NATION

PASSWORD

What is your opinion on LGBT+ marriage?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Lgbt marriage: good or bad?

Yes, love is love.
408
58%
No, it's a sin.
86
12%
No, love is for reproducing.
50
7%
No, civil unions are better.
23
3%
Maybe
13
2%
Praise David Hasselhoff (Requested by Some random cat dude)
88
13%
No opinion/neutral
30
4%
 
Total votes : 698

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 1:54 am

I don't get invited to enough of them >:(

That said, I am in favour of LGBT+ marriage. Though I prefer having marriage as a governmental thing to be abolished, having it open to all citizens regardless of gender and/or sexual orientation is a good first step.

Edit: I only read OP
Last edited by The Blaatschapen on Thu May 02, 2019 1:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Old Tyrannia
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 16569
Founded: Aug 11, 2009
Father Knows Best State

Postby Old Tyrannia » Thu May 02, 2019 2:20 am

I don't believe that the Crown in England should extend official recognition to any marriage that isn't regarded as valid by the Anglican Church. It's not an issue that particularly bothers me, though.
Anglican monarchist, paternalistic conservative and Christian existentialist.
"It is spiritless to think that you cannot attain to that which you have seen and heard the masters attain. The masters are men. You are also a man. If you think that you will be inferior in doing something, you will be on that road very soon."
- Yamamoto Tsunetomo
⚜ GOD SAVE THE KING

User avatar
Mettaton-EX
Diplomat
 
Posts: 731
Founded: Sep 24, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Mettaton-EX » Thu May 02, 2019 2:44 am

Old Tyrannia wrote:I don't believe that the Crown in England should extend official recognition to any marriage that isn't regarded as valid by the Anglican Church. It's not an issue that particularly bothers me, though.

both the crown and the church should be abolished, so
THIS ROBOT IS TRANS | AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT | هٰذه الآلة تقتل الفاشيين
(prefer it/its but any pronouns are acceptable)

User avatar
The Grims
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1843
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby The Grims » Thu May 02, 2019 2:54 am

Sapientia Et Bellum wrote:
The Grims wrote:
And we do not get the whole "this things has 1000 uses, but I do not see the point of getting it if one only wants to use 999 of them" reasoning

Then that's where we are.... I see marriage as something beyond a state contract likely due to the fact I had a religious upbringing... Its just how I have come to understand the idea of a marital union


So you would understand it if gays find a religion that has no problem with two homosexuals marrying ? Or would you dismiss the validity/worth of such marriages because they are not christian ?

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 2:57 am

The Rich Port wrote:Why else WOULD you get married. The whole reason why people discriminate against gay people is by barring them from the same tax benefits heterosexual cisgenders get.


Marriage is also discrimination against certain types of asexuals *nods*

And see. I want those tax benefits while staying single. Government should get out of my boinking business as long as it is done with consent.

That said, until they do, open marriage up as much as possible.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Forsher
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21516
Founded: Jan 30, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Forsher » Thu May 02, 2019 3:06 am

If you're homophobic what you really want to is to not hear about homosexuality. You might think you want something else but this is your real objective: out of sight, out of mind. Banning gay marriage merely has the effect of stimulating attention towards the issue and therefore is self defeating.

If you're not homophobic and not opposed to marriage as an institution to start with I really can't see why you'd object to it.

If you;re not homophobic and opposed to marriage you think gay marriage bans are a good first step and are, even now, trying to convince people to ban all marriage.

These are my opinions on gay marriage. Also, invite me to your wedding plz. I like weddings.
That it Could be What it Is, Is What it Is

Stop making shit up, though. Links, or it's a God-damn lie and you know it.

The normie life is heteronormie

We won't know until 2053 when it'll be really obvious what he should've done. [...] We have no option but to guess.

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am

Forsher wrote:If you're homophobic what you really want to is to not hear about homosexuality. You might think you want something else but this is your real objective: out of sight, out of mind. Banning gay marriage merely has the effect of stimulating attention towards the issue and therefore is self defeating.

If you're not homophobic and not opposed to marriage as an institution to start with I really can't see why you'd object to it.

If you;re not homophobic and opposed to marriage you think gay marriage bans are a good first step and are, even now, trying to convince people to ban all marriage.

These are my opinions on gay marriage. Also, invite me to your wedding plz. I like weddings.


Your third opinion I disagree with. I am not homophobic and opposed to marriage and I think allowing (keeping; I was 17 when it was allowed in my then jurisdiction) gay marriage is a good thing.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Forsher
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21516
Founded: Jan 30, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Forsher » Thu May 02, 2019 3:12 am

The blAAtschApen wrote:
Forsher wrote:If you're homophobic what you really want to is to not hear about homosexuality. You might think you want something else but this is your real objective: out of sight, out of mind. Banning gay marriage merely has the effect of stimulating attention towards the issue and therefore is self defeating.

If you're not homophobic and not opposed to marriage as an institution to start with I really can't see why you'd object to it.

