|
On November 25 2012 06:48 Cutlery wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 06:02 tMomiji wrote:On November 25 2012 04:57 Cutlery wrote:On November 25 2012 04:54 tMomiji wrote:On November 25 2012 04:51 Recognizable wrote:
This thread makes me lose all faith in humanity. Especially because some of these people actually seem educated, yet apply it in such a way to confirm to their irrational fear and hate. Disgusting. Well, everyone has irrational fears...still it's wrong to hurt other people because of said fears. Is it survival? I mean, animals will attack you (or flee) when scared. I was just thinking this the other day (unrelated to this topic), that perhaps we're forgetting how to survive since we never have to 'fight', not in the survival of the fittest sense. But is this one form of the instinct of survival? To attack our fears. I'm usually not one to condemn instincts. Nor emotions. They can both change morality (if not complete 180 degrees, they affect your actions and morals, and can change them rapidly). Typically I'd argue they (instincts and emotions) are not inherently wrong. But when hurting others you should know why you hurt them and why it is "the only way". And depending on the severity you better be DAMN sure. Are you saying it's for their own good, then...? No, that I'm not saying.
Oh. Then I don't really understand...
|
On November 25 2012 05:52 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 21:28 Robinsa wrote:
No wonder its a third world country.. The fact that you're getting emotional and throwing out irrelevant personal attacks like "no wonder its a third world country xDDDD" is a sign that you're no "better" than the people pushing this bill in Uganda. First world countries have more people who hate homosexuals than those who don't. Did you know that? Oh look your logic just got destroyed.
But then again, in first world countries people don't pass laws enforcing prison sentences just because you happen to be a homosexual. If that happened in America there would be an uproar, and I can imagine the same thing happening in all first world countries. That's a pretty big difference you should probably take into consideration.
Even if you are right that there are more people who hate homosexuals (which you haven't linked any evidence in support of), at least they have the "first world" quality of respecting their right to live how they want.
|
On November 25 2012 05:52 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 21:28 Robinsa wrote:
No wonder its a third world country.. The fact that you're getting emotional and throwing out irrelevant personal attacks like "no wonder its a third world country xDDDD" is a sign that you're no "better" than the people pushing this bill in Uganda. First world countries have more people who hate homosexuals than those who don't. Did you know that? Oh look your logic just got destroyed.
That is pretty much nonsense, anything to back that up ?
|
Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread.
Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe.
Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life.
Source
Bestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony.
Source
Indecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List.
Source
Now, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal.
The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect.
So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours.
But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked.
And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples?
So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all.
|
On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all.
Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.)
I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public.
I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts.
|
On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all.
I think the incest laws came about because children born from incest are much more prone to genetic defects, and bestiality is more because animals don't have a legal standing. Can't comment on indecent exposure though.
It sounds a little contradictory when you say "I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you" and then in the very next sentence say "But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage"...but I, at least, get what you mean. I'm just nitpicking here saying it could be worded better.
|
On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts.
Aaah, you beat me to it!
But why hate on him just because he's uncomfortable? He's not saying that society should change just because he's uncomfortable. I for instance am uncomfortable when I see someone wearing fur but I don't DEMAND that nobody wear fur just so I can feel comfortable...and he is not demanding that gays be pushed away.
|
On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts.
Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality.
As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe.
And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic.
Edit:
@tMomiji: Just like I won't recognize a human-animal couple as a marriage, even though I feel someone that wants to marry an animal should be treated fairly, and I won't recognize a father-daughter couple as a marriage, even though I feel that their wants should be respected, I won't recognize a gay couple as a marriage, even though I feel they should be treated like with respect. Hope that clarified.
|
On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic.
I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans.
I edit in incest because it deals with humans. I think we can agree on genetic defects that happen with incestual offspring? Birth control can not be completely controlled by the government and we know what incest can do, hence it brings harm to offspring for incestual couples to procreate. Also birth control isn't perfect anyway.
|
Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.)
Indeed, comparing these two isn't valid. Bestiality falls into the same category as rape in an ethical/moral framework
Incest (between consenting adults in any case) falls into a wierd edge case like the religious laws against eating pork. It comes from a very legitimate socio-cultural source, but one that is rendered obsolete by modern culture and science (since incest is only problematic if it ends in several consecutive generations of children, and even then is probably less of an issue than a mother smoking or a parent with a serious genetic condition reproducing in a 'how is this going to fuck up the children' sense).
In the context of homosexuality, incest between consenting partners should be governed by precisely the same doctrine that governs homosexuality- it is consent, not format that is important. It's an interesting kind of provocative point- if you're okay with gay and lesbian rights, you should have no issues with incestuous ones until procreation becomes involved.
|
On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans.
Incest is between humans...
But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. .
Edit:
On November 25 2012 08:48 Thereisnosaurus wrote:Show nested quote +Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) Indeed, comparing these two isn't valid. Bestiality falls into the same category as rape in an ethical/moral framework Incest (between consenting adults in any case) falls into a wierd edge case like the religious laws against eating pork. It comes from a very legitimate socio-cultural source, but one that is rendered obsolete by modern culture and science (since incest is only problematic if it ends in several consecutive generations of children, and even then is probably less of an issue than a mother smoking or a parent with a serious genetic condition reproducing in a 'how is this going to fuck up the children' sense). In the context of homosexuality, incest between consenting partners should be governed by precisely the same doctrine that governs homosexuality- it is consent, not format that is important. It's an interesting kind of provocative point- if you're okay with gay and lesbian rights, you should have no issues with incestuous ones until procreation becomes involved.
As I said before, by that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride a horse, or milk a cow, or, heck, own a pet. The reason for bestiality laws is because people are uncomfortable with bestiality.
Your second thing is exactly my (second) point. If you're okay with all of that, you're being logically consistent, and making laws based off of that is logical. But that doesn't mean you have to be comfortable with the idea, or be uncomfortable with being uncomfortable.
|
On November 25 2012 08:51 soon.Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans. Incest is between humans... But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. .
I had edited in the incest part afterwards. You do know you're quoted as calling gay marriages "untrue"? From that, I assumed you only call male-female marriages as being "true". You're the one that needs to prove that gay marriages are "untrue". We haven't even equalized human rights for gay individuals since they cannot be married yet you claim to treat them fairly?
But even so, I shall answer about other species; another species cannot consent to marriage, hence of course it won't be recognized. If an alien species were to drop down and have intelligence relative to ours or greater and could consent, I would call to recognize such a relationship.
|
On November 25 2012 08:58 SkysLa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:51 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans. Incest is between humans... But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. . I had edited in the incest part afterwards. You do know you're quoted as calling gay marriages "untrue"? From that, I assumed you only call male-female marriages as being "true". You're the one that needs to prove that gay marriages are "untrue". We haven't even equalized human rights for gay individuals since they cannot be married yet you claim to treat them fairly? But even so, I shall answer about other species; another species cannot consent to marriage, hence of course it won't be recognized. If an alien species were to drop down and have intelligence relative to ours or greater and could consent, I would call to recognize such a relationship.
Even if you edited it, you still have to address the incest part. According to your argument, incest should be recognized as a legit marriage. Which is fine. But just recognize that that's your position.
And it is fair. Nobody is owed the right to the the benefits of marriage, as long as everybody is given the right to marriage. So what that the animal has no idea what's going on? Why can't somebody demand that their union to the animal be recognized a marriage? Because according to YOUR definition of marriage, it's between two consenting humans? Who cares what you think? I demand that my right to marry a tree be recognized. That my right to marry a table be recognized. That my right to marry my computer be recognized.
But of course that's ridiculous. Our government has, for whatever reason, given us the present of the benefits of marriage, as long as you get married by what they define marriage to be. Gays have that right- THAT'S WHY IT'S FAIR. And the law doesn't give gays those benefits to a gay marriage? So what? Who owes it in the first place?
|
We should really stop discussing beastiality, since that is kind of a different topic. It is also quite complicated, in my opinion it is about as morally acceptable as animal husbandry in general. If you are allowed to keep animals just to slaughter them for food, i don't really see why you should not be allowed to keep an animal to fuck it.
