Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
- Thread starter Johnny
- Start date
Johnny
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Finally you're awake. Now read this.
Tanooki
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Nice phantom edit in your previous post.
Do you also believe pacifism was being compared to pedophilia?
That's easy - look at what *** marriage has done for Europe. I'd rather my country didn't follow suit.
*edit* Whoops, that was aimed at Johnny.
Nice phantom edit in your previous post.
Do you also believe pacifism was being compared to pedophilia?
That's easy - look at what *** marriage has done for Europe. I'd rather my country didn't follow suit.
*edit* Whoops, that was aimed at Johnny.
Uncle_Mike
D2 PvP Moderator
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Pretty hilarious post on your part there.
[email protected]: what exactly did *** marriage do to Europe?
And who exactly is "you people"? Take a moment and read the thread before you cast stones at me...
Pretty hilarious post on your part there.
[email protected]: what exactly did *** marriage do to Europe?
Nazdakka
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
I'm curious: What, in your view, has homosexual marriage done for Europe?
Johnny
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Oh do tell. What did it do?
Tanooki
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Unless I'm completely mistaken, the marriage rate in Europe has steadily fallen in the past decade or so. The idea being that once you define marriage as broadly as you can it loses meaning.
Correct me if I'm wrong here. Has the marriage rate in Europe risen?
Unless I'm completely mistaken, the marriage rate in Europe has steadily fallen in the past decade or so. The idea being that once you define marriage as broadly as you can it loses meaning.
Correct me if I'm wrong here. Has the marriage rate in Europe risen?
Amra
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
I know. It's all good.
Johnny
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
As gays get married in more and more states. Does your urge to divorce your wife grow?
You said this before. You mentioned some drop in marriage rate in Sweden and blamed that on *** marriage but Sweden didn't even have *** marriage back when you said it. heck we have only had *** marriage for 27 days.
Only 5 countries in Europe have same sex marriage of which 2 got it in 2009, one got it in 2005, one 2004 and one 2001. How big of an impact do you think we would actually be seeing over the last decade from this?
So if *** people get married. You will love your wife less?
As gays get married in more and more states. Does your urge to divorce your wife grow?
You said this before. You mentioned some drop in marriage rate in Sweden and blamed that on *** marriage but Sweden didn't even have *** marriage back when you said it. heck we have only had *** marriage for 27 days.
Only 5 countries in Europe have same sex marriage of which 2 got it in 2009, one got it in 2005, one 2004 and one 2001. How big of an impact do you think we would actually be seeing over the last decade from this?
Johnny
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Right here
Now as a first hand account I was raised by a single parent in Sweden and I can tell you that my mother did not leave my father because boys where kissing. She left my father because he was a bastard.
Right here
You said this in late November in 2008. Neither Sweden or Norway even had *** marriage back then so it's impossible that the supposed drop in marriage among straight couple could have been caused by *** people getting married.
Now as a first hand account I was raised by a single parent in Sweden and I can tell you that my mother did not leave my father because boys where kissing. She left my father because he was a bastard.
Tanooki
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Wow, that was fast searching. I honestly didn't recall that. Give me 3 seconds to read ... oh, there it is. The word "close". You must have missed it. Last paragraph, 3rd sentence. They've had "something close to full *** marriage for a decade or more." Nice attempt, though.
Wow, that was fast searching. I honestly didn't recall that. Give me 3 seconds to read ... oh, there it is. The word "close". You must have missed it. Last paragraph, 3rd sentence. They've had "something close to full *** marriage for a decade or more." Nice attempt, though.
Nazdakka
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Your argument is pretty easy to test statistically. Wikipedia says that the Netherlands was the first 'modern' nation to legalise same-sex marriage, in 2001, followed by a bunch of other nations in successive years. Show us that there has been a clear change in the trend of marriage/divorce rates in those countries since same-sex marriage was legalised, and that this has not happened in countries where same-sex marriage remains illegal, and your case has some validity.
Bear in mind that you'll need to show a change in the trend, because (I think) marriage rates have been dropping and divorce rates growing for the last few decades, regardless of same-sex marriage law, so there's clearly something going on that doesn't directly relate to that issue.
Your argument is pretty easy to test statistically. Wikipedia says that the Netherlands was the first 'modern' nation to legalise same-sex marriage, in 2001, followed by a bunch of other nations in successive years. Show us that there has been a clear change in the trend of marriage/divorce rates in those countries since same-sex marriage was legalised, and that this has not happened in countries where same-sex marriage remains illegal, and your case has some validity.
Bear in mind that you'll need to show a change in the trend, because (I think) marriage rates have been dropping and divorce rates growing for the last few decades, regardless of same-sex marriage law, so there's clearly something going on that doesn't directly relate to that issue.
Last edited:
Johnny
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Come on now. If there is a direct relation between *** people getting married and straight people divorcing then surely you as a straight married person in a country with civil unions and where *** marriage is growing must be feeling the urge to divorce closing in.
Sure they had "civil unions" before that. Does civil unions give you the urge to divorce your wife?
