Gay marriage making progress in Norway, State of California

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Zayphod

Add this:

The Religious Right wants to "save the institution of marriage". Last time I checked, the divorce rate in the USA was around the 50% range, and those are your traditional (supposedly) $DIETY-fearing man/woman types getting them.

To the Religious Right: Want to truly protect and save the insitituion of marriage? Do this:

MAKE DIVORCE ILLEGAL EVERYWHERE

Watch the fun.

You have a point here. It is just to easy to file for divorce and have it granted. Not long ago, divorce was looked down upon and you would receive the scarlet letter "D" on your chest. Not anymore, you can pick up the divorce papers at the local Walmart for .69 cents and be done with it in a week. Alas, marriage between men and women are ar 50%, we can now started adding same sex marriages to this statistic as well. Nothing in the cards say this type of relationship is every lasting. Just more to fill the courtrooms.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by August

Well wait a minute. Getting married entails certain tax benefits so it IS our business.

Actually, married couple incur a tax penalty.

[August]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Actually, married couple incur a tax penalty.

At least until 2003 they did...

[LtCmdrRat]

I repeat it again and again" Political correctness nowadays is killing ( or messing with) common sense".
I dont have any problem with gays or lesbians, but why minorities became majorities in modern mass media?
If you re a gay, be proud of that, but dont make a commercial from it or propaganda of gay way of life !!!!!!
Sincerely Me.
Still Straight.
Caucasian American

[Ducimus]

Random thoughts in no particular order:

- Marriage is not what it used to be, like back in our grandparents day. Divorce's are common, and vows are subject to being null and void if the wind blows the wrong way.

- In my time, i have seen alot of abuses of marriage such as
a.) Single women looking for a daddy to support them and their kid, and for no other reason, and ive seen them reel in a love sick fool as their patsy.

b.) Contract marriages. Common enough in the military. Here's how it works. You find a member of the opposite sex that you can put up with, get married, and then you get paid extra money for offbase housing, and food. Its quite the scam, you can substantially increase your monthy pay and live in much better quarters then the barracks doing this. I knew of at least two contract marrages, and both "partners" were actively dating. (and why not, its not like they really loved each other )

c.) Cheating spouses.


When i think of the sanctity of marriage, i think of a little word play on "Victory's Secrets" In sum, just Victoria doesn't have a whole lot of secrets left, neither does marriage have a whole lot of sancity. Gays have had absolutley nothing to do with any of this.

Times change, and these days marriage is more of a legal thing then anything else. Thats the truth. I won't marry my girlfriend of 6-7 years because she can't manage her finances for ****. Oh yes, ill call her my wife, becaus spiritually she is, but legally she isn't. And so long as we dont "legally" tie the knot (IE, get married), her creditor's cant touch me. Which is probably the only thing that has saved our relationship.

Now about this whole gay marriage thing. Im reminded of a little line from a document called "The Declaration of Independence". "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Ok.. well, if thats what makes them happy, fine, whatever, just keep me out of it. I would never be so presumptious as to try and dictate what people can or cannnot do with their private lives. I don't agree with their lifestyle, frankly im repulsed by it, BUT, it is their life, and they should be free to live it however they deem. They certainly can't do any damage to "institution of marriage", that hit rock bottom years ago. Marriage is what it is in this modern day and age, and the victorian ideal of it has come and gone years ago.

[Doolan]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

c.) Cheating spouses.

I still believe the plural of "spouse" should be "spice". I know it isn't, but it would sound way cooler and I'm going to use it from now on anyway :hmm:

All in all, it's normal for institutions such as marriage to lose their meaning with time. Many of them were created in a completely different context to point immature / unruly societies in the right direction when there were no other means. Women's rights and a rather convoluted and elaborate legal system have turned it into little more than a mere clause that just keeps the name.

At least English-speaking countries don't have the problem we have here. In English, the word "marriage" comes from Latin "maritare", literally "to give a husband to", while in Spanish the word is "matrimonio" which comes from "matrem" and "monium", the "competence of a mother".

While this seems irrelevant, there was a rather heated discussion among politicians here because they claimed that gay marriage should never receive the name "matrimonio" as no mothers were involved.

Funny how a deep social issue became, once again, a matter of mere semantics.

In any case, the issue becomes clearer for me when I see that in certain countries homosexuality is actively prosecuted and, in a selected few, punished with death.

This leads me to think that:

a) This brutal behavior makes complete sense to them in their social context.

b) Banning gay marriage makes complete sense for some in our (western) social context, so it's my belief that we're just a few steps ahead from the haters but still drag prejudice of the same unforgivable kind that leads men to kill other men just because they love other men.

c) Whenever I find somebody who shows this prejudice but also justifies beating certain countries over the head arguing that they are backwards societies of barbaric nature, I feel that something doesn't quite fit. Same goes for the typical European (or at least Spanish) case of people becoming champions of gay marriage, democracy and women's rights while at the same time defending autoritarian countries because they are "just a different culture".

