| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
| Do you accept same-sex marriage? |
| Anti - homosexual; sinful, unmoral & unnatural |
|
27% |
[ 16 ] |
| ambivalent - undecided, unsure, mixed feelings |
|
5% |
[ 3 ] |
| laissez-faire - noninterventionist, tolerant |
|
27% |
[ 16 ] |
| Pro - deeply believe in freedom & equality |
|
39% |
[ 23 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 58 |
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun
Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
quote:
Originally posted by cfmdobbie
I firmly believe in the sanctity of marriage
I thought about this one, but it's probably beyond my scope. What do you mean with 'sanctity' in the context of marriage.
Where I come from marriage is a legal institution and it sets some legal bases, requirements and benefits that one has from being married AND in addition to that there is the emotional concept of having a bond with another person that goes beyond having 'only' a relationship.
In my country you can be married to someone of the same sex or the opposite sex. There are no differences. It was only a small step from the 'registered partnership' we had before that and basically defined that as legally being equal to marriage from the perspective of the state.
As there are no differences between the 'registered partnership' and marriage as seen from the state, the only thing left was the emotional side of 'being married'. There is no valid foundation in my opinion to deny people of the same sex those emotions.
_________________
Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:52 pm |
|
|
piln
High Emperor
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 906
Location: Leeds, UK |
quote:
Originally posted by Roqua
Most guys are turning into gays anyway with their chest shaving, girly drink drinking, and other women activities.
Wait... you know women that shave their chest? 
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
To me, 'marriage' is just a word. If people want an official title/ritual name for their time of living together, why not let them?
Although, I don't think gay couples/families should get the same benefits as ordinary families who actually help the advancement of society with reproduction.
I agree (with Myrthos too) about the "marriage" thing... plus, I assume all the folks that say marriage is supposed to be "man and wife" are referring to the way it's defined in Christianity... but marriage isn't solely a Christian rite (or right, for that matter). You might not think that same-sex marriage should be accepted by the Christian faith, but that's a seperate issue.
As for the idea of not bestowing the same benefits on gay parents due to the fact they aren't contributing to the growth of the human race - interesting point, but consider this: almost all of the "civilised" world is currently overpopulated, and world population is growing at an exponential rate, which raises all kinds of problems such as housing and the increasingly rapid depletion of the world's (already scarce) resources. Overpopulation is a big problem, therefore by your logic gay couples are actually helping more by reducing the rate of growth. What do you think of this? Personally, I think there should be no distinction.
To answer the original question, I think that people should be allowed to do or say whatever they like as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Religious beliefs are fine, as long as you can accept that they are just your beliefs and not rules that everybody else should have to live by. And as for children of gay parents having a hard time... this is because of intolerant people, and children of same-sex parents are just one of their many targets (ethnic minorities, mixed-race families, disabled people, different religions, different social classes, etc.)... of course, same-sex parents should acknowledge that thay may attract the attentions of intolerant people and protect their children accordingly, but they are not the ones causing the problem and therefore they should not be penalised. IMO, that would be the same as saying black people in predominantly white areas should not have children because they will probably suffer some racist abuse. And that, IMO, is an abhorrent notion. |
|
Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:11 pm |
|
|
sauron38
Rara Avis
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 4396
Location: Winnipeg's Sanctum Sanctorum |
Hmm... I guess conservatives will have a target painted on them in this thread. Actually, I'm not that far right - so long as it isn't actually called "marriage" I am pretty fine with the idea of a same-sex civic union. That's of course because over here, "marriage" has been defined in law as based on the Christianity example. I know for a fact, however, that this view on the restriction of definition will not be respected, as religious freedoms, while growing for paganism, have been sliced into itty bitty pieces of what they once were for Christians. I could give numerous examples where Christian displays have been ordered removed (ie. Christian morning prayers in schools), while equally symbolic pagan displays (ie. Wiccan prayers in schools) have been sheltered by the courts.
Quite honestly, the wisdom behind some of the court decisions on the subject is not visibly apparent from a third party perspective... and I have no doubts that anti-Christian rulings that are in favour of pro-pagan rights will become much more frequent in the modern age of excessive civil rights.
Which means that although I would prefer to see the entomological sanctity of marriage restricted to that which has been legislated to conform with the Christian definition, I will not be surprised when the legislation is "reinterpreted" in the near future - shortly after the more moderate stance of allowing same-sex civic unions to come to fruition in a state that is different from marriage only by titular measure is abandoned, giving way to the obvious perversion of the word "marriage" to include that which both the Law and the law (in that order) have expressly forbade it to include.
_________________
Make good choices. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:35 am |
|
|
Rendelius
Critical Error
Joined: 06 Jul 2001
Posts: 16
Location: Austria |
Well, I had three types of sex in my younger days: with men, with women and myself. I dropped sex with men - not for a particular reason, just dropped it. I never fell in love with a man back then, and so I think you could call me a curious straight *g*.
I am all for marriages between the same sex, just to give those couples the same legal rights as other couples. And I think that hating someone for his kind of love is just silly - and the same is true for someone's sexual preferences, as long as all parties involved are voluntarily involved.
And that's about all I have to say about this 
_________________
Rendelius
former Senior Editor RPGDot
now at http://www.theastronomers.com |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:57 am |
|
|
Elverath
Village Leader
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 80
Location: USA |
Damn Roqua you have got some serious self image problems.
