Profound insights from MAD on Gay Marriage

[_skippy the dead]

Has any person who opposes gay marriage ever really explained how gay marriages would threaten hetero marriages?

One of my favorites is the argument that if a man can marry a man (or a woman marry a woman), there's nothing to stop someone from marrying their dog. Since that is, of course, the logical progression. *big eye roll*

[_asbestosman]

However, I have a hard time believing that they would prefer their marriages to remain nonlegal due to respecting other people's rights not to recognize their own marriages. Wives and children have very little rights or protections in such a situation, as they were well aware of.

Makes sense to me as well.

I really do not see how you can argue the church isn't hypocritical - not just about gay marriage, but in the way they currently treat polygamists in their midst.

Perhaps hypocritical in the sense of having their plans thwarted by rule of the majority. Different in the sense that gays are allowed to practice their thing in private without governmental benefits, while polygamists were actively prosecuted.

The differences between modern day polygamists and polygamy amoung the saints are not obvious to me. The one thing I always heard was that they broke off from the church and therefore the church feels no responsibility for them. There may still be some hypocrisy if the church supports the governmental persecutaion of polygamy.

There are always segments of society that find progress towards legal equalization abhorrent. Segregationists in the south certainly felt that way about the idea of blacks and whites marrying, going to school together, etc. I'm sure many people were once abhorred at the idea of women voting and getting an education, too.

You're right, but to really get my thoughts on the matter, it's probably best to read my comments on Ren's blog. In summary I think the government should stay out of marriage, and only concern itself with benefits amoung couples, including say a child caring for an aged parent.

[_Zoidberg]

Has any person who opposes gay marriage ever really explained how gay marriages would threaten hetero marriages?

One of my favorites is the argument that if a man can marry a man (or a woman marry a woman), there's nothing to stop someone from marrying their dog. Since that is, of course, the logical progression. *big eye roll*

I know. What a load of manure.

There was an extremely pathetic article by Orson Scott Card in Meridian about fairness and gay marriage. http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ideas/0 ... rness.html

A must read to understand that mentality. My favorite parts are when he expresses nostalgic regret that unwed mothers are no longer socially stigmatized, compares marriage to the mortgage interest tax deduction and says that allowing gay people to marry would be obliging the government to make up for their deficiency.

[_Ren]

I find the comment that lesbians are more promiscuous than homosexual males as rather suspect.

Who made this comment Monk?
...someone over on MAD?

You're right, but to really get my thoughts on the matter, it's probably best to read my comments on Ren's blog. In summary I think the government should stay out of marriage, and only concern itself with benefits amoung couples, including say a child caring for an aged parent.

Hear hear!

Exactly what that means and whether than has any impact on the same-sex marriage debate is a separate question

I can't see much more in it than a nasty little smear campain. The kind of trash that Mormons find so morally repugnant when thrown on their table.
...if you see anything else in it, please holler...

Oh and - like beastie - I'd also like to see the data that shows the average lesbian couple to be more promiscuious than the average hetrosexual couple. Oh, and of course, I'd like to see how unmarried couples specifically compare as part of this comparison...
Not saying it can't be true, and I'm also not convinced that it has much to do with anything. But I'm interested in seeing the data non-the-less, it would go against my general understanding at this point.

One of my favorites is the argument that if a man can marry a man (or a woman marry a woman), there's nothing to stop someone from marrying their dog. Since that is, of course, the logical progression. *big eye roll*

Exactly skippy!
...it's like the word 'consent' doesn't even exist!

Has any person who opposes gay marriage ever really explained how gay marriages would threaten hetero marriages?

Even though I'm a hetro male, it's crazy the amount of times I've been tempted to get hitched to a guy since they've introduced civil unions over here in the UK.
....they've just made it TOO easy! :D

[_beastie]

Who made this comment Monk?
...someone over on MAD?

jwhitlock questioned someone's assertion that lesbians tend to be monogamous by saying:

Again, any claim that lesbians are more sexually monogamous than heterosexuals is most likely suspect.

And then, on this thread, ALitD asserted that studies clearly show lesbians are more promiscuous than hetero couples.

Even though I'm a hetro male, it's crazy the amount of times I've been tempted to get hitched to a guy since they've introduced civil unions over here in the UK.
....they've just made it TOO easy! :D

No kidding!! All these hetero married couples apparently just went with the hetero "lifestyle choice" because gay marriage isn't legal, and will flip the second it is.

Seriously, I really can't figure out this argument. Maybe it's like old segregationists who felt that allowing blacks into the same schools as their children just tainted the whole thing. Ewww, if we let GAYS get married, it will ruin the whole idea of marriage!!!

In fifty years, people will look back on this controversy and view anti-gay marriage advocates the same as anti-segregationists, in my opinion. Studies are already showing the generation currently in their twenties are much more accepting of the idea of gay marriage than their parents.

asbestos

You're right, but to really get my thoughts on the matter, it's probably best to read my comments on Ren's blog. In summary I think the government should stay out of marriage, and only concern itself with benefits amoung couples, including say a child caring for an aged parent.

I totally agree. I'll check out his blog. I'm a very lazy blog reader and usually only read them when prompted to do so. I haven't quite gotten the blog spirit yet.

[_Ren]

And then, on this thread, ALitD asserted that studies clearly show lesbians are more promiscuous than hetero couples

Yeah - I saw the comparison between lesbians and hetrosexuals.

But this is what Monk said:

I find the comment that lesbians are more promiscuous than homosexual males as rather suspect.

...lesbians MORE promiscous than gay men?!
...maybe it was just a misread - or a typo...

[_beastie]

..lesbians MORE promiscous than gay men?!
...maybe it was just a misread - or a typo...

Ah, I didn't catch that. I suspect typo, because the conversation was talking about lesbians versus heteros.

[_barrelomonkeys]

Oops! Sorry I should have said heterosexual, instead of homosexual. My bad!

:)

[_SatanWasSetUp]

And I must say I love Katherine the Great. I'd just about go gay for her. ;)

Katherine the Great is cool. One of the few level headed people over there.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

I find it interesting that the church of Joseph Smith has become so outspoken in its support of traditional monogomous marriage. Could it be they are overcompensating in an attempt to make ammends for their polygamous past?