Come on now. If there is a direct relation between *** people getting married and straight people divorcing then surely you as a straight married person in a country with civil unions and where *** marriage is growing must be feeling the urge to divorce closing in.
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Remember causation isn't required for a correlation, I mean it's just like saying a lot of americans are fat, and americans were the first to get to the moon, so the country that gets to <insert planet> first, will be the fattest in 50 years.
I believe the reason of so many being divorced in my country has a lot to do with the mentality there exist nowadays, people believing there life is defined through experiences, thinking a wedding is a fun idea and when realising it wasn't as wonderfull as they wanted it to be, they don't give it a second chance, but divorces, not to mention the effect drunk parents have had not only towards eachother, but also towards their children.
Suddenly it isn't that weird again you're impossible to reason with in the previous thread, you're either truely a troll or someone who might need help with understanding some very basic principles.
First of all, you must not honor anything, but you've no saying in anything that doesn't harm others or in any other way is against the law. Just because you think it's wrong (or evil) doesn't make it so. Pretty weird that you actually consider an act accepted by both people perfoming that act to be evil, that's not only a misuse of the word, it shows a lot about you, in a very negative way.
Afterwards you compare *** people with people who harm others, now it should be obvious why you comparission fails. However let me take each one as I believe it's the better for you:
Child Molesters: It's wrong to hurt others, it's not wrong to wanting to hurt others though, no matter what they've exactly the same rights as you, which mean you may not hurt others as well, but you may want or think about doing so.
Satanists: A religion, they're free to practice whatever religion they choose to, for whatever reason they choose, as long as they don't hurt others or in any other way breaks the law, as religion doesn't make you immune to the law, a religion is always something personal, and you can't define anything that makes you immune to the law, as the law is non-personal and everyone is equal in front of it.
Drunk people: Again, unless they actually can't control themselves and thereby hurt others or in anyway breaks the law, you've no saying.
Smokers: Once again, if smoking is legal you've no saying.
Certainly many of these activities are either stupid (hurting others, or following a religion (or to say shortly, follow others mind set without you ever considering why you do so, or just saying being brain washed/manipulated), or dangerous to yourself (drinking and smoking), not to include others for drinking, smoking and morlesting children, then it's only the last aspect that make these worth considering to be acceptable or not in our society, because no one should have the power to command of others what they should do with their body, with their life.
No, talking about the reasons of why people are *** are also off topic, only arguments around if homosexuals should be married or not are on topic.
That conclusion is completely wrong. I live in Denmark and I know that about 70% (of those I can remember) of the people I know have parents who're divorced, yet I only know one person who's *** and this person has never been married. I highly doubt anyone of the divorced people I know of are secretly *** or anything like that, which makes them go for a divorce, I really don't see how you get to this conclusion.Tanooki said:
Remember causation isn't required for a correlation, I mean it's just like saying a lot of americans are fat, and americans were the first to get to the moon, so the country that gets to <insert planet> first, will be the fattest in 50 years.
I believe the reason of so many being divorced in my country has a lot to do with the mentality there exist nowadays, people believing there life is defined through experiences, thinking a wedding is a fun idea and when realising it wasn't as wonderfull as they wanted it to be, they don't give it a second chance, but divorces, not to mention the effect drunk parents have had not only towards eachother, but also towards their children.
Maybe, but still, causation isn't required for correlation.
O_O
Suddenly it isn't that weird again you're impossible to reason with in the previous thread, you're either truely a troll or someone who might need help with understanding some very basic principles.
First of all, you must not honor anything, but you've no saying in anything that doesn't harm others or in any other way is against the law. Just because you think it's wrong (or evil) doesn't make it so. Pretty weird that you actually consider an act accepted by both people perfoming that act to be evil, that's not only a misuse of the word, it shows a lot about you, in a very negative way.
Afterwards you compare *** people with people who harm others, now it should be obvious why you comparission fails. However let me take each one as I believe it's the better for you:
Child Molesters: It's wrong to hurt others, it's not wrong to wanting to hurt others though, no matter what they've exactly the same rights as you, which mean you may not hurt others as well, but you may want or think about doing so.
Satanists: A religion, they're free to practice whatever religion they choose to, for whatever reason they choose, as long as they don't hurt others or in any other way breaks the law, as religion doesn't make you immune to the law, a religion is always something personal, and you can't define anything that makes you immune to the law, as the law is non-personal and everyone is equal in front of it.
Drunk people: Again, unless they actually can't control themselves and thereby hurt others or in anyway breaks the law, you've no saying.
Smokers: Once again, if smoking is legal you've no saying.
Certainly many of these activities are either stupid (hurting others, or following a religion (or to say shortly, follow others mind set without you ever considering why you do so, or just saying being brain washed/manipulated), or dangerous to yourself (drinking and smoking), not to include others for drinking, smoking and morlesting children, then it's only the last aspect that make these worth considering to be acceptable or not in our society, because no one should have the power to command of others what they should do with their body, with their life.
Crowd Control
Banned
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Well let's compare some statistics about marriage in a country where same sex marriage is allowed.
Here you can see the amount of marriages over time of the last 4 decades.
