*United Nations* launches **worldwide** gay rights campaign

[Vareiln]

I am happy to hear this.

[Scholencia]

If it comes to me I would ban all marriages.

Oh. So you're one of those people...and how would you solve the legal consequences and hassles after that decision?

You mean how would I solve the property and all that? Well, since there are no marriages the people that they got property already would not be in the succession of the marriages.

[Scholencia]

I am tring to exaplain that to the people. It is also expensive since married couple are more taxed.

I'm pretty sure they pay less taxes, not more.

Well, actually not. You have to pay more insurance, more health care and so on, at least in Europe...

[Regnum Dominae]

So why are you opposed to supporting equality for LGBT people? Banning marriages for everyone is equality, at least.

Yes, I would ban hetero marriages If I had a chance to. That is why I would also not allowed gay marriages; it cause pain and I would only ban for the good sake of gay people.

Stop lying.

[Blasveck]

I'm pretty sure they pay less taxes, not more.

Well, actually not. You have to pay more insurance, more health care and so on, at least in Europe...

Well not in 'Murica, AFAIK.

[Quintium]

They face the death penalty in seven countries. That's equivalent to genocide. They also face imprisonment in other nations. For arbitrary reasons.

What people in those countries do isn't something I'd support here. However, you need to realise that you can't change their minds. You can try to force them to carry out your will instead of their own - and even that would be impossible for the crumbling west to do in the face of China, India and Russia - but you won't change their minds. They won't suddenly accept homosexuality.

Even if you force Afghanistan's government to abolish the death penalty for sodomy, you'll still see people in rural communities carrying out their idea of justice against those who, in their view, have committed crimes against their god and their country by engaging in sodomy. Those who support these 'global campaigns' need to realise that you can't change thousands of years of cultural, religious and political developments by passing a few laws. There are several steps between the official situation and the real situation, and even if all governments in the world suddenly embraced progressive policies, there'd only be a marginal real improvement, and real change would only, if ever, come centuries down the line.

[Geilinor]

I'm pretty sure they pay less taxes, not more.

Well, actually not. You have to pay more insurance, more health care and so on, at least in Europe...

You think you're banning marriages for the good of society?

[Geilinor]

They face the death penalty in seven countries. That's equivalent to genocide. They also face imprisonment in other nations. For arbitrary reasons.

What people in those countries do isn't something I'd support here. However, you need to realise that you can't change their minds. You can try to force them to carry out your will instead of their own - and even that would be impossible for the crumbling west to do in the face of China, India and Russia - but you won't change their minds. They won't suddenly accept homosexuality.

Even if you force Afghanistan's government to abolish the death penalty for sodomy, you'll still see people in rural communities carrying out their idea of justice against those who, in their view, have committed crimes against their god and their country by engaging in sodomy. Those who support these 'global campaigns' need to realise that you can't change thousands of years of cultural, religious and political developments by passing a few laws. There are several steps between the official situation and the real situation, and even if all governments in the world suddenly embraced progressive policies, there'd only be a marginal real improvement, and real change would only, if ever, come centuries down the line.

Nobody is being forced to accept anything. It is just an education and public information campaign.

[Blasveck]

Oh. So you're one of those people...and how would you solve the legal consequences and hassles after that decision?

You mean how would I solve the property and all that? Well, since there are no marriages the people that they got property already would not be in the succession of the marriages.

There's also hospital visitation rights, burial rights, and about 1100 other legal benefits and protections. How would those be taken care of without legal marriage?

[Genivaria]

They face the death penalty in seven countries. That's equivalent to genocide. They also face imprisonment in other nations. For arbitrary reasons.

What people in those countries do isn't something I'd support here. However, you need to realise that you can't change their minds. You can try to force them to carry out your will instead of their own - and even that would be impossible for the crumbling west to do in the face of China, India and Russia - but you won't change their minds. They won't suddenly accept homosexuality.

