The Consequences of Gay Marriage
| Shelved by: giantpenguin87 on 2012-01-29
60 Comments:
Blue also stands for:
"Bigoted people will find something else to be afraid of after they see that legalizing gay marriage didn't cause the end of the world like they thought."
And:
"Economy will improve as money flows around due to the significant increase in number of weddings."
Shhhh! Don't let the children hear your socialist commie propaganda!
Gay couples cant have kids, only can adopt ones
They can have kids, but adoption doesn't solve the problem, the kid's already there.
Besides, it's not like gay people are sitting around going, "Well, it's still illegal to marry people to whom I'm attracted, so I guess I'll marry someone in whom I'm utterly disinterested."
I guess so, but I still think it would have at least some effect on the population growth
It may have a minor influence on cultural development, which could lead to some lessening of scarcity (the primary issue of over population).
I could see it having a positive effect if we frame overpopulation as just kids without parents. I haven't seen any estimates, but I'm pretty sure gay/lesbian adoption would definitely help.
Yes gay people would get married but, you are missing the point. When you change one principle that our country was founded on where do you stop? It would turn into marrying to 3 or 4 more partners. It would be the start of something that goes against the principles of our country
Marrying multiple people isn't against anything this country stands for. In fact, since polygamy doesn't hurt anyone, it'd be more towards our country's founding ideals to ALLOW it.
America was founded to be a secular nation in a world drowning and polluted by theocracy. This is why the First Amendment reads as it does.
No actually it is. Our country was founded on Christian ideals. It is clearly stated that there is one man and one woman in a relationship
Clearly stated where? And how do you claim that we were founded on Christian ideals?
"...the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them...". -Declaration of Independence. That and at the top of I believe the Supreme Court is a picture of the Last Supper.
References to god != founded on Christianity
You notice they don't name a god, but call him "Nature's God."
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." -- Thomas Jefferson
Not using a government to shove your religion down peoples' throats is a pretty cool thing. But I can understand if you think that Christians need to rule over nations like they did in the dark ages. You know, since that's what Jesus did and all.
wow, so basically the US as a whole has been going through 'classic' immigrant angst?
It's the same reason why some immigrant muslims in europe end up more hardcore(some even become terrorists) than the countries they came from. They're usually 2nd/3rd generation immigrants who dont know exactly how their home country does things, but want to remain connected to its culture. So they try to live in the same way without knowing where to draw the line. Or maybe they try to live up to values the country they're originally from already stopped following?
the US's situation is probably diffrent and I've also probably forgotten alot of details, but it seems to fit atleast somewhat.
While I don't necessarily disagree, I don't see how my comment lead you to this.
Well, if the at the founding of the country christianity was not a big deal. How did it become what it is now? I wondered how that happened, so I guessed that they might've tried to "regain" it and overshot.
Another possibility would be a larger gap(media, social status, etc) between the ruling elite and the (devout?) populace I guess.
I dont know alot about American(US) history and I wonder how it got so christian(its probably more christian than most european countries now).
Ah, see, I can answer this, as I know the relevant history.
Once upon a time, the US was to Europe, religiously, what Europe is to the US now. However, the Cold War broke out, and it was time to propagandize. The Russians had to be portrayed as the enemies, and so we called on the religious majority in the country to unite, and we put "Under God" and "In God we Trust" on our things to further demonize the Russians.
The Declaration of Independence is not a document putting forth laws to govern our country. It is a document that told the English we are through with their bull and are going to secede from their empire as free people have a right to do. There is more evidence that the founding fathers wanted no LEGAL connection to religion in the Constitution. Not to mention, the British Empire's king was a representative of God and that's not only true of Britain. Look at the tyranny many representatives of God brought down on their people.
I have a better solution remove all government involvement from the process of marriage. If a man and woman want to have all the perks of a "marriage" let them file for the benefits with the government and call it a civil union.
Ok, so that doesn't even explicitly state that the government should preside over marriage AND that it should be between a man and woman.. Also since it's natural for gay people to exist that falls under the laws of nature right? Besides that, why the fuck should we follow ANY ideas set for 230 years ago by a bunch of guys WHO FUCKING OWNED SLAVES. Times were a little different retard.
Just because the laws of nature allow something to happen does not necessarily mean that it's natural. Is it natural for one to simply get cancer, or Lou-Gehrig's disease? Secondly, I know times have changed, but the question was where God was stated in America's foundation. Thirdly, I support gay marriage, I was simply answering a question indirectly related to the subject of gay marriage.
P.S. It would be in your best interest to cease the needless capitalization and name calling, because it makes you look much less intelligent, and makes me less willing to put forth a counter-argument on the basis of further needless name calling.
Our country was founded on religious freedom.
