# Is The Gay Marriage Debate Over? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 2, 2014, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472 "2014-05-02T00:00:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/501 "2014-05-06T18:17:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Anti-SSM and not homophobic …? Unicorn, or something comparably mythical. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/502 "2014-05-06T18:18:06Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Why would it be a “sin” to eat pork or be a homosexual? Because the Torah says so. But again, that’s just for me and other Jews. You are not bound by any of it and I’m not trying to get pork banned. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/503 "2014-05-06T18:21:08Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Because the Torah says so. > > But again, that’s just for me and other Jews. You are not bound by any of it and I’m not trying to get pork banned. From my understanding, the pork prohibition is meant to apply only to Jews. But at least in the orthodox tradition, same sex relationships are prohibited to everyone by the Noahide laws. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/504 "2014-05-06T18:25:06Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What do _you_ think would be a non-bigoted reason to oppose SSM? I’d only buy it if someone opposed all marriage, for any reason. But they’d have to spend as much time opposing straight marriage as SSM. Or more, really, since there are so many more straight marriages. I mean, if someone wanted to get rid of all marriage, it seems like the SSM thing would just go away if they could get straight marriages removed from the legal/political realm. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/505 "2014-05-06T18:25:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The reasons stated by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They were clearly not homophobes before coming around on gay marriage. And the gay community certainly didn’t treat them like “the lesser of two evils”. They were treated as valued allies. You’re wrong on both counts there. The gay community has always been keenly aware that the Democrats are in no way a reliable ally. So long as the only other viable political option out there is the Republicans, the Democrats know they can safely take our money and ignore us. The Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, can be counted on to be pro-gay rights to precisely the degree that it does not damage them politically, and not one inch further. It is not by accident that it took until his final term in his last ever political office that Obama’s opinion on gay marriage suddenly “evolved.” Barrack Obama is not a gay rights icon, no matter how badly he wants you to think he is. And Bill Clinton is lucky gay people still talk to him. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/506 "2014-05-06T18:29:02Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > Surely the reason was not that marriage between people of different races was “not marriage”, but that it was miscegenation and opposed on those grounds. That’s just semantics, isn’t it? According to the Virginia law overturned in _Loving_, marriages between a white person and a person of any other race were automatically void. Those marriages legally could not exist, and if you violated the law, your marriage would be nullified and you would face prison time. [You can read at least parts of those laws here:](http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1#ZO-388_US_1n3) > [@](#): > > Section 257 of the Virginia Code provides: > > Marriages void without decree. – All marriages between a white person and a colored person shall be absolutely void without any decree of divorce or other legal process. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/507 "2014-05-06T18:34:39Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > You’re wrong on both counts there. The gay community has always been keenly aware that the Democrats are in no way a reliable ally. So long as the only other viable political option out there is the Republicans, the Democrats know they can safely take our money and ignore us. The Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, can be counted on to be pro-gay rights to precisely the degree that it does not damage them politically, and not one inch further. It is not by accident that it took until his final term in his last ever political office that Obama’s opinion on gay marriage suddenly “evolved.” > > Barrack Obama is not a gay rights icon, no matter how badly he wants you to think he is. > > And Bill Clinton is lucky gay people still talk to him. Absolutely. What’s funny is how many prominent republican leaders have suddenly been LGBT supportive when they leave office. Cheney, Bush 1, Other members of the Bush family (Except W as far as I can tell), Gingrich and probably others. Political expediency works for both parties. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/508 "2014-05-06T18:35:24Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > And Bill Clinton is lucky gay people still talk to him. Then the LGBT community is a cheap date. Bill Clinton has never failed to get a warm reception from the community wherever he’s gone, and he’s never failed to raise big money for candidates from the gay community. “Lesser of two evils” is what independents vote for. the gay community is overwhelmingly Democrat, and their support is vocal and enthusiastic and backed by a lot of campaign donations. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/509 "2014-05-06T18:39:00Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Then the LGBT community is a cheap date. Bill Clinton has never failed to get a warm reception from the community wherever he’s gone, and he’s never failed to raise big money for candidates from the gay community. > > “Lesser of two evils” is what independents vote for. the gay community is overwhelmingly Democrat, and their support is vocal and enthusiastic and backed by a lot of campaign donations. Because they are the best chance we have had historically. In most cases, you have a better shot of Democrats supporting LGBT rights than you do with Republican. But I don’t know any other gay person who doesn’t know that the Democratic leaders would sell us down the river in a heartbeat if they thought it would help them. Again, see Clinton and his signing DOMA and DADT. He was roundly castigated for that. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/510 "2014-05-06T18:40:58Z")
Here’s the game that is being played: Some people opposed to SSM are bigots. Some people opposed to SSM are homophobes. Therefore, all people opposed to SSM are both bigots and homophobes. This Special Strain Of Logic brought to you by The Contortionists. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/511 "2014-05-06T18:42:05Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Here’s the game that is being played: > > Some people opposed to SSM are bigots. > Some people opposed to SSM are homophobes. > Therefore, all people opposed to SSM are both bigots and homophobes. > > This Special Strain Of Logic brought to you by The Contortionists. > > :rolleyes: I thought the consensus was that all people who oppose SSM are bigots. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/512 "2014-05-06T18:42:41Z")
