Opposing gay marriage is merely archaic

Great Debates
1

dictionary.com “archaic” 2.

The argument that anyone is a homophobe for opposing gay marriage is silly. It would be a radical new step in the world. Up until now gay men had to live apart and look longingly at one another without ever touching…

Oh, REALLY?!

One misconception: that the churches in the US will ever be forced to do anything.

Sure the government tax… No, they don’t. Sure the government regulat… No, they don’t. Churches may be, in my guesstimation, more prevalent in the US than anywhere in the world. Every religion seems to be represented in every big city. There is no better growth industry. Too bad you can’t buy stock.

Yet, if gay people get a piece of paper that allows someone to marry them legally – the moral or legal foudation of the US or world will crumble. Um, as they say, I call BS.

It will allow gay partners to have basic legal rights like wills, and, everything else basically. The “slippery slope” should be hard enough to avoid. Homosexuality is recorded throughout human history. I’m not saying it should be mandatory, just allowed.

“Well, no, the courts never have turned a blind eye to pig intercourse in this country, or in the common law.”

2

Another freaky typo. Did I just disprove my own argument by saying?

The slippery slope of sentence construction, OTOH, is tied to the immutable laws of physics. Heh, the new physics theories are wacky. Better than my old comic books.

3

This was not a parody thread. I swear, I missed that one, and that one, but maybe not that one. Thanks for not pitting me for opening ANOTHER one.

That was a real typo. I mangled three complex sentences into one Frankestein’s monster of a correction. A Freudian typo? Only partially. I was going to go into a lot more stuff.

MODs I’m going to post a corrected OP in another thread, could you close this one?

4

Well just to illustrate how you are misinformed (creator of thread).

A lot of homosexuals refer to the “perfect” society that was the Greeks, which were openly accepted of gays.

They often over look the fact that the Greeks also had sex with young boys (sometimes below the ages of 12), and animals.

If that’s the society you want, start legalizing Gay Marriages.

There is a slippery slope, it is the incrimentalism in policy making.

We only push the boundaries of current policy.

The next generation, deeming that Gay Marriages were successful, will allow civil unions between animals and people, because, there are always nuts who want to do stuff like that.

When the moral structure of a nation collapses, the nation itself generally falls apart soon afterwards.

5

Yes, the anti-gay marriage position all makes sense to me now! If we allow two human beings with the same type of genitalia to enter into a formal relationship, it logically follows that we must allow them to marry dogs! You’re making perfect sense, Broken Column! I bow before your impeccable logic! I find your ideas interesting and wish to subscribe to your newsletter! :rolleyes:

6

Heck, if you like that, check the other gay marriage threads…

He’s full of… err… wisdom.

7

I find it facinating that it is Liberals who say “There is no slippery slope”.

Why don’t you take a look at the slope you liberals have fallen down.

Since 1900 you’ve successfully done the following.

You’ve managed to practically oblitterate Judeo-Christian tradition in society throughout the West.

You’ve managed to introduce incrimentally an increasing problem of drug use.

You’ve managed to create a society from men who had never seen bare breasts till they were married, to a society where breasts and nudity is practically common place.

You’ve managed to introduce promiscuity as the popular choice of life style.

You’ve managed to re-introduce the idea of “direct democracy” (Already proven an abyssmal failure time and time before.)

You’ve managed to get Women into almost every corner of the military, while before such a thing would be dishonorable.

You’ve managed to destroy the concept of honor.

You’ve managed to make it nearly impossible now for a family to survive on 1 parent working.

You’ve managed to make it now so that kids grow-up without their parents around most of the time, because both now work.

You’ve managed to put into practice the evil that is socialism.

You’ve managed to take away people’s property, and enslave them to the state by forcing policy of government funded health care and other services.

You’ve managed to put the State before God. (1984 INGSOC anyone?)

You’ve managed to introduce not only foul language, but the permissiveness of bad language everywhere.

You’ve managed to destroy Hollywood.

You’ve done so many things…

Yeah, you Liberals keep telling yourselves there’s no such thing as a “Slippery Slope.”

