People Who Are Against Gay Marriage Aren't Thinking Things Through.

[javajo]

I'm a Christian and I support same-sex marriage with full equal rights as any other marriage and I support their being able to adopt children and I am against bullying and all that. So, its not wise to generalize people. Some folks think the Bible condemns it and some folks use the Bible to hate others. The former are mislead and the latter use the name of christian but are not.

 

[Sleeppy]

It really shouldn't have to be thought through.. It's unconstitutional. I'm against gay marriage, but we live in the U.S. where we're supposed to have certain equal rights.

 

[jasonwill2]

if ur reasons are religious that breaks the 1st amendment

 

[ChristineES]

It really shouldn't have to be thought through.. It's unconstitutional. I'm against gay marriage, but we live in the U.S. where we're supposed to have certain equal rights.

You're absolutely right, it really shouldn't have to be "thought through", but we have to a lot of things that shouldn't have to be done.

 

[Awoon]

What does the irrational fear of strangers or foreigners have to do with same-sex marriage?

You dont know? Same-sex marriage is strange and foreign to the modern world. The words of a marriage commitment doesnt care who's repeating them, only the people who created the standard words of the state care.

 

[Mr. Skittles]

This is a paraphrase of something I posted as a reply on Facebook. It was about the CEO of Chick-Fil-A. I realize that most of these people who are against gay marriage aren't really thinking their belief thoroughly or completely through. I really don't believe that most of those are thinking "I am against gay marriage because I hate gays". They are saying "I want to keep marriage traditional". And by not thinking it through, they don't realize that they are not separating what they want from the rights of other people.
They don't realize about legal issues of people together for a lifetime and not being able to make decisions about their significant other- not being able to see the person if they person is incapacitated, not being able to make any decisions regarding a funeral if their S. O. has died, and all that.
If we all just think these things through, then maybe we can stop all this insanity and all these battles.

Any other thoughts?

I wish that all those who are against gay marriage would really think it through. Try to separate what you want from what people are truly asking for. Start thinking about others.

First off the owner of Chick-Fil-A has a right to voice his opinion. I think the homosexual community was bent out of shape with the "kiss in front of a chick-fil-a day" which was a flop protest, and the like. What the LGBT community doesn't realize is that change does not happen when we want it to happen. It took decades upon decades upon decadez for society to accept interracial marriage. You cannot expect a devout Christian who announces his belief to change them.If you don't like what the owner stands for don't eat there. Simple.

As far as thinking stuff through, the man knew what he was saying. He is a millionare for christ sake (no pun intended), most millionares know what the heck they're saying.

 

[Man of Faith]

If marriage is redefined from one man and one woman, then we might as well throw out any definition of marriage, because no definition of marriage will be able to be defended. The same arguments that are used for gay marriage can be used for any type of marriage. There won’t be any way to define marriage. Not to mention society will break apart. The family, which holds society together, will disappear.

Think about it, 50 years ago, gay was taboo. What is taboo today that 50 years from now won’t be? Incest? Bigamy? Once those things are no longer taboo, then they will want their rights to be married. There, I thought 50 years into the future, is that enough thinking it through?

 

[Me Myself]

Typically, the response I've been given is that America has been founded on Christian values, that we've always legislated morality, and that the people need to protect these values that made this country so great.

Shamefully, it is simply true (that they say this).

so that`s when you remember them about bible telling women to be quiet and slaves to be happy

 

[Zoe Doidge]

If marriage is redefined from one man and one woman, then we might as well throw out any definition of marriage, because no definition of marriage will be able to be defended. The same arguments that are used for gay marriage can be used for any type of marriage. There won’t be any way to define marriage. Not to mention society will break apart. The family, which holds society together, will disappear.

This has yet to happen anywhere that gay marriage is permitted, despite just over 11 years having passed.

Think about it, 50 years ago, gay was taboo. What is taboo today that 50 years from now won’t be? Incest? Bigamy? Once those things are no longer taboo, then they will want their rights to be married. There, I thought 50 years into the future, is that enough thinking it through?

I suspect you're right, incest and bigamy will likely eventually lose their taboo status and people will demand they be permitted.

Good for them.

 

[crocusj]

If marriage is redefined from one man and one woman, then we might as well throw out any definition of marriage, because no definition of marriage will be able to be defended. The same arguments that are used for gay marriage can be used for any type of marriage. There won’t be any way to define marriage. Not to mention society will break apart. The family, which holds society together, will disappear.

Then we will have to surmount this problem. If society is based on laws that make some more equal than others then it is built on shifting sands.

Think about it, 50 years ago, gay was taboo. What is taboo today that 50 years from now won’t be? Incest? Bigamy? Once those things are no longer taboo, then they will want their rights to be married. There, I thought 50 years into the future, is that enough thinking it through?

Not quite enough. You are still projecting your morals onto someone else. Apart from purely medical considerations what is actually morally wrong with incest? Or bigamy?

 

[Sunstone]

If marriage is redefined from one man and one woman, then we might as well throw out any definition of marriage, because no definition of marriage will be able to be defended. The same arguments that are used for gay marriage can be used for any type of marriage. There won’t be any way to define marriage. Not to mention society will break apart. The family, which holds society together, will disappear.

Think about it, 50 years ago, gay was taboo. What is taboo today that 50 years from now won’t be? Incest? Bigamy? Once those things are no longer taboo, then they will want their rights to be married. There, I thought 50 years into the future, is that enough thinking it through?

Are you familiar with the "slippery slope fallacy"? I mean, other than by committing it?

 

[jarofthoughts]

If marriage is redefined from one man and one woman, then we might as well throw out any definition of marriage, because no definition of marriage will be able to be defended.

Well, if there are no logical fact-based arguments for something, then maybe it can't and shouldn't be defended.

Not to mention society will break apart. The family, which holds society together, will disappear.

I'm sure this is where you will present evidence to the effect that same-sex marriage has caused society to fall apart in, say, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, just to mention a few.

Think about it, 50 years ago, gay was taboo. What is taboo today that 50 years from now won’t be?

Who cares about taboos?
I mean, we're not really arguing in favor of keeping taboos just because we want taboos?
Surely one must argue against each on their own merits?

Incest?

Can be argued against on the grounds of being potentially detrimental to the offspring on a genetic level.

Bigamy?

I don't have a problem with bigamy or polygamy as long as men and women are treated equally in this respect.

Once those things are no longer taboo, then they will want their rights to be married.

Then we will deal with that.

There, I thought 50 years into the future, is that enough thinking it through?

Apparently not since your arguments don't hold water.

 

[Muffled]

This is a paraphrase of something I posted as a reply on Facebook. It was about the CEO of Chick-Fil-A. I realize that most of these people who are against gay marriage aren't really thinking their belief thoroughly or completely through. I really don't believe that most of those are thinking "I am against gay marriage because I hate gays". They are saying "I want to keep marriage traditional". And by not thinking it through, they don't realize that they are not separating what they want from the rights of other people.
They don't realize about legal issues of people together for a lifetime and not being able to make decisions about their significant other- not being able to see the person if they person is incapacitated, not being able to make any decisions regarding a funeral if their S. O. has died, and all that.
If we all just think these things through, then maybe we can stop all this insanity and all these battles.

Any other thoughts?

I wish that all those who are against gay marriage would really think it through. Try to separate what you want from what people are truly asking for. Start thinking about others.

Usually that is done through civil unions.

The problem is not that people are legally united but that there is a requirement to legally recognize that such marriages are equivalent to traditional marriages.

 

[George-ananda]

So many people strongly support same-sex marriage.

But most people are so against some polygamists in Utah doing their thing. And send them to jail.

I've wondered if the big difference is the liberal politically-correct voice in this country supports gay marriage. And polygamists are associated with the conservative and Mormon element (definitely not the cool politically correct crowd).

If you're raise in a liberal western society, you are likely to take the 'cool liberal' views. If you're raised in a conservative Muslim country you are likely to take 'respectable conservative' views. It seems to me people don't generally think independantly although most people think they think independantly.

Thoughts please....

 

[Zoe Doidge]

So many people strongly support same-sex marriage.

But most people are so against some polygamists in Utah doing their thing. And send them to jail.

I've wondered if the big difference is the liberal politically-correct voice in this country supports gay marriage. And polygamists are associated with the conservative and Mormon element (definitely not the cool politically correct crowd).

If you're raise in a liberal western society, you are likely to take the 'cool liberal' views. If you're raised in a conservative Muslim country you are likely to take 'respectable conservative' views. It seems to me people don't generally think independantly although most people think they think independantly.

Thoughts please....

Yes, not thinking things through likely applies to all sorts of stances people take. Personally I support polygamy on much the same basis as I support gay marriage - there's no real reason to forbid it.

 

[George-ananda]

Yes, not thinking things through likely applies to all sorts of stances people take. Personally I support polygamy on much the same basis as I support gay marriage - there's no real reason to forbid it.

What's the legal situation with gay marriages and polygamist marriages in the UK at this current time? Are you guys having the same debates?

 

[Zoe Doidge]

What's the legal situation with gay marriages and polygamist marriages in the UK at this current time? Are you guys having the same debates?

I'm not aware of any big movement on polygamy in the UK.

But our prime minister intends to make gay marriage legal by the end of his current term (which means by around 2015). Support polls (YouGov showed 71% in favour last I checked) and the stance of all three main parties suggest it's likely to happen.

Although we do have civil partnerships already, and unlike the US they really are marriage in all but name, giving the same rights & benefits etc.

For some reason though religious bodies will be forbidden by law (except in Scotland, their government appears to be being sensible about this) to perform a gay marriage ceremony.

 

[Man of Faith]

Are you familiar with the "slippery slope fallacy"? I mean, other than by committing it?

I'm not sure if a slippery slope is a fallacy or a valid concern.

[youtube]ZchnlR8rF1g[/youtube]
Black Bear Sliding Down a Snow Slope at Whistler Blackcomb Ski Resort - British Columbia, Canada - YouTube

 

[waitasec]

Same as it always was

:cigar:

 

[waitasec]

Typically, the response I've been given is that America has been founded on Christian values, that we've always legislated morality, and that the people need to protect these values that made this country so great.

interesting, the value of equality takes a back seat to "christian" values
in other words "the value i place on bias is more important than your value on tolerance"

great :sarcastic

the disconnect is astonishing