Same-Sex Marriage: Point of View

[Essos]

Prostitution, selling sex for money, is not inherently a bad thing. Criminal prostitution, where sex workers are villified and treated like shit or subhumans, is bad.

Prostitution is linked to those things because it is so heavily stigmatized by society.

Eh, I don't see how prostitution a can be justified by a moral civilization. It is unclean.

How and why? Source your argument. Is sex unclean? If so, why? If it is not unclean, what makes paying for sex unclean?

[Tlaceceyaya]

Prostitution, selling sex for money, is not inherently a bad thing. Criminal prostitution, where sex workers are villified and treated like shit or subhumans, is bad.

Prostitution is linked to those things because it is so heavily stigmatized by society.

Eh, I don't see how prostitution a can be justified by a moral civilization. It is unclean.

It is 'unclean' to have sex with someone in exchange for money?

Quick! Shut down all the bars! We can't let people buy drinks for others in order to get them to temporarily relax their standards!

[Hathradic States]

> Says one cannot "force" religion on another
> "Forces" opinion on another

There's a difference. Anti-SSM activists are inherently forcing their views down the throats of every same-sex couple who wishes to marry.

On the other hand, SSM shoves NOTHING down the throats of ANYBODY. If you have an objection to same-sex marriage, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to get one. If you're a member of the clergy, and you have an objection to performing same-sex marriages, again, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to perform them.

My only question is, that, since so many people equate this to the struggles with segregation in the '60s, who is to say that it won't end up forcing preachers to do marriages they don't want? Not that I oppose SSM, but that is a legitimate concern for some people, especially the religious.

[Coalition of the Radical Left]

I support same sex marriage because it is a persons right.

[The Steel Magnolia]

There's a difference. Anti-SSM activists are inherently forcing their views down the throats of every same-sex couple who wishes to marry.

On the other hand, SSM shoves NOTHING down the throats of ANYBODY. If you have an objection to same-sex marriage, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to get one. If you're a member of the clergy, and you have an objection to performing same-sex marriages, again, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to perform them.

My only question is, that, since so many people equate this to the struggles with segregation in the '60s, who is to say that it won't end up forcing preachers to do marriages they don't want? Not that I oppose SSM, but that is a legitimate concern for some people, especially the religious.

Er, the fact that I'd imagine it'd be unconstitutional? Public pressure is fine, legal pressure is not.

[Hathradic States]

My only question is, that, since so many people equate this to the struggles with segregation in the '60s, who is to say that it won't end up forcing preachers to do marriages they don't want? Not that I oppose SSM, but that is a legitimate concern for some people, especially the religious.

Er, the fact that I'd imagine it'd be unconstitutional? Public pressure is fine, legal pressure is not.

The thing is, it wouldn't be unconstitutional, unless the pastor/priest/preacher doing the wedding did it without pay. Much like how laws forced businessmen into serving blacks when they didn't want to, something could happen here.

[Zweite Alaje]

Eh, I don't see how prostitution a can be justified by a moral civilization. It is unclean.

How and why? Source your argument. Is sex unclean? If so, why? If it is not unclean, what makes paying for sex unclean?

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

[Tlaceceyaya]

How and why? Source your argument. Is sex unclean? If so, why? If it is not unclean, what makes paying for sex unclean?

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

So you hate car mechanics?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Er, the fact that I'd imagine it'd be unconstitutional? Public pressure is fine, legal pressure is not.

The thing is, it wouldn't be unconstitutional, unless the pastor/priest/preacher doing the wedding did it without pay. Much like how laws forced businessmen into serving blacks when they didn't want to, something could happen here.

It's an entirely different situation however, and one fundamentally incomparable.

[Essos]

Er, the fact that I'd imagine it'd be unconstitutional? Public pressure is fine, legal pressure is not.

The thing is, it wouldn't be unconstitutional, unless the pastor/priest/preacher doing the wedding did it without pay. Much like how laws forced businessmen into serving blacks when they didn't want to, something could happen here.

You don't generally pay the preacher, you generally make a voluntary donation to the church. And even if he did get paid, it's a religious institution, the government can't force them to do things they don't want to do.

[Hathradic States]

The thing is, it wouldn't be unconstitutional, unless the pastor/priest/preacher doing the wedding did it without pay. Much like how laws forced businessmen into serving blacks when they didn't want to, something could happen here.

It's an entirely different situation however, and one fundamentally incomparable.

True. Of course, religious ceremony is not required for marriage.

[Zweite Alaje]

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

So you hate car mechanics?

Not funny.

[Essos]

How and why? Source your argument. Is sex unclean? If so, why? If it is not unclean, what makes paying for sex unclean?

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

That's not anyone elses problem but yours. Do not make your problems our problems.

[Whittington]

I try to stay away from things like this, but I feel like i'll give my two cents.

I myself, am a gay man, living in a state where I am not allowed to marry. You would think, California of all places would be one of the first to allow such a thing.

Someday, I hope that our nation can come around and people like myself can get married, and have it called "marriage", not a civil-union, or whatever. However I do know that people, have certain beliefs that will disagree with how I live my life, and that is something I can turn my cheek to, and I try my hardest to respect their beliefs, as long as they don't try to shove it down my throat. Granted there are some bigots out there who past their beliefs down to generation and generation and so on, continuing the cycle, and sometimes, no matter how hard you try, you just can't change people's minds/opinions. Gay marriage (for some damn reason) is and always will upset people. I don't know why other's who are against it are so invested in how I live my life. What I do with my life, has no effect on theirs whatsoever. Live and let live.

I do have high hopes that in the near future, I will be able to walk down the aisle and have a loving marriage, just like the one's my parents have.

