Gay Marriage - Where's the fury?

[themorrigan]

Disclaimer: I am either acquainted with, or friends with, several Christians. I am perfectly aware that both sides of the fence have irrational fanatics. If you feel offended by anything I say, please don't hesitate to bring it to me and we can talk about it

Comments

[netgecko]

A quote I saw recently:

"It promotes the acceptance of gays, as a normal member of society..because it gives them all the same rights as everyone else..which I guess I don't agree with."

There are people out there who somehow believe that gays are not only abnormal deviants, but that any step that brings that lifestyle closer to being accepted as normal is another step on the slippery slope to destroying the moral fabric of our society.

Personally, I rather think that it's silly. But then again, I think laws against polygamy are silly, too.

[bellabrigida]

Better yet: poligamy is a logistical nightmare. Say a man is married to one man and two other women. Let's say that they're all intermarried.

Now let's say that one of these spouses wants a divorce. How do you figure out spousal support if they're only divorcing one person and not all? How about the "shared possessions"?

Divorce is difficult enough, as is, without brining innumerable parties into it.

Although from a moral standpoint, I have no problem with poligamy.

[netgecko]

I think those details could be worked out with some effort, and probably bring a great deal of much-needed simplicity to existing marriage laws in the process.

Unfortunately, our current legislative environment is in favor of complication rather than simplicity. It's annoying.

[netgecko]

Marriage for citizenship has always been a problem - I don't think it will get all that much more common with polygamy, though it may.

Of more concern to me is how to handle divorce, child custody and that sort of thing.

But then again, I think the legal rights of marriage need a serious overhaul with an eye towards simplicity. Divorce law right now is horribly overcomplicated...

[netgecko]

I'm not so sure, really. Laws against Polygamy have an interesting background.

Funny thing is that polygamy was made illegal primarily as a tool to indirectly destroy a religion.

[bellabrigida]

Yeah, bu tonly if it was old school poligamy: where a man can have as many wives as he wants.

There's plenty of illegal poligamy in that guise. It's just letting us women have our own man-harems...

[themorrigan]

A quote I saw recently:

"It promotes the acceptance of gays, as a normal member of society..because it gives them all the same rights as everyone else..which I guess I don't agree with."

I'm with you that this is very silly. I'd pretty much go so far as to say offensive, actually. If the color of one's skin has at least nominally been accepted as a factor that does not change one's ability to be a productive and normal member of society, why in the world does sexual orientation, or how one views sex in general, make such a drastic difference?

As for the moral fabric of society being negatively impacted by a choice in partners, I've got to contend that is the most inane sentiment I've ever heard. (And I'm well aware that it isn't yours.:) Where is the empirical support of this statement?

I just don't understand narrow-mindedness, I suppose.

[themorrigan]

Intellectually, I am well aware that is the most likely possibility. And while I tend to pride myself on being able to at least understand the general ball field of a perspective that varies from my own, this one has always baffled me. A person is a person. Skin tone, gender, sexual orientation - none of this is prohibitive of the status of person. Which follows that each person has certain liberties and basic rights, and has the option to function in society to accumulate further benefits and rights.

Discrimination is one of those things I just can't get my head around.

[themorrigan]

*grin* I suppose it would be. I mean, I know what the definition of discrimination is, and I know what forms it takes, but I have no idea why it happens. What causes it. It just plain makes no sense to me.

[netgecko]

I don't really understand why the prejudice exists, but I'm able to recognize that it does and see how some of the disgusting behavior extends from that.

I know it's based on fear, though I couldn't explain how, and I can't really peg exactly what it is that they're afraid of. I'm not sure if it's fear that they might be contaminated in some way, or fear that by accepting it as normal, they might be tempted to participate. Or something else entirely.

Whatever it is, though, it's an instinctual reaction that's not based on reason or any other higher brain function, and it quite frankly disgusts me. They claim to be members of a civilized society in one breath, and yet continue to let their visceral fear-driven intolerance guide their actions.

See, I have my own prejudice. I hate bigots.

[themorrigan]

Exactly. Makes absolutely no sense.

See, I have my own prejudice. I hate bigots.

I can't say I hate them. I just don't understand them.