Gay Marriage Question

Forums: Ask A New Question, Same Old Same Old, Gay Marriage
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I have a legitimate question, that I've never heard discussed and would like to know peoples thoughts.

First of all, I used to be in favour of gay marriage. The reason is because it doesn't effect me and I genuinely believed that it should be their right to marry. The whole it's "unnatural" bullshit doesn't fly with me.

However, I do understand the argument that it is "between a man and a woman" and so homosexual couples don not fall under that category. You may say that this is denying the rights of two adults but then should siblings be allowed to marry? Legitimate question.

I mean even if the argument of possible children with defects was proposed, should two brothers or two sisters be allowed to marry?? And if not, isn't this violating the rights to equality if they love each other and want to get married?

I have honestly never heard a convincing argument against this that could not also be applied to gay marriage and, likewise, all defence arguments of gay marriage surely apply here also.

And, while we're on the definition of "between a man and a woman", do people who support gay marriage also believe groups of 5 people who want to marry eachother should be allowed? If not, does this not violate their rights? Saying "no, marriage is between two people" is the same as saying that currently marriage doesn't discriminate against gays as it is "between a man and a woman" and so the gays are free to marry someone of the opposite sex.

So basically to sum up;

What arguments can you make in favour of gay marriage that cannot be said in favour of sibling marriage or multiple people getting married? And if you are against the latter two, then why would you deny them their rights? If you are in favour of sibling and multiple person marriages then that's fair enough, but ask yourself honestly if gays were allowed to marry now and then in 30 years time a group of people or a father and a daughter (over 18) wanted to marry would you support them.

Thanks

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 1,504 • Replies: 18

@JustWondering123,

There are plenty of threads on this subject.

Click Here

And if you're not willing to read those read this Thread

2 Replies

@JustWondering123,

JustWondering123 wrote:

I have a legitimate question, that I've never heard discussed and would like to know peoples thoughts.

this has been discussed in dozens of threads here and elsewhere

there is plenty of reading on the subject - please go do it

if you want to do the reading here - follow the gay marriage tags and don't click on jcboy's second link

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

You just made me go click on jcboy's second link.

(To everyone else... whatever you do, definitely do not click on jcboy's second link.)

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

ah geez - just hover the cursor over it so you know what it is next time (that's how I spotted it)

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Thanks, but where can I get answers to these questions? I've looked but all I find is random gay marriage threads, can you please specifically show me where there is discussion on this topic?

0 Replies

@jcboy,

jcboy, u need to get a life

0 Replies

What ridiculous posters you both are actually. I can find no topics on the subject, yes it may have been discussed briefly in thread somewhere, but come on, does everything previously discussed in some thread mean that no more discussion is allowed and we must all never speak on the matter again? It's not like the topic has been beaten to death; I've struggled to find much on the topic at all.

Is it so bad that I want to hear peoples opinions of it NOW, like in May 2014, without some forum regulars saying use the search function then posting no relevant links; just general gay marriage search. It's pathetic.

I doubt you could make a thread on something that has not been touched on somewhere, but **** sake, that's what forums are for. You were both rude and dismissive; if you have nothing to bring to the topic, then don't reply.

1 Reply

JustWondering123 wrote:

It's not like the topic has been beaten to death; i've struggled to find much on the topic.

there are 105 threads with the gay marriage tag

there were threads on the topic before this forum has tags

for some of us it does feel like the topic has been beaten to death

....

and how do you (who joined today) know who might or might not be forum regulars?

1 Reply

@JustWondering123,

JustWondering123 wrote:

if you have nothing to bring to the topic, then don't reply.

jcboy brought you the link to 105 threads

if anyone else wants to discuss this with you, they're most welcome to

0 Replies

@JustWondering123,

JustWondering123 wrote:

You may say that this is denying the rights of two adults but then should siblings be allowed to marry?

should two brothers or two sisters be allowed to marry??

do people who support gay marriage also believe groups of 5 people who want to marry each other should be allowed?

then in 30 years time a group of people or a father and a daughter (over 18) wanted to marry would you support them.

here you go

sure
sure
can't speak for anyone else, but I'm ok with it
sure

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Yes 105 with the general "gay marriage" tag is not the same as 105 addressing THESE QUESTIONS. How you cannot see that is beyond me.

2 Replies

@JustWondering123,

Quote:

I have a legitimate question, .....

Quote:

First of all, I used to be......

Quote:

What arguments can you make in favour of gay marriage that cannot be said in favour of sibling marriage or multiple people getting married? And if you are against the latter two, then why would you deny them their rights? If you are in favour of sibling and multiple person marriages then that's fair enough, but ask yourself honestly if gays were allowed to marry now and then in 30 years time a group of people or a father and a daughter (over 18) wanted to marry would you support them.

Are you discussing or trying to start a fight? You really consider gay marriage the same as incest? Really.

0 Replies

@JustWondering123,

they are not unique questions -they've been talked about literally dozens of times here - go poke around in the threads - do a word search - do a google phrase search - you're interested in discussing it - I gave you my responses - off you go on your hunt

0 Replies

@jcboy,

jcboy wrote:

And if you're not willing to read those read this Thread

You sir, are full of beans tonight!

0 Replies

@JustWondering123,

JustWondering123 wrote:

Yes 105 with the general "gay marriage" tag is not the same as 105 addressing THESE QUESTIONS. How you cannot see that is beyond me.

Because we've been here for years. We've seen dozens and dozens of threads about gay marriage and threads about the legalization of incest. We have homophobic rants that indicate incest is the morally the same as homosexuality. We've seen hundreds of proincest posts. We have seen thousands of homophobic posts. We've seen thousands of anti-incest/homophobic rants.

We can figure out by tone and (lack of) substance who is disingenuous with their claims pretty much off the bat.

Your pathetic thread is purely disingenuous. I'm calling your bluff.

Quote:

[T]hen in 30 years time a group of people or a father and a daughter (over 18) wanted to marry would you support them.

The father and daughter scenario and the brother and sister scenario which is a fearmongering/crap argument against gay marriage has been made moot as the evolution to gay marriage because every side has acknowledged the dangers of inbreeding and incest.

No one who is arguing for same sex marriage is going to accept same sex sibling marriage. It's not going to happen. That's too much of a cultural shift that will be tolerated by even supporters of same sex (nonsibling) marriage.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

because every side has acknowledged the dangers of inbreeding and incest.

errr, not so much

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

tsarstepan wrote:
because every side has acknowledged the dangers of inbreeding and incest.

errr, not so much

With the exception of the very tiny/minute proincest-minority that incest is fine and dandy, which side progay marriage or antigay marriage is saying that inbreeding and incest isn't a bad thing? The progay marriage side? Or the antigay marriage side? The proincest crowd is so small that statistically they're outliers in this political debate. In fact, they're so small, technically they're not a side at all.

The antigay marriage side isn't proincest. They think gay marriage is the moral and social equivelent to inbreeding. So they're using the fearmongering argument that inbreeding and incest is very dangerous and thusly any procreation during gay marriage is dangerous.

The progay marriage side is saying that gay marriage isn't at all related or similar to incest and inbreeding. They tend to use science and reason and also highlight that incest and inbreeding is a terrible thing and that the conservatives need to stop comparing gay marriage to inbred family marriage.

It's the only thing that both sides agree on. Incest and inbreeding is bad.

What other side (statistically speaking) are you referring to?

0 Replies

@JustWondering123,

Now this little asshole sent me a harassing PM

Reported! Razz

0 Replies

Forums
» Gay Marriage Question

Read Question
Reply to All

Gay Marriage Question

Quick Links

My Account

able2know