What began as a redress of commonsense greivances…equal rights to blacks, and voting for women.

Has become one of the most disgusting dismantlings of a Culture ever seen in the history of the World.

Not even Htiler destroyed the German culture so much, as the liberals have destroyed the common bonds that Western Civilization identified itself with.

I’m am certainly more wise than you Who_me.

Just because I don’t subscribe to your beliefs of “freedom to do anything you want”…doesn’t make me ignorant.

Unlike you I’ve at least read Hobbes and Rousseau, and Rousseau’s assumption has been proven wrong thanks to you guys.

Freedom from Society, results in chaos and “Perfect Danger” as Hobbes put it.

8

Other than “You’ve done so many things…” which I must admit is true and perhaps the women in the military bit, can you back up (in full) any of those claims you just posted?

9

Cite? It seems strong to me…

Drugs have been in use much further back than 1900. Also, I believe some conservatives have been known to partake. BTW, cite for the liberal at fault claim?

Show me where the sight of a bare breast is bad. Show me any damage caused by it.

And the problem is?

Cite?

Thank you, I’ll take credit for this. It was a long time coming, but we’re not there yet.

Cite?

Cite?

Cite for liberals being the cause?

Not all socialism is bad, socialize medicine for example. Unfortunately I haven’t seen that it’s in practice.

Excuse me… huh???

Separation between church and state… freedom of religion (or lack thereof).

Liberals invented foul language? Never heard that before.

And when was it healthy?

Now show me evidence.

I think that your thoughts are ill formed and illogical. I have not seen a single shred of evidence of any of your allegations.

10

Oh, shit. I hadn’t even noticed the Hindus taking over.

Yup, you’ve got us there. Never shoulda legalized heroin…wait, I mean cocaine… oh, whoops, I meant marijuana- nope, not that either. Oh, yes, alcohol . That whole Prohibition thing you Conservatives were big on had been going so well too.

No we haven’t. I haven’t seen a breast all day. In any case, virtually every man sees a bare breast within the first few hours of life.

Bollocks. That was your conservative ideal- the market- at work. “Should I be celibate, or alive?”

Missed again, chief. We still have an electoral college. Does it bother you that Senators are directly elected? I thought it might. Much better to go back to letting special interests appoint them.

And of course, honor demands that a woman’s place in the army is as a camp follower, right?

The Marines still use it in their recruiting ads. Good enough for them, good enough for me.

Last I checked, “we” had also saved those kids from being workers themselves . The “evil of socialism” seems to have done okay in pretty much all of Western Europe. Pardon me, though, they must obviously be on a one-way trip to Gomorrah.

Er, no, the Founding Fathers did that quite nicely.

We destroyed it, you say? Did we drop a bomb on it? Is it on fire? I don’t understand. CNN seems to have missed this story completely!

[QUOTE=The_Broken_Column]

You’ve done so many things…
Yeah, you Liberals keep telling yourselves there’s no such thing as a “Slippery Slope.”
What began as a redress of commonsense greivances…equal rights to blacks, and voting for women.
Has become one of the most disgusting dismantlings of a Culture ever seen in the history of the World.
QUOTE]

Reality train coming through… ding ding ding ding ding… oh, look at that, you missed it. Seriously, I can’t take it anymore. You’re a complete dipshit. (sorry mods).

11

Won the vote for women? Made minorities full citizens under the law? Upheld the sanctity of free speech? I apologize; you must have found those very distressing. But why stop at 1900? The whole march of human history has been that of human freedom.

That march began in darkness. The greatest monuments of the ancient world are a testament to the slavery of man: the ziggurats of Babylon; the pyramids of Egypt; the Colosseum of Rome; all of these record the destruction of individual human lives and liberties. Even those ancients who took up the mantle of freedom did so were quick to shirk it when the burden grew heavy: do not forgot that the Athenians killed Socrates.

We have come far since Athens. Men are men, and not slaves. Women are their equals, and not chattel. Nations are contracts, and not prisons.