Even if you force Afghanistan's government to abolish the death penalty for sodomy, you'll still see people in rural communities carrying out their idea of justice against those who, in their view, have committed crimes against their god and their country by engaging in sodomy. Those who support these 'global campaigns' need to realise that you can't change thousands of years of cultural, religious and political developments by passing a few laws. There are several steps between the official situation and the real situation, and even if all governments in the world suddenly embraced progressive policies, there'd only be a marginal real improvement, and real change would only, if ever, come centuries down the line.

Then you PUNISH them for it. '
Seriously your entire argument boils down to 'well people are still going to break the law so we shouldn't have law', how fucking stupid is that?

[Scholencia]

Well, actually not. You have to pay more insurance, more health care and so on, at least in Europe...

Well not in 'Murica, AFAIK.

Well, in Europe gay marriages are not there because of equality, but it is there to tax the people more and more, this is the reason why many gay people were participating in the anti-gay-marriage demonstration in Paris. So, I really dont think that the majority of gay people in USA want that the state starts to imposing austerity policies only to get gay marriages?

[Blasveck]

Well not in 'Murica, AFAIK.

Well, in Europe gay marriages are not there because of equality, but it is there to tax the people more and more, this is the reason why many gay people were participating in the anti-gay-marriage demonstration in Paris. So, I really dont think that the majority of gay people in USA want that the state starts to imposing austerity policies only to get gay marriages?

You're not making any sense....

[Scholencia]

Well, actually not. You have to pay more insurance, more health care and so on, at least in Europe...

You think you're banning marriages for the good of society?

Yes, because the most marriages are ending in divorce and it is more and more perceived as something archaic. And what happenes when the divorce starts? The former couple starts to fight about propterty, right, etc. in other words it doesn end good.

This is why gay marriages should be banned for the good of the gay people.

[Geilinor]

Well not in 'Murica, AFAIK.

Well, in Europe gay marriages are not there because of equality, but it is there to tax the people more and more, this is the reason why many gay people were participating in the anti-gay-marriage demonstration in Paris. So, I really dont think that the majority of gay people in USA want that the state starts to imposing austerity policies only to get gay marriages?

How do married people pay more? Look at the UK's Married Couples Allowance, for example. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/incometax/married-allow.htm

[Meryuma]

One thing that should be focused on is the fact that homophobia in Oceania, many parts of Africa and China is something introduced through colonialism. Many countries try and present gay rights as a white invention when in fact it's pretty much the opposite.

What?

Homosexuality has been around in Europe since the Bronze Age.

By "the opposite" I mean it's homophobia that's colonialist, not homosexuality. Basically it's monotheistic empires in Europe and the Middle East who spearheaded and exported homophobia and that continued all the way up to Victorian times.

So why allow it for straight people? It's just a piece of paper after all.....

Why the hell should the government be involved in marriage at all?

For once I agree with you.

[Blasveck]

You think you're banning marriages for the good of society?

Yes, because the most marriages are ending in divorce and it is more and more perceived as something archaic. And what happenes when the divorce starts? The former couple starts to fight about propterty, right, etc.

This is why gay marriages should be banned for the good of the gay people.

Again, how're you going to handle those 1100 benefits without legal marriage?

[Geilinor]

You think you're banning marriages for the good of society?

Yes, because the most marriages are ending in divorce and it is more and more perceived as something archaic. And what happenes when the divorce starts? The former couple starts to fight about propterty, right, etc. in other words it doesn end good.

There are also many married couples who stay together until the very end.

[Quintium]

Then you PUNISH them for it. '
Seriously your entire argument boils down to 'well people are still going to break the law so we shouldn't have law', how fucking stupid is that?

No - what I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to change popular policies in other countries. What happens in many countries is brutal, but it's the way those people live. And to insult them, to lecture them and to insist that they change the way they live - that is, in accordance with their ancient customs or their religion - isn't the way to bring about any form of change. All you'll do is make people in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan hate the west even more.

