Gay marriage opens the door to a plethora of new definitions of how "marriage" is defined, a door which the majority of people,especially in the UK, would like to see shut. Consenting adults in a loving relationship is NOT a good enough reason to re-define marriage.
33 comments
I'm a Brit and I don't know anyone who wants to ban same sex marriage. The ones that do are a very vocal minority. They're also the loud mouthed idiots that opposed racial and sexual equality, or any extension of human rights. Basically they're just small minded bigots that oppose anything that extends happiness and equality to others.
Marriage has already been redefined many, many times. Consenting adults in a loving relationship is a damn fine definition of marriage.
I sure hope you're not opposed to the "consenting adults" and the "loving relationship" parts. I would hate to think you support forced marriage of non-consenting children to adult pedophiles.
So don't accept those new definitions. The nice thing about western nations is that they're democracies where the majority decides. If the majority sees no harm in gay marriage, legalize. If they see some definition of marriage they don't like, don't legalize it. You'll probably get backing from the majority of same-sex couples on the most outrageous definitions as well.
Well, marriage has already been redefined to drop dowries, levirate marriage, marriage after abduction, marriage on rape, polygamy, and living together with the wider kinship group, and to include love; so if you were OK with those changes, why not this one?
"Consenting adults in a loving relationship is NOT a good enough reason to re-define marriage."
Ok, let's accept that for a moment. But based on our democratic constitutions, a majority of people and in parliament are.
Of course, we don't accept that, so let's get back to reality but forget about the equality argument. There's also the facts that gay weddings help the economy, that tax benefits will make gay marriages enable to spend more than before, an administrative ease resulting in less spending, a psychological ease for homosexuals, less cost in a health care system (mental as well as phyical), the betterment of social security net and of course a more peaceful society. Let me make this shorter, even if you block out all emotion from the decision making process, gay marriage legalization still makes sense. Not only are your ilk guilty of not wanting others to be equal, you're also favoring inefficient governing.
Just because the only woman you have ever talked to have strangled you and threw you in a ditch (and that was your own mother), does not mean that other people can't get married. Grow up, you bigoted fuck.
1) 61% of our population support same-sex marriage.
2) Even if they didn't, popularity is not a reason to violate anyone's human rights.
3) Slippery slope arguments are automatically invalid.
4) Every other nation where same-sex marriage is legal managed to limit it to two consenting adults just fine.
5) The form of marriage you know is only a couple of centuries old, popular mythology notwithstanding.
6) Yes, it is a good enough reason. You just flatly stating it's not without any form of argument doesn't stop it being so.
Maybe not in your twisted mind, but to the majority of sane, rational humans, it's a perfectly good enough reason.
A majority of people?
Citation please.
Consenting adults in a loving relationship is NOT a good enough reason to re-define marriage.
Yes, it is. This is the reason why interracial marriage is no longer illegal: consenting adults in a loving relationship.
Well, marriage is derived from a biblical sales contract between two christian men, so of course it has nothing to do with consent or love.
I never understood why people want to marry, besides the stuff regarding taxes. It's not like having the stupid ritual and doing the bureaucracy actually change anything, or do they?
Actually, no.
Many of us support ir. After all, the country's in such a shitty state right now: what with the farcical immigration/overpopulation problems, the overtly sensationalist press that overhype it with 'political correctness gone mad' stories (despite being very PC themselves) that are either ill-informed or outright lies, the obsession with the Royals, the ecoonomy, the education system, the bloated benefits state AND the misapplied 'cures' to it that leave genuine cases in the lurch, and their insistence to tax you through your fucking arsehole...
... Don't you think it's right that people are allowed a little bit of happiness?
Personally, I think the whole institution of legal marriage is an anachronism.
If you want to be married in your church, "under the eyes of God" as it were, you can do so without having a state law that says "you're married now."
The rights of parental access to their children, and children's rights, are unchanged whether the parents are legally married.
The priviliges accorded a married couple that aren't accorded a non-married couple, such as hospital visitation rights or avoidance of Estate taxes should one of them die, are legal hold-outs that should be changed -- but they don't need "marriage" to effect said change.
Get rid of marriage as a secular institution, and you'll see a hell of a lot of problems dissolve.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.