gay marriage

[xpyrate]

ok ... im wondering what everyone thinks about mass. legalizing gay marriage? ... like in my opinion, i think its gross ... i mean are they gonna legalize polygamy and incest marriage next? it really is the same thing

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by xpyrate

i mean are they gonna legalize polygamy and incest marriage next? it really is the same thing

Yer fucking joking, right?

... funk... out.

[xpyrate]

actually im not ... im dead serious

[Destiny]

Originally posted by xpyrate

ok ... im wondering what everyone thinks about mass. legalizing gay marriage? ... like in my opinion, i think its gross ... i mean are they gonna legalize polygamy and incest marriage next? it really is the same thing

wow i was going to say that everyone is entitled to their own opinions until i read the whole polygamy and incest being on the same level thing. It definitely isn't and thats a horrible comment to make.

There is no reason why gay marriage shouldn't be legalized. Just because its not typical, doesn't mean its not right and shouldn't be done. Who is anyone to say who should love who? That's the reason we're in this country in the first place, so we can CHOOSE to do what we please within reason.

[mssabina]

how does gay marriage relate to polygamy and incest?

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by xpyrate

actually im not ... im dead serious

Whether you care for gays or what they do is one thing. But, the fact that you equate them with polygamists and incestual people is just fucking retarded.

I guess everyone that's not like you is just lumped into one big pool, in yer opinion, huh?

Jeez man... get out more... plz.

... funk... out.

[xpyrate]

so like then what is the difference between incest and gays then? please explain? i mean who says a brother and sister shouldnt be able to get married? i mean if they both really love each other ...why not? what is the difference?

i mean i think you all are bigots cause you think a brother and sister cant love each other in those ways

[mssabina]

there's a good reason for not allowing incestual marriages... they can reproduce... inbreeding causes a greater risk for genetic defects and imperfections, therefore as a population we wouldn't be able to evolve and continue to survive.

gay couples cannot conceive through sex... that's a huge difference.

[Destiny]

Originally posted by mssabina

there's a good reason for not allowing incestual marriages... they can reproduce... inbreeding causes a greater risk for genetic defects and imperfections, therefore as a population we wouldn't be able to evolve and continue to survive.

gay couples cannot conceive through sex... that's a huge difference.

thank you

at least I'm not the only one who thinks like that other then dgtlfnk lol

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by xpyrate

so like then what is the difference between incest and gays then? please explain? i mean who says a brother and sister shouldnt be able to get married? i mean if they both really love each other ...why not? what is the difference?

i mean i think you all are bigots cause you think a brother and sister cant love each other in those ways

Well... let's see... ever heard of the bad things that happen when you inbreed? Ever heard people joke about that to some fucked up lookin' country bumpkin? There's a reason. MEDICALLY, when you procreate with someone from yer immediate family, the chances of genetic mutations increase dramatically! That includes physical defects, diseases, etc.

THAT'S why incest is considered gross and just a horrible thing. You might want to do some research, man... 'cause the fact that you don't know that is a bit scary.

And the definition of marriage is a union between two people... not 3 or 12 or whatever. So, polygamy is viewed by most as just an act of greed in a way, and just bullshit, when it comes to "vowing your undying love" for yer.... wives.

We haven't even mentioned the tax benefits and other legal issues that go along with marriage. Which is why gays are fighting for their right to be recognized as "married". They're gonna be together regardless. But, being recognized by yer state as married allows for all sorts of legal benefits and such... including one partner handling posessions/wills and such when and if one dies.

I personally don't see anything wrong with that. If two people love each other, swore their undying love for each other for eternity... why SHOULDN'T each and every state see them as "married"??

But, the other two scenarios you mentioned are so far and away worse, imo... it shouldn't even be in the discussion.

Btw... gay marriages will NEVER be bringing new babies into the world... much less ones with 3 eyeballs or a leg growing out of it's mouth.

... funk... out.

[xpyrate]

well ... first off there is alot more to marriage than 'getting it on' or having children for that matter ...

lets say we have a brother and sister that dont want or cant have kids ... then what reason for them not to be able to get married? explain?

i understand the birth defect part .... but what about cousins then? there is no more risk of birth defects from FIRST cousins having babies ... this is proven in studies BTW

i dont see the logic in how it differs morally from gay marriage ... most arguements revolve around "they both love each other" ... if a brother and sister REALLY love each other ... there are greater risks involved than birth defects ...

if three people REALLY love each other ... whats to stop them from getting married? i dont see what u dont get in this argruement

[JonStephen]

I say let people be people and let them do what they want.

[mssabina]

so are you saying you support incestual and polygamous marriages? the same arguments your using to make your point can be applied to gay marriages... if they're in love and they care about each other, WHO CARES?

[xpyrate]

Originally posted by dgtlfnk

And the definition of marriage is a union between two people...

and just how does two people of the same sex form a union? exactly? there are reasons we were born with two sets of genetalia, not just for sexual gratification male and female we form a ying for the others yang, we need each other in society ... homosexuality breaks all that balance apart ... now a minor percentage wont ... but teaching kids in school that it is OK to be gay is NOT acceptable

the only reason i bring up incest is because it is a taboo ... and guess what? so is homosexuality! if you are going to argue in favor of one perverse sexual act then you must concede to the other which is equally taboo. in fact id almost argue in favor of incest before id argue for gays. obviously i disagree with both

[mssabina]

btw before you read this, 1) i didn't write it & 2) realize it is written tongue-in-cheek, so don't go calling me hypocritical...

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can't legally get married because the world needs more children.

3. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if Gay marriage is allowed, since Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire counrty. That's why we have only one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

10. Children can never suceed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to things like cars or longer lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will.

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by xpyrate

lets say we have a brother and sister that dont want or cant have kids ... then what reason for them not to be able to get married? explain?

i understand the birth defect part .... but what about cousins then? there is no more risk of birth defects from FIRST cousins having babies ... this is proven in studies BTW

i dont see the logic in how it differs morally from gay marriage ... most arguements revolve around "they both love each other" ... if a brother and sister REALLY love each other ... there are greater risks involved than birth defects ...

if three people REALLY love each other ... whats to stop them from getting married? i dont see what u dont get in this argruement

It's not whether a brother and sister want kids or not. The fact that they MAY have kids is something that society NEEDS to prevent from happening, for the simple benefit of society as a whole. I mean, what, should we allow incestual marriages.. as long as you sign some agreement saying you'll never have kids? Well, that's just rediculous.

The whole point of marriage in the first place is to vow your love to someone, AND procreate and thereby continue your family lines. Now, obviously, marriage is a VERY old institution. Nowadays you have many people getting married, with zero intention of having children. But, that's looked upon as ok because marriages have become so commonplace... people are like, "Cool. No problem."

But, finding your "life mate"... by looking to your left or right while your family photo is being taken is just rediculous, imo. I mean, while, as you say, first cousins aren't quite as much at risk as siblings, it's still a higher risk than those from separate lines altogether.

Now trust me... I am one of those people that will, quite possibliy, settle down with 2 girls.. in a SERIOUS relationship. That's just how I am. The girls I tend to date seriously, are usually somewhat into, if not fully into, other girls. So, I could easily see myself in a situation like that. However, you will never see me protesting for our right to be recognized as a "marriage". Because I don't believe society owes me that, just because I might have a slightly different belief than them.

But homosexuality has not only been around FOREVER, but it's now more accepted than ever. And because of the majority of ppl in this country "accepting" it, gay people now want to know why they themselves can't be given marriage rights as well. At least that's how I see it.

I dunno man... as I said before, it seems that you're ok with the things that YOU'RE into... but, not the things that you're not. Yer not gay, so it's wrong for them. But, yer prolly into yer sister or sisters, so you make a case for that.

Seems like yer a bit close minded... on top of being a bit confused.

Not bashing here, man.... just thinkin' aloud.

... funk... out.