Now here you can see the amount of divorces over the same period and you can see the trend has been set long before same same sex marriage was allowed (april 2001).
It's hard to believe *** marriage has any influence on these numbers, though it's too bad the line doesn't continue. I'll take a look if I can fetch some more up to date data. Anyway divorcing is just modern, just like *** marriage is going to be. Let those people be, if it makes them happy they sure as hell have my blessing.
edit: lastly, here is the latest figure of same sex marriage in Holland. As you can see those marriages decrease too, which actually somewhat follows the general marriage trend over the last decades.
Well let's compare some statistics about marriage in a country where same sex marriage is allowed.
Here you can see the amount of marriages over time of the last 4 decades.
Now here you can see the amount of divorces over the same period and you can see the trend has been set long before same same sex marriage was allowed (april 2001).
It's hard to believe *** marriage has any influence on these numbers, though it's too bad the line doesn't continue. I'll take a look if I can fetch some more up to date data. Anyway divorcing is just modern, just like *** marriage is going to be. Let those people be, if it makes them happy they sure as hell have my blessing.
edit: lastly, here is the latest figure of same sex marriage in Holland. As you can see those marriages decrease too, which actually somewhat follows the general marriage trend over the last decades.
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
In general you can make most of anything fit using statistics wrongly, all it requires is that you look at too big of a picture, not considering the cause of the effects, whereby if any two variables over a period you subjectively find large enough both rises doesn't mean you can conclude anything out of it.
I agree.
In general you can make most of anything fit using statistics wrongly, all it requires is that you look at too big of a picture, not considering the cause of the effects, whereby if any two variables over a period you subjectively find large enough both rises doesn't mean you can conclude anything out of it.
KillerAim
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
Johnny:
Let me give you a more accurate example. I want to go to bar to drink and smoke like people have done for centuries. Some anti-smoking person comes up to me and tells me he doesn't want me to smoke in the bar. When I tell him that he does not have a saying on whether or not I smoke "then he all of a sudden demands that I should respect his view on the matter. As if we need to reach some common ground between his opinions and my rights."
Or change 'smoking' to 'buying a gas-guzzling car' or to 'buying an incandescent light bulb'.
Johnny:
Because the majority of people don't want them to. If you accept the position that the Government can make people do things and prevent people from doings things for the 'good of society', then you'd better willing to accept the decisions of the people when you're in the minority.
Come on, Johnny, don't be intentionally obtuse. By 'encourage' I'm talking about the Government giving perks to people if they are married. Since the tab for these perks is picked up by all taxpayers, the argument that legalizing same-sex marriages will not affect people who are against such marriages is a blatant lie.
Another oft-repeated distortion of reality. It's not the anti same-sex marriage group that is trying to change historical laws and practices surrounding marriage, it's the pro same-sex group that's doing that.
Why not, if that's the way you feel? In your world, people have a right to impose their views on the rest of Society when the majority of people think it's for the benefit of us all. So all you have to do is get enough people who feel the way you do and you can get a law passed against big hairy men having sex.
No argument there. But the same thing could be said about any number of laws that are enacted. I haven't been benefited from minimum wage laws since I was around 16, but I have to pay higher prices because of them. The same thing applies to such things as affirmative action, government support of such groups as ACORN, and the bailout of Chrysler and General Motors. I don't benefit from any of them but I'm sure as hell picking up the tab.
Back to the distortion of history, I see. To make your analogy valid, same-sex marriage would have had to be the law of the land with the anti same-sex marriage advocates being the ones who are trying to change the laws. But you and I both know that that isn't the case.
Let me give you a more accurate example. I want to go to bar to drink and smoke like people have done for centuries. Some anti-smoking person comes up to me and tells me he doesn't want me to smoke in the bar. When I tell him that he does not have a saying on whether or not I smoke "then he all of a sudden demands that I should respect his view on the matter. As if we need to reach some common ground between his opinions and my rights."
Or change 'smoking' to 'buying a gas-guzzling car' or to 'buying an incandescent light bulb'.
No, we're not. As I said before, you definitely have a right to marry anyone you want to but you have no right to force me to accept your marriage or to receive any of my tax dollars in support of your marriage. The benefits attributed to marriage in the United States are not 'rights'; they are sacrifices that Society as a whole has agreed to make in order to promote an institution that it feels benefits everyone. Saro and I are against such policies on principle. You appear to be against them only when its your oxen who are being gored.
Relativity
Diabloii.Net Member
Re: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry people of the same gender? Yay or Nay
A decline in marriage over the last 4 decades can be attributed to many things. Such as the baby boomers getting older, divorcing, and choosing not to re-marry. It can also be attributed to a change in social values. Others attributing such a decline solely to legalized homosexual marriage because "marriage has no meaning" is hilarious.
It affects them in the same way it affects *** people re: opposite-sex marriages. Why should *** people have to pick up the tab of straight people? In fact, why should unmarried people in general have to pick up the tab of married people? Seems like a ****ty deal to me.
Eh, just have to wait until the baby boomers die and Generation X/Y/Z takes over. Same-sex marriage is becoming legalized around the world, it's only a matter of time before all US states will follow.