Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-29-2012, 03:22 PM   #201 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr November View Post
Why is marriage a civil right? What does this mean?!?

What is marriage, and why should government have anything to do with it?

And morals aren't always subjective, they can be very logical. Humans are animals that are naturally social - morals are just social behaviours.
It becomes a civil right ONLY when its denied to a certain section of the population. Why should some be granted the contract and right of marriage and others refused it?

Morals are both subjective and logical, as most people in the western world have had a similiar education, understanding of what is right and what is wrong and therefore have a grasping of human morality and their responsibility to society.

We know its wrong to kill another human being, so thats logical as its a shared opinion by society. Minor issues though, become much more subjective, for example is it acceptable for a couple to have sex in a public environment or for a human being to take advantage of another human being financially?
Unknown Soldier is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 03:35 PM   #202 (permalink)
Oh my golly!
 
Above's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England
Posts: 335
Default

As one o' them queerosexuals, I don't really care about marriage. I don't need a piece of paper to make my love 'official', and it's always been a religious thing in my eyes anyway.

That said, I don't see why anyone should be stopped from marrying someone of their own gender. What's the big deal?
__________________
Be pure,
Be vigilant,
Behave
Above is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 04:31 PM   #203 (permalink)
Get in ma belly
 
Salami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Above View Post
That said, I don't see why anyone should be stopped from marrying someone of their own gender. What's the big deal?
This is what I'd like hip hop bunny hop to address if he wants to take issues with what we're saying. I think there are some clear-cut issues here I shall raise again:

(1). WHY should anyone be "stopped from marrying someone of their own gender"? I am asking for something a little more than Franco's retort that marriage is "traditionally" between a man and a woman, I'd like to hear a clear moral reason, and some form of justification as to why your objection is greater than people's right to love each other.

(2). This is the most important part: What the fuck gives anyone the right to direct how other people live their lives? How could anyone possibly think they are in any position to dictate who I want to marry or express my love for? It's MY life, and any kind of biases you have are completely irrelevant and should be kept to yourself.

(3). Consequences of gay marriage: I saw Rubato post an interesting little pie chart detailing the consequences very clearly:



So, what I'd like from anyone arguing against is some form of address to these issues, which so far I've failed to find.

I know hip hop bunny hop is very good at finding links which may support his position, but I would like something a little more relevant than Tablet next time please, which Unknown Soldier, as a catholic, claimed was a poor source.
Salami is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 04:55 PM   #204 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
hip hop bunny hop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salami View Post
This is what I'd like hip hop bunny hop to address if he wants to take issues with what we're saying. I think there are some clear-cut issues here I shall raise again:

(1). WHY should anyone be "stopped from marrying someone of their own gender"? I am asking for something a little more than Franco's retort that marriage is "traditionally" between a man and a woman, I'd like to hear a clear moral reason, and some form of justification as to why your objection is greater than people's right to love each other.

(2). This is the most important part: What the fuck gives anyone the right to direct how other people live their lives? How could anyone possibly think they are in any position to dictate who I want to marry or express my love for? It's MY life, and any kind of biases you have are completely irrelevant and should be kept to yourself.

<snip>

So, what I'd like from anyone arguing against is some form of address to these issues, which so far I've failed to find.

I know hip hop bunny hop is very good at finding links which may support his position, but I would like something a little more relevant than Tablet next time please, which Unknown Soldier, as a catholic, claimed was a poor source.
I'll encapsulate my argument in brief, as I've already addressed that point on this board several times, and I touched on it in this thread before Pepe entered the discussion.

Anyways, in regards to the point you labelled #1, same-sex couples are allowed to have private ceremonies and all that. There is no law preventing them from doing so. In the context of the USA, the arguments regarding homosexual marriage have to do with state recognized marriage. So, there is nothing interfering with the ritual of marriage or their ability to love one another.