[xpyrate]

just to clear something up ... FIRST cousins who have kids, are NO more likely to produce a kid with birth defects then two people who are NOT related ... that is an undisputed fact ... and uh ... I frown upon incest marriage FYI

with that ima sleepin

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by xpyrate

and just how does two people of the same sex form a union? exactly? there are reasons we were born with two sets of genetalia, not just for sexual gratification male and female we form a ying for the others yang, we need each other in society ... homosexuality breaks all that balance apart ... now a minor percentage wont ... but teaching kids in school that it is OK to be gay is NOT acceptable

So, you don't believe that some men are born to be, think and act VERY much in a feminine way? And therefore maybe they ARE quite the "ying" to another man's "yang", as you put it? And the same for 2 women? I mean, if you're gonna talk about "completing one another", I see that in almost EVERY relationship, INCLUDING straight, gay or bi relationships.

And the reason people are "teaching" young kids that it's ok... is because YOU CAN'T STOP IT. Nor can you change it. People are born the way they are. The reason today's society wants to teach people that it's "ok" is because people are going to be confronted by it, sooner or later, wherever they go. And that being so, people shouldn't then treat people that are different from them in a negative manner. It's all about caring and loving one another as a society. I mean, should we go on lynching black people? Raping women? Beating up retards? "Teaching" gays a lesson by holding them down and sodomizing them with a broomstick? Surely you see these things as barbaric and caveman-like behaviors.

Today's world has evolved, my friend. And there are JUST as many gay people today, as there were 5,000 years ago. It just wasn't talked about or openly acted upon as it is today.

... funk... out.

[djinergy]

why not? i mean, wtf is marriage anyway? a tax deduction? a way of saying i'm not gonna be with anyone else? (well.... at least it's supposed to be....). you know there have, in the past, been many concerns in the gay community, and concern from the straight community regarding the gay community, regarding promiscuity and sexually transmitted disease.... personally i think any reason to keep ANY couple from being overly promiscuous is a good reason. my personal feeling about homosexuals and bisexuals aside, i think legalizing gay marriage is not only a good idea, but NECESSARY.

[djinergy]

btw.... 1 in 10 people are gay. and there HAS been a "homosexual" gene identified. it is an inherited trait. something you are born with.

[anotherway83]

Originally posted by djinergy

btw.... 1 in 10 people are gay. and there HAS been a "homosexual" gene identified. it is an inherited trait. something you are born with.

actually, recent studies indicate that only about 3-4% of the general population is actually homosexual. bisexuality, on the other hand, is estimated to be as high as 25% - the problem arises in how to define homosexuality and bisexuality.

xpyrate: homosexuality is not unnatural - it has been observed in many animal species in nature including dolphins, for instance. here is an article that recently appeared in the new york times, feb 7th, 2004.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0C1EF83A5F0C748CDDAB0894DC404482

Love That Dare Not Squeak Its Name

By DINITIA SMITH

Published: February 7, 2004

Roy and Silo, two chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan, are completely devoted to each other. For nearly six years now, they have been inseparable. They exhibit what in penguin parlance is called "ecstatic behavior": that is, they entwine their necks, they vocalize to each other, they have sex. Silo and Roy are, to anthropomorphize a bit, gay penguins. When offered female companionship, they have adamantly refused it. And the females aren't interested in them, either.

At one time, the two seemed so desperate to incubate an egg together that they put a rock in their nest and sat on it, keeping it warm in the folds of their abdomens, said their chief keeper, Rob Gramzay. Finally, he gave them a fertile egg that needed care to hatch. Things went perfectly. Roy and Silo sat on it for the typical 34 days until a chick, Tango, was born. For the next two and a half months they raised Tango, keeping her warm and feeding her food from their beaks until she could go out into the world on her own. Mr. Gramzay is full of praise for them.

"They did a great job," he said. He was standing inside the glassed-in penguin exhibit, where Roy and Silo had just finished lunch. Penguins usually like a swim after they eat, and Silo was in the water. Roy had finished his dip and was up on the beach.

Roy and Silo are hardly unusual. Milou and Squawk, two young males, are also beginning to exhibit courtship behavior, hanging out with each other, billing and bowing. Before them, the Central Park Zoo had Georgey and Mickey, two female Gentoo penguins who tried to incubate eggs together. And Wendell and Cass, a devoted male African penguin pair, live at the New York Aquarium in Coney Island. Indeed, scientists have found homosexual behavior throughout the animal world.

