# Homosexual Marriage: Why OSC is against it. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 26, 2004, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663 "2004-12-26T08:23:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/41 "2004-12-27T09:28:52Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > I believe that same sex marriage would continue to, well, not encourage it, but it wouldn’t discourage pre-marital sex. That’s not to say that homosexual fathers or mothers couldn’t encourage their kids to practice abstinence. But why should the kids listen to their homosexual parents? Why would they be any more likely to listen to heterosexual parents? > [@](#): > > But with a homosexual friend’s family as an example, apparantly healthy too, you might ask, “why wouldn’t they listen to their parents?” For one, because of stereotypes. Like it or not, they exist. The friends would be less likely to listen to their parents because they have an example of another family that is headed by sexual “deviants”. Sounds like the solution to that is to teach them that homosexuals aren’t “deviants”. > [@](#): > > And sexual deviants that live a healthy life and appear to be good parents. And why is that a bad example? Because that the belief (however wrong) that the homosexual couple is a sexual deviant sort of gives permission to the friend to practice pre-marital sex. I’m sorry, but this makes no sense at all. You seem to be suggesting that because kids see healthy gay people, and for some reason they think gays are deviants, they will conclude that all “deviant” behavior is OK, and then because for some reason they also think premarital sex is deviant behavior, they’ll think premarital sex is OK. But it really has nothing to do with gay marriage or premarital sex. In handy diagram form, your logic flows like this: X is OK + X is deviant + Y is deviant -\> Y is OK You use that thought process to suggest that gay marriage will lead to premarital sex, but it could also be used, just as (in)accurately, to suggest that foot fetishes will lead to polygamy, or with just a bit more stretching, that riding a unicycle to work will lead to sniping townspeople from a clock tower. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/42 "2004-12-27T09:36:08Z")
Hiding behind Card isn’t doing you any good, you know. His little essay is devoid of substantive content. But if you insist, I’ll tell you why Card is wrong again. 1. The Massachusetts Supreme Court is Evil Incarnate. Card opens up with a rant about the MSC overstepping its bounds. First, as **RickJay** pointed out, this is a procedural point, and has absolutely no bearing on the question of whether SSM is a good idea or not. Second, Card’s comments are completely off-base. He is claiming that the MSC doesn’t have the authority to determine whether legislation is constitutional or not. This is simply false as a matter of law. 1. The Law in its Majesty Forbids Rich and Poor Alike to Beg in the Streets and Sleep under Bridges Card tries to convince us that marriage laws don’t discriminate against homosexuals. This is just silly. If laws forbidding SSM do not discriminate against homosexuals, by precisely the same logic, laws forbidding opposite-sex marriage would not discriminate against heterosexuals. After all, you’d be perfectly free to marry the same-sex partner of your choice. Ludicrous. Obviously laws forbidding SSM have a different impact on gays and lesbians than they do on heteros. That this needs to be pointed out is just sad. Moreover, Card must think it’s a good idea to push people into loveless, dysfunctional marriages, given that he apparently believes that gays and lesbians should get married to members of the opposite sex and have children. I don’t quite know how to respond to this level of idiocy, myself. 1. The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Divorce Yes, Orson, we get it already. Divorce is bad. Extremely unpleasant. Hard on the kids. However, his comparison point is with functional marriages. _Of course_ divorce is harder on kids than living in a stable two-parent family. But the alternative to divorce is generally an unstable two-parent family, and in many cases that can be even worse than divorce. If kids are so dependent on their parents for role models, what does it do to a kid to grow up watching her parents scream at each other every night? Or subjecting each other to physical abuse? Does this lead to a healthy understanding of the appropriate way to function in a committed relationship? While it is likely that we would all be better off if people were, in general, willing to put more effort into maintaining their marriages, some divorces are certainly necessary for the emotional and even physical wellbeing of those involved. And, of course, that divorce is bad is again irrelevant to the issue of gay marriage. If anything, social acceptance of homosexuality will in general lead to fewer gays and lesbians entering hetero marriages that break down because they are simply incapable of forming the requisite sort of emotional bond with their opposite-sex spouse, and hence to fewer divorces. 