Obama has won but so have the bigots as constitutional bans on same-sex marriages look like passing in every state which held a referendum on the issue. Respect for human rights - NIMBY in the USA!
Obama has won but so have the bigots as constitutional bans on same-sex marriages look like passing in every state which held a referendum on the issue. Respect for human rights - NIMBY in the USA!
Yes. A note for regret among the euphoria. I guess it just hasn't been argued well enough.
So somebody that disagrees is a bigot? Hardly, at least in my view.
Thousands of years of cultural history and practice throughout the world have recognized marriage as a union between a man and a woman for procreation. That's what the vast majority of people throughout history in almost every nation have thought and recognized. I don't want to be the same as "them" and I suppose I ought to start whining that I and my male partner are being discriminated against because we poor dears can't have babies and can't even menstruate.
Woe is us.
thousands of years ? I thought they just shacked up with each other until religion stuck it's nose into the whole business.Originally Posted by Bob
I'm only a light drinker. When it's daylight I drink.
Hence heterosexual couples intending not to have any children - or unable to do so - should not be allowed to marry?Originally Posted by Bob
"The fruits of peace and tranquility... are the greatest goods... while those of its opposite, strife, are unbearable evils. Hence we ought to wish for peace, to seek it if we do not already have it, to conserve it once it is attained, and to repel with all our strength the strife which is opposed to it. To this end individual[s]... and in even greater degree groups and communities are obliged to help one another... from the bond or law of human society." [Marsilio dei Mainardini (c.1275-1342), Defensor Pacis]
There were thousands of years and cultural history institutionalizing slavery too yet that all changed. Time for a change.Originally Posted by Bob
I have met several gay men that have expressed their view that gays should not be allowed to marry. Their argument seems based on emotion (religion) rather than logic. The same arguments that once made biracial marriage a crime are used in gay marriage.
Personally, I think civil unions is the way to go and avoid all the emotional and religious baggage of the term marriage. A simple civil legal association, nothing more.
E Dok Tong
When you die in the UK, you can leave your assets to your spouse free of tax. When homosexuals died, assets left to their partners, over a certain sum, were taxed. Worth moaning about? It was. The law was changed, and you can now leave your assets to your same sex Civil Partner free of tax. That's one example of the progress that has been made. Some will mock with menstruating jibes, but all can share the benefits.Originally Posted by Bob
Which (I'm sure) reminds more than just me of Stan/Loretta's predicament in Python's "Life of Brian":Originally Posted by Bob
Stan: It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg: But you can't have babies.
Stan: Don't you oppress me!
Reg: Where's the fetus going to gestate? You're going to keep it in a box?
Equally, the argument that "marriage" is the only acceptable term, and that Civil Union / Civil Partnership is unacceptable seems not only to be based purely on emotion but to be extremely short-sighted (even, dare I say it, bigoted); had such alternative terms been used it is at least possible that they may have been acceptable to homo and heterosexuals alike.Originally Posted by TrongpaiExpat
I hardly think so; those arguments were obviously based on racial, not physical/biological differences, and were resolved when it was decided (at least in theory) that all races/colours were essentially the same. The arguments differentiating between the sexes are based on clearly visible (in most cases) and undeniable differences. Unless you are saying that there are no such differences, or that such differences are so minor that there is no need for separate toilets, separate athletic events (currently horse riding is the only "mixed" event in the Olympics), etc, etc, your argument is fatally flawed.Originally Posted by TrongpaiExpat
I am with you Bob, all the way.Originally Posted by Bob
Thanks for the above bao-bao, it gave me a bloody good laugh looking back and remembering that part of the movie. For those of you that are unfamiliar with the movie The Life of Brian, or the Stan/Loretta's predicament part of it, you can check it out below.Originally Posted by bao-bao
Cheers,
George.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c[/youtube]