Category Archives: Social issues

Gay marriage

same-sex-marriage2As I’m posting this, 17 states allow gay marriage, while 33 ban it. In 1967, there were 17 states that still banned interracial marriage, until a Supreme Court ruling that year made those bans unconstitutional.

One day, the current controversy surrounding gay marriage will seem as strange to people as the controversy surrounding interracial marriage back in 1967. Yet as I write this, the controversy remains high, as gay marriage gains momentum, and its opponents dig in their heels.

Throughout this controversy, I have been listening for a convincing argument against gay marriage. My favorite is the non sequitur about how legalizing gay marriage will open the door to people marrying their sisters or their dogs. I hope the people worried about this are also vegans, for if you allow people to eat meat, and they eat cows and chickens today, what prevents them from eating dogs and cats and people tomorrow?

But here I must stop, lest I spiral down the drain of bad arguments alone. If you think you have a legitimate argument against allowing gay marriage, leave a comment, and we’ll discuss.

Update: Ken has posted a comment that does a good job summarizing common arguments against gay marriage (thanks Ken).¬† I’ve decided to add it to this post.

The foundational building block of society is the family. The family has been in decline for decades, starting during the 60’s, the era of free love.

I don’t thing we’re going back to marriage as we traditionally remember it. The increase in divorce, remarriage, single parents, and non-traditional adoptive families means the definition of family has changed. Whether or not this is a good thing is another question, but I agree with Ken that having¬† stable families is an important foundation of society, and good for people in general. But the fact is, gay people have children, whether from a prior marriage or adoption, and families are being built around gay parents. Forbidding the parents of these families from legitimizing their union in the eyes of the law and society, only destabilizes these family units.

Major rips in the fabric of society began to happen as marriage began to be seen as “just a piece of paper”, which meant you can now have sex with whoever you want. Birth control separated the sex act from it’s intended purpose, the creation of children.

It does seem we talk about sex more in the media now than before, so that may make it seem that extra-marital sex is more prevalent today. The numbers, however, may not tell the same story, as suggested by this Washington Post article on cheating, and this 2007 report from the Association of Schools of Public Health about premarital sex statistics over the years (about 90% of women born in 1940 reported having premarital sex). In any event, if the idea is to reduce the number of sex partners people have, including gay people, then forbidding gay people from entering into committed, monogamous relationships seems an odd way to achieve this.

Hence, the single most powerful force a human being has, the creation of another life, was reduced to something we do for fun and pleasure. What was previously seen as profoundly life changing was now trivialized. Marriage plummeted.

I fail to see how forbidding gay marriage will increase the rate of marriage overall. Perhaps what Ken means is that no marriage is better than gay marriage, and gay marriage somehow poaches people away from traditional marriage. But the idea that forbidding gay couples from marrying means they will instead enter into heterosexual unions makes about as much sense as Ken or I settling for a dude if we couldn’t marry a woman.

Because birth control did not guarantee no children, babies were born out of wedlock and some communities began to sink deep into poverty as young girls were left with babies and no means to support them financially.

I agree with Ken that out-of-wedlock children + poverty are bad for a community. How about we support legislation for better sex education, and research into more effective birth control?

Others aborted babies on a grand scale…..since Roe V Wade almost 60 million in the US alone. That’s like 9-11 every single day since this court case was decided….and we consider its Right! So here we sit with women emotionally shredded by having to kill their own unborn children, kids who are juggled like luggage in divorced homes (because the mindset has become, why stay married if the the thrill is gone), and women who put off getting married till they are too old to have kids so the resort to crazy fertility drugs and create embryos (which are human lives) which get frozen like a Swanson TV dinner.

I’m sure that gay male couples contribute zero to the abortion rate, and lesbian couples not much more than that. It is heterosexual unions that lead to abortion. So if reducing abortion is the goal, shouldn’t we promote gay sex instead?

My point is that the family has become completely screwed up because we redefined how it all worked, and the culture is suffering greatly because of it. By diluting it still more by calling 2 men who have sex with each other “married”, will only create more confusion and marriage/families will become a meaningless gesture.

I wonder who’s confusing the issue. If gay marriage were allowed, you could define a family as “a married couple.” I have not seen any gay marriage opponents present a definition that is any less confusing.

It can be anything, with anyone.

Unless you’re vegetarian, Ken, I’m hiding my pets from you. Come to think of it, I’m hiding my kids too.

Plus, at the end of the day, it just is not normal. Let’s face it. No matter how many times someone says, “it happens in nature…there are gay tigers, horses, whatever…..” That does not make it normal. There are also tigers, horses, etc born with 3 legs once in a while. Because it happens doesn’t make it normal. Any doctor can tell you that your rectum was made to push feces out of your digestive tract. A penis was made to inset into a vagina and dispense sperm. To argue otherwise is simply to pretend that reality does not exist, and you can believe whatever you want. Gay marriage will further the decline of marriage and the family and ultimately the culture. I’m completely against it.

Reality? Search Google for “sex videos,” and you will get an idea of what people do with sex in reality (and on camera). I think you’ll find most of the weird stuff is done by heterosexuals, and it ain’t about pro-creation. I’m afraid your definition is a bit incomplete.

Update: Oregon’s ban against gay marriage was ruled unconstitutional on 5/19/14. Congratulations my gay brothers and sisters, I’m sorry it took so long.