1. Orson Scott Card Doesn’t Understand Evolution Apparently Mr. Card is under the impression that, absent rigid adherence to a strict social norm of lifelong monogamous marriages, all men will do their best to fuck every woman they see, and all women will refuse to mate with anyone who isn’t rich. Aside from the irony of a Mormon going on about how men need to be compelled to be monogamous (not to mention the oddness of penalizing gay guys for the promiscuity of straight guys), he just plain doesn’t understand what’s going on here. “Civilization” doesn’t suppress evolutionary impulses (much). Rather, it’s built upon them. While men do indeed have more promiscuous tendencies than women, they also are interested in committed relationships. “Civilization”, he says, gives us better odds at reproductive success than “nature”. This is simply ignorant. Civilization is itself natural (show me a human population that doesn’t have complex social arrangements for long-term arrangements, and I’ll show you the figment of your imagination), and it’s rather less than obvious that population growth rates are correlated with degree of civilization in any event. And even if it were, what’s so great about high population growth? People are going to have sex with each other, and hence children, any which way you organize society. When the human species is disappearing from the planet because of low birth rates, then maybe we should worry about this. Until then, why does it matter? 1. Orson Scott Card Doesn’t Understand History Either Mr. Card apparently believes that “family” can refer only to stable units including one man, one woman, and their biological offspring. Deviations from this norm are only “family-like” units which will inevitably result in children whose behaviour will be uniformly anti-social. Okay, perhaps he’s not being quite so sweeping, but that’s certainly the trend of his argument. And it rather ridiculously ignores the fact that throughout history, societies have functioned perfectly well with a vast, vast array of family configurations. While he’s quite right in preferring stable families for the upbringing of children, there’s no evidence whatsoever that stable families involving unusual configurations do any worse at raising children than stable families with one male parent and one female parent, and plenty of evidence that stable but unusually configured families do a lot better at raising children than unstable but conventionally configured families do. Stability is the key, not the gender ratio of the parents. 1. Homosexual Marriage is an Act of Intolerance? I have a hard time even comprehending what Card is trying to say here. I mean, I recognize all the words, but strung together in that order they appear to be damn near incoherent. But here’s my best shot: the Institution of Monogamous Heterosexual Marriage is Special because it’s the font of all that is Good and Right in Society. By pretending that gays can be married - which they can’t be, because Marriage is Special, and gays aren’t - the Specialness of the Institution of Marriage will be destroyed, as will the Institution itself. This is an appalling argument on a couple of levels. First, it’s simply staggeringly arrogant of him to think that gays are incapable of relationships that are worth anything. Second, he still hasn’t provided us with any possible causal mechanism whereby gays getting married is going to result in weaker marriages for straight folk. How exactly do they get weaker? A guy sees a gay couple walking out of the courthouse in tuxes, and this causes him to go home to his wife and confess that while he still loves her and the kids, and they’re all perfectly happy, he wants a divorce because those gay guys just looked so fabulous in their penguin suits? Presumably not, but where, in the name of all that’s holy, is the causal mechanism?!? So there we have it. Nine tenths of Card’s article actually has nothing to do with SSM per se, but just goes on about how divorce is evil, and families are the bedrock of society. But since he provides no evidence for the purported superiority of his preferred family configuration (and indeed, the evidence which does exist fails to support his view), these parts of his diatribe are completely irrelevant to the question of SSM. The only part that’s actually relevant is his attempt to explain how letting gays marry will result in the destruction of marriage, but here he merely asserts that it will happen, without explaining how it possibly could. This is no more convincing than the Sauerkraut Hater. ---
**Author:** ![Greg\_Charles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/839c29/32.png) [@Greg\_Charles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greg_Charles)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/43 "2004-12-27T09:45:38Z")
Prisoner, you seem like a reasonable person. I do appreciate this thread because I’ve been struggling to understand the reasons behind the opposition to same-sex marriages for quite awhile now. Even though I don’t think I can ever agree with these reasons, I would like to at least understand them. I’m partway there. However, several posters have compared opposition to SSM with earlier opposition to miscegenation (i.e. different-race) marriage. I find this comparison particularly apt. Do you find miscegenation to be a threat to society as well? If not, then in what way are the anti-miscegenists different from the anti-SSMers? ---
**Author:** ![SolGrundy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbce88/32.png) [@SolGrundy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SolGrundy)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 9:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/44 "2004-12-27T09:55:14Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Well, as I read much of his writing throughout my lifetime, I have always wondered if he could be gay. He is very unique in his writing style. It’s very emotional and he gets into the minds of his characters that I wouldn’t expect to get from a guy. It’s been said of OSC about homosexuality, he is one that appears to “get it”. Said by whom? Card’s tirades about homosexuality and gay rights have been refuted repeatedly, not only in this thread but several others on this message board (you do a search for his name for more examples). So it’s clear that not everyone believes that he “gets it.” His only qualification seems to be that he’s opinionated about the topic, and he writes in a style that matches your stereotypical view of how homosexual men think. The idea of identifying someone’s sexual orientation from his writing style is absurd, and yet this is still somehow supposed to lend weight to Card’s opinions. I’d be interested to see what would happen if we took a cross-section of posts from men on the SDMB that don’t make any mention of the poster’s sexual orientation, and see how many you can identify as straight or gay. I know I wouldn’t be able to. > [@prisoner6655321](#): > > He was just fighting back at me starting it. I don’t blame him. And I know you guys aren’t “forcing” me to vote your way. **Guinistasia** is a she. This is not being pedantic, merely pointing out that if it’s difficult to identify a person’s sex from his or her writing, then identifying sexual orientation is even more difficult. My point is to ask you to please stop making “arguments” like this, as they’re insulting. If you were as “live and let live” as you keep insisting, then you wouldn’t be so adamant about denying me the right to marry. Your opinion is your own, and you’re more than welcome to it, but please stop acting as if your opinion doesn’t affect me in any way, and I have no right to object to it. Because it does, and I do. ---
**Author:** ![Arwin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Arwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arwin)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 10:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/45 "2004-12-27T10:07:18Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Oh, but I will say this. It’s not about any specific single family. It’s about society in general and the moral condition of that society. (And I’m not saying that homosexuality is immoral). If you’re not saying it, be aware that you’re implying it. > [@](#): > > The change in society over the past 30 years has been very subtly moving away from family and moral values. You probably didn’t even realize it was happening. But I have. And I don’t like it one bit. The trend towards individualism is common knowledge - or at least I thought it was. > [@](#): > > I feel that same sex marriage continues the trend towards a different less structured family. But it is in fact only giving people who think exactly like you, think that a structured family is important, the rights to build that structured family. Just because they have been endowed with a different sexual inclination. > [@](#): > > It’s not that I feel that it’s immoral, but… Just listen to yourself. “It’s not that I feel that it’s immoral, but …”. But … you do. > [@](#): > > for example, I am very opposed to pre-marital sex. I think that it playing a huuuge part in our society’s problems, particularily abortion. But the real causes here are poverty resulting from large scale and growing social inequality and parents, mostly religious, foregoing their responsibility to have ‘the talk’, sometimes out of disinterest, sometimes out of embarrassment, sometimes out of a misplaced fear that it would only encourage sex. > [@](#): > > I believe that same sex marriage would continue to, well, not encourage it That would indeed be rich, since same-sex pre-marital sex would never result in abortions. > [@](#): > > , but it wouldn’t discourage pre-marital sex. A complete non-sequitur. > [@](#): > > That’s not to say that homosexual fathers or mothers couldn’t encourage their kids to practice abstinence. But why should the kids listen to their homosexual parents? Why should any kid listen to any parents? You forget that for a child, these parents would be its parents. Plain and simple. That there might be stuff to talk about later, maybe, yes. Maybe, no. > [@](#): > > Or how about the kid’s friends? Their parents might be heterosexual christian parents. But with a homosexual friend’s family as an example, apparantly healthy too, you might ask, “why wouldn’t they listen to their parents?” For one, because of stereotypes. Like it or not, they exist. The friends would be less likely to listen to their parents because they have an example of another family that is headed by sexual “deviants”. It would be healthy for them to question their parents if they label the other family ‘sexual deviants’. In fact, it is healthy for any kid to question its parent’s values. That’s the only way to learn their true meaning. Of course the stereotypes exist. You don’t have to tell us that, because you show us in almost every post in this thread. You know people don’t draw a parallel to racial discrimination for nothing here. Don’t you yourself see a moral consideration to question your own stance on this matter, instead of continuously seeking affirmation for it? > [@](#): > > And sexual deviants that live a healthy life and appear to be good parents. And why is that a bad example? Because that the belief (however wrong) that the homosexual couple is a sexual deviant sort of gives permission to the friend to practice pre-marital sex. The things people tell themselves … > [@](#): > > I have another example in the links of a street that is largely populated by homosexual couples. We all know the real reasons for teen pregnancies. And they will be answered by this simple question to you. What are you doing to prevent them? If you are focussing on making same sex marriage the cause for it, you’re not helping. ---
**Author:** ![Siege](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@Siege](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siege)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/46 "2004-12-27T12:30:14Z")
**prisoner6655321** , I have a simple question for you. First, let me present some facts. I’m a 40 year old programmer who’s never married. For the past year I’ve been dating a man who’s a year or so older