# 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:** 34
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/661 "2014-05-07T20:01:33Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I strongly suspect that the majority of people who feel that SSM contaminates marriage’s neighborhood by its existence are past the “first marriage” average age by a long shot. > > And, like the dude whose neighbors are suddenly black, they feel their own extant marriages have been devalued by the addition of gays. But once that happens, what can you do? You’re stuck with your now-gross devalued neighborhood. > > For those of us who are pro-SSM, this is a bit of a win-win. We get the legalization of SSM and those who feel their marriages are devalued by it feel bad. I like it when bigots feel bad. I surely do. I can agree with that suspicion. However I’ve never actually heard anyone say that their own marriage is devalued though, only that other people…either not yet married or not even born yet…will feel it is devalued. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/662 "2014-05-07T20:07:50Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > I can agree with that suspicion. However I’ve never actually heard anyone say that their own marriage is devalued though, only that other people…either not yet married or not even born yet…will feel it is devalued. Well, what can you say? You pretty much have to couch it in terms of what others will feel rather than what you feel when the position in inherently bigoted. “I don’t want to live in this neighborhood now that I have black neighbors” sounds a lot worse than “I’m afraid my house values might go down because people are so racist and won’t want to live next to black people.” “I have problem with gay people getting what I have” versus “I’m just concerned that other people will feel that marriage is watered down by the addition of gays into marriage and that will make them not want to get married and that will hurt society, so it’s best that we keep the gays out. I’m totally not a bigot. I’m just dealing with reality here.” People quite often try to put their own fears and biases into the mouths of “some say” in order to keep some plausible deniability. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/663 "2014-05-07T20:11:09Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > What you are saying is that giving me the option to order a coffee with cream somehow harms your cup of black coffee. Yeah, that’s the problem with this whole range of analogies. I approve of SSM. I have a couple of lesbian friends who desperately need to be able to get married. TO EACH OTHER. If my marriage is orange juice and theirs is pineapple juice, WE’RE NOT MIXING THEM. My marriage will remain orange juice; it’s just that there’ll be a glass of pineapple juice right next to it. I have no desire to drink the pineapple juice. It doesn’t appeal to me. What sort of schmuck would I have to be to tell other folks they can’t have it, because I’m worried about demeaning the word “juice”? I mean, Jesus Christ. If you want to make marriage more sacred, more meaningful, deny it to those whose grasp on their own marriage is so weak that they’re worried about what someone else’s marriage will do to their own. Those folks shouldn’t be able to get married, for sure. But committed, loving couples who happen to have different genitals? Let them get married, ferchrissake. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/664 "2014-05-07T20:12:12Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > People quite often try to put their own fears and biases into the mouths of “some say” in order to keep some plausible deniability. Snipped the quote for space. 🙂 Of course. People tell these sorts of lies to themselves and others all the time. I probably do too, but try to avoid it whenever I realize I’m doing it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/665 "2014-05-07T20:16:54Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I mean, Jesus Christ. Please do. So many who rationalize their own fears and hatreds by claiming it’s Christian doctrine have only a single line in Leviticus to point to. That’s in the Old Testament, the pre-Christ half of the Bible if you will, and so is a whole bunch of other stuff that someone today really doesn’t want to claim to believe in. Christ himself had exactly nothing to say about homosexuality, but he said a whole awful lot about loving and cherishing and not judging and being excellent to each other. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/666 "2014-05-07T20:25:39Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > Snipped the quote for space. 🙂 > > Of course. People tell these sorts of lies to themselves and others all the time. I probably do too, but try to avoid it whenever I realize I’m doing it. Some say I should too, but I don’t! Seriously, though, I find that when I’m faced with something and I become really worried by what someone else will think, if it’s really that it’s about the someone else, I’ll say “Let them be bothered. That’s not my problem.” It’s when I can’t do that that I realize that it’s internal. So, if I say “I have no problem with X, I’m just worried that other people will, so we shouldn’t do X” what it really means is that I have a problem with X. If I say “I have no problem with X. I know that other people will, but that is not my problem” what it really means is exactly what it says. ---
**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 7, 2014, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/667 "2014-05-07T20:36:16Z")
Well, at least he admits they’re both juice, as opposed to orange juice and pineapple civil unions, ONE set of beverages, ONE!! I guess it’s progress, of a sort. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/668 "2014-05-07T21:03:13Z")
Before same-sex marriage started happening I never heard anyone argue that the specialness of marriage was based on the fact that some couples couldn’t get married. That’s a concept that gets weirder and weirder the more you think about it. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/669 "2014-05-07T21:11:01Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Before same-sex marriage started happening I never heard anyone argue that the specialness of marriage was based on the fact that some couples couldn’t get married. That’s a concept that gets weirder and weirder the more you think about it. No doubt. And the vague free-floating “fear” of dame age to the institution of marriage becomes somehow very difficult to explain of justify in any rational way. Hence such nebulous and impersonal phrases like “Thats the fear.” That fear becomes so difficult to pin down that the harder you look at it the less you can see. ---
