all things good, are not so wonderful as we hope for them to be.
    What, then, is left, but various shades of grey neutrality? Where are the heroes and villains? All I see are people.

  7. #7
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    SF,CA
    Posts
    2,133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning
    Laughable.... Most gays are simply cultural, while a tiny minority actually have the mental disorder of only being attracted to their own sex.
    KB, why do you continue to state things that are simply not true? I've devoted an entire thread utterly disproving the complete nonsense that you propogate with respect to homosexuality. See: http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...ead.php?t=1908

    Among other things, as of 2001, all of the major professional psychiatric and psychological organizations state that homosexuality is a normal, natural, and fixed sexual orientation. The American Psychological Association (APA) released a Statement on Homosexuality in July 1994. Their first two paragraphs are:

    "The research on homosexuality is very clear.Homosexuality is neither mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as heterosexuals.

    Nor is homosexuality a matter of individual choice. Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture. Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores. Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments."

    BTW, in a rare move, I hit KB with negative rep points for continously propogating misinformation, even after I've shown that he's completely wrong. I encourage all members of ODN to do the same. Maybe he will get the point...

  8. #8
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    SF,CA
    Posts
    2,133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    Homosexuals are entitled to equal treatment. Any gay man can marry a woman and any gay woman can marry a man. As a bisexual woman, if I wanted to marry a woman, I would not be able to. A heterosexual man could not marry another man. We are all receiving equal treatment.
    HL: I'm both surprised and saddened that someone of your intelligence would adhere to this viewpoint. Here's a little history lesson for you today that I hope will impact your viewpoint on this topic:

    From: Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation By Peggy Pascoe, Associate Professor and Beekman Chair of Northwest and Pacific History at the University of Oregon. She is completing a book on the significance of miscegenation law in United States history.

    Here are four of the arguments that were used to justify miscegenation laws (laws prohibiting interracial marriage):

    1) First, judges claimed that marriage belonged under the control of the states rather than the federal government.

    2) Second, they began to define and label all interracial relationships (even longstanding, deeply committed ones) as illicit sex rather than marriage.

    3) Third, they insisted that interracial marriage was contrary to God's will, and

    4) Fourth, they declared, over and over again, that interracial marriage was somehow "unnatural."

    [Hmmm...sound familiar?]

    The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.

    In 1948, the Supreme Court of California took a giant step toward ending the regime of miscegenation law when it broke an sixty-five year string of post-Reconstruction judicial precedents and declared California's miscegenation law unconstitutional. Speaking for a deeply divided court, Justice Roger Traynor flatly rejected the shopworn claim that miscegenation laws applied "equally" to all races. "A member of any of these races," Traynor explained, "may find himself barred by law from marrying the person of his choice and that person to him may be irreplaceable." "Human beings," he continued, "are bereft of worth and dignity by a doctrine that would make them as interchangeable as trains." "The right to marry," Traynor insisted, "is the right of individuals, not of racial groups." Nineteen years later, in 1967, in the case of Loving v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court agreed, this time in a unanimous decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren. "There can be no doubt," Warren wrote, "that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause."

  9. #9
    ODN's Crotchety Old Man

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    9,565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    Doesn't this automatically fall into fallacy of false dilemma.
    No, false dilemmas fall into that catagory, not hypotheticals presented as such.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Long Beach, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,065
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Boog one does not simply ask for negative rep points against a certain member in public, that would be like declaring war on somebody. Its also not nice.

    With that said...I dont think KB is ignoring anything you are throwing at him, only the validity of your "evidence", just like when you (hypotheticaly) question the validity of some evidence supporting a particular religion.

    Sure you can get scientist "A" to support a claim like "gays have no choice to become heterosexual", its just hard to believe that, who knows...maybe KB will succomb to your arguments, maybe he wont. Ironicaly speaking, Jesus warns us of those who refuse to listen to the message, he tells us to just walk away from them because they will never change.

    You will not turn KB over to the darkside

    /rant.
    Do or do not, there is no try. - Master Jedi Yoda
    He's Kermit on acid who happens to carry a big stick when pissed off. Big deal. - Apokalupsis
    Actually, didn't Frank Oz do Bert as well? We're cousins! - Withnail in reference to Bert and Yoda

  11. #11
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Here and Now
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger
    HL: I'm both surprised and saddened that someone of your intelligence would adhere to this viewpoint.
    For the record, and to clear my tainted name, I made the comment as a sarcastic gesture. Perhaps I should have noted it with [/Sarcasm]

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger
    [Hmmm...sound familiar?]
    Yes, but the bottom line was that an interracial marriage is capable of producing healthy babies. That is pretty much the bottom line for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger
    "The right to marry," Traynor insisted, "is the right of individuals, not of racial groups."
    Not all people are created equal, though. Unless your IQ is 120 or above, you're not going to graduate at the top of your class. Unless you marry someone of the opposite sex, you aren't going to have children naturally. I think the argument that interracial marriage was similar to homosexual marriage is a weak argument, because the nature of the marriage is different. What is being preserved by prohibiting homosexual marriage is "man and woman."