If you’re saying that some people opposed to SSM are \*not \*homophobes, you’ve chosen a strange way to show us. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/513 "2014-05-06T18:44:53Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > Because they are the best chance we have had historically. In most cases, you have a better shot of Democrats supporting LGBT rights than you do with Republican. But I don’t know any other gay person who doesn’t know that the Democratic leaders would sell us down the river in a heartbeat if they thought it would help them. Again, see Clinton and his signing DOMA and DADT. He was roundly castigated for that. He was. But I can smell the difference between an alliance of convenience and genuine friendship, and at least beginning with Bill Clinton, it was practically a marriage. And the gay community actually has shown remarkable patience for political realities, content to bide their time and let the winds slowly shift their way. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/514 "2014-05-06T18:53:17Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > Marriage is not just a word. I would say that no one pro SSM has advanced that as their point but this conversation has so much repetitive blah blah blah that I may have missed it. I don’t think it’s just a word though. But many in these debates bristle at at the notion of protecting the meaning of the word. “It’s just a word!”" is almost like a mantra. Just do a search and look at the first hundred instances or so of this being done. > [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > You are right about marriage being the cornerstone of a stable society. It encourages people to commit to and support each other no matter what…in sickness and in health, as it were. It encourages a mindset that makes people think less selfishly and put their family before themselves on a consistent basis. It assures that children — both natural and adoptive----- are cared for. The support network provided by marriage lessens the burden of the state when it comes to caring for it’s citizens. > > So why would it not be in the best interest of society and the state to broaden that cornerstone and allow access to the institution of marriage to same sex couples? Wouldn’t that increase social stability? I’d say no. Because while you are broadening it in one respect, you are weakening its meaning on the other. I agree with just about all you wrote. I want SS couples to enter the same type of relationships, and tap into the same package of legal benefits and privileges. But by doing so without the badge “marriage”, we get all the upside without the downside. > [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > If you believe that broadening marriage to include same sex couples denigrates or deteriorates the institution of marriage, then you must also believe that all homosexuals suffer from some sort of character or moral deficit that precludes their full participation in this socially beneficial institution. I do not believe the last part of that at all. As far as the first part of the statement, you’re using words that go beyond the value I see and the point I’d make. I’d say it water’s down the meaning of the word. It weakens it. The same way that adding water to a glass of orange juice weakens it. That doesn’t mean that there’s anything wrong with water. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/515 "2014-05-06T18:56:35Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > He was. But I can smell the difference between an alliance of convenience and genuine friendship, and at least beginning with Bill Clinton, it was practically a marriage. And the gay community actually has shown remarkable patience for political realities, content to bide their time and let the winds slowly shift their way. But he still sold us out, which was my point about political expediency. And yes, there has been a lot of patience but there has been a lot that had to change. It’s still in living memory that gay people were a category on the State departments list as security risks for being ‘un-american and subversive’, considered mentally ill, arrested on the flimsiest of charges and so on. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/516 "2014-05-06T18:56:55Z")
> [@](#): > > I want SS couples to enter the same type of relationships, and tap into the same package of legal benefits and privileges. But by doing so without the badge “marriage”, we get all the upside without the downside. What’s the “downside” again? I keep missing it. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/517 "2014-05-06T19:02:39Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > If you’re saying that some people opposed to SSM are \*not \*homophobes, you’ve chosen a strange way to show us. This is hilarious. There is not one—not one—benefit that OS couples enjoy that I do not want extended to SS couples. I simply want them to do it through a different mechanism than you and others here. Call it a civll union or whatever the hell else you want and we’d be on the same side. But a marriage not comprised of man + woman, husband + wife, is like one hand clapping, it’l like an atom with electrons orbiting a nucleus filled with other electrons. It’s nonsensical. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/518 "2014-05-06T19:04:22Z")
The downside is letting the gays use a word that implies they’re normal. That’s it. Something bad might result from that someday, he claims, even if he can’t think of what that might be, and can’t acknowledge that \*real \*bad things happen \*today \*if we don’t. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/519 "2014-05-06T19:07:29Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > But he still sold us out, which was my point about political expediency. > > And yes, there has been a lot of patience but there has been a lot that had to change. It’s still in living memory that gay people were a category on the State departments list as security risks for being ‘un-american and subversive’, considered mentally ill, arrested on the flimsiest of charges and so on. When I was getting ready to move to Kentucky from Florida, I wanted to find out how racist the place still was. The internet is imperfect for such a study, but I figured that was the first place to start. This is 2006, mind you. Since I’m in an interracial marriage, that was the first thing I googled: “Interracial marriage Kentucky”. One of the first page hits was an ad for an office of psychiatry, treating disorders like homosexuality, bestiality, self-mutiliation, porn addiction, sex addiction, and interracial dating. The reality was thankfully not as awful as that hit would suggest. Three incidents of someone yelling racial epithets out of moving cars, and being asked if we wanted seperate checks every time we went to a restaurant. And I did have out, gay employees working with me who faced constant slights and weird reactions but didn’t feel like they were in danger. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/520 "2014-05-06T19:09:11Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > This is hilarious. There is not one—not one—benefit that OS couples enjoy that I do not want extended to SS couples. Except the use of the word “married”. :rolleyes: It does matter, as has been explained to you many times. It even matters to you, given the countless times you’ve told us it matters, even if you’ve had trouble explaining why. > [@](#): > > I simply want them to do it through a different mechanism than you and others here. Call it a civll union or whatever the hell else you want and we’d be on the same side. A “different mechanism” is not “the same set of laws” as you claim, now is it? Tell us why you think the growing majority of people disagree with you. > [@](#): > > But a marriage not comprised of man + woman, husband + wife, is like one hand clapping, it’l like an atom with electrons orbiting a nucleus filled with other electrons. It’s nonsensical. There you have it, folks. The very idea of allowing gays to marry is so far beyond his comprehensive abilities that he doesn’t even see it as bigoted; it’s “nonsensical”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472.md?page=27)