I know I didnt really say it with my previous post so I guess Ill say that Im 100% behind gay marriage but I dont think they should be allowed to adopt children, at least not until the vast majority of the population is behind homosexuality (which wont be for a long, long time). When it comes to children, its not about you, its about the kid. Its not fair to them to put them in such an awkward situation. Now if all gay schools were to become commonplace in the US, it would be a different story. But there's too much risk there from nazis that would burn them down all the time.
_________________
Hush little baby dont say a word
Mamas gonna buy you a mocking bird
If that mocking bird dont sing
Mamas gonna bury it the backyard
-Stans mom |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:57 am |
|
|
Bigpapa
Stranger from north
Joined: 22 Oct 2001
Posts: 930
Location: Strange place. |
I have a tattoo which says Exit Only tattooed to my butt, i think it says all about my thinkings about Gays.
_________________
I'll be back... |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:09 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
Thanks for the award Val, its nice to be appreciated for once. Any monetary contributions for the cause coming my way?
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:27 am |
|
|
piln
High Emperor
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 906
Location: Leeds, UK |
quote:
Originally posted by sauron38
...the obvious perversion of the word "marriage" to include that which both the Law and the law (in that order) have expressly forbade it to include.
You're talking about US law and Christian faith, right? What about the rest of the world; what about people with different beliefs? And (while I agree with Hexy that words are superficial and don't really matter) are you sure that same-sex marriages pervert the meaning of the word? I understand that they may not match what is deemed acceptable by US law or Christian scripture, but I'm fairly sure that marriage existed before both of those things. If I have my facts straight, marriage originated as a kind of contract between wealthy families to govern the exchange of family members as "goods," to seal business relationships, or something like that. The interpretation of the word by the aforementioned organisations is different to its original meaning, so doesn't that actually make the established Christian view of marriage a perversion? And if so, does it matter? I would say not; throughout history, the meaning of the word (and more importantly, the meaning of the act of marriage) has changed to remain relevent to society - should it not continue to do so? |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:38 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
Australia does not have the same rights that Myrthos mentions for the Netherlands but otherwise I wholeheartedly endorse his comments. I can see no reason why couples of different sexual orientation should not receive the same legal protections, or indeed any emotional value from "formalising" their relationship. As to the word "marriage", while I'm not a language or cultural expert I would expect various cultures and creeds all over the world would have some sort of ceremonial bonding of couples that would be translated as "marriage" in english - so I see no reason the christian faith (or any other) should claim it as their own exclusively.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:54 am |
|
|
Ammon777
Warrior for Heaven
Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 2011
Location: United States |
Homosexuality is against my religion. God says its a very bad sin. So no, i dont support gayness. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:06 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
Not to offend anyone but I think people get church and state mixed up. By being an American and paying taxes and choosing to stay here you already support many freedoms that go against God and the Christianity.
I can legally join a satanic cult that legally has the right to sacrifice animals in rituals.
I can basically break eight of the ten commandments.
I can lie all day about most things.
I can worship false gods.
I can dishonor my mother and father.
I can commit adultery and never worry about jail time as long as the girl is over 18.
I can take the name of the Lord in vain.
I do not have rest on the seventh day or keep it holy
I can covet my neighbors wife
I can covet my neighbors house and his ox, servants and ass's.
The government steals my money every time I get paid or buy something and they also kill.
Seperation of church and state. Morality is to legality as Heaven is to Earth. If I can commit 8 out of 10 cardinal sins and the goverment can commit 10 out of 10 why fight for a concept that is basically a side note in the Bible?
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:05 am |
|
|
Elverath
Village Leader
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 80
Location: USA |
The thing is that if we WERE forbidden to do those things, we would basically be living in nazi germany.
_________________
Hush little baby dont say a word
Mamas gonna buy you a mocking bird
If that mocking bird dont sing
Mamas gonna bury it the backyard
-Stans mom |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:28 am |
|
|
piln
High Emperor
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 906
Location: Leeds, UK |
Well, before anyone covets Bigpapa's ass, be sure to read what's written on it first.
Roqua, I agree, it's pretty much the same situation over here in the UK, and personally I think that religion and government should be entirely seperate. But (both in the UK and US, and many other places) the boundaries are blurred when it comes to marriage. The church has the power to marry a couple, which obviously overlaps with legal issues, and so it doesn't surprise me that the laws governing marriage continue to mirror religious views to some extent. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:43 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
The good thing about the US is its slowness to change. The way I understand it for the UK is that if the Labor party gets voted in, over night you have a whole new goverment. Thats kind of crazy. I love how at odds the Democrats and Republicans are, as long as they don't agree things will always change slowly. And if they do agree, the thing they agree on is probably a good choice for everyone. 3 branches check each other, bipartisans check each other, party in-fighting checks the parties from within.
I don't like change. I think "equal protection under the law" basically sums up my feelings on most issues involving groups and rights, and it still says the same thing after all these years.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:56 am |
|
|
Elverath
Village Leader
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 80
Location: USA |
Yeah but the problem is that both major american political parties are morons. The conservatives want to keep us from doing anything, and the liberals want to keep us from saying anything. |
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:00 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:02 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