**Author:** ![standingwave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@standingwave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/standingwave)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/670 "2014-05-07T21:36:21Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > How about if you like your coffee black and add it that way and a barista gives it to you with a little cream in it? How about if a someone chooses to remain a virgin until marriage? having sex just that once is no biggie, right? The fact is that either marriage stands for the traditional coming together of man and woman or it doesn’t. SSM is one change. The desire for some to enter into polygamous marriages would be another. FFS, no one is going to “serve” you up a SSM against your will like a barista messing up your order. It’snot as if you go the chaple, someone’s going to say, “OK Bob, we know you had your heart set on marrying Suzy but you’re getting a Steve instead.” Don’t want a SSM? Don’t have one. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/671 "2014-05-07T21:36:39Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Look, people, **magellan01** simply wants a separate word but equal rights and responsibilities for the same action. How can you possibly call that separate but equal? Right now, two groups, U.S. Citizens and Legal Residents, can get a license and drive. Yet, they both have to adhere to a single set of traffic laws. In your mind does that fall into Separate but Equal, too? No. It can’t, because there is just one set of traffic laws. What Brown v. The Board of Education eliminated was the notion that, simply put, _two different schools_, one on each side of the tracks, could be both separate and equal. Brown case: 2 different groups; 2 different schools My idea: 2 different groups; 1 set of laws ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/672 "2014-05-07T21:39:07Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > What you are saying is that giving me the option to order a coffee with cream somehow harms your cup of black coffee. An analogy used to illuminate Point A has no Burden of also illuminating Point B, C, or D. Most people realize this. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/673 "2014-05-07T21:39:12Z")
> [@standingwave](#): > > It’s not as if you go the chaple, someone’s going to say, “OK Bob, we know you had your heart set on marrying Suzy but you’re getting a Steve instead.” Some opponents of SSM would love that. They’d be gay married without having to admit that gay sex was what they wanted all along. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/674 "2014-05-07T21:42:46Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > And what qualities exist in heterosexual couples, that do not exist in homosexual couples, that necessitates a special term only for heterosexual couples? 1. The degree to which they symbolize the necessary ingredients for procreation. 2. They are the components present in the ideal environment to raise children. Before you respond, do remember that I am in favor of gays—either single or a couple—being able to adopt children. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/675 "2014-05-07T21:44:14Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > My idea: 2 different groups; 1 set of laws And both groups get a driver’s license. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/676 "2014-05-07T21:45:02Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Right now, two groups, U.S. Citizens and Legal Residents, can get a license and drive. Yet, they both have to adhere to a single set of traffic laws. > > In your mind does that fall into Separate but Equal, too? No. It can’t, because there is just one set of traffic laws. This is a great comparison for advocates of same-sex marriage: it’s about two different groups who get the exact same set of privileges (including the name!) under the law. For you, it doesn’t work at all. For one thing the DMV doesn’t divide them up into different classes. That’s an immigration issue. What you’re proposing is that we divide people into two groups and give them the same privileges, but we call one group Drivers and the other, I don’t know, Vehicle Operators. By doing so, we are protecting the sanctity of driving or something. > [@](#): > > Brown case: 2 different groups; 2 different schools > > My idea: 2 different groups; 1 set of laws Again, “sets of laws” are not relevant to discrimination and as far as I can tell they’re not even really a thing. You’re separating marriages into two different groups. The number of laws required to achieve your purpose is irrelevant. “White children go to one school and nonwhite children go to another school” could be written as a single law. > [@magellan01](#): > > 1. The degree to which they symbolize the necessary ingredients for procreation. Why does this symbolism matter? > [@](#): > > 1. They are the components present in the ideal environment to raise children. I’m sure you’ve already seen the studies that debunk this. > [@](#): > > Before you respond, do remember that I am in favor of gays—either single or a couple—being able to adopt children. Which means you don’t care about this ideal environment thing anyway. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/677 "2014-05-07T21:45:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Still awaiting an answer as to whether marriage makes you less of a man. Wrench ottoman sunset effort spoon nickel calico. Uvula! ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/678 "2014-05-07T21:46:54Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > 1. They are the components present in the ideal environment to raise children. There is no evidence that a married man/woman couple is superior in child-rearing to a same-sex couple. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/679 "2014-05-07T21:49:31Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Wrench ottoman sunset effort spoon nickel calico. Uvula! If man+woman doesn’t equal lesser man or lesser woman, perhaps same sex+marriage doesn’t necessarily mean lesser marriage. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2014, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472/680 "2014-05-07T22:12:53Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Right now, two groups, U.S. Citizens and Legal Residents, can get a license and drive. Yet, they both have to adhere to a single set of traffic laws. > > In your mind does that fall into Separate but Equal, too? No. It can’t, because there is just one set of traffic laws. For the purpose of licensing, they are each identified as “licensed driver,” so that odd attempt fails. > [@magellan01](#): > > What Brown v. The Board of Education eliminated was the notion that, simply put, _two different schools_, one on each side of the tracks, could be both separate and equal. > > Brown case: 2 different groups; 2 different schools > > My idea: 2 different groups; 1 set of laws Actually, what _Brown_ did was point out that any effort to promote “separate but equal” inevitably led to inequality. No evidence has been presented that that conclusion has ever been successfully challenged. And under _Brown_, there was one set of laws, so your claim does not even address your own point. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472.md?page=33) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-gay-marriage-debate-over/687472.md?page=35)