    A lot of the legal argument against interracial marriage was based on misconceptions that children would be genetically deformed, etc... It just wasn't true. The fact is, a man can not get a man pregnant.

    A black man and white woman can still have children. They still adhere to the gender roles as defined by society.

    I understand that a lot of the argument sounds the same. But that doesn't mean they ARE the same.
    Souls of the animal kingdom: eagle, fox, bottle-nose dolphin, octopus, house cat. Okay, let's jump this jump. -- Rod Kimble

  12. #12
    ODN's Crotchety Old Man

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    9,565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    Yes, but the bottom line was that an interracial marriage is capable of producing healthy babies. That is pretty much the bottom line for me.
    There are MANY hetero couples who can't produce healthy babies. Are you proposing that their marriage be revoked as unlawful?

    Not all people are created equal, though. Unless your IQ is 120 or above, you're not going to graduate at the top of your class. Unless you marry someone of the opposite sex, you aren't going to have children naturally. I think the argument that interracial marriage was similar to homosexual marriage is a weak argument, because the nature of the marriage is different. What is being preserved by prohibiting homosexual marriage is "man and woman."
    So you want to preserve proper "terminology". And you call the slavery comparision weak...

    A lot of the legal argument against interracial marriage was based on misconceptions that children would be genetically deformed, etc... It just wasn't true. The fact is, a man can not get a man pregnant.
    And alot of the anti-gay marriage argument is based on misconceptions that children would be socially destroyed etc... This just isn't true, either.

    A black man and white woman can still have children. They still adhere to the gender roles as defined by society.
    You and your "gender roles". :rolleyes:

    I already attacked this in the thread we were on last night, still waiting...

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    northeast
    Posts
    1,066
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    If I was told I was not allowed to marry because I was not conforming to the standard of the society, I would accept it.
    Simple answer to the question. End of thread.

  14. #14
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by HL
    Yes, but the bottom line was that an interracial marriage is capable of producing healthy babies. That is pretty much the bottom line for me.
    Happylady, your argument would hold water if married couples were REQUIRED to have babies.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    northeast
    Posts
    1,066
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Godlesspagan
    There are MANY hetero couples who can't produce healthy babies. Are you proposing that their marriage be revoked as unlawful?


    Couples who cannot have healthy babies and have done nothing to change the meaning of the marriage act have a valid marriage.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    northeast
    Posts
    1,066
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    Happylady, your argument would hold water if married couples were REQUIRED to have babies.
    Married couples are required to do nothing against nature to prevent having babies.

  17. #17
    ODN's Crotchety Old Man

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    9,565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam
    Couples who cannot have healthy babies and have done nothing to change the meaning of the marriage act have a valid marriage.
    That's irrelevant to my point, Sam. HL said the ONLY qualifier for her is that they can produce healthy babies so I refuted that. Try to keep up.

  18. #18
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam
    Married couples are required to do nothing against nature to prevent having babies.
    What did we talk about, Sam? This discussion... this debate... has to do with laws regarding marriage, not scripture regarding Christian marriage. Please stay on topic. Christianity is not the only religion that allows marriage / marriage laws are completely secular.

    The question is: How many babies are married couples REQUIRED to have.
    The answer is: Zero.
    Period.

    Happylady's argument is invalidated by this very simple fact.

  19. #19
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    What would you think?
    I think that I'd start trying to persuade my fellow citizens to change their mind.

    If married couples aren't REQUIRED to have babies, than what's wrong with incestuous marriages? Even if you bring up the argument that "the babies would be messed up", what's wrong with homosexual incestuous marriage?
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  20. #20
    ODN's Crotchety Old Man

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    9,565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Equal treatment" in marriage options

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples
    If married couples aren't REQUIRED to have babies, than what's wrong with incestuous marriages?
    You're going to have to clear this one up for me, Clive. I don't see what you're getting at.

 

 
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Marriage
    By Booger in forum Politics
    Replies: 287
    Last Post: January 30th, 2008, 12:09 PM
  2. US men want foreign wives
    By Spartacus in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: October 19th, 2006, 01:50 PM
  3. The Paedophile Prophet
    By Montalban in forum Religion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 28th, 2004, 09:07 AM
  4. The Importance of Gay Marriage
    By Apokalupsis in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 5th, 2004, 06:22 AM
  5. Incest marriage
    By Apokalupsis in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: October 29th, 2004, 05:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •