Gay marriage making progress in Norway, State of California

[Safe-Keeper]

You all know that recently, a Surpreme Court in California made gay marriage legal within the entire 36.5 million people state. Meanwhile in Norway, there's clear support in five of eight parties for gay and lesbian marriage, adoption, and artificial insemination (the latter should hopefully shut up the anti-gay "they can't have children" whining choir, though I'm not holding my breath:p). That's 41.3 more people who now have the right to marry within their own gender, should they so desire.

Score one for progress.

Oh, and while I remember it, I want to post this:

'Cause you just know there are still people out there who think "separated but equal" is a valid way to handle minority rights.

[Letum]

One day people will look up up in the history books and wonder why why we where so
socially backward at this time and why everything took so long to change.

[rifleman13]

Wild, dark times are rumbling toward us, and the prophet who wishes to write a new apocalypse will have to invent entirely new beasts, and beasts so terrible that the ancient animal symbols of Saint John will seem like cooing doves and cupids in comp.

- Heinrich Heine

[Polak]

I am glad that there is no support for such things in Poland.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Letum

One day people will look up up in the history books and wonder why why we where so
socially backward at this time and why everything took so long to change.

I think it is far more likely that they cast curses on us for our self-deconstruction, our unlimited relativizing of norms that keep a survivable social community together, for our shortsightedness and stupidity. In this context - and in several others as well.

[Jacky Fisher]

This is good news overall. I just wish they wouldn't use the term 'marriage'. Its too loaded a term.

Gays can't screw up marriage any more then straight folks already have

[LtCmdrRat]

Originally Posted by Jacky Fisher

This is good news overall. I just wish they wouldn't use the term 'marriage'. Its too loaded a term.

Gays can't screw up marriage any more then straight folks already have

In case Gays and Lesbians will call it marriage I call "straight" families and couples - misunderstanding that appears periodically due to unortodox traditions.

[Iceman]

Your logic is flawed here Safe-Keeper and whomever thinks that the person who calls themselves "Gay" is not in violation of not God law or Man's law but what about the laws of nature if you must call it that...it's like trying to screw two nuts together or two bolts...it just does'nt naturally work that way.

Man though has the unique ability to try to rationalize any behavior as "OK".


To me...blowing your head off with a shotgun for example would be perfectly ok huh?....To "ME" maybe that is ok...or sacrficing little babies upon fires or whatever...

My point is every person on Earth...whether they are religious or not or athesist has natural sense of right and wrong...It becomes a "Choice"...a voluntary Choice a person makes as to which way he or she will live they're life.

Being a follower of Jesus Christ..this type of behavior is any human souls God given right to choose...that said it is also the Creators right not to have to live with such who make such choices...and again...it is all back to choice and Free will...given by God Himself..enjoy your choice...and please choose wisely...

41.3 million people...you say...?

Wide is the road that leadeth to destruction.

[Schroeder]

As long as they don't hurt anybody I don't care what they are doing. If they are really loving each each other then I don't see any reason for them not to be together.

[Skybird]

I do not care for them being together, it is not my business as long as they do not make it my and other's problem. the problem for me starts regarding the special protection of naturally created families, hetero couples I mean, for these smallest social cells are the future basis of every social community, and I do not wish to see the already heavily battered institution of "family" being relativesed even more into meaningless. For psychological and sociological reasons I cannot take the argument of artificial insemination as to be meant serious. Women and men are not only different in physiology, but in sociological and psychological deimensions as well, and a kid learns different things from it'S mum's role model than it learns from it's father'S role-model. And to make one thing clear: I HAVE been psychologist myself, so I have at least an idea of how many ill-thought out "statistics" and "research studies" have been done trying to "prove" that kids do not deveklope differently in the first 20 years if one parent is missing in their life, or both parents are of the same sex. It is nonsens. I also know these disgusting tendency in psychology (one of the reasons i left it behind) to obediently engage in proving the kind of picture of man's nature that polticially and ecopnomically is wanted, psychology does so to boost it's own reputation and powerstatus in society by lining up with the society-deciding powerfactions, camps and parties, because by it's own stand it has relatively little valuable things to say and to offer, but is master in creating hot air and selling it as "science" (Karl Popper for no rasons separates sciences into true sciences and pseudo-sciences, and psychology is one of the latter - can you imagine how much I was loved by my former colleagues? ). But to compensate for that it has drastically changed it's paradigms quite often in relatively short ammount of time.

So I am not discriminating to gays. I am concerned about the new step to relativise the importance of families as the inevitable basic cell of social community. This is being done by putting families and thus: hetero marriages, into endless relations until they have no specially protected and valued status anymore.

Western societies suffer from declining populations. and this and ongoing relativizing and minimizing of the importance of families is one major reason, beside some others.

Couples as they are meant by nature to preserve the species, have all they need to make sure for that all without artifical insemination. Even while it is true that surprisingly many mammal species show the behavior of homosexuality, it remains to be the exception from the rule - not a new rule of laboraty routines equal in importance and meaningfulness to the original natural solution to preserve the surviuving of the species. we can peacefully tolerate homosexuality as the curiosity and exception from the rule that it is - why we need to see it of the same importance and meaning as mixed relations and heterosexuality, is beyond me.

[Safe-Keeper]

I think it is far more likely that they cast curses on us for our self-deconstruction, our unlimited relativizing of norms that keep a survivable social community together, for our shortsightedness and stupidity. In this context - and in several others as well.

Blah, blah, blah. You gay marriage opponents keep saying gay marriage is ruining society and causing divorce, but I've yet seen as much as a single one of you back it up with facts.

And even if gay marriage did cause a rise in divorce rates, that's not a reason to prohibit it. Women's rights, too, caused a huge increase in divorce rates, when women suddenly became economically independent and gained the ability to walk away from a failed marriage without being shunned by her community. Yet today we consider those good things.

Divorce rates increasing? Tough luck. There's a ton of things we can do to counter this without denying minority groups rights.

Your logic is flawed here Safe-Keeper and whomever thinks that the person who calls themselves "Gay" is not in violation of not God law or Man's law but what about the laws of nature if you must call it that...it's like trying to screw two nuts together or two bolts...it just does'nt naturally work that way.

Yawn. Not only is it an Appeal to Nature that you're not even being consistent about (if you really wanted humans to stick with nature, you'd go join the Amish), but there's also this kinky deal about .

Oh, and "God's law"? There's so much nonsense in the Old Testament that it could drive any sane man crazy.

Man though has the unique ability to try to rationalize any behavior as "OK".

Any animal has the ability to rationalize any behaviour as "OK".

[Skipping religious rant]

I do not care for them being together, it is not my business as long as they do not make it my and other's problem. the problem for me starts regarding the special protection of naturally created families, hetero couples I mean [...]

"Chauvinist? Me? I've got nothing against women, I just think they should stay in the kitchens where they belong."

"I've got nothing against slaves, it's their damned revolts, I can't stand."

"Those stupid nig****. Nothing bad about them as such, but geez, can't they keep the peace instead of marching and demonstrating all day?!"

"Traditional marriage" is a myth. Marriage has been changing nonstop for as long as we've had it. There have been several huge changes to the "institution of marriage" in this century alone.

I do not wish to see the already heavily battered institution of "family" being relativesed even more into meaningless.

I keep hearing people say this. I'm completely and utterly at a loss to understand why.

Did the thousand-year old system of democracy become meaningless when women gained the ability to vote? Did marriage become "more meaningless" when whites gained the ability to marry blacks?

[Doolan]

Who gives a damn about nature, if I may ask?

Technically, gay marriage is not more unnatural than using contraceptives or eating a steak with bordelaise sauce instead of biting a cow as it walks by.

Gay marriage "beats the purpose" of sex? Ok, so do contraceptives (and catholic priests, but that's a different story altogether). And when I eat, I rarely do it with the sole purpose of not starving to death: I do it because I enjoy it. Many times I eat when I'm not hungry and drink when I'm not thirsty just because I like it.

A fine painting or the works of Beethoven or Shakespeare have no "natural purpose" whatsoever and I still love them.

While all animals are capable of this, humans are remarkably good at turning things into more of an art and less of an instinct. That's why nutrition became gastronomy and perfectly good mammoth hides became pretty awesome leather jackets, and that's why a crazy German can devote his entire life to writing musical notes on a sheet of paper just to make my evenings more interesting.

And hey, sexy lingerie won't make my offspring grow stronger and healthier, but what the heck, I love it when my girlfriend wears it.

As for the institution of marriage, I have nothing against it, but it has changed a tad. Like safe-keeper said, women's rights have had a huge impact in it, as one of its original purposes was keeping women tied to the household and keeping them from fleeing when their husbands spent a fortune in submarine simulators and naval miniatures

[August]

Originally Posted by Doolan

Like safe-keeper said, women's rights have had a huge impact in it, as one of its original purposes was keeping women tied to the household and keeping them from fleeing when their husbands spent a fortune in submarine simulators and naval miniatures

Seriously, having the wife stay home and keep house wasn't such a bad thing. It's good for a family for one parent to keep house and the raise children full time. Someone that doesn't have to leave work when the kid gets sick. Someone at home when the children gets home from school. Someone who doesn't have to work all day then do housework at night. Someone that isn't forced to choose between their job and their family on a daily basis.

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Your logic is flawed here Safe-Keeper and whomever thinks that the person who calls themselves "Gay" is not in violation of not God law or Man's law but what about the laws of nature if you must call it that...it's like trying to screw two nuts together or two bolts...it just does'nt naturally work that way.

Man though has the unique ability to try to rationalize any behavior as "OK".

There is homosexuality in some other animals than humans aswell, so this law of nature thing does'nt really work in your favor. Besides, mankind is not in any risk of extinction and leting them get married has'nt changed anything.

Originally Posted by August

Seriously, having the wife stay home and keep house wasn't such a bad thing. It's good for a family for one parent to keep house and the raise children full time. Someone that doesn't have to leave work when the kid gets sick. Someone at home when the children gets home from school. Someone who doesn't have to work all day then do housework at night. Someone that isn't forced to choose between their job and their family on a daily basis.

I agree, some still choose to do so, but at least now the choise is theirs to make.

[bradclark1]

If God didn't want gays he wouldn't have made them.