Yet freedom has not marched forward unopposed. At its every hour of birth, it has been attended by those who sought to destroy it, for they perceived in new liberty the death of old order. In one sense, these reactionaries were correct: the social order that they loved and defended is dead. It died at Runnymede, at Philadelphia, at Nuremberg, and on innumerable other battlefields lost to memory. We no longer labor for the glory of despots; we live for ourselves.

Insecure men have always opposed the tide of human freedom, and they have always been wrong.

We live still in the shadow of past slavery, and under the specter of slavery in the present. In Athens, men and women were free to love men or women as their natures dictated. Today the dictates of nature are held captive by the whims of those who insist that marriage must remain as their own taste prefers it; as it is alleged to have remained since the dawn of time.

If mankind were to exist now as it did at the dawn of time, it would remain within the shadows of its earliest and darkest caves.

The United States has long prized its position at the vanguard of human freedom. Its history traces the evolution and expansion of liberty: to women, to children, to the poor – to all colors of huddled masses yearning to breathe free. We are met now on another battlefield of freedom. If we advance, this hour will live in history as the hour at which we took one more great stride towards the right of all human beings to exist as they exist: at which marriage was deemed so right and so strong that it could be shared by all who sought it with blessings to spare, and at which our nation declared that it did not fear love.

If we retreat, then we can withdraw only into the slavery of the past. If we now shirk the mantle of freedom, then we slouch – not towards Robert Bork’s Gomorrah, but towards Kipling’s Nineveh and Tyre.

For God’s sake, do your duty.

12

Where are you finding these people? I’ve never once met a gay person who referred to Greek society as “perfect”.

13

Obviously false; Judeo-Christian traditions of all sorts remain strong throughout the world.

The use of heroin has declined substantially since 1900. The use of cocaine is about the same, perhaps a bit less. The use of marijuana has declined substantially. You forget that in 1900 all three of these drugs were legal and routinely sold at corner drugstores.

Bare breasts (and bare all sorts of other things) were quite common sights in the late 1800s. You had to go to certain types of shows to see them, but these shows were quite common.

Given the current strong social and legal disapproval of polyamory, as well as the significant sanctions still applied to those who “cheat”, I would say that this statement is plainly false.

The worst abuses of “direct democracy” are, curiously enough, launched by conservatives.

Just as it was “dishonorable” for blacks to serve in the military? There has never been dishonor for those women who have chosen to risk their lives for their country. Many did, you know, long before integration of the forces, by the simple expedient of passing for men in their companies. Entire battalions of women served with great honor and dignity in World War II – and you claim their service was without honor? You seem not to know what honor is.

I place the blame for that squarely in the hands of conservatives.

This took place during the Nixon presidency – a conservative, and is perpetuated by businesses who refuse to pay a family wage – most of which are run by conservatives.

Again, a result of conservative refusals to act in the interest of children or working-class Americans.

I grow tired of you.

14

To address the actual issue of the thread there is no slippery slope. There is only a slippery slope if one has no grasp of logic or reality.

Since only the legal aspects of marriage can be legislated (by definition) the only question is whether or not a legal marriage contract between members of the same sex creates a precedence that will allow the legalization of other activities, some of which are considered deviant.

Only legal consenting adults, and certain minors with parental permission, are allowed to marry and gay marriage does not change this. It merely changes the allowable sexes of the LCAs (or MWPPs). Those exluded from marriage contracts now, animals and companies for instance, are not given a back door legally.

I understand though that a fair deal of the argument is actually that the legalization is a symptom of moral decay and once that symptom has appeared the complete collapse into a society of necrosadist zoophiles is at hand. Again this does not follow reasonably from the situation.

Recognizing a particular form of mutual love between humans does not open up the door to recognizing the love of a depraved human for the corpse of an animal or anything else. It is the fact that the feeling is mutual, that both parties can express desire to be in the relationship and the recognition of the individuals as legal adults that make gay marriage logical. These principles do not allow for many other forms of marriage or legal perversion.

