Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Why not?

Nov 20, 2003 2:34AM PST

We've been going all around this for days. I've heard lots of discussion on lots of topics. So far no one has made an argument on the harm that would occur if gays were allowed to get married.

Can anyone give me a clear, simple explanation of the harm that would come to anyone who is married or who wants to marry just because gay couples can do it too? "Because it has to be a man and a woman" ain't good enough. "Because god said so" ain't good enough. "Because it will corrup our moral fiber" ain't good enough. "Because it's icky" ain't good enough. I want to hear about problems that will occur that are not happening now. Or whatever the harm is feared to be.

Thanks.

Dan

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re:nobody gets married out of love
Nov 24, 2003 1:49AM PST

Wrong answer. I didn't marry my wife because we had a child. I married her a year later because I love her and I wanted to vow that I would spend the rest of my life with her.

- Collapse -
Re: So! You give a reason WHY it should be passed.....
Nov 20, 2003 11:29AM PST

Hi, Glenda.

For exactly the same reason that people of mixed races are allowed to marry (though they once weren't in much of the country) -- because any other policy is a violation of their civil rights.
-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Re:So! You give a reason WHY it should be passed.....
Nov 24, 2003 1:22AM PST
You obviously won't accept any one's reason for being against it!

At this point in the thread noone's given a valid reason against it. Many give a variety of approach to the same reason, ie it's immoral, but that is based on religious belief which is the wrong approach.
- Collapse -
Re:I agree with you, Evie.....
Nov 24, 2003 1:16AM PST
What good comes from sin Dan?

This hints that the law to allow or disallow be based on it's religious approval. Should music also be outlawed if some beliefs also consider it a sin? This issue should be proven or disproven outside of religious support.
- Collapse -
I see your point ...
Nov 24, 2003 11:47PM PST

... but I think it's a bit oversimplistic to ignore the basis of all of our laws. I think it's impossible to separate all laws from such amorphous concepts as "common good", morality and even general religious conviction. So my point was is there any benefit to society if gays are allowed to redefine marriage?

Yes, many couples marry for reasons other than children. But back in my feminist days I took more than one course and read more than one piece on the evolution of marriage in societies. Regardless of religion, it has always been predominantly one man one woman, and where it has been one man several women, the concept is similar. Biologically, the female is more necessary in a nurturing role particularly at young ages. A man can easily father children without knowing he is the father, a female knows w/o doubt that she is the mother! So that the parents know who their offspring belong to, marriage has basically been the family structure in societies. The feminist take on all this was to support the men oppressing women angle, but it still makes sense to me on the common good for society angle.

I maintain that this is really a non-issue except to legitimize and create another class with special "rights" based on behavior. If two gay men or women want to spend the rest of their lives together, they can even "marry" in many places. The state just doesn't recognize them. If the lack of state recognition is what deprives them of "rights", then I still think the solution is not to redefine a non-government societal institution, but rather change government policy to make it marriage neutral -- as in to neither give preference to nor punish the married, and allow individual "ownership" of all of one's worth so WE the people can decide who gets what when we die.

You and I know it's almost hopeless to really get government out of the bedroom. Demanding government sanction seems an odd way for gays to achieve this goal, so I believe it is more motivated by trying to legitimize their deviant lifestyle (and it is deviant as in deviates from the norm). Since the percentages effected are actually rather small, this is one of those cases where I wonder if it wouldn't just be better to say "fine, get married" and take the issue off the table so the soapboxes can be put away.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
An interesting twist
Nov 20, 2003 4:13AM PST

Many in this forum argue that smaller government is good government. Given that, it is the responsibility of those who wish to press government into service to pass laws to restrict the people's behavior to present a case for that restriction.

Dan

- Collapse -
Re:An interesting twist
Nov 20, 2003 4:44AM PST

C'mon Dan, I've told you before but maybe you forgot. One of the few places government belongs is in people's bedrooms.

Wink

- Collapse -
You have a point there Josh!
Nov 20, 2003 5:50AM PST

I know you avoid me, but I have to say that you do have a point in what you say here. The only difference between a gay couple and a heterosexual couple is HOW they do it in the bedroom! And in many cases not even that differ...

- Collapse -
Yes but the gay POV ...
Nov 20, 2003 4:46AM PST

... is that they are being denied some *right* to marriage. So I am asking why. The burden of proof for that is on you.

The liberals love to drag out the general welfare clause to validate all sorts of big government programs. Well, gay marriage doesn't seem to have any benefit to the general welfare of the citizenry.

I've already stated that if government got out of some other aspects of our lives -- e.g. a marriage neutral tax code, and privatized health care and social security -- there is no need to even have this discussion! Smaller government -- yep!

- Collapse -
Marriage is a government program?
Nov 20, 2003 5:02AM PST

I don't think so.

I think gays should be allowed to marry because there are no sufficient reasons to deny them that institution. Were anyone to present me with a reason that meets the criteria in my initiating post I would be happy to entertain it.

Let's not get started on the tax code! It may be impossible to prove there's a god, but that tax code makes a darned good argument for the existance of the devil. Wink

Dan

- Collapse -
Re:Marriage is a government program?
Nov 20, 2003 5:28AM PST

Dan, you listed x number of reasons you wouldn't accept. I still bring you back to answering for me why gays need to marry? You want to ignore the global and cultural basis of marriage for centuries -- forget God even -- destroy the family and you destroy society.