This growing body of science has been increasingly drawn into charged debates about homosexuality in American society, on subjects from gay marriage to sodomy laws, despite reluctance from experts in the field to extrapolate from animals to humans. Gay groups argue that if homosexual behavior occurs in animals, it is natural, and therefore the rights of homosexuals should be protected. On the other hand, some conservative religious groups have condemned the same practices in the past, calling them "animalistic."

But if homosexuality occurs among animals, does that necessarily mean that it is natural for humans, too? And that raises a familiar question: if homosexuality is not a choice, but a result of natural forces that cannot be controlled, can it be immoral?

The open discussion of homosexual behavior in animals is relatively new. "There has been a certain cultural shyness about admitting it," said Frans de Waal, whose 1997 book, "Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape" (University of California Press), unleashed a torrent of discussion about animal sexuality. Bonobos, apes closely related to humans, are wildly energetic sexually. Studies show that whether observed in the wild or in captivity, nearly all are bisexual, and nearly half their sexual interactions are with the same sex. Female bonobos have been observed to engage in homosexual activity almost hourly.

Before his own book, "American scientists who investigated bonobos never discussed sex at all," said Mr. de Waal, director of the Living Links Center of the Yerkes Primate Center at Emory University in Atlanta. "Or they sometimes would show two females having sex together, and would say, `The females are very affectionate.' "

Then in 1999, Bruce Bagemihl published "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" (St. Martin's Press), one of the first books of its kind to provide an overview of scholarly studies of same-sex behavior in animals. Mr. Bagemihl said homosexual behavior had been documented in some 450 species. (Homosexuality, he says, refers to any of these behaviors between members of the same sex: long-term bonding, sexual contact, courtship displays or the rearing of young.) Last summer the book was cited by the American Psychiatric Association and other groups in a "friend of the court" brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas, a case challenging a Texas anti-sodomy law. The court struck down the law.

"Sexual Exuberance" was also cited in 2000 by gay rights groups opposed to Ballot Measure 9, a proposed Oregon statute prohibiting teaching about homosexuality or bisexuality in public schools. The measure lost.

In his book Mr. Bagemihl describes homosexual activity in a broad spectrum of animals. He asserts that while same-sex behavior is sometimes found in captivity, it is actually seen more frequently in studies of animals in the wild.

Among birds, for instance, studies show that 10 to 15 percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild are homosexual. Females perform courtship rituals, like tossing their heads at each other or offering small gifts of food to each other, and they establish nests together. Occasionally they mate with males and produce fertile eggs but then return to their original same-sex partners. Their bonds, too, may persist for years.

Among mammals, male and female bottlenose dolphins frequently engage in homosexual activity, both in captivity and in the wild. Homosexuality is particularly common among young male dolphin calves. One male may protect another that is resting or healing from wounds inflicted by a predator. When one partner dies, the other may search for a new male mate. Researchers have noted that in some cases same-sex behavior is more common for dolphins in captivity.

Male and female rhesus macaques, a type of monkey, also exhibit homosexuality in captivity and in the wild. Males are affectionate to each other, touching, holding and embracing. Females smack their lips at each other and play games like hide-and-seek, peek-a-boo and follow the leader. And both sexes mount members of their own sex.

Paul L. Vasey, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Lethbridge in Canada, who studies homosexual behavior in Japanese macaques, is editing a new book on homosexual behavior in animals, to be published by Cambridge University Press. This kind of behavior among animals has been observed by scientists as far back as the 1700's, but Mr. Vasey said one reason there had been few books on the topic was that "people don't want to do the research because they don't want to have suspicions raised about their sexuality."

Some scientists say homosexual behavior in animals is not necessarily about sex. Marlene Zuk, a professor of biology at the University of California at Riverside and author of "Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn About Sex From Animals" (University of California Press, 2002), notes that scientists have speculated that homosexuality may have an evolutionary purpose, ensuring the survival of the species. By not producing their own offspring, homosexuals may help support or nurture their relatives' young. "That is a contribution to the gene pool," she said.

