# What motivates people to vote other people's rights away **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 4, 2009, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261 "2009-11-04T05:59:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/221 "2009-11-05T04:57:23Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > This completely misses the point. Government works to foster the creation of stable relationships and the production of children by encouraging male-female pairing. Government does not single out individuals who cannot reproduce and the overall goal is to encourage stable family units. you completely made this up or borrowed it from some anti SSM gibberish. It has no basis in reality. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/222 "2009-11-05T05:11:42Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > No. This is not about two people marrying. It is about two people of the same sex marrying. As I’ve stated straights and gays have the same rights. No, they don’t; such an argument is ridiculous to the point of parody. > [@yorick73](#): > > But, the state does also limit opposite sex marriage. Polygamy is not allowed. Brother and sister cannot marry. Parent and child cannot marry. Meaningless. All of those have non-bigoted reasons to make them illegal. Opposition to SSM is purely a matter of bigotry. > [@yorick73](#): > > Re-read post #188 Garbage that I already answered. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/223 "2009-11-05T05:14:24Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Parents and children and brothers and sisters are separate issues. Stay on topic. > > What we are talking about is an of age couple not being able to marry because of bigotry. SS couples do not have the sames rights as an opposite sex couple. Because a heterosexual can marry someone they’re sexually attracted to. A homosexual cannot. > > I’m surprised that you aren’t able to understand that. Read it a couple more times, maybe it will sink in. How are they different. If love and sexual attraction are the only requirements for marriage then these poor souls are being discriminated against. Incest couples do not have the same rights as non-incest couples. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/224 "2009-11-05T05:18:58Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > How are they different. If love and sexual attraction are the only requirements for marriage then these poor souls are being discriminated against. Incest couples do not have the same rights as non-incest couples. But they are very seldom consenting adults. And there are also genetic issues with children, and the moral issues involved with telling them not to have children. All of which are reasonable arguments for making it illegal. The opposition to SSM lacks any such reasonable arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/225 "2009-11-05T05:20:40Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > this. > It is perfectly normal for a percentage of the population just as other variables are. No, it is normal in the same sense that webbed fingers or spina bifida exist as a percentage of the population. We fix those physical abnormalities. This is different in that it affects behavior. there are many behavioral abnormalities that we endeavor to correct as a society. But the criteria for this has been limited to behavior that bring direct harm to individuals or other members of society. While a case can be made that certain practices are harmful within the gay community the behavior itself is not deemed harmful. That does not make it normal, it just means it’s not harmful. The legal ramifications of this is that for the most part, laws regarding homosexual activity have been set aside. As such, public support for privacy is high. But what motivates people to vote to retain the definition of marriage is the underlying idea that it represents a specific (normal) relationship. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/226 "2009-11-05T05:24:42Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > But they are very seldom consenting adults. And there are also genetic issues with children, and the moral issues involved with telling them not to have children. All of which are reasonable arguments for making it illegal. The opposition to SSM lacks any such reasonable arguments. This is nonsense. They don’t need to be married to have children. And NOW it’s about the children?!? What if they were sterile? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/227 "2009-11-05T05:25:28Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > No, it is normal in the same sense that webbed fingers or spina bifida exist as a percentage of the population. Ah. And your evidence that homosexuality is a defect? And even if it IS a defect, _ **we let people with genetic defects marry** _. > [@Magiver](#): > > But what motivates people to vote to retain the definition of marriage is the underlying idea that it represents a specific (normal) relationship. So, in other words it was just fine for people to oppose interracial marriage. That too was “normal” at one time. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/228 "2009-11-05T05:29:18Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > This is nonsense. They don’t need to be married to have children Incestuous sex is, however a requirement ( barring technological intervention ), and that is illegal. > [@yorick73](#): > > And NOW it’s about the children?!? Yes, because NOW the children in question are at risk of genetic defects. And because in the case of opposing SSM, children are only harmed, not helped. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/229 "2009-11-05T06:27:07Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Parents and children and brothers and sisters are separate issues. Stay on topic. It is on topic. Look to what he was replying to. Society does make restrictions on marriage. It’s a fact, albeit an uncomfortable one for you. > [@Lobohan](#): > > What we are talking about is an of age couple not being able to marry because of bigotry. SS couples do not have the sames rights as an opposite sex couple. Because a heterosexual can marry someone they’re sexually attracted to. A homosexual cannot. Beg the question much? The discussion is about the motivations of those of us who oppose SSM. Bigotry is but one possibility. You don’t get to frame the debate with the conclusion you’re trying to support. Sorry, chum. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/230 "2009-11-05T06:52:17Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I don’t think that it is “strange.” I just think that it is irrelevant; it is a holdover from a different time before significant changes in science and culture removed the cultural barriers and the biological impetus for recognizing only opposite sex marriage. I see no significant difference between celebrating the natural coming together of a man and a woman from that of a man and a man or a woman or a woman. I think that a bit odd, but can you see that some people might see the man/woman coupling more aligned with the natural order in the world? I understand that you and others might feel that that is now irrelevant, for the reasons you gave, but that sidesteps my question. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Dogs and cats are different: they are biologically distinct species with significantly different behaviors. Marriage is the same act uniting persons of the same species. Men and women are biologically distinct, but the expression of love that is distinct from blood kindred or distinct from friendship without physical intimacy is pretty much the same. Your analogy fails. Analogies needn’t be, and usually aren’t, exact duplications of what they are trying to shed light on. The point was/is that things can be very,very similar and still be worthy of separate classification. Man and woman are every bit as similar as SSM is to OSM, yet we still use “man” and “woman”. We even use “man” when referring to people of both genders at times, but we’ve not done away with “woman”. And that is helpful when we want a word describing the gender with the breasts and the shoe fetish. By allowing gays to “marry” you not only dilute the word, you strip the language of a descriptor for the very institution that has been so fundamental to society for centuries and, specifically, this very country. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/231 "2009-11-05T06:55:09Z")
Here’s a question I have for those who favor SSM and bring up the fact that not all married couples have or raise children: IF marriage had been restricted by law to only those people who would have an raise children, would you be okay with a civil union instead of “marriage”? ---
**Author:** ![Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ed655f/32.png) [@Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crown_Prince_of_Irony)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/232 "2009-11-05T07:14:16Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > So homosexuals can procreate with same-sex partners? I don’t think it’s hard to understand that the special relationship between man and woman is the natural order that gave us all life and to give it some exalted status is not unreasonable. > [@magellan01](#): > > I think that a bit odd, but can you see that some people might see the man/woman coupling more aligned with the natural order in the world? I understand that you and others might feel that that is now irrelevant, for the reasons you gave, but that sidesteps my question. Oh, bull-pucky - I am sick and tired of this argument. By extension, _cancer_ is the natural order of things. Should we stop treating cancer patients and searching for a cure, because this flies in the face of the natural order? _Living in cave, dressed in a loincloth and catching your food with a pointed stick_ is the natural order of things. Should we all ditch our comfy domiciles, with our central air and refrigerated food? News flash - that **was** the natural order of things. Species evolve - and part of this evolution from an anthropological standpoint is that the old ways give way to the new, in response to shifting cultural, intellectual, and environmental factors. And IMO, part of this evolutionary process is recognizing that love can come in more forms than the predominant religious community is willing to accept. So we search for cancer cures, build comfortable homes and drive shiny cars, and hopefully learn to tolerate that with which we aren’t comfortable. And all this equating homosexuality with incest and polygamy? It smacks of the same arguments that folks used against legalizing integration and interracial marriage 40 years ago. Every time I hear that argument, in my mind’s eye I see George Wallace and Orval Faubus - it really does your argument no good whatsoever. But then again, I doubt the good ol’ boys down South cared about such things back then either - not as long as they had the scared white Christian vote. Now we’re just replacing “scared” with “straight” - you all must be proud of yourselves. ---
**Author:** ![Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ed655f/32.png) [@Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crown_Prince_of_Irony)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/233 "2009-11-05T07:25:20Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Here’s a question I have for those who favor SSM and bring up the fact that not all married couples have or raise children: IF marriage had been restricted by law to only those people who would have an raise children, would you be okay with a civil union instead of “marriage”? No. Marriage between two legally consenting adults should be a fundamental right. Someone’s idea of the religious definition of marriage should have no bearing. ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/234 "2009-11-05T07:25:57Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Here’s a question I have for those who favor SSM and bring up the fact that not all married couples have or raise children: IF marriage had been restricted by law to only those people who would have an raise children, would you be okay with a civil union instead of “marriage”? No, then you’d be marginalizing an even greater segment of the population. There’s nothing special about couples that have or plan to bear children that make them better than other couples. ---
**Author:** ![Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ed655f/32.png) [@Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crown_Prince_of_Irony)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/235 "2009-11-05T07:27:15Z")
> [@Crown\_Prince\_of\_Irony](#): > > . . .not as long as they had the scared white Christian vote. Now we’re just replacing “scared” with “straight” - you all must be proud of yourselves. Oops, I meant to say ‘now we’re just replacing “ **white** ” with “straight”. . .’ I botched my punchline. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/236 "2009-11-05T07:36:02Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Ah. And your evidence that homosexuality is a defect? And even if it IS a defect, \*\*\* You’re comparing a physical defect to a physically driven behavioral abnormality. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > So, in other words it was just fine for people to oppose interracial marriage. That too was “normal” at one time. No, the fact that a law that was struck down existed is not an argument that it was a good law. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/237 "2009-11-05T07:43:07Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > It is on topic. Look to what he was replying to. Society does make restrictions on marriage. It’s a fact, albeit an uncomfortable one for you. Not uncomfortable for me. I’m not the one embracing irrational stupidity to validate my personal prejudices. Why is incest a separate issue? Because the homosexuals who want to get married aren’t related maybe? > [@](#): > > Beg the question much? The discussion is about the motivations of those of us who oppose SSM. Bigotry is but one possibility. You don’t get to frame the debate with the conclusion you’re trying to support. Sorry, chum. Opposing SSM is bigotry silly. I don’t care how you try to sell it to yourself, chum. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/238 "2009-11-05T07:51:44Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > > So, in other words it was just fine for people to oppose interracial marriage. That too was “normal” at one time. > > No, the fact that a law that was struck down existed is not an argument that it was a good law. **Der Trihs** was not arguing that it was a good law. He’s saying that your argument against SSM based on “normalcy” is flawed, because that same argument could have also been used to defend keeping interracial marriage illegal in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 8:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/239 "2009-11-05T08:15:13Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > **Der Trihs** was not arguing that it was a good law. He’s saying that your argument against SSM based on “normalcy” is flawed, because that same argument could have also been used to defend keeping interracial marriage illegal in the past. Bad laws have always made their way onto the books. That is not an argument. The op asked what motivates people to keep the definition of marriage as it stands. The answer is that the word has meaning and the vast majority of people do not want to change that meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2009, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261/240 "2009-11-05T08:23:36Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I think that a bit odd, but can you see that some people might see the man/woman coupling more aligned with the natural order in the world? Certainly - if that’s the way they choose to excuse their bigotry. But it is still bigotry, just like the people who said separation between the races was the natural order were just excusing bigotry. > [@magellan01](#): > > By allowing gays to “marry” you not only dilute the word, you strip the language of a descriptor for the very institution that has been so fundamental to society for centuries and, specifically, this very country. Garbage. Again; if there is any “dilution” of the word going on, it’s by people who oppose SSM, and by doing so smear the institution of marriage with bigotry. And your claim that the word would lose it’s meaning is ridiculous. > [@magellan01](#): > > Here’s a question I have for those who favor SSM and bring up the fact that not all married couples have or raise children: IF marriage had been restricted by law to only those people who would have an raise children, would you be okay with a civil union instead of “marriage”? No. I’d just be demanding the right to childless couples to marry. > [@Magiver](#): > > You’re comparing a physical defect to a physically driven behavioral abnormality. Like being left handed? Guess we’d better keep them from getting married too! :rolleyes: > [@Magiver](#): > > The op asked what motivates people to keep the definition of marriage as it stands. The answer is that the word has meaning and the vast majority of people do not want to change that meaning. And allowing SSM won’t change the meaning at all; that’s a ridiculous claim. Everyone will still know what “Bill and Jane are married” means. And all these empty, silly reasons being given for opposing SSM really underline the truth of my claim that the real reason is always bigotry. Opponents can’t come up with good arguments, because there are none. And they can’t ( at least on a board like this ) come right out and admit that it’s because they or their god hates homosexuals without being rhetorically torn apart. So all they can do is throw out one ridiculous rationalization after another, because their real reasons won’t fly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-motivates-people-to-vote-other-peoples-rights-away/516261.md?page=13)