What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

California supreme court overturns gay marriage ban

  • Thread starter Clint
  • Start date
  • #41
Well unfortunately outsiders, but it had to be done. Like it or not GAYS are minority's, and they Have social status, its not like they are going to hurt you if they are gay they have rights, and its not hurting any one to marry the same sex. And even if you don't feel this way you come off as if you do.

Yes because this whole thread here I've been trash talking gays getting married right? Please show me where I stated that I have problems with gays having rights? I've been for gay rights, what I'm not for is the changing the definition of marriage. Gay couples could be called civil unions and still have the same rights as a married couple. The fact is it was never about rights, it's about social receptiveness.
 
  • #42
I see where your coming from outsiders, But lets say you have some one who is 12, really smart, seems like they have a very good grasp on reality. And understands relationships on the mental level (not physical i mean come on the child is 12). Would it be ok then, should we have some kind of test that finds out if its ok? but thats just a "lets say this could happen" thing. Doesn't mean it really will happen. No, this is why I assume that its set at 18. Their are a majority of teenagers, that can make responsible decisions at this age.

But on the subject, Here is how I see it, You have your right to your opinion and values, we all know this and we all express it! But, if you are forcing your values or opinions on some one else aren't you taking away their rights? Being gay and being gaily married doesn't hurt any one, maybe on an emotional level with their parents, (usually close minded parents) but this can be overcome unless the parents are really ignorant.
 
  • #43
Just because you say we aren't socially accepted doesn't make it so. Have you seen the media? People LOVE us. And I don't mean just on Bravo and Showtime. Try ABC and Fox. Primetime. Even a lot of people who don't think we should marry LOVE us, and these days most of the stereotypes are positive. We're everywhere in the public sphere and no one has a problem with it. Maybe Phred Phelps.

Why don't you call your relationships by the original word for marriage if it means so much to you that you want to exclude people.
 
  • #44
Even though we're not discussing the marriage of children here xvart

Well, we are talking about marriage of children because an argument was made on why marrying gay couples is similar to marrying children and dogs, and I was responding to that under the context of the original discussion.

xvart, I will humor you.

Okay... I appreciate that?

Can you please show me how someone who is 17 that turns 18 magically has some kind of mental capacity that they didn't before?

Clint is correct. You do have to draw an age somewhere, because if you didn't, a four year old could put an "X" on a piece of paper giving his or her parents retirement fund, house, or anything away.

I know adults who are in their mid 20's/30's who have the mental capacity of someone who you'd think was a teenager. Age doesn't mean anything.

Additionally, mental capacity is another area that makes contracts null and void under the law. People without the mental capacity to know what they are signing are under the same protection as children are.

xvart.
 
  • #45
Interesting. So please do show me how Jews/Christians are forcing people to get married and have marriage rights. Oh that's right, I believe people are taking from Judeo/Christian values and distorting it for their own means.

Also you're free to believe that you are a descendant of a monkey.

Yes because this whole thread here I've been trash talking gays getting married right? Please show me where I stated that I have problems with gays having rights? I've been for gay rights, what I'm not for is the changing the definition of marriage. Gay couples could be called civil unions and still have the same rights as a married couple. The fact is it was never about rights, it's about social receptiveness.


Right, but you dont get it, its some one right to get married male or female, calling it a Civil union is just like making black people free, but instating Jim Crow Laws like what was done in the past, they are free, but we wont let them do certain things
 
  • #46
Indeed it is not binding for a minor to sign any legal contract. And marriage is a legal contract!

Capslock
 
  • #47
Also you're free to believe that you are a descendant of a monkey.

That is because we are. Also because I believe this does not mean I do not believe in god. I think evolution is in his plan for this earth. All he did was get the ball started and then that fearful thing of evolution took over. Just like the remnant of the dinosaurs are the birds we know today. Not all were reptile. Just like when we create a good enough AI it will evolve and this planet may then be inhabited by robotic life forms.

Now back to the topic at hand. What difference does two guys having the same rights under the law as far as child issues and financial issues have to do with anyone else? The whole bestiality comment and incest have nothing to do with the argument and are not even in the same realm as gay marriage. But if you want to get technical incest is in the bible and not in a bad way. So you could argue it is allowed.

I can also make a case to legalize marijuana with the bible, but I bet most are still against that too. So I think it is asinine to use the bible as an excuse for one thing, but then not use it for the other.
 
  • #48
I know if I was a God, I'd put things on autopilot, too :p
 
  • #49
Indeed it is not binding for a minor to sign any legal contract. And marriage is a legal contract!

Capslock

And I think Outsiders' point is that originally it was a "contract" between god and man/woman and not a "legally binding contract." But then, my discussion point about churches, the voice and body of god, marrying gay couples comes back.

xvart.
 
  • #50
Because I'm waiting for someone to drop the bomb. I'm waiting for someone to suggest why all these things are deemed wrong.

It sounds like morality might be an issue here and I find it quite ironic.
While that looks like it might be true with incestuous marriage/relationships, its just not the cases for human beings marrying animals.

On marrying a close relative:

To me, incestuous marriages seem to be another victim less crime. Unless, of course, you count the risk of defects in the case of conception. But thats where things start to get complicated. One could argue that if incestuous conception is not to be allowed for the sole purpose of preventing genetic problems in offspring, then in couples where both people carry the same problematic recessive gene should also not be allowed to conceive.

There seems to be no actual good reason to ban incestuous marriages, other than the vast majority frowns upon it but its never a good idea to make laws based on the most widespread opinion.

If you look way back in the history of the royal family, you'd see that incest was quite commonplace. Just food for thought.
 