than me who has also never married. Neither of us has any children. Because, like you, I don’t believe in having children outside of wedlock and, given my peculiar nature, I assumed I’d never marry, I assumed I’d never have children. Given the facts in evidence, in your opinion would it be wrong or immoral for me to want to marry this man? You’re also welcome to take a shot at what Mr. Card’s opinion would be. If you could explain the reason for your opinion, I’d appreciate it. Respectfully, Siege ---
**Author:** ![Logicalkitten](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f6c823/32.png) [@Logicalkitten](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Logicalkitten)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/47 "2004-12-27T16:03:11Z")
Personally, civilization has been on a downswing ever since around 1992, when Jay Leno took over the Tonight SHow. I believe THAT is directly responsible. Kidding, of course, but seriously Having same sex couples marry actually discourages sex outside of marriage, if you’ll think about it for about one second. ---
**Author:** ![cheddarsnax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cheddarsnax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheddarsnax)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/48 "2004-12-27T16:26:03Z")
**prisoner** , you’re drifting off your own thread’s topic. Just like Card did in his article. When you talk about the children of homosexual parents, such as in [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5651635&postcount=39) post, you’re not debating gay marriage. You’re debating gay adoption, which is a different and separate issue. If gays are not fit to raise children, then do not allow them to adopt children. But that should have no bearing on whether or not they can be married. ---
**Author:** ![stegon66](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee59a6/32.png) [@stegon66](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stegon66)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/49 "2004-12-27T17:05:04Z")
> [@](#): > > You should be ashamed of trying to force me to vote your way. And you should be ashamed of voting the way you do. Sorry if that seems rude, but if you can’t see the wrongness of your position, then more’s the pity. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/50 "2004-12-27T17:11:46Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Oh, but I will say this. It’s not about any specific single family. It’s about society in general and the moral condition of that society. (And I’m not saying that homosexuality is immoral). The change in society over the past 30 years has been very subtly moving away from family and moral values. You probably didn’t even realize it was happening. But I have. And I don’t like it one bit. I feel that same sex marriage continues the trend towards a different less structured family. It’s not that I feel that it’s immoral, but… for example, I am very opposed to pre-marital sex. I think that it playing a huuuge part in our society’s problems, particularily abortion. I believe that same sex marriage would continue to, well, not encourage it, but it wouldn’t discourage pre-marital sex. That’s not to say that homosexual fathers or mothers couldn’t encourage their kids to practice abstinence. But why should the kids listen to their homosexual parents? Or how about the kid’s friends? Their parents might be heterosexual christian parents. But with a homosexual friend’s family as an example, apparantly healthy too, you might ask, “why wouldn’t they listen to their parents?” For one, because of stereotypes. Like it or not, they exist. The friends would be less likely to listen to their parents because they have an example of another family that is headed by sexual “deviants”. And sexual deviants that live a healthy life and appear to be good parents. And why is that a bad example? Because that the belief (however wrong) that the homosexual couple is a sexual deviant sort of gives permission to the friend to practice pre-marital sex. I have another example in the links of a street that is largely populated by homosexual couples. Bluntly, sir, you are either attempting to be non-condemnatory here (which is a nice sentiment) and failing in your efforts, or your picture of what morality and how it applies to society is in error – and, I believe, that is founded in your impression of gay people. What, exactly, do you consider “moral values” and how are they inculcated in society? I think that’s an important, and urgent, question to ask. Because I believe we agree on the foundation of where moral values are derived, and we’re in the minority here on that opinion. But how the individual applies those moral values, and what those moral values constitute, in his own life, and how he attempts to persuade society to promote those moral values – we’re as far apart as, well, Jesus and Satan. And, friend, the values I subscribe to are the ones that Jesus explicitly taught. I’m fairly certain that you will not, perhaps cannot, see that view, but I’m prepared to discuss it at length with you – as, I’m certain, are others who share them. As someone else said, don’t hide behind Card – have opinions that you’re willing to share here. You can agree with him, disagree with him, bring new material to the table. But the point behind Great Debates is to justify your views with evidence. I count myself the friend of most of the gay people here, and I’m fairly sure they share my views. And feeling that “that’s not for me, it would be a violation of my marriage vows” is not something they see as a condemnation of their moral choices. Where your “my opinion is that SSM should be outlawed” is. Do you by any chance see a difference in what we’re saying, and how it affects others? If not, why not? Where are your grounds for your assertions? ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/51 "2004-12-27T17:39:37Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Religious views aside… that’s part of my point… The original questions weren’t about religion. They were addressed to all people against SSM. I know I said Christians in my OP. Sorry, my mistake. I shouldn’t have limited the opinions to that group. Whatever our collective religious beliefs, I (mostly) agree with him regarding same sex marriage. And I believe that those that are against same sex marriage (whether they are Christian, LDS, Jewish, Muslim, or atheist) also believe most of what Card said here: that SSM is bad for civilization. Yet neither you nor that bigotted turd Orson Scott Card (I, too, have recently destroyed all of my Ender books and will never recommend them nor read anything by him again) can provide no real reason as to why my being able to marry the person I love, my being able to build a stable and legally protected life with the person who is my life, is bad for society. Card’s rant is nothing but seething hate and outright bigotry. If you agree with him, then you are beneath contempt. In the future, your children will look back upon you, and they will be ashamed. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/52 "2004-12-27T17:42:26Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > What if you thought that sauerkraut was bad for the environment, that eating it made everybody evil and, oh I don’t know. You just thought that it was bad for civilization. Now I know I’m stretching things a bit. No way sauerkraut is bad for civilization, but I think that ssm and a lot of common practices today ARE bad for civilization. So I will vote to protect civilization whenever given the choice. How am I bad for civilization? How is my love bad for civilization? Why do you hate me, despise me and seek to harm me? Why do you want me to be barred from making medical decisions for the person who would be my spouse? Why do you wish for him or me to die alone in a hospitale, with no comfort from the only person who we truly cherish? Why do you seek to spread hate and misery? Oh, yes, I remember. Because you’re Christian. As Jesus always said, “YOu will know them by their love (aside from the worthless faggots, Christians, go out and hate the faggots).” ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/53 "2004-12-27T17:46:45Z")
> [@spectrum](#): > > How am I bad for civilization? > > How is my love bad for civilization? > > Why do you hate me, despise me and seek to harm me? > > Why do you want me to be barred from making medical decisions for the person who would be my spouse? > > Why do you wish for him or me to die alone in a hospitale, with no comfort from the only person who we truly cherish? > > Why do you seek to spread hate and misery? Oh, yes, I remember. Because you’re Christian. As Jesus always said, “YOu will know them by their love (aside from the worthless faggots, Christians, go out and hate the faggots).” Don’t be too scathingly down on him, **Spectrum**. After all, by his own belief system, he’s just consigned himself to be among the goats at the Last Judgment – and beside that condemnation, whatever you have to say to him pales to insignificance. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/54 "2004-12-27T17:48:16Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > I have been. I’ve been watching as kids kill each other in schools. I’ve been watching the streets become more and more dangerous at night. I’ve been watching halloween change from a light and fun filled candy filled night for the kids, to a night where kids aren’t allowed outside. I’ve been watching as selfish people sue companies for millions for spilling their own coffee on themselves. I could go on but you get my meaning. Now of course SSM isn’t to blame for any of this since SSM didn’t really exist until now. But the devaluation of the family, lack parental supervision, and reduction of good role models IS to blame. SSM continues that trend, IMO. How can the fact that I love someone as much as you would ever love the man/woman you marry and want to form a family possible devalue family? How does the fact that I love a man make me a bad role model? Who am I hurting? You can’t talk about this in abstract. When you attack gays, you attack me PERSONALLY. When you call gays a threat to civilization, you call me, PERSONALLY, a threat to civilization. So step up the plate, Mr. prisoner, and tell me: how do I threaten society? Specific details, please. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/55 "2004-12-27T17:51:15Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Sorry, I was trying to keep my opinions out of this discussion. This discussion is supposed to be about OSC’s article. I suggest you start with the 3 links in the OP. I described at great length my own personal opinions. > > And let’s not forget, this is about personal opinion. I have a right to vote. And so do you. You should be ashamed of trying to force me to vote your way. You should be ashamed of trying to keep me and the person I love separate. You should be ashamed of spitting in my face and telling me I’m not as good as you, that I’m a threat to the American family, that I am destroying civilization, when you can’t show one shred of evidence to support that conclusion. You should be ashamed of requiring me to live by the standards of your pathetic little hate cult of a religion. You should be ashamed of telling the children being raised gay couples that their parents aren’t as deserving of legal recognition and protection as you are. You should be ashamed. But we know you’re not. You’re proud of your bigotry. So were many in the South who support segreation back in the 1950s. I hope history is just as kind to you. ---