I, however, object to state recognized marriage same sex marriage because:

Quote:
marriage is heavily regulated, and for good reason. When a state recognizes a marriage, it bestows upon the couple certain benefits which are costly to both the state and other individuals. Collecting a deceased spouse’s social security, claiming an extra tax exemption for a spouse, and having the right to be covered under a spouse’s health insurance policy are just a few examples of the costly benefits associated with marriage. In a sense, a married couple receives a subsidy. Why? Because a marriage between two unrelated heterosexuals is likely to result in a family with children, and propagation of society is a compelling state interest. For this reason, states have, in varying degrees, restricted from marriage couples unlikely to produce children.
To which you may point out not all married couples have children, to which I'd say:

Quote:
A small minority of married couples are infertile. However, excluding sterile couples from marriage...would be costly. Few people who are sterile know it, and fertility tests are too expensive and burdensome to mandate.... Some couples who marry plan not to have children, but without mind-reading technology, excluding them is impossible. Elderly couples can marry, but such cases are so rare that it is simply not worth the effort to restrict them. The marriage laws, therefore, ensure, albeit imperfectly, that the vast majority of couples who do get the benefits of marriage are those who bear children.

In regards to the point you labelled #2;

Quote:
Homosexual relationships do nothing to serve the state interest of propagating society, so there is no reason for the state to grant them the costly benefits of marriage,
All of these quotes were pulled from this article, which is the same old "Secular Case Against Gay Marriage" which I've quoted far too many times on this board.... LINK to it here

Below is a quote from earlier pages in this thread from myself, which remains relevant, and should serve as a helpful jump to pre-Pepe discussion of the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
...why offer anyone benefits for being married? Not being married doesn't harm anyone else, so why should those who are not married pay higher taxes, be burdened with unfavorable loan rates, unfavorable car insurance rates, etc.?

The arguments that justified these unfavorable conditions were primarily related to (1) increased reproductive rates of married couples, & (2) the improved outcomes of children from married couples. But do these arguments still make sense if you're going to extend marriage benefits to same sex couples?
__________________
Have mercy on the poor.
hip hop bunny hop is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 05:23 PM   #205 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
I'll encapsulate my argument in brief, as I've already addressed that point on this board several times, and I touched on it in this thread before Pepe entered the discussion.

Anyways, in regards to the point you labelled #1, same-sex couples are allowed to have private ceremonies and all that. There is no law preventing them from doing so. In the context of the USA, the arguments regarding homosexual marriage have to do with state recognized marriage. So, there is nothing interfering with the ritual of marriage or their ability to love one another.

I, however, object to state recognized marriage same sex marriage because:
The points you've raised for state recognized marriage are really just a bucket full of holes.

Point 1- Collecting a deceased's social security shouldn't really be an issue in a same sex marriage, as there is a strong liklihood that both partners would've been paying contributions anyway and why shouldn't a the partner of a deceased collect contributions that their partner has worked for and paid into, unless you're trying to claim that the marriage union could've been done with this future ulterior motive in mind!

Point 2- Getting cover under a spouse's health insurance needn't be an issue either, in the USA health insurance comes as part of a workers package right? Or the person taking out the health insurance pays a premium dependent on their health and who is covered? If this be the case, insurance companies are taking a calculated risk with those that they cover, insurance companies as far as I'm aware usually make a nice profit otherwise they wouldn't be in business.

Point 3- "The propagation of society is a compelling state interest" Now that statement is extremely debatable, in a country with a falling population that may hold some truth, but does the USA have a decling population problem?
Unknown Soldier is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:01 PM   #206 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier View Post
Point 3- "The propagation of society is a compelling state interest" Now that statement is extremely debatable, in a country with a falling population that may hold some truth, but does the USA have a decling population problem?
It will, if gays marry. DO YOU WANT TO LIVE IN A COUNTRY LIKE THAT?
Farfisa is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:08 PM   #207 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Paedantic Basterd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 5,118
Default

Honestly, I think that given the state of the world, I place more value in couples who can't, or choose not to procreate.

/misanthropy
__________________
Paedantic Basterd is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:15 PM   #208 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,760
Default

NO. I won't be happy till the earth is so over populated that we run out of resources and resort to cannibalism.

I've always wanted to try a piece of human thigh
Farfisa is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:21 PM   #209 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
hip hop bunny hop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,367
Default

WTF happened to Skeltezons post?
__________________
Have mercy on the poor.
hip hop bunny hop is offline  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:42 PM   #210 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,014
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop View Post
WTF happened to Skeltezons post?
Looks like he deleted it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by P A N View Post
i'm not gonna spend my life on music banter trying to convince people the earth is flat.
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die


last.fm
Janszoon is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.