  • #51
You could say it's mentally damaging to one or both partners/relatives, and/or that the desire to have an incestuous relationship is a pre-existing mental illness, or brought on by some external stimuli, such as childhood trauma or something of that nature.
 
  • #52
You could say it's mentally damaging to one or both partners/relatives, and/or that the desire to have an incestuous relationship is a pre-existing mental illness, or brought on by some external stimuli, such as childhood trauma or something of that nature.
Sure, you could say that, but can it be proven?

When you write "You could say it's mentally damaging to one or both partners/relatives", what do you mean? I'm not understanding that part.
 
  • #53
I'm saying you could make the argument that incest IS a crime with victims, with the damage being done mentally to one or both people.
 
  • #54
Hot damn Jeremy that was a good post!! I would personally not want to do my mother, but incest has happened and is even in the bible. You just opened another can of worms when you talk about two people with the same recessive traits not being allowed to marry.
 
  • #55
That is because we are. Also because I believe this does not mean I do not believe in god. I think evolution is in his plan for this earth. All he did was get the ball started and then that fearful thing of evolution took over. Just like the remnant of the dinosaurs are the birds we know today. Not all were reptile. Just like when we create a good enough AI it will evolve and this planet may then be inhabited by robotic life forms.

You can choose to believe that JB_OrchidGuy, but that is only ONE possibility which requires faith to accept as truth.

But if you want to get technical incest is in the bible and not in a bad way. So you could argue it is allowed.

I can also make a case to legalize marijuana with the bible, but I bet most are still against that too. So I think it is asinine to use the bible as an excuse for one thing, but then not use it for the other.

Do you know the likes of Lot and his daughters? The Bible frowns upon incest, and anything that intoxicates your mind. Regardless we're not using the Bible here to justify incestual/polygamistic/animal marriages. We're using the law and the fact that gays can be married. If everyone truly deserves the same rights and protections under law, lets put our money where our mouth is.
 
  • #56
then in couples where both people carry the same problematic recessive gene should also not be allowed to conceive.
I agree with that though. Just because you CAN reproduce, does not by any means insinuate that you ever should. There are plenty of mentally unstable people (i.e. serial killers and the like), and plenty of people born with severe congenital defects that aspire to nothing but a waste of resources and a burden on the state that could've been prevented. I think people should have to file an application to have a kid. [EDIT]

I don't see what's so wrong with having a more Spartan society, but hey, that's just me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #57
As a Conservative, a Republican and a Christian, I would like to say..

thank GOD more states are finally coming to their senses..
IMO, it is UNChristian in the worst way to deny gays the right to marry..

Women couldnt vote..what was used to support that position? the bible..
Black people are slaves..what was used to support the position that they SHOULD be slaves??
the bible..
Black Kids and White kids are finally allowed in the same schools (amazingly..this is the 1960's)..what is used to support the position that white kids and black kids should NOT be in the same classes together?? the bible..
"mixed race" (black & white) heterosexual marriage was illegal...yep, the bible again.

using the bible to support anti-gay marriage is our society's last great fling with bigotry..
women got equal rights finally..
blacks got equal rights finally..
a black man can marry a white woman finally..
black kids can be in the same classroom as white kids finally..

only one outpost of bigotry and ignorance remains..
keep up the fight.

Scot

p.s.
yes, there are lots of Christians who feel as I do..
im working to increase their ranks..

(dont bother to reply to me specifically..especially if you want to tell me why, as a Christian, im wrong..I wont believe you, and I already heard it all..I still wont believe you..so save your breath..thanks...)
 
  • #58
I think he was saying basing social issues on the Bible hasn't had the best results in the past :p He didn't blame the Bible, he blamed people taking it literally and not in a modern context.
 
  • #59
ok..im not done yet..one more point.

in order for the Christian anti-gay position to make any sense and to be remotely valid, homosexuality has to be a CHOICE..you have to CHOOSE to be gay, and CHOOSE to therefore commit the sin of homosexuality..

because anti-gay christians certainty can never admit that gays are BORN gay..
that wont work..because if they were born Gay that would mean God MADE them gay..
and if God made them gay, then how can it possibly be a sin right?

so these Christians, amazingly, have to believe that gays CHOOSE to be gay..
that position is so amazingly laughable its pathetic..
and there is a very easy way to prove its wrong..
simply ASK any gay person who has ever lived!
ask them if they have a choice!

and if was a simple choice, like choosing to smoke or do drugs or commit adultry,
why have so many gay teenagers commited suicide?
why was it such a big deal that they had to kill themselves because their so-called "Christian" society told them they were evil?
why couldnt they just say "well..this gay expirement of mine isnt working out so well for me..I guess I should just "switch back" and be straight now.."

why cant they "switch back" to being straight?
because they were NEVER straight to begin with..

God creates babies with ambiguous sexual organs, neither totally male or female..I doubt anyone can sucessfully argue that the babies CHOSE to be that way while developing in the womb..
so God Himself creates ambiguous physical sexual traits all the time..
but yet we are to believe that its impossible to have male sexual organs yet not have male hetrosexual brain chemistry?? God cant do that? wow..I didnt know you had the authority to tell God what He can and cant do..arent you special.

and..if some people can choose to be gay..why cant ALL people choose to be gay?
I honestly cant CHOOSE to be gay..its impossible..
why?? because im NOT...its simply not an option for me.
in the same way, gays cant choose to be gay..or choose to not be gay,
they have no choice..they were CREATED gay..
if you believe in God, you have no choice but to believe that God created them gay..
therefore, homosexuality can not be a sin..its impossible.

ok..now im done! ;)

Scot
 
Back
Top