For Janet Mann, a professor of biology and psychology at Georgetown University, who has studied same-sex behavior in dolphin calves, their homosexuality "is about bond formation," she said, "not about being sexual for life."

She said that studies showed that adult male dolphins formed long-term alliances, sometimes in large groups. As adults, they cooperate to entice a single female and keep other males from her. Sometimes they share the female, or they may cooperate to help one male. "Male-male cooperation is extremely important," Ms. Mann said. The homosexual behavior of the young calves "could be practicing" for that later, crucial adult period, she added.

But, scientists say, just because homosexuality is observed in animals doesn't mean that it is only genetically based. "Homosexuality is extraordinarily complex and variable," Mr. Bagemihl said. "We look at animals as pure biology and pure genetics, and they are not." He noted that "the occurrence of same-sex behavior in animals provides support for the nurture side as well." He cited as an example the ruff, a type of Arctic sandpiper. There are four different classes of male ruffs, each differing from the others genetically. The two that differ most from each other are most similar in their homosexual behaviors.

Ms. Zuk said, "You have inclinations that are more or less supported by our genes and in some environmental circumstances get expressed." She used the analogy of right- or left-handedness, thought to be genetically based. "But you can teach naturally left-handed children to use their right hand," she pointed out.

Still, scientists warn about drawing conclusions about humans. "For some people, what animals do is a yardstick of what is and isn't natural," Mr. Vasey said. "They make a leap from saying if it's natural, it's morally and ethically desirable."

But he added: "Infanticide is widespread in the animal kingdom. To jump from that to say it is desirable makes no sense. We shouldn't be using animals to craft moral and social policies for the kinds of human societies we want to live in. Animals don't take care of the elderly. I don't particularly think that should be a platform for closing down nursing homes."

Mr. Bagemihl is also wary of extrapolating. "In Nazi Germany, one very common interpretation of homosexuality was that it was animalistic behavior, subhuman," he said.

What the animal studies do show, Ms. Zuk observed, is that "sexuality is a lot broader term than people want to think."

"You have this idea that the animal kingdom is strict, old-fashioned Roman Catholic," she said, "that they have sex just to procreate."

In bonobos, she noted, "you see expressions of sex outside the period when females are fertile. Suddenly you are beginning to see that sex is not necessarily about reproduction."

"Sexual expression means more than making babies," Ms. Zuk said. "Why are we surprised? People are animals."

[weyes]

wow, xpyrate; you're so young to be set in your ignorance. most people this closed-minded are only this way because they haven't been given access to diversity. i can only hope that your incest analogy is mostly in jest .

[kahn]

First things first.... Let's work on getting pot legalized, and then we can worry about gay marriages and such...

[dgtlfnk]

Originally posted by izzykahn

First things first.... Let's work on getting pot legalized, and then we can worry about gay marriages and such...

NOW yer cookin' with gas, mister!!!! :aright:

... funk... out.

[barvybe]

Ok there are big differences between polygamy / incest and gay marriage.

Take out religion for a second...

...the law has a lot to do with protecting people from harm. Who gets harmed if two gay people marry?

incest - there's very good evidence for serious psychological damage but aside from that any child of that union is very likely to be harmed.

polygamy there's a whole bunch of women who are being harmed in terms of their societal rights.

Lets keep in mind that "marriage" is a human thing - it doesn't equate to mating for life like some animals do. Nearly everyone who gets married had sex with someone else first. 50% get divorced. Another significant percentage have sex with someone other than their spouse.

So what is marriage really about? Its about property and inheritance. It even was back in the bible: so and so married this one and received 50 sheep and a cottage, etc. etc. It was an agreement between men about the ownership of things including women, property and livestock.

Well, we don't trade women about that way anymore (sigh ) but marriage confers lots of legal rights to property, to insurance, to inheritance, etc. Its these legal things that gay people should have because their getting them doesn't hurt anyone or anything except some people's religious based morality.

Personally I'm all for civil unions that confer the same legal rights as marriage does. I don't care what the term is and i could give a rats ass if the gay guys down the street want to qualify for family insurance plans and get a tax deduction.