Perhaps it'll make some people feel good, but it's not going to bring about actual change apart from a further deterioration in international relations.

[Geilinor]

Yes, because the most marriages are ending in divorce and it is more and more perceived as something archaic. And what happenes when the divorce starts? The former couple starts to fight about propterty, right, etc.

This is why gay marriages should be banned for the good of the gay people.

Again, how're you going to handle those 1100 benefits without legal marriage?

With 1,100 separate contracts. That would be a terrible mess. Imagine having to sign that many papers. "Just sign here, here, and these 1,100 other lines".

[Ifreann]

Yes, because the most marriages are ending in divorce and it is more and more perceived as something archaic. And what happenes when the divorce starts? The former couple starts to fight about propterty, right, etc.

This is why gay marriages should be banned for the good of the gay people.

Again, how're you going to handle those 1100 benefits without legal marriage?

Private contracts. Lawyers will rake in cash from those rich enough to craft their own "marriages" and the poor can go climb a wall of dicks.

[Geilinor]

Again, how're you going to handle those 1100 benefits without legal marriage?

Private contracts. Lawyers will rake in cash from those rich enough to craft their own "marriages" and the poor can go climb a wall of dicks.

"Lawyers will rake in cash from those rich enough to craft their own x and the poor can go climb a wall of dicks."
This would also work in any debate against an-caps or an-cap theories.

[Meryuma]

Then you PUNISH them for it. '
Seriously your entire argument boils down to 'well people are still going to break the law so we shouldn't have law', how fucking stupid is that?

No - what I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to change popular policies in other countries. What happens in many countries is brutal, but it's the way those people live. And to insult them, to lecture them and to insist that they change the way they live - that is, in accordance with their ancient customs or their religion - isn't the way to bring about any form of change. All you'll do is make people in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan hate the west even more.

Perhaps it'll make some people feel good, but it's not going to bring about actual change apart from a further deterioration in international relations.

If you try and impose global law? Yeah, you're right. However, that's not the only way to go about changing perspectives in those countries. Perhaps some people in Gaza Strip might change their views on both homosexuality and Westerners if they heard about Queers against Israeli Apartheid.

[Ifreann]

Private contracts. Lawyers will rake in cash from those rich enough to craft their own "marriages" and the poor can go climb a wall of dicks.

"Lawyers will rake in cash from those rich enough to craft their own x and the poor can go climb a wall of dicks."
This would also work in any debate against an-caps or an-cap theories.

Mmm, well, it might be a valid point, but I wouldn't count on it turning anyone away from the Rand side.

[Genivaria]

Then you PUNISH them for it. '
Seriously your entire argument boils down to 'well people are still going to break the law so we shouldn't have law', how fucking stupid is that?

No - what I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to change popular policies in other countries. What happens in many countries is brutal, but it's the way those people live. And to insult them, to lecture them and to insist that they change the way they live - that is, in accordance with their ancient customs or their religion - isn't the way to bring about any form of change. All you'll do is make people in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan hate the west even more.

Perhaps it'll make some people feel good, but it's not going to bring about actual change apart from a further deterioration in international relations.

Yeah here's I view the whole 'it's their culture' bullshit.
"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."
-Charles James Napier

[Geilinor]

Then you PUNISH them for it. '
Seriously your entire argument boils down to 'well people are still going to break the law so we shouldn't have law', how fucking stupid is that?

No - what I'm saying is that we shouldn't try to change popular policies in other countries. What happens in many countries is brutal, but it's the way those people live. And to insult them, to lecture them and to insist that they change the way they live - that is, in accordance with their ancient customs or their religion - isn't the way to bring about any form of change. All you'll do is make people in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan hate the west even more.

Perhaps it'll make some people feel good, but it's not going to bring about actual change apart from a further deterioration in international relations.

Education will severely weaken international relations? It's better than the other options and we can prevent some lives from being destroyed for absolutely no reason.