[Threlizdun]

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

They provide a service to those that want it. It may not be vital to society, but unless you are going to begin opposing actors, musicians, and artists then I don't see how you can oppose prostitutes.

[Grenartia]

I oppose same-sex marriage because 1. men and women complement each other, and the 2. law ought to reflect that. I oppose polygamy because an individual ought to devote his or her full attention to a single spouse and because our population is half male and half female. In short, marriage is a union between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

1. Source? From a scientific, peer-reviewed, unbiased source.

2. No, it shouldn't. Because its inherently unconstitutional, and inherently against American values found in the Declaration of Independence (you know, the whole "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" bit).

The point of gay marriage, aside from the obvious points of equality that I'm sure you are already aware, is that it makes us more easy to identify with. And therefore more likely for people to change negative views.

Obviously I support gay marriage. I'm gay. I'd like to marry my partner some day.

I also think that, while it's important, it's also a distraction from many of the issues.

Recently. Maryland, which voted for marriage equality, killed off a bill that would have given trans* folk the same rights as gays.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/03/1 ... otections/

One of the Democrats who voted against the protections was Sen. Norman Stone, who in 1967 voted to maintain the state’s ban on interracial marriage and who opposed same-sex marriage in 2012. Another was Sen. James Brochin, who was actually convinced to vote for marriage equality because of how “appalling” opponents’ testimony was. Apparently when the Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg testified that trans people are “suffering” from a “delusion” and require therapy instead of protections, it just wasn’t appalling enough.

Gay marriage is a distraction. The T is largely ignored in GBLT spaces. I can't tell how many times I've been in a queer space and I've been the token trans* person, or how many times queer activist groups have shafted trans* people in favour of cis white gay dudes (this is also why I dislike pride parades, and also the HRC). For example, in NY, activism pushed hard for gay marriage - ignoring the fact that the initial focus was on passing GENDA, aka the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, which would have provided things like housing or job discrimination protection for transgender persons.

So yes. I think gay marriage is a fucking distraction.

Obviously, the issue, then, is rampant misinformation. I see no reason why marriage equality and protections for trans* people can't be handled at the same time.

There's a difference. Anti-SSM activists are inherently forcing their views down the throats of every same-sex couple who wishes to marry.

On the other hand, SSM shoves NOTHING down the throats of ANYBODY. If you have an objection to same-sex marriage, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to get one. If you're a member of the clergy, and you have an objection to performing same-sex marriages, again, you're in luck, because NOBODY'S forcing you to perform them.

My only question is, that, since so many people equate this to the struggles with segregation in the '60s, who is to say that it won't end up forcing preachers to do marriages they don't want? Not that I oppose SSM, but that is a legitimate concern for some people, especially the religious.

Like I said, nobody's forcing a preacher to perform any marriage they don't want to do. Hell, you can STILL refuse to marry an interacial couple as a preacher. Of course, there'd be massive backlash against you, but you could still refuse to do it.

[Zweite Alaje]

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

That's not anyone elses problem but yours. Do not make your problems our problems.

People becoming addicts and having crack babies is everyone's problem.

[Hathradic States]

Like I said, nobody's forcing a preacher to perform any marriage they don't want to do. Hell, you can STILL refuse to marry an interacial couple as a preacher. Of course, there'd be massive backlash against you, but you could still refuse to do it.

Just putting that out there, as it popped into my head. As I said before, I am pro-SSM.

Anything to make the rainbows go away. Anything.

[Tlaceceyaya]

That's not anyone elses problem but yours. Do not make your problems our problems.

People becoming addicts and having crack babies is everyone's problem.

Therefore, ban it? Why not tackle the problem, rather than the symptom?

[Essos]

That's not anyone elses problem but yours. Do not make your problems our problems.

People becoming addicts and having crack babies is everyone's problem.

Sex does not lead to drug addiction. Try again.

[Grenartia]

That's not anyone elses problem but yours. Do not make your problems our problems.

People becoming addicts and having crack babies is everyone's problem.

Not inherent to prostitution.

[Zweite Alaje]

I'm opposed to people wasting theirselves laying on their backs for a living. In other words I'm not sex positive.

They provide a service to those that want it. It may not be vital to society, but unless you are going to begin opposing actors, musicians, and artists then I don't see how you can oppose prostitutes.

Actors, musicians, and artists contribute to our culture, whores don't.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Obviously, the issue, then, is rampant misinformation. I see no reason why marriage equality and protections for trans* people can't be handled at the same time.

In a perfect world you'd be more than right.

This ain't a perfect world. You have any idea how many people say to black folks and women "you can vote now, there's no discrimination!"

Peeps like TJ and Aurora pop up all the time. While gay marriage is illegal, we have a platform from which we can launch the campaigns we need to launch. We can get donations and endorsements from celebrities, politicians - resources we can use to not only legalize gay marriage, but expand equal liberties across the nation and the world.

If I'm perfectly honest, I think gay marriage being illegal serves as an incredibly useful rallying point.

[Grenartia]

Like I said, nobody's forcing a preacher to perform any marriage they don't want to do. Hell, you can STILL refuse to marry an interacial couple as a preacher. Of course, there'd be massive backlash against you, but you could still refuse to do it.

Just putting that out there, as it popped into my head. As I said before, I am pro-SSM.

Anything to make the rainbows go away. Anything.

I understand, Hathy, Your Awesomeness.

[Essos]

They provide a service to those that want it. It may not be vital to society, but unless you are going to begin opposing actors, musicians, and artists then I don't see how you can oppose prostitutes.

Actors, musicians, and artists contribute to our culture, whores don't.

Why not? Source your reasoning.