Ya know, not too long ago you would have asked why shouldn't people be able to live together if not married. Well, before that you had few kids born out of wedlock. Now the illegitimacy rate is sky high. Has that benefitted society? Led to government staying out of our bedrooms more? No. No, not every marriage is perfect, not every intact family is ideal, but there is no arguing that any kid conceived to two married parents has a heck of a lot better chance at being afforded life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. One of the biggest risk factors for poverty is being raised by a single parent.

Humans need mothers and fathers. The genders are different and possess general characteristics that are particular to the survival of the species. No, not every kid that is raised without one is doomed to fail, but why except for selfish reasons would anyone want to deprive a kid a chance to at least begin without the deck stacked against him?

Sad really. All the liberals whining about this and that for the children. Give them back normal childhoods where they don't have to learn that Johnny's dad sleeps with Steve before the age they can even grasp the particulars that babies don't come from the stomach.

A lesbian close to my husband's family came out after her divorce. She has two boys. Her girlfriend -- or "wife" as she calls her -- moved in. It's all great, fine and dandy. Except for those boys. They had problems before with the contentious marriage. But they were at least social with my husband and myself and others at social events. Now they stay to themselves. Never have friends over. I doubt parents of their friends want them exposed to that environment, and that is the right of those parents if they feel that lifestyle is wrong. No amount of laws will force or convince parents to think this is a good lifestyle that they want their kids to be exposed to. So, those boys suffer Sad

- Collapse -
Re:Re:Marriage is a government program?
Nov 20, 2003 5:52AM PST

And I bring you back to the point that it is not the job of government to force a definition of family. How will gays being married destroy the family?

Right now you have some great families and some awful families. That would not change if gays are allowed to marry.

Dan

- Collapse -
Why does a man want to "marry" a man
Nov 20, 2003 6:07AM PST

Live with him for life.

Pledge undying love.

Sign over power of attorney. Leave all your worldly possessions.

If gays didn't keep trying to redefine marriage, there would be no need for the current reaction which is the popularity of defense of marriage laws.

Many have given you answers to why not. You reject them as not to your liking. You have still not given a reason as to why.

- Collapse -
And...
Nov 20, 2003 6:19AM PST

two people of the same gender cannot love each other in the same way?

- Collapse -
who mentioned love?
Nov 20, 2003 6:26AM PST

he wants the right to get married!

- Collapse -
NT - LOL!
Nov 20, 2003 6:29AM PST

.

- Collapse -
NT - Re:NT - LOL!
Nov 20, 2003 7:45AM PST

`?

- Collapse -
Re:And... Just think a minute Charlie........
Nov 20, 2003 8:37AM PST

If your Father had been homosexual and your Mother a lesbian.........


You wouldn't be here!

Glenda

- Collapse -
Possibly...
Nov 20, 2003 8:50AM PST

But that isn't the issue here. The discussion is whether Gays should have the right to get married or not. And AFAIK a lot of people HERE would be much happier if I wasn't here!!!! LOL! Happy

- Collapse -
Re:Possibly...
Nov 20, 2003 8:55AM PST

Charlie, just think what happens when the whole population decides they don't want to be hetero sexuals, Gee no more kidsSad
Actually Charlie when you think and make good posts, I think you are welcome in SEHappy

Glenda

- Collapse -
This made me laugh .... Thanks Glenda.
Nov 20, 2003 9:34AM PST

.
"Charlie, just think what happens when the whole population decides they don't want to be hetero sexuals, Gee no more kids"

Glenda, I don't think just because they 'decide' they don't want to be hetrosexuals their sexual urges will disappear. Nor would men cease to prefer women or vice versa. I'm sure there would be plenty of children.
.

- Collapse -
NT - Gee no more kids - And the down side?
Nov 20, 2003 12:26PM PST

And the down side?

- Collapse -
Glenda, please...
Nov 20, 2003 1:32PM PST
" ... when the whole population decides they don't want to be hetero sexuals,... " - Glenda

Glenda,did you decide to be heterosexual or whatever you are? Homosexuality isn't a decision! People don't decide that they want to like any kind of gender, it just happens... At least that is my case. I just happen to like women. And some of my friends just happen to like the same gender. They didn't decide it! I didn't decide to like certain sexual activities and I doubt you did. We just happen to like them! Thats the way God made us I guess...
- Collapse -
Re:Re:Possibly...
Nov 21, 2003 12:11AM PST

Glenda, forgive me but you really ought to learn more about homosexuality before opining about it. People don't "decide" to be straight or gay.

- Collapse -
Re:Re:Re:Possibly.../ Just like any other sin, Josh........
Nov 21, 2003 1:41AM PST

They do decide to ACT out the behaviour! By the way I DO know homosexuals! Just because I think it is a sin means I don't understand what it is? Sin is sin no matter what name you choose to call it!

Glenda

- Collapse -
Glenda, what you said was....
Nov 21, 2003 1:55AM PST
...just think what happens when the whole population decides they don't want to be hetero sexuals...

Do you really think people just decide to be gay, whether or not they act on it?
- Collapse -
People CHOOSE to engage in sex.
Nov 21, 2003 3:33AM PST

They also CHOOSE whom to engage in sex with. Yes, it's a CHOICE.

- Collapse -
Re:People CHOOSE to engage in sex.
Nov 21, 2003 3:54AM PST

Yes, people choose to have sex or not have sex. But what gender(s) they are sexually attracted to are not a matter of choice. You don't just wake up one morning and decide to be gay, James.

- Collapse -
Re:People CHOOSE to engage in sex.
Nov 24, 2003 2:09AM PST
- Collapse -
Re:Glenda, what you said was....LOL Josh......
Nov 21, 2003 3:48AM PST

I was JUST being sarcastic when I said that one! Happy

Glenda