|
On November 25 2012 09:09 soon.Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:58 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:51 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans. Incest is between humans... But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. . I had edited in the incest part afterwards. You do know you're quoted as calling gay marriages "untrue"? From that, I assumed you only call male-female marriages as being "true". You're the one that needs to prove that gay marriages are "untrue". We haven't even equalized human rights for gay individuals since they cannot be married yet you claim to treat them fairly? But even so, I shall answer about other species; another species cannot consent to marriage, hence of course it won't be recognized. If an alien species were to drop down and have intelligence relative to ours or greater and could consent, I would call to recognize such a relationship. Even if you edited it, you still have to address the incest part. According to your argument, incest should be recognized as a legit marriage. Which is fine. But just recognize that that's your position. And it is fair. Nobody is owed the right to the the benefits of marriage, as long as everybody is given the right to marriage. So what that the animal has no idea what's going on? Why can't somebody demand that their union to the animal be recognized a marriage? Because according to YOUR definition of marriage, it's between two consenting humans? Who cares what you think? I demand that my right to marry a tree be recognized. That my right to marry a table be recognized. That my right to marry my computer be recognized. But of course that's ridiculous. Our government has, for whatever reason, given us the present of the benefits of marriage, as long as you get married by what they define marriage to be. Gays have that right- THAT'S WHY IT'S FAIR. And the law doesn't give gays those benefits to a gay marriage? So what? Who owes it in the first place?
That's such cheap rhetoric. Essentially it amounts to "we have a definition and I think it's the right one and therefore it's the right one."
The fact that I think marriage should be between 2 people of any may be as arbitrary as saying you should be allowed to marry to a tree, that doesn't make it any less of an opinion. I mean hell, our current conception isn't any less arbitrary - the rules were set based on tradition. Marriage isn't inherent to nature after all, it's a human construct. But in reality, there are tangible reasons behind wanting homosexuals to be able to marry, even though you choose to outright deny those reasons.
Additionally, you call it "fair" that homosexuals are allowed to marry, even though it's people that they don't truly love. That's the pinnacle of a cheap argument, and shows how disingenuous you really are. Make an effort to be reasonable in the future.
|
Societey developing backwards is just painful to see and I especially don't get why it seems to happen so often in the last years. Humanity sucks so hard, kinda unbelievable.
|
On November 25 2012 09:16 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 09:09 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:58 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:51 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans. Incest is between humans... But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. . I had edited in the incest part afterwards. You do know you're quoted as calling gay marriages "untrue"? From that, I assumed you only call male-female marriages as being "true". You're the one that needs to prove that gay marriages are "untrue". We haven't even equalized human rights for gay individuals since they cannot be married yet you claim to treat them fairly? But even so, I shall answer about other species; another species cannot consent to marriage, hence of course it won't be recognized. If an alien species were to drop down and have intelligence relative to ours or greater and could consent, I would call to recognize such a relationship. Even if you edited it, you still have to address the incest part. According to your argument, incest should be recognized as a legit marriage. Which is fine. But just recognize that that's your position. And it is fair. Nobody is owed the right to the the benefits of marriage, as long as everybody is given the right to marriage. So what that the animal has no idea what's going on? Why can't somebody demand that their union to the animal be recognized a marriage? Because according to YOUR definition of marriage, it's between two consenting humans? Who cares what you think? I demand that my right to marry a tree be recognized. That my right to marry a table be recognized. That my right to marry my computer be recognized. But of course that's ridiculous. Our government has, for whatever reason, given us the present of the benefits of marriage, as long as you get married by what they define marriage to be. Gays have that right- THAT'S WHY IT'S FAIR. And the law doesn't give gays those benefits to a gay marriage? So what? Who owes it in the first place? That's such cheap rhetoric. Essentially it amounts to "we have a definition and I think it's the right one and therefore it's the right one." The fact that I think marriage should be between 2 people of any may be as arbitrary as saying you should be allowed to marry to a tree, that doesn't make it any less of an opinion. I mean hell, our current conception isn't any less arbitrary - the rules were set based on tradition. Marriage isn't inherent to nature after all, it's a human construct. But in reality, there are tangible reasons behind wanting homosexuals to be able to marry, even though you choose to outright deny those reasons. Additionally, you call it "fair" that homosexuals are allowed to marry, even though it's people that they don't truly love. That's the pinnacle of a cheap argument, and shows how disingenuous you really are. Make an effort to be reasonable in the future.