If you;re not homophobic and opposed to marriage you think gay marriage bans are a good first step and are, even now, trying to convince people to ban all marriage.

These are my opinions on gay marriage. Also, invite me to your wedding plz. I like weddings.


Your third opinion I disagree with. I am not homophobic and opposed to marriage and I think allowing (keeping; I was 17 when it was allowed in my then jurisdiction) gay marriage is a good thing.


Marriage is bad but gay marriage... otherwise the same except for who is in it... is good?
That it Could be What it Is, Is What it Is

Stop making shit up, though. Links, or it's a God-damn lie and you know it.

The normie life is heteronormie

We won't know until 2053 when it'll be really obvious what he should've done. [...] We have no option but to guess.

User avatar
The Huskar Social Union
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58271
Founded: Apr 04, 2012
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The Huskar Social Union » Thu May 02, 2019 3:30 am

San Lumen wrote:>:(
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:That'd be a pretty sad reason to reduce a punishment.

Are you seriously endorsing whipping as a punishment for being gay?

Islamist gona Islamist.
Irish Nationalist from Belfast / Leftwing / Atheist / Alliance Party voter
"I never thought in terms of being a leader, i thought very simply in terms of helping people" - John Hume 1937 - 2020



I like Miniature painting, Tanks, English Gals, Video games and most importantly Cheese.


User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35483
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Thu May 02, 2019 3:44 am

The Huskar Social Union wrote:
San Lumen wrote:>:(
Are you seriously endorsing whipping as a punishment for being gay?

Islamist gona Islamist.

It's no surprise that gay Muslims are often granted asylum in the West.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
American Pere Housh
Senator
 
Posts: 4278
Founded: Jan 12, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby American Pere Housh » Thu May 02, 2019 3:48 am

*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)
Last edited by American Pere Housh on Thu May 02, 2019 3:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
Government Type: Militaristic Absolute Monarchy
Leader: King Alexander I
Prime Minister: Isabella Stuart-Jones
Secretary of Defense: Hitomi Izumi
Secretary of State: Eliza 'Vanny' Cortez
Current Year: 2752
Population: 75 billion

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35483
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Thu May 02, 2019 3:57 am

American Pere Housh wrote:*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)

Got anything to contribute other than vitriol?
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Old Tyrannia
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 16569
Founded: Aug 11, 2009
Father Knows Best State

Postby Old Tyrannia » Thu May 02, 2019 4:00 am

The New California Republic wrote:
American Pere Housh wrote:*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)

Got anything to contribute other than vitriol?

I would advise you not to engage. I'm sure that one of my colleagues who hasn't posted in the thread will be along shortly.
Anglican monarchist, paternalistic conservative and Christian existentialist.
"It is spiritless to think that you cannot attain to that which you have seen and heard the masters attain. The masters are men. You are also a man. If you think that you will be inferior in doing something, you will be on that road very soon."
- Yamamoto Tsunetomo
⚜ GOD SAVE THE KING

User avatar
Asherahan
Minister
 
Posts: 2626
Founded: Dec 08, 2015
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Asherahan » Thu May 02, 2019 4:00 am

The New California Republic wrote:
American Pere Housh wrote:*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)

Got anything to contribute other than vitriol?

He probably doesn't understand that what he said also applies to him either.
Status: Serial Forum Lurker
Ideologically a Blanquist
Who Likes: Single Party Democracy | Democratic Centralism | State Capitalism | Blanquism | State Atheism | Sex Positive Feminism & Socialist Feminism
Former Resident of NSG CTALNH here since 2011 - Add like 10000 to my post number.

User avatar
American Pere Housh
Senator
 
Posts: 4278
Founded: Jan 12, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby American Pere Housh » Thu May 02, 2019 4:07 am

Old Tyrannia wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Got anything to contribute other than vitriol?

I would advise you not to engage. I'm sure that one of my colleagues who hasn't posted in the thread will be along shortly.

What exactly have I done that so bad?
Government Type: Militaristic Absolute Monarchy
Leader: King Alexander I
Prime Minister: Isabella Stuart-Jones
Secretary of Defense: Hitomi Izumi
Secretary of State: Eliza 'Vanny' Cortez
Current Year: 2752
Population: 75 billion

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 4:12 am

Forsher wrote:
The blAAtschApen wrote:
Your third opinion I disagree with. I am not homophobic and opposed to marriage and I think allowing (keeping; I was 17 when it was allowed in my then jurisdiction) gay marriage is a good thing.


Marriage is bad but gay marriage... otherwise the same except for who is in it... is good?


No, you misunderstand. Marriage is discriminatory. By making marriage open to more groups, it becomes less discriminatory. Hence why I support making it more open, especially when abolishing is simply not in the cards right now.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Jakker
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 2938
Founded: May 17, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Jakker » Thu May 02, 2019 4:30 am

American Pere Housh wrote:*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)


*** Warned for Trolling ***
One Stop Rules Shop
Getting Help Request (GHR)

The Bruce wrote:Mostly I feel sorry for [raiders], because they put in all this effort and at the end of the day have nothing to show for it and have created nothing.