As for the rest of the accusations against “liberals” (a label I do not attach to myself, and I think few who know me would) I could construct a list of things I didn’t like in society blaim it on “conservatives”. This list would not prove anything besides the fact that I like insulting people for disagreeing with me.

15

To suggest that the service of women to the American military is or should be dishonorable simply because they are women, those are fighting words. The honor of serving our country has often been denied to minorities in this country. When allowed to serve, their contributions, most often in separate and not equal units, were often minimized or ignored as much as possible. Allowing women to serve along side men is more honorable not less. Now we deny the privilege to gays and lesbians. Before it was denied to others including native Americans and blacks. When all are allowed to serve based their merit and not arbitrary characteristics, this country will have more honor not less.

You have some kind of romanticized piture of life before that is simply ridiculous. The child labor legislation passed since your golden age belies your twisted vision of the past. So does your reference to how liberals destroyed Hollywood. Without antitrust laws of the liberals there would have been no Hollywood as we know it. Go to the Library of Xongress website and look at the Westinghouse films of women in factories. Do you think that women working outside the home was a recent phenomenon then? If so then you have forgotten how many died in fires in textile mills because they were locked in to prevent theft and to make sure they would work their scheduled hours. Addiction to opiates was common in 1900 and before. Your vision never held for all or even most. Only select classes could afford for women and children not to work outside of the home. The lack labor regulations made life for those who had to go out to work made their lives dangerous, unpleasant and too often quite short. How letting a child work in a dank factory day in and day out somehow made out country more honorable and not less so is beyond me.

16

lee, Publius, those were both fabulous posts. Hats off to both of you.

17

Now I’m worried…

So if the neighbours feel my Gay marriage to my husband is successful, will the kid next door start ringing the doorbell asking if he can take my Golden Retriever out for a walk and a quick ceremony?

18

<minor hijack for a comment>In viewing The_Broken_Column’s post (and other recent posts on this board), the first thing that comes to mind is a Puritan from the 1600s with a bad memory of history and a bad case of witch-hunting fervor.</hijack>

Now, on to the topic. The people most fervently against homosexual marriage (and the rights that come along with granting the legal title) forget that the government is based on a separation of church and state. They also tend to forget that homosexuality was part of several societies throughout history (examples have been stated by other posters), and homosexual behaviour in animals isn’t uncommon. At this point, they’re fighting with dodgy logic, bending their memory to fit the brand of truth they attempt to peddle.

Personally, I’d grant homosexuals the legal rights that come along with marriage, and I don’t have a problem with them referring to it as marriage. I feel every person has a right to be able to confirm legally and publicly their lifemate, all rights and bonuses included. This is an issue that I lean liberally towards, but I consider myself to be fairly moderate. I’m normally a fencepost-sitter, with the exception of a few issues that I am very passionate about.

Lee, Publius, and The Tim, you speak your points of view much more eloquently than I can manage at this time. [sub]Gotta love the 24 hours of no sleep that comes along with night shifts…[/sub]

19

No, I’m anti-sex-with-children. That’s one of the points I made on the other thread exactly like mine. It’s easy to make factual distinctions in the law. They typo I made in this OP didn’t help much.

The slippery slope in terms of other conduct will be EASY to avoid. We presently ignore (or tacitly acknowledge) homosexual “marriage” in fact already.

Now, of course, they are getting married at the courthouse. Damn, those lines are long! The sidewalks will crumble first.

20

Yeah! Because you know what happened the last time Western society looked upon the ancient Greeks with reverence, and based a large amount of their society upon their philosophy and aesthetic principles? Remember that disaster?

The Renaissance.

Wow. Wouldn’t want that to happen again.

The idea that if we look upon the Greek ideals favorably, we must descend into pedophilia is astonishingly ludicrous. Do you oppose Euclidian geometry on the same basis? How about democracy?

We, as a species, must learn from the mistakes of the past, and not repeat them. And we must look upon the successes in history, and strive to emulate them. Both the pinnacles and nadirs of civilization can be found in some cultures; should we eschew their achievements because they committed atrocities? Or should we learn from both?