Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 5
What are the benefits to society; of Polygamous Marriage?
Topic Started: Jan 8 2007, 03:07 PM (1,298 Views)
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
TomK
Jan 9 2007, 12:34 PM
AlbertaCrude
Jan 9 2007, 12:05 PM
John D'Oh
Jan 9 2007, 07:58 AM
IMO, the majority of people don't want gay marriage because it's 'a bit icky'. (a phrase requiring a hat-tip to Dewey)

That's right. 'Cuz icky things makes some people a bit uncomfortable in polite company.

And what's wrong with wanting to feel comfortable in polite society?

That post.. quoted above.. is a refreshing dose of sanity in an insane world.

The root of civilization is, or course civil.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Mik covered it well. There are basically 3 levels when it comes to this issue.

The homosexual person - simply a person with a certain orientation, no problem there.

The homosexual acts - the actual sexual activity, which I think is morally wrong, but shouldn't outlawed among many other things I think are wrong but shouldn't be against the law. (religious and non-religious reasoning)

The homosexual marriage - this is a legal/social issue, where one defines what they think the requirements for marriage should be, where I think it is obvious where I stand. (non-religious reasoning)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TomK
HOLY CARP!!!
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 01:16 PM
Mik covered it well. There are basically 3 levels when it comes to this issue.

The homosexual person - simply a person with a certain orientation, no problem there.

The homosexual acts - the actual sexual activity, which I think is morally wrong, but shouldn't outlawed among many other things I think are wrong but shouldn't be against the law. (religious and non-religious reasoning)

The homosexual marriage - this is a legal/social issue, where one defines what they think the requirements for marriage should be, where I think it is obvious where I stand. (non-religious reasoning)

89th I agree with your post. That pretty much sums it up--also, couples--gay and otherwise (e.g. two old spinsters living together,) should have what ever rights are granted to heterosexual couples.

Just not marriage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Right on, Tom! :thumb: If it's about equal rights, then it really should be equal rights!!
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TomK
HOLY CARP!!!
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.

That whhole "icky" thing is non-religious reasoning.

Frankly in NYC--gays are just a normal part of life, but here in the boonies (Florida,) they are a bit unsettling. Who knows why?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.

That doesn't make any sense. I don't need religion to tell me what kind of reasoning I should have. Of couse people use non-religous reasoning when it comes to marriage!
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sue
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 10:16 AM
The homosexual marriage - this is a legal/social issue, where one defines what they think the requirements for marriage should be, where I think it is obvious where I stand. (non-religious reasoning)

I'm not convinced you are using non-religious reasoning for this. I see what you are saying, but I think your opinion on social issues is coloured by your religious beliefs, is it not?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
States issue "marriage licenses". "Civil union" means a limited set of laws- and no federal status whatsoever. All I mean by "same-sex marriage" is civil law including all of the same laws relating to marriage but I don't think it should be called marriage. Marriage isn't the issue at all. Boy, people are upset about marriage. I assure you when I say "same-sex marriage" I am talking about the civil aspect. The "marriage" part of it isn't what I'm talking about at all.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.

Daniel,

It's not really a good idea to be asking for clarification on someone's viewpoint and then saying you don't believe them. It's fine to ask further questions, but dismissing their viewpoint like that is a conversation-killer for sure. Very disrespectful as well.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
He's just not making any sense....I wonder if he's doing it on purpose? I kind of hope so, for his sake.
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
LW, you can drop the snide comments. I'm no troll and I don't expect to be treated like one.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:43 PM
LW, you can drop the snide comments. I'm no troll and I don't expect to be treated like one.

I will. Ok. Deal. Just stop acting like a troll. For some reason, I feel like you have been - just dropping random comments here and there. :shrug:
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TomK
HOLY CARP!!!
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:43 PM
LW, you can drop the snide comments.  I'm no troll and I don't expect to be treated like one.

No offence Daniel, I know you're no troll--but you have no trouble making snide comments about other people's posts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

TomK
Jan 9 2007, 12:26 PM
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 01:16 PM
Mik covered it well. There are basically 3 levels when it comes to this issue.

The homosexual person - simply a person with a certain orientation, no problem there.

The homosexual acts - the actual sexual activity, which I think is morally wrong, but shouldn't outlawed among many other things I think are wrong but shouldn't be against the law. (religious and non-religious reasoning)

The homosexual marriage - this is a legal/social issue, where one defines what they think the requirements for marriage should be, where I think it is obvious where I stand. (non-religious reasoning)

89th I agree with your post. That pretty much sums it up--also, couples--gay and otherwise (e.g. two old spinsters living together,) should have what ever rights are granted to heterosexual couples.

Just not marriage.

I agree that some rights should be given to homosexual couples, along with any other type of couple (any groupings of adults regardless of sexual relationship or lack thereof, gay couples, heterosexual friends, 5 women, brothers and sister, etc) that wants to file as a legal "union" for purposes of taxes, benefits, rights, etc. However when it comes to marriage and the few but special rights that are entitled to them, I have drawn the line at one woman and one man. This is probably pretty close to what you think too, TomK...but I dont want to speak for you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Aren't we getting lost in semantics here? For the most part, when people refer to 'marriage' isn't it a civil rather than a religious ceremony they're talking about? I was married in a civil ceremony, but I'm still married. THe fact that the Roman Catholic church may or may not recognize Mrs. D'Oh as my trouble-and-strife doesn't bother me one jot. After all, I don't recognize the Bishop of Rome as being anything other than a German in a slightly peculiar hat, so why should they?

If a church doesn't want to allow gay marriage, or mixed marriage, or even red-headed marriage, I guess they may be entitled to discriminate. However, this isn't at issue here. Or am I missing the point?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

sue
Jan 9 2007, 12:34 PM
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 10:16 AM
The homosexual marriage - this is a legal/social issue, where one defines what they think the requirements for marriage should be, where I think it is obvious where I stand. (non-religious reasoning)

I'm not convinced you are using non-religious reasoning for this. I see what you are saying, but I think your opinion on social issues is coloured by your religious beliefs, is it not?

The general umbrella of my social views probably stems from my religious foundations, sure. But when it comes to specific issues, I wont cite religion as evidence for or against gay marriage. It's just not a fair playing field to do so. It's like going to court and saying you are going to examine a witness on the stand to prove your innocence, but the only problem is that the witness is your "invisible friend"! :lol:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 12:54 PM

The general umbrella of my social views probably stems from my religious foundations, sure. But when it comes to specific issues, I wont cite religion as evidence for or against gay marriage. It's just not a fair playing field to do so. It's like going to court and saying you are going to examine a witness on the stand to prove your innocence, but the only problem is that the witness is your "invisible friend"! :lol:

But if you happen to agree with what your invisible friend in every regard, even though you don't quote him directly, then isn't it the same thing?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TomK
HOLY CARP!!!
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 01:51 PM

I agree that some rights should be given to homosexual couples, along with any other type of couple (any groupings of adults regardless of sexual relationship or lack thereof, gay couples, heterosexual friends, 5 women, brothers and sