Discussion: Same-sex couples’ rights

I find myself thinking, at beginning this post, that everything has pretty much been said on this topic, so here, briefly, are what I believe are the most important points:

– Love is something the world needs more of, not less. Duh.

– Marriage is no longer a religious institution, and I don’t think many gay couples will want to get married in a church, so get over it. If you wish to have the law ban homosexual marriage on the basis that it’s against your religion, don’t you think we must also forbid atheists from getting married? If a relationship is to create offspring, shall we also ban infertile couples and post-menopausal women from having relationships? If you’re worried about protecting the “sanctity of marriage”, well I’m sorry, but Ms. Britney Spears & Co. fucked that over long ago.

And the biggest, most important, and most obvious point here:

“What does it really matter if two gay people want to get married? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

Badly-quoted quote from the amazing Miss Miriam Margolyes. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is really the heart of the matter… grow up. Realise some people are different to you, and that they don’t want to hurt you or attack your way of life. They just want to be free to love who they love and not be persecuted for it or discriminated against. Be mature, get a life, stop bitching about shit that doesn’t matter. Grow up, live and let live.

Motspur

Advertisements

4 responses to “Discussion: Same-sex couples’ rights

  1. vladseventysix

    Perhaps heterosexuals should start an Institution of Mating that does legally acknowledge the existence of mating other than being a sexual offense.

  2. Ummm… forgive me for being as thick as two confused short planks, but I’m not sure exactly what you were saying there…?

  3. Returning from my long absence…

    “Love is something the world needs more of, not less. Duh.” The NAMBLA members would agree. The problem with them, and with your point, is the need for a working definition of love that goes beyond pleasure and emotion.

    “Marriage is no longer a religious institution”
    As I’m sure you might expect, I, as a religious person, could not disagree more.

    “I don’t think many gay couples will want to get married in a church, so get over it.”
    I don’t think that’s true. At all.

    “If you wish to have the law ban homosexual marriage on the basis that it’s against your religion, don’t you think we must also forbid atheists from getting married?”
    First, homosexual marriage is not “banned”. I live in California, which is something of the epicenter (at least in the USA) for the homosexual marriage debate (you may have heard of our “proposition 8”). At least here in California, there is no restriction on any two people calling themselves “married” and presenting themselves as such to all their friends and acquaintances. “Ban” is an inappropriate (i.e. false) description of this issue.
    Second, your point about atheists is irrelevant. No one is proposing such a thing because belief in God is not one of the elements of a marriage.

    “If a relationship is to create offspring, shall we also ban infertile couples and post-menopausal women from having relationships?”
    Now you’ve switched the debate from marriage to “having relationships.” There is absolutely, positively no law prohibiting any homosexual from “having a relationship” with any other homosexual. Furthermore, I am pretty sure both categories of persons you identified in this example have been on occasion mis-diagnosed and had children. I am pretty sure that no homosexual couple has ever produced a child through homosexual sex.

    “If you’re worried about protecting the “sanctity of marriage”, well I’m sorry, but Ms. Britney Spears & Co. fucked that over long ago.”
    I am sure you were just being humorous here, but whether someone has desecrated something special has no relevance on whether it is worthy of reverence. If someone pisses on a war memorial, it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t honor our fallen troops.

    “And the biggest, most important, and most obvious point here: What does it really matter if two gay people want to get married? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    This is the same “what do you care?” argument that I addressed in my blog, the one that the white southern Christians threw at Martin Luther King, Jr.
    But let’s entertain these questions. I’ll put them back to you to make my point (although I’d love to see your answers):

    What does it really matter if two closely-related people want to get married and engage in incestuous “love”? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

    What does it really matter if one adult and one five year old want to get married? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

    What does it really matter if five adults want to get married? Five hundred adults? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

    What does it really matter if an adult wants to marry his puppy? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

    What does it really matter if an adult wants to marry her computer? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.

    See, the crazier these get, the more you must recognize that you need a real definition of what marriage is, or else it becomes meaningless. And that definition will necessarily exclude certain types of relationship, even if those relationships don’t “hurt you.”

    “Realise some people are different to you, and that they don’t want to hurt you or attack your way of life. They just want to be free to love who they love and not be persecuted for it or discriminated against.”
    First of all, you clearly aren’t in on the news in California, where the Mormons have been taking all sorts of abuse for their support of Prop 8. Second, the NAMBLA people don’t want to attack you, they just want to love and not be persecuted or discriminated against. And yet we do. Because we should.

    Note here: discrimination itself is not a reason to oppose anything. We discriminate against young people by not allowing them to drive, even though they can’t do anything about their age. We discriminate against people who violate our laws (not only including murderers, but also people who commit incest and polygamy) by putting them in jail and taking away their freedoms. I am not saying that is appropriate for homosexuals; I’m just saying that discrimination *itself* is not a reason to oppose anything. You need more.

    The argument I have yet to see is how homosexuality itself is positively *good* (rather than merely acceptable). Most people are afraid to go there.

    “Be mature, get a life, stop bitching about shit that doesn’t matter. Grow up, live and let live.”
    I find the first two words of this quote to be inconsistent with the rest. 🙂
    And if it doesn’t matter, why did you post about it? It clearly matters to you.

  4. Greetings my friend, appologies for MY even longer absence…

    Here are my responses to your comment:

    ” “Love is something the world needs more of, not less. Duh.” The NAMBLA members would agree. The problem with them, and with your point, is the need for a working definition of love that goes beyond pleasure and emotion.”

    So, would you define same-sex love as not real love? I’m just curious. Also, I really don’t think one can compare NAMBLA with same-sex couples. While I have no wish to discriminate against genuine consenting relationships between people who are separated by a large age gap, some things must be in place in laws to protect children from coercion & exploitation. This is not anywhere near the same issue as same-sex relationship rights.

    ” “Marriage is no longer a religious institution” As I’m sure you might expect, I, as a religious person, could not disagree more.”

    So, you believe that marriage remains a purely religious institution? I’m kind of repeating myself, but in that case, why is it not illegal for atheists to get married? Why is it perfectly legal for anyone to get married without any sort of religious involvement at all? Marriages no longer need to be performed by a priest, in a church, or have anything to do with religion. It is a religious thing to those who want it to be, yes – and that’s fine. But at the base level, it is a legal process & a declaration of commitment. Anything on top of that is optional. You cannot deny same-sex couples marriage on the basis of religion, because non-religious weddings take place all the time. First let’s see you ban those.

    Perhaps you’re saying that you do not think of marriages when there is no religious involvement as being real marriages, or something along those lines? Two people not united by God are not really united, something like that? Okay, fair enough, but I’m not trying to get the right to same-sex marriages in Christian churches. I’m trying to get the right to same-sex marriages in the same legal process that non-religious marriages currently go through.

    “At least here in California, there is no restriction on any two people calling themselves “married” and presenting themselves as such to all their friends and acquaintances. ”

    This is not the point. In many places, including California I believe, a same-sex couple cannot go through the legal process of marriage. Sure, they can call themselves married, but so could a man and his pet rock. Being able to say “we’re married” isn’t the point here. Nor is, as I said, being married “in the eyes of God”. Being able to be LEGALLY married is what I am discussing here.

    “Second, your point about atheists is irrelevant. No one is proposing such a thing because belief in God is not one of the elements of a marriage.”

    Okay, then explain to me how marriage is a religious institution?

    ““I don’t think many gay couples will want to get married in a church, so get over it.”
    I don’t think that’s true. At all.”

    My comment there was admittedly perhaps a little in the heat of the moment. I can assure you that were I to want to marry someone of the same gender, I sure as hell wouldn’t want to do it in the church of a religion which says I’d go to hell for my love. But that’s just me. I am aware there are many people out there who are attracted to their own gender, who also consider themselves Christians, etc. This is not my battle to fight… I doubt the church will change it’s stance on this for a long time to come, and I have no desire to be affiliated with Christianity, so really this isn’t something I can properly discuss. Do I believe there are same-sex couples that want to get married in a church? Yes. Do i think they should be allowed to? Yes. Am I going to actively campaign for their right to get married in a church? No… I think that fight is a lot bigger than me and will simply take a lot of time and a lot of change in our world.

    “Now you’ve switched the debate from marriage to “having relationships.” There is absolutely, positively no law prohibiting any homosexual from “having a relationship” with any other homosexual. Furthermore, I am pretty sure both categories of persons you identified in this example have been on occasion mis-diagnosed and had children. I am pretty sure that no homosexual couple has ever produced a child through homosexual sex.”

    This is true. I merely mentioned this because some people’s argument against legalising gay marriage is that the point of marriage is to produce children. I am aware that you are definitely more intelligent than that!

    “I am sure you were just being humorous here, but whether someone has desecrated something special has no relevance on whether it is worthy of reverence. If someone pisses on a war memorial, it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t honor our fallen troops.”

    Yeah… that was kind of just a joke 😛

    “What does it really matter if two closely-related people want to get married and engage in incestuous “love”? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    It doesn’t bother me at all, actually. Not something I’d do, personally, but each to their own. It doesn’t affect anyone except for their possible future children – in which case incestuous couples should be happily allowed to do whatever they like, but if they wish to commit to incestuous sexual relationship, they should be willing to either get sterilised, or legally commit to abort any pregnancy that may result. Looking at it from a practical point of view, this would be rather difficult to implement through law… so that is why incestuous relationships are illegal. But personally, it doesn’t bother me as long as they don’t have children.

    “What does it really matter if one adult and one five year old want to get married? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    There’s a problem there because the five year old could easily be coerced into this and are not old enough to make this kind of decision for themselves.

    “What does it really matter if five adults want to get married? Five hundred adults? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    That doesn’t bother me at all, actually. In any way, shape, or form. I believe people should be able to have relationships with, or get married to, as many people as they like, as long as all involved are consenting.

    “What does it really matter if an adult wants to marry his puppy? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    A puppy cannot consent to a relationship. It must be kept illegal to protect the puppy.

    “What does it really matter if an adult wants to marry her computer? How is it hurting you? Really? Grow up.”

    Hah, that’s certainly strange, but this truly does not affect me in any way, so I don’t care what people do with their inanimate objects.

    “See, the crazier these get, the more you must recognize that you need a real definition of what marriage is, or else it becomes meaningless.”

    Marriage means very different things to everyone as it is, so this is irrelevant. There is no real definition of what marriage is, and there cannot ever be. I would never exclude any relationship involving two consenting adults from the right to get married. (except in cases such as incest, on which I already outlined my thoughts above).

    “First of all, you clearly aren’t in on the news in California, where the Mormons have been taking all sorts of abuse for their support of Prop 8.”

    I don’t support violence against those who discriminate, but these Mormons do need to look at why they may be suffering this abuse.

    “Note here: discrimination itself is not a reason to oppose anything. We discriminate against young people by not allowing them to drive, even though they can’t do anything about their age. ”

    This is a whole other issue & kettle of fish which I’ll be getting into later. Watch for my post on discrimination against children. (and no, I don’t think three-year-olds should be allowed to drive.)

    “We discriminate against people who violate our laws (not only including murderers, but also people who commit incest and polygamy) by putting them in jail and taking away their freedoms.”

    Well, I certainly don’t agree with putting polygamists in gaol, and what should and should not be a gaol-able offense is, again, a whole other issue. But there are reasons for putting people in gaol – to protect other people from them, to punish them for doing things which may have hurt other people somehow, etc… none of this is the same as discriminating against two people simply because they want to get married. I wouldn’t call it discrimination.

    “The argument I have yet to see is how homosexuality itself is positively *good* (rather than merely acceptable). Most people are afraid to go there.”

    How is heterosexuality positively *good*? I really don’t see what you’re trying to say with that.

    “And if it doesn’t matter, why did you post about it? It clearly matters to you.”

    It matters to me when people are being discrimnated against for no reason. It doesn’t matter to me when people want to love each other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s