I never say it's the right one. I never said there is a right one. There is no right one. It's arbitrary. Hence all my examples for all the past posts, including incest and bestiality.
The fact that I think marriage should be between 2 people of any may be as arbitrary as saying you should be allowed to marry to a tree, that doesn't make it any less of an opinion
So basically you're agreeing your opinion is arbitrary. So your opinion has no more weight than mine. So your decision to not recognize certain marriages is just as legitimate as my decision not to recognize gay marriage.
And as for
... But in reality, there are tangible reasons behind wanting homosexuals to be able to marry, even though you choose to outright deny those reasons.
First off, I never said there aren't tangible reasons; not sure why you keep misquoting me. Second of all, there are tangible benefits to a lot of things, but that doesn't mean we need laws recognizing and rewarding them. Should I get a tax deduction if I'm not overweight?
Additionally, you call it "fair" that homosexuals are allowed to marry, even though it's people that they don't truly love. That's the pinnacle of a cheap argument, and shows how disingenuous you really are. Make an effort to be reasonable in the future.
As I keep saying, these laws are arbitrary. The government doesn't owe anyone the benefits of marriage. That's why the argument of "I want to marry an animal/computer/table, recognize the marriage" isn't a good argument. So the government decided to give this benefit to heterosexual couples. Fine. Either argue that there shouldn't be benefits for anyone, or there should be benefits for everyone, including people that want to marry animals. Anything in the middle is inconsistent.
Make an effort to be reasonable in the future.
And calm down; no reason to be sarcastic.
|
That's to screw around with semantics, it can easily be abused to put a position above another without ever passing your own judgment. Stating that you're fine with the status quo is not very interesting.
|
On November 25 2012 09:38 Djzapz wrote:
That's to screw around with semantics, it can easily be abused to put a position above another without ever passing your own judgment. Stating that you're fine with the status quo is not very interesting.
What specific point are you replying to...?
|
On November 25 2012 08:51 soon.Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:42 SkysLa wrote:On November 25 2012 08:31 soon.Cloak wrote:On November 25 2012 08:23 Glurkenspurk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:16 soon.Cloak wrote:Okay, I think I disagree with most people in this thread. Let's look at some other laws, shall we? I'm going to use the model of the USA just for ease, but there's probably a lot of similarity in Europe. Incest between consenting adults: In many states, you can be imprisoned for 10 years, 14 years, 20 years, 25 years, or for life. In some, you are put on the Sex Offenders List for life. SourceBestiality: Illegal in approximately thirty states. In many of these states, bestiality is a felony. SourceIndecent Exposure: Illegal to some extent in most states, though the definition of "indecent" varies. Punishments can include fines, imprisonment, or being registered on the Sex Offenders List. SourceNow, what are these? These are laws that express some sort of morality in our society. Our society, as a whole, and as represented through our government, has decided that some things are simply inappropriate. Obviously, marriage is not recognized in cases where it's illegal. The issue is that these laws are almost completely subjective, and therefore almost completely arbitrary. Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be able to walk around naked? Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to marry my mother? There's no objective reason. It's based on what society feels is correct and incorrect. So my first point is that any discussion related to morality/marriage rights is probably arbitrary. If you want to allow gay marriage, but are also comfortable with incest, bestiality, and indecent exposure, I may consider you strange, but I can't call you inconsistent. If you support gay marriage, but don't support those other things, then you are arbitrarily deciding what is legitimate and what is not. And if Uganda disagrees with you, their laws aren't any less legitimate than yours. But there's one more point. Even if you do feel that all those things should be allowed, that doesn't mean that they won't make you feel uncomfortable. Even if you think people should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm others, you may feel...uncomfortable watching a man marry his daughter, or watching a woman marry a cow, or watching people walk around naked. And that's perfectly okay. If you grow up with a certain standard of what's marriage and of what's not, of what's okay and what's not, of what's "normal" and what's not, there's no reason to feel any pressure to change that. It's NOT okay to be discriminatory, to be rude or hurtful. But if I can think you're strange because you wear funny clothes, or because you speak in a weird voice, or because you have a ridiculous layup in basketball, why can't I feel uncomfortable with incest, bestiality, indecent exposure, or gay couples? So to the gay members of this wonderful community; I respect you, I respect your feelings, and I demand that you be given fair treatment by everyone around you. But I don't recognize a gay marriage as a true marriage, and I am uncomfortable around gay couples. And I don't feel guilty about that at all. Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) I still don't get the point. There are a lot of silly laws that should be removed in the US. I think most intelligent people agree that even though you may feel a bit uncomfortable around something doesn't mean you should try to ban it. I don't really feel comfortable around any couple making out in public, but I don't think it should be against the law to show affection in public. I think you should accept the fact that some people are different and not make up arbitrary reasons to defend your blatant homophobic thoughts. Incest is still illegal, even if you use a condom. By that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride horses, because they can't consent. The point I think you're saying is whether or not it hurts the animal, and many of the laws covered under bestiality don't hurt the animal. There are bestiality laws in place because society isn't okay with bestiality. As if you are among those that think everything should be legal, that's specifically what I addressed in my second point. I didn't say they should be banned in that part- I said that you have the right to be uncomfortable. Reread, maybe. And as I explicitly said, I am okay with people being different than me, but again, that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable with their lifestyles. If that makes me homophobic, fine. But unfortunately, there's no derogatory word describing you, who feels uncomfortable with people making out in public, even though by logical extension it's just as bad as my being homophobic. I think your examples are completely arbitary. Gay marriages are not related to beastiality or incest, it is a marriage between humans. We have given the right to certain humans but not others, it is not related to other species. Since you used the concept of a "true" marriage when saying gay marriages are not "true", I'll assume you believe in the concept of marriage in general. In that regard, you consider a subset of humans being married but not the other subset. This is where you seem to contradict yourself when you say you demand fair treatment for gay individuals but then don't treat them equally as other humans. Incest is between humans... But even ignoring that, you just decided that marriage is only between humans. Let's say a human wants to marry a member of a different species. You are denying their right to marry an animal. Why isn't that marriage recognized? PROVE to me that that shouldn't be recognized as a marriage. . Edit: Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:48 Thereisnosaurus wrote:Bestiality is against the law because animals can't consent. Incest is a bit trickier, but the much higher rate of birth defects probably accounts for that now (although in the past it may have just been a religious thing.) Indeed, comparing these two isn't valid. Bestiality falls into the same category as rape in an ethical/moral framework Incest (between consenting adults in any case) falls into a wierd edge case like the religious laws against eating pork. It comes from a very legitimate socio-cultural source, but one that is rendered obsolete by modern culture and science (since incest is only problematic if it ends in several consecutive generations of children, and even then is probably less of an issue than a mother smoking or a parent with a serious genetic condition reproducing in a 'how is this going to fuck up the children' sense). In the context of homosexuality, incest between consenting partners should be governed by precisely the same doctrine that governs homosexuality- it is consent, not format that is important. It's an interesting kind of provocative point- if you're okay with gay and lesbian rights, you should have no issues with incestuous ones until procreation becomes involved. As I said before, by that argument of bestiality, you shouldn't be allowed to ride a horse, or milk a cow, or, heck, own a pet. The reason for bestiality laws is because people are uncomfortable with bestiality. Your second thing is exactly my (second) point. If you're okay with all of that, you're being logically consistent, and making laws based off of that is logical. But that doesn't mean you have to be comfortable with the idea, or be uncomfortable with being uncomfortable.
Animals cannot legally consent to contracts. This is because animals cannot read, write, or speak on a level that would enable them to give informed consent. Thus they cannot enter into a marriage contract. Please quit comparing gay marriage to bestiality. It is degrading. Bestiality laws exist as a very basic, low level moral standard. When partnered with animal cruelty laws it effectively says that while animals are property, they have the right to not be tortured or raped. Thus it has nothing to do with our ability to ride a horse or milk a cow.
As stated by many others previously, it has little to do with the issue of gay marriage. The gay marriage front wishes to change the gender requirement for secular marriage. It is not a movement which wishes to deregulate marriage to the point of it being between any two things. You are correct in saying that laws against incest provide a similar problem from a purely ethical point of view. Unfortunately for your argument, the two ethical problems are independent of one another. Thus it is not hypocritical to support gay marriage while not supporting consensual incest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