I honestly see no reason to be against gay marriage if we look at the issue with some perspective, that is, trying to remember how our own society was fifty years ago or how other societies are right now. You have to remember that less than half a century ago it was perfectly understood and accepted by most that black people were inferior, a thought that nowadays we find revolting. We're only beginning to accept this new phenomenon and we have a long way to go. It's just a matter of time, the argument is lost already (or won, depending on where you lie).

[Platapus]

They way I look at it

If you don't want a gay marriage, don't marry a homosexual!

If two people love each other and want to form a legal/moral commitment I say let em.

A happy married couple can't be bad for society.

Gay marriage aint for me, but then I ain't the moral compass of society either.

[Doolan]

Pretty much...

In fact, I have harder feelings against certain men marrying certain women and vice versa

Gay people can't marry, and yet many politicians are allowed to reproduce!

Crazy world...

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Skybird

why we need to see it of the same importance and meaning as mixed relations and heterosexuality, is beyond me.

Why you don't get it is because you stumble around in the same darkness as those who claim such things are ok.It is the nature for a child to try to justify doing wrong.It is grasping at straws...in attempt to bring others down into the same depths of unrighteosness to make oneself feel ok with doing something one knows in his or her heart is wrong.

Again, I cast my pearls before the swine...enjoy.

Reap it!

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by August

At least until 2003 they did...

It will return in 2011.

[Doolan]

Originally Posted by Skybird

(...)still until and short after WWI. I people change partners quicker today than the ebb and flow are changing , this only shows again that the institution of "family" is under attack from many sides, massively. Couples breaking up so easily like it is often oday show me only that they never should have married and raise children at all.(...)

Now, this is just a theory, but I don't think the institutions of "family" and "marriage" are losing points in the ranking of hot stuff because of a multi-sided conspiracy.

"Short after WWI", national women's suffrage became a reality in the US. A bit later in the UK. This alone is probably the factor that changed reality the most, with women taking an officially-recognized publicly-active role in society and being put, at least on paper, on the same level as men.

You know what this leads to because we're seeing it today. Women work, often in the same positions as men and with the same responsibilities. Men undergo the difficult process of becoming "house animals" to compensate or keep working and wait until dinner cooks itself. Plus, if a woman is now tired of her husband she can just tell him to sod off and law will be on her side.

In fact, "no-fault divorce" didn't even exist as such in the US until the second decade of the 20th century.

All I'm saying is that, while I don't deny that certain political groups, or any other pressure groups, might be interested in undermining a traditional structure that is often held as a flag by other political (and religious) groups, I think the fact that divorce wasn't even allowed without charges and that women didn't have the option to access it might have something to do with it.

"Couples breaking up so easily like it is often oday show me only that they never should have married and raise children at all."

I suppose you don't believe that people instantly became reckless about marrying after WWI. Couples that weren't meant to be have always existed, and in fact they existed more before WWI than after. Just take a look at the average age for marriages and you'll see that most took place when the girls didn't have a clue, even less so a choice.

The difference is that today if a couple doesn't work you break it, you don't just pretend it works.

[August]

Originally Posted by Doolan

The difference is that today if a couple doesn't work you break it, you don't just pretend it works.

Naw i think the difference is today nobody has any incentive to even try to make it work so even the littlest thing has the potential to destroy a relationship.

I believe that a relationship, like anything else worthwhile, takes effort.

Originally Posted by Iceman

Why you don't get it is because you stumble around in the same darkness as those who claim such things are ok.It is the nature for a child to try to justify doing wrong.It is grasping at straws...in attempt to bring others down into the same depths of unrighteosness to make oneself feel ok with doing something one knows in his or her heart is wrong.

Again, I cast my pearls before the swine...enjoy.

Reap it!

It must be wonderful to live in your intolerant world , and to consider anyone that doesn't have your beliefs to be children is pure arrogance , its the 21st century now not the dark ages.

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Why you don't get it is because you stumble around in the same darkness as those who claim such things are ok.It is the nature for a child to try to justify doing wrong.It is grasping at straws...in attempt to bring others down into the same depths of unrighteosness to make oneself feel ok with doing something one knows in his or her heart is wrong.

Again, I cast my pearls before the swine...enjoy.

Reap it!

Not pearls, just pure arrogance.

Originally Posted by darius359au

It must be wonderful to live in your intolerant world , and to consider anyone that doesn't have your beliefs to be children is pure arrogance , its the 21st century now not the dark ages.

I'd like to think so, yet some people seem stuck in the 11th century.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Again, I cast my pearls before the swine...enjoy.

Iceman, you are one ignorant bible thumper.