**Author:** ![prisoner6655321](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5f8ce5/32.png) [@prisoner6655321](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/prisoner6655321)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2004, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/56 "2004-12-27T23:49:18Z")
Okay, I’d like to shout out a genuine apology to the gay community for appearing biggoted. I don’t mean to be that way. But honestly, I do think it’s wrong. I can’t help feeling that way any more than you feel that you can be attracted to someone of the opposite sex. This all began with several threads asking people like me why we believe that SSM is wrong. I answered the best I could, and that wasn’t good enough for all of you. My opinions might not be yours, so you may not think them valid. But to me they are. And I am entitled to my have an opinion. And I am entitled to a vote. And I will always vote my conscience. We all will. And it’s wrong to try to influence other people to go against their hearts. I consider the continuing acceptance of homosexuality a threat to morality and a continuing threat to family values. That’s it. Hate me all you want. You live your life the way you want. But I can’t stop feeling that your lifestyle is a threat to my ideals. Sorry if that makes me a biggot. If you want to read more about my reasons, again. You can find it all in the 3 links in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2004, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/57 "2004-12-28T00:51:55Z")
> [@prisoner6655321](#): > > Okay, I’d like to shout out a genuine apology to the gay community for appearing biggoted. I don’t mean to be that way. But honestly, I do think it’s wrong. Yeah, I’d agree that appearing bigoted is wrong! 🙂 Seriously, I think you have a right to hold an informed opinion on the subject – and you might consider, going beyond the scathing remarks, reviewing what has been said substantively here that disagrees with and contradicts what you and OSC have had to say. > [@](#): > > And it’s wrong to try to influence other people to go against their hearts. This is probably the most unintentionally ironic comment of 2004. > [@](#): > > I consider the continuing acceptance of homosexuality a threat to morality and a continuing threat to family values. [/QUOTE] I don’t. I think you need to restate, succinctly and clearly, why you believe this, and _engage in discourse_ with the people who disagree with you. They might even temper their rhetoric if you’re willing to **listen to them**. In the interim, a question: I’ve formed the opinion that you are a committed Christian. Am I correct in this? If that is the case, would you consider addressing the questions I’ve posed in the past regarding the most important duties of a Christian, as set forth by Jesus, with relation to this issue? I’ll be glad to restate them if you are willing to do so. Because I consider that the state of your soul is significantly more important than winning a debate – and if we can speak as brothers who serve our Lord, I have some important things to say to you about what He commanded us, and how it applies here. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2004, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/58 "2004-12-28T01:23:08Z")
Prisoner, you aren’t really being bigoted (as far as I can see) but you are thinking in terms of stereotypes. Two women lived by me in New Jersey, one across the street, one next door. One had been in a committed relationship for 20 years, the other went from partner to partner, and now was on her third. Of course the first was gay, and the second was straight. I can’t imagine how letting the couple across the street be married would hurt anything - they’d do a better job at it than my next door neighbor. BTW, I was in college 34 years ago, and if we had had ever imagined that someone would consider us and the society we lived in the exemplar of morality, we’d have laughed our asses off. Things always seem better 30 years before. One thing is different - my kids grew up in a less bigoted environment than I did. Racist jokes are not okay anymore. My daughter and her boyfriend went to the prom with one of her friends and his boyfriend, and guess what? The world didn’t end and no one thought twice about it. I’m as straight as they come, been married 26 years to one woman (that’s my street ced for the reactionaries 🙂 ) and I can’t imagine how our marriage would be any different if SSM was possible. How about you? Stop hiding behind Card and let us know how things would be different for you? Are you afraid you’d turn gay or something? Or is this another faith thing? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2004, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/59 "2004-12-28T01:33:22Z")
cred. not ced. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2004, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663/60 "2004-12-28T07:06:20Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Guin, you may want to consider using more honey and less vinegar. When you start off your side of the argument with “you should be ashamed,” even smart and decent people will tune you out pretty much right off the bat. Well, normally I would agree with you, but I was merely turning **prisoner6655321** own words back on him, when he said, “You should be ashamed of trying to force me to vote your way.” > [@prisoner6655321](#): > > He was just fighting back at me starting it. I don’t blame him. And I know you guys aren’t “forcing” me to vote your way. Did someone perform a sex-change operation on me without my knowledge? 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexual-marriage-why-osc-is-against-it/281663.md?page=4)