In the bible it is also clearly stated that marriage is one man one woman and many concubines, one man and many women, a rapist and his victim and a soldier and his female prisoner of war. So tell me, if you guys are following Christian ideals on marriage, why only that one?
Just a heads up, good sir... you're preaching to a pretty liberal crowd here on lolbrary.
yes it's just an image. let's not do the slippery slope thing. i could easily say that if we allow 16-year-olds to drive then eventually 12-year-olds will be wanting to drive so we'll have to give them licenses. or i could say if we allow people to earn money, they'll eventually want to have all the money on earth for themselves, and that goes against the principles of our country. slippery slope arguments just don't carry any logical weight. but i'll just assume you were trolling. :)
Was not expecting that. Everything went better than expected.
I think Im colourblind
gay marriage is purely a luxury
currently in this materialistic nation it could be looked at like that, the only reason people now a-days find it fit to get married is to share their economic worth. Before it used to be a symbol of unbreakable strength and people were barely divorced.
Do you want a candle, or flashlight for that rock you live under?
IDK do you want one too, cause maybe you haven't realized that family life has virtually disappeared
I wouldn't go so far as to say that it has virtually disappeared. There's still a strong traditional undercurrent in the US, and I honestly don't think anything ever "disappears". To flip the argument a bit to reflect a negative, we could say that the 13th-15th Amendments and the Civil Rights Act ended racism.
No. It used to be a symbol of women's subversion to men. However, we fixed that, socially. Now it's a legal status shared by two people that begets a certain number of benefits to both members.
Totally fixed marriage, only increased the divorce rate by what like 80%? And it was never a symbol of women's subversion in America, Maybe in india or china with arranged marriages...Think before you talk lol
No, I was talking about colonial times, and medieval times. You know, when the Bible was very influential. "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." -- 1 Timothy 2:12
The divorce rate is so high due to most people's goals upon entering a relationship of the sort being out of focus. Further, the teaching that sex outside of wedlock is a sin causes people to marry before they understand if they can put up with their significant other, and thus leads to a divorce. Even further, many times there is a gap of understanding and communication between the genders that most couples don't seek to understand through counseling.
Woah man we got a bible quote that isn't related to marriage and now medieval times occurred in America, Genius. Plus America was pretty much founded on religious freedom from those types of things anyway. So you sir are wrong.
Also "the teaching that sex outside of wedlock is a sin causes people to marry before they understand if they can put up with their significant other" This may have been true 40-60 years ago, but again that was when the divorce rates were low
"Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord." -- Colossians 3:18
"Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives" -- 1 Peter 3:1
Also, no offense, but you have to be kind of dense to think I was talking about the medieval ages being in America. I was referencing western culture, which America is and has been a part of.
While the documentation of America is nonreligious, not all of the colonies were irreligious, as can be seen by the Salem witch trials.
As for your last paragraph, the same things are being taught today. So, I'm not sure what you're getting at.
I specify America because that is where I live and should be the only place I can have an effect on. I'm trying to get at I don't want "Being Gay" a social norm; I say this because their practices are abnormal and in my opinion disgusting. Allowing them to Marry would adhere to making it a social norm.
p.s. I'm not a Christian so the bible has nothing to do with my choice
I brought it up as why people acted that way.
Okay, we're getting to the source of the issue here. First, it's important to note that your opinion doesn't mean shit. I'm not going to offer examples of other possibly offensive things that are legal, because that's irrelevant. Something being disgusting is also irrelevant. If it doesn't pose a risk to others, there's frankly no reason to regulate it.
Second, homosexuality is normal. It's common, relatively, and it's natural, being genetically based and occurring in over 1500 species (as observed at this time) and is thoroughly documented in at least 500 species.
Marriage is an institutional thing between a man and woman. If gay marriage was legalized people could find all sorts of loopholes, technically two dudes who aren't gay and just best friends could move in together and get the legal status of married and get all the benefits.
Animals are known to eat their shit too, is that natural?
Yes, marriage is an institute, but we, as a society, get to define that institute. But, since it's also a legal agreement assigned by the sate, the state gets to decide that.
Also, you realize that currently a man and a woman can exploit the same loophole. What's the problem with that?
Lastly, yes, eating shit is natural.
Thanks for not being retarded. Not being sarcastic.
Any argument against this is an illogical fallacy. To be honest, I honestly feel like every fundie christian is a complete retard.
I think the best way to describe most Christians is with Romans 1:22:
"Thinking themselves wise, they became fools."
How explaining homosexuality to kids should be:
My son- daddy, why are those two men holding hands? Me- because they're in love just like your mother and I. Son- Oh. can i have a cookie?
"Schools will begin to teach kids how to have gay sex"...
Funniest thing I've read in a long time... XDDD
None of this graph is true in america though. Like the cake of democracy, this too is a lie.
Celebratory buttsex. That'll happen.
