Live & Let Live. Sign This.

[Zen Badger]

Somehow appropriate.....

[festive1]

As homosexuals never were in the picture of marriage in society for hundreds of years, they do not have any significant say over to whom this privilage should be made available to. The majority, who are normal people, have used marriage as the primary tool to lay the foundation of the family. And the family is the foundation of society. With homosexuals never having much of a place in normal society with their homosexual identities, how can they really ask for such things?

And WHY exactly were homosexuals left out of the marriage loop? Why were they left out of "normal society" with their homosexual identities?
Because of ignorance, fear, bigotry, and religious bullshit. So exactly why shouldn't society try to be more inclusive of homosexuals (and by extension, the whole of the GLBT community)?
You do realize this argument was made about blacks when they received their rights? Also made about women when they got the vote and more equatable standing in regards to being hired for work. Simply because "traditional" society works one way, does not mean it always has to work that way, or the traditional way is inherently better.

[kılıç_mehmet]

It's not really that, friend. The thing is, homosexuality is not normal. I'm not saying that homosexuals are not "normal", they can very well marry and reproduce as other people, and get married on that accord, have their own families. But those who build an identity on simply their carnal desires of flesh, and especially those which are considered and known to be abnormal....How do you expect them to be a part of a society? It has nothing to do with ignorance, fear, bigortry or religiousity. People, both homosexual and heterosexual know what homosexuality is. And they treat it accordingly from their own perspective.
İnclusive? Well, society can be inclusive to such people by simply guaranteeing their safety and well-being, which would also help to maintain harmony, order and law.
But other than that, why are we ought to give homosexuals something that they are not entitled to in the first place?
Besides, I'm sure people made arguments about whether allowing blacks into universities, but I'm uncertain whether similar bias existed towards homosexuals at that time.
The situation of homosexuals cannot be compared to what the descendants of former slaves have seen at the hand of their former masters. About suffrage rights for women, that too, is just another thing. I'm not saying that we should ban homosexuals from voting, or take away their rights on property or education. These are things that are not related to their sexual identities, identities that they have only recently began to flaunt around, and asking privilages related to them, like marriage.

[TaraJo]

Wow. Ok, question tiem!

Where do these marriage issues leave me? I mean, it's going to be damn hard to say 'you can't marry anyone' because that reeks of obvious discrimination. However, here's the reality for me: while the great majority of the world sees me as female and treats me as female, my ID still reads male so as far as the state is concerned, I'm a dude (*grumble* stupid state). Does this mean I should be able to marry men or women? And let's say I do get married here in the next year or so and at that point I do get my gender change legally recognized; what then? Does my marriage get automatically annulled? And why would our marriage be more worthy of state recognition before a matter of paperwork is accomplished but unworthy after?

[kılıç_mehmet]

Wow. Ok, question tiem!

Where do these marriage issues leave me? I mean, it's going to be damn hard to say 'you can't marry anyone' because that reeks of obvious discrimination. However, here's the reality for me: while the great majority of the world sees me as female and treats me as female, my ID still reads male so as far as the state is concerned, I'm a dude (*grumble* stupid state). Does this mean I should be able to marry men or women? And let's say I do get married here in the next year or so and at that point I do get my gender change legally recognized; what then? Does my marriage get automatically annulled? And why would our marriage be more worthy of state recognition before a matter of paperwork is accomplished but unworthy after?

Maybe you should change your ID to write "female". Then you can get married to whomever you want to. It was done in my country, where a popular singer, who did get a sex change, changed his sex in official records from male to female. Now he(or she) is able to marry men, although she didn't have any long-lasting marriages that I've heard of.
Besides, it's not just state recognition that matters. It's also the recognition of the people. Not just people you know. Society ought to accept such marriages. And from what I see, society does not accept the marriage of a man with another man, or a woman with another woman.

[TaraJo]

It's not really that, friend. The thing is, homosexuality is not normal.

Define 'normal.'

I'm not saying that homosexuals are not "normal"

Yes, you did. It was your last sentence. I mean, just fucking look up.

But those who build an identity on simply their carnal desires of flesh, and especially those which are considered and known to be abnormal....How do you expect them to be a part of a society?

What does that say about boy raping priests and their carnal desires? I jest.

The GLBT community has largely formed because so much of the rest of the world is aligned against us. It's actually something quite interesting I've noticed: the more accepted queerness is within a given social circle, the less visible the GLBT community will be. You want to make us just kinda disappear and blend in with the rest of society? Acceptance will do that.

It has nothing to do with ignorance, fear, bigortry or religiousity.

Yes, yes it does.

People, both homosexual and heterosexual know what homosexuality is.

It's an attraction to people of the same gender. Are you claiming it's something else?

İnclusive? Well, society can be inclusive to such people by simply guaranteeing their safety and well-being, which would also help to maintain harmony, order and law.

When you consider all the ways our safety and well-being can be hurt by denial of same sex marriage, you own words are saying that you're not inclusive.

But other than that, why are we ought to give homosexuals something that they are not entitled to in the first place?

Begging the question? Why are we not entitled to it in the first place?

*sigh* Tired. Just woke up. I'll deal with the rest of his garbage here later.

[festive1]

It's not really that, friend. The thing is, homosexuality is not normal. I'm not saying that homosexuals are not "normal", they can very well marry and reproduce as other people, and get married on that accord, have their own families. But those who build an identity on simply their carnal desires of flesh, and especially those which are considered and known to be abnormal....How do you expect them to be a part of a society? It has nothing to do with ignorance, fear, bigortry or religiousity. People, both homosexual and heterosexual know what homosexuality is. And they treat it accordingly from their own perspective.
İnclusive? Well, society can be inclusive to such people by simply guaranteeing their safety and well-being, which would also help to maintain harmony, order and law.
But other than that, why are we ought to give homosexuals something that they are not entitled to in the first place?
Besides, I'm sure people made arguments about whether allowing blacks into universities, but I'm uncertain whether similar bias existed towards homosexuals at that time.
The situation of homosexuals cannot be compared to what the descendants of former slaves have seen at the hand of their former masters. About suffrage rights for women, that too, is just another thing. I'm not saying that we should ban homosexuals from voting, or take away their rights on property or education. These are things that are not related to their sexual identities, identities that they have only recently began to flaunt around, and asking privilages related to them, like marriage.

Not "normal"??? Then why are animals homosexual? I believe the number is 60-some different species humans have documented the animals engaging in homosexual activity.
And if I'm reading you correctly you are saying because being homosexual is a sexual identity, they should be denied rights pertaining to the arena from whence their minority status comes from? This makes no sense.
If you think being a black male doesn't include a sexual identity, you are wrong. Just look at all the black men who have been lynched over the years for looking at a white woman, for being accused of consensual relations with a white woman, for being accused of rape... That is a sexual identity as well. The same is true of black females historically, never heard of the the whole Venus Hottentot thing have you?

[TaraJo]

Society ought to accept such marriages. And from what I see, society does not accept the marriage of a man with another man, or a woman with another woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opin...ted_States

Notice how the great majority of the polls up there have at least 50% of the population in support of same sex marriage? Yeah, I don't know where you're from, but down here, that's called a slight majority which is a far cry from 'society does not accept the marriage of a man with another man or a woman with another woman.'

[kılıç_mehmet]

Society ought to accept such marriages. And from what I see, society does not accept the marriage of a man with another man, or a woman with another woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opin...ted_States

Notice how the great majority of the polls up there have at least 50% of the population in support of same sex marriage? Yeah, I don't know where you're from, but down here, that's called a slight majority which is a far cry from 'society does not accept the marriage of a man with another man or a woman with another woman.'

Society is not simply the numbers of a poll. Society is both past and future. 50% of the population, still does not account for your dreams. When homosexuals are able to produce children, and contribute to society as "homosexuals", since they primarily identify themselves as such before everything else, maybe you'll gain the support of the lot of the population. But until then, society will not allow you into it, even if you are able to get married on paper. Your marriage will still not give you the respect and treatment that you expect from society.
You will still be different than the rest, and will be treated as such.

In my opinion, it'd be better to abolish marriage as a social and governmental institution, rather than to allow anything besides a man-woman union to get in.

[Tobie]

It's not really that, friend. The thing is, homosexuality is not normal. I'm not saying that homosexuals are not "normal", they can very well marry and reproduce as other people, and get married on that accord, have their own families. But those who build an identity on simply their carnal desires of flesh, and especially those which are considered and known to be abnormal....How do you expect them to be a part of a society?

I doubt anyone, homo- or heterosexual, that built their identity based purely on their sexuality would be considered normal.