User avatar
American Pere Housh
Senator
 
Posts: 4278
Founded: Jan 12, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby American Pere Housh » Thu May 02, 2019 4:31 am

Jakker wrote:
American Pere Housh wrote:*Watches in amusement at these snowflake's stupidity* 8)


*** Warned for Trolling ***

That wasn't trolling
Government Type: Militaristic Absolute Monarchy
Leader: King Alexander I
Prime Minister: Isabella Stuart-Jones
Secretary of Defense: Hitomi Izumi
Secretary of State: Eliza 'Vanny' Cortez
Current Year: 2752
Population: 75 billion

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 4:38 am

American Pere Housh wrote:
Jakker wrote:
*** Warned for Trolling ***

That wasn't trolling


Appeals go to the moderation forum.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Forsher
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21516
Founded: Jan 30, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Forsher » Thu May 02, 2019 4:41 am

The blAAtschApen wrote:
Forsher wrote:
Marriage is bad but gay marriage... otherwise the same except for who is in it... is good?


No, you misunderstand. Marriage is discriminatory. By making marriage open to more groups, it becomes less discriminatory. Hence why I support making it more open, especially when abolishing is simply not in the cards right now.


If your problem with marriage is that it's discriminatory I don't really think you oppose marriage as an idea.

That it would be easier to ban once everyone has it might be true though.
Last edited by Forsher on Thu May 02, 2019 4:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
That it Could be What it Is, Is What it Is

Stop making shit up, though. Links, or it's a God-damn lie and you know it.

The normie life is heteronormie

We won't know until 2053 when it'll be really obvious what he should've done. [...] We have no option but to guess.

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 4:49 am

Forsher wrote:
The blAAtschApen wrote:
No, you misunderstand. Marriage is discriminatory. By making marriage open to more groups, it becomes less discriminatory. Hence why I support making it more open, especially when abolishing is simply not in the cards right now.


If your problem with marriage is that it's discriminatory I don't really think you oppose marriage as an idea.

That it would be easier to ban once everyone has it might be true though.


What is the idea of marriage? :p

Everyone is free to use whatever symbols, etc. to express their consensual love between two (or more) human beings.

But my problem is purely with the government assigning benefits to it.
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Tarsonis
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27313
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Tarsonis » Thu May 02, 2019 4:52 am

The blAAtschApen wrote:
Forsher wrote:
If your problem with marriage is that it's discriminatory I don't really think you oppose marriage as an idea.

That it would be easier to ban once everyone has it might be true though.


What is the idea of marriage? :p

Everyone is free to use whatever symbols, etc. to express their consensual love between two (or more) human beings.

But my problem is purely with the government assigning benefits to it.


What is love?
NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Thucydides: “The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.”
1 Corinthians 5:12 "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?"
Galatians 6:7 "Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Technical Moderator
 
Posts: 62660
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Thu May 02, 2019 4:55 am

Tarsonis wrote:
The blAAtschApen wrote:
What is the idea of marriage? :p

Everyone is free to use whatever symbols, etc. to express their consensual love between two (or more) human beings.

But my problem is purely with the government assigning benefits to it.


What is love?

Love is a burnin' thing
The Blaatschapen should resign

User avatar
Andsed
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13086
Founded: Aug 24, 2017
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Andsed » Thu May 02, 2019 5:04 am

Tarsonis wrote:
The blAAtschApen wrote:
What is the idea of marriage? :p

Everyone is free to use whatever symbols, etc. to express their consensual love between two (or more) human beings.

But my problem is purely with the government assigning benefits to it.


What is love?

Baby don’t hurt me.
I do be tired


LOVEWHOYOUARE~

User avatar
Shanhwa
Envoy
 
Posts: 268
Founded: Mar 18, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Shanhwa » Thu May 02, 2019 5:08 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Gilmanian Districts wrote:From what I take the meaning of life to be in the biological sense, it is against the laws of nature to be gay/lesbian/bi.


You reasoning is backwards. You argue "I believe it should be so, therefor reality must agree" instead of looking what reality actually is and then basing your understanding on that.

Fact is that homosexuality is common in nature and that having a few homosexuals around seems to improve the reproductive succesrate of (animal) populations. Examining why is your homework assignment.


Reality can be whatever I want
The Free State of Shanhwa

自由州的山红瓦


Alt-universe and alt-account of Sicaris.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aerlanica, Arianhroda, Arikea, Bornada, BRITISH EMPIRE OF MALAYA, Des-Bal, Divided Free Land, Durzan, Duvniask, El Lazaro, Fractalnavel, Hidrandia, Hurdergaryp, Juansonia, Nantoraka, Necroghastia, New Ciencia, Nilokeras, Ostroeuropa, Rio Cana, Stellar Colonies, The Emerald Legion, The Grand Fifth Imperium, Umeria, Upper Magica, Xind

Advertisement

Remove ads