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

[Scholencia]

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

Sure, but it is more and more rarely. The most couples who are until the end are from the old conservative days where marriage was indeed a sanctity. In Sweden, I heard half of couples are not living in any kind of marriages and the number is declining.

You should also have on mind that you dont have to marriage in order to live with somebody happily ever after.

[Regnum Dominae]

Scholencia, read the UDHR.

[Ifreann]

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

You know, governments were a great idea. Then we had to go and fuck it up by inventing nations.

[Geilinor]

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

Sure, but it is more and more rarely. The most couples who are until the end are from the old conservative days where marriage was indeed a sanctity. In Sweden, I heard half of couples are not living in any kind of marriages and the number is declining.

You should also have on mind that you dont have to marriage in order to live with somebody happily ever after.

Many people still want marriage. LGBT people too. Why do you want to deny it to people?

[Scholencia]

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?

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages. The only "benefits" that a couple has is to pay taxes for free education although the couple may dont have children.

[Geilinor]

Scholencia, read the UDHR.

We've said that numerous times already. Now he's just trying to be even more obtuse and change the topic to whether or not marriages should be banned outright.

[Regnum Dominae]

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

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages. The only "benefits" that a couple has is to pay taxes for free education although the couple may dont have children.

Tax benefits, visitation rights, among many other things.

[Scholencia]

Sure, but it is more and more rarely. The most couples who are until the end are from the old conservative days where marriage was indeed a sanctity. In Sweden, I heard half of couples are not living in any kind of marriages and the number is declining.

You should also have on mind that you dont have to marriage in order to live with somebody happily ever after.

Many people still want marriage. LGBT people too. Why do you want to deny it to people?

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

[Regnum Dominae]

Many people still want marriage. LGBT people too. Why do you want to deny it to people?

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

Who are you to tell people what they can and cannot do?

[Ifreann]

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

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and ... ted_States
You do now.

[Fartsniffage]

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

If it comes to me I would ban all marriages.

You know what? I don't think this is a terrible position.

Impractical, but not terrible.

[Quintium]

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.

To be honest, I very much doubt that. With the customs in the region, the religious and legal precedents on the issue and the excessive political power of fundamentalist clerics, I think those 'Queers against Israeli Apartheid' will always be a lot better off on the Israeli side of the wall.

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

There's one problem with that, and this little quote identifies it much more clearly than I ever could. All that he says there depends on physical force. Here's a man who had the world's then-largest empire, and armies numbering in the tens of thousands with the best military technology in the world, backing him. Here's a man who could have entire cities torched at his pleasure.

You can't do that now. If anything, Britain is now much more afraid of Pakistan than Pakistan is of Britain.
EDIT: Basically, here's another quote that's much more relevant today: "You and what army?"

[Regnum Dominae]

If it comes to me I would ban all marriages.

You know what? I don't think this is a terrible position.

Impractical, but not terrible.

Why? Marriage is a human right.

[Geilinor]

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

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages. The only "benefits" that a couple has is to pay taxes for free education although the couple may dont have children.

There are 1,138. Stop being obtuse. http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples
http://people.howstuffworks.com/marriage1.htm
http://www.marriageequality.org/get-the-facts

[Pandeeria]

Many people still want marriage. LGBT people too. Why do you want to deny it to people?

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

Wut?

[Liriena]

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages.

You get hospital visitations, joint custody of children, spousal secret, inheritance and funeral arrangements, for starters.

Seriously, you should inform yourself before doing something as unbelievably ignorant as claiming that marriage is 'useless'.

[Liriena]

Many people still want marriage. LGBT people too. Why do you want to deny it to people?

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

1. You need to source your bullshit.
2. Marriage is still very important to the vast majority of the human species, including LGBT people.

[Scholencia]

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages.

You get hospital visitations, joint custody of children, spousal secret, inheritance and funeral arrangements, for starters.

Seriously, you should inform yourself before doing something as unbelievably ignorant as claiming that marriage is 'useless'.

In most Eu countries you dont have that, I am sorry.

[Liriena]

You get hospital visitations, joint custody of children, spousal secret, inheritance and funeral arrangements, for starters.

Seriously, you should inform yourself before doing something as unbelievably ignorant as claiming that marriage is 'useless'.

In most Eu countries you dont have that, I am sorry.

Source your bullshit, please.

[Scholencia]

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

1. You need to source your bullshit.
2. Marriage is still very important to the vast majority of the human species, including LGBT people.

1. See for Germany http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/pstg/ ... G000300000
2. No, it is not. With the decline of religiosity it is worthless.

I personally dont know for any special benefit that you have for marriages. The only "benefits" that a couple has is to pay taxes for free education although the couple may dont have children.

There are 1,138. Stop being obtuse. http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-overview-of-federal-rights-and-protections-granted-to-married-couples
http://people.howstuffworks.com/marriage1.htm
http://www.marriageequality.org/get-the-facts

I post for Germany, I could also post for other EU countries if you like. All that "benefits" has to pay somebody. What do you think does pay it?

[Kradlandia]

I've been thinking, there are about 135 million orphans out there, about 8 million more orphans than there are people living in Japan and the Total Fertility Rate of the United States is around 2.2 children. If those gay couples, being unable to breed children, adopt 2 kids like how the average American gives birth to 2 children, wouldn't that reduce the number of orphans in the world significantly?

I know it is impossible to get every orphan a home, but, if lets say the entire developed world allows same-sex marriage and the right to adoption, how many of those 135 million orphans will have a home and no longer live in longing for a family? I'd say it's a win-win.

Jesus, I need some rest. So many mistakes in this post.

[Scholencia]

Because it is bad for them. it is to expensive for them (in fact the government would try to tax them more than hetero couples). It is anachron, and it is worthless. Marriages are not sacred in modern days, you know.

Who are you to tell people what they can and cannot do?

Well, if a person want to kill himself, it think it is a duty of every person to warn him not to do it. Do you agree?

[Regnum Dominae]

1. You need to source your bullshit.
2. Marriage is still very important to the vast majority of the human species, including LGBT people.

1. See for Germany http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/pstg/ ... G000300000
2. No, it is not. With the decline of religiosity it is worthless.

Bullshit. Religions do not have a monopoly on marriage.

Who are you to tell people what they can and cannot do?

Well, if a person want to kill himself, it think it is a duty of every person to warn him not to do it. Do you agree?

Marriage != suicide.

[Fartsniffage]

You know what? I don't think this is a terrible position.

Impractical, but not terrible.

Why? Marriage is a human right.

Why?

[Liriena]

1. You need to source your bullshit.
2. Marriage is still very important to the vast majority of the human species, including LGBT people.

1. See for Germany http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/pstg/ ... G000300000
2. No, it is not. With the decline of religiosity it is worthless.

1. Sorry, I can't speak German, and I don't trust the Google Translator.
2. Worthless? Hardly. LGBT people still want to get married, and so do billions of non-LGBT individuals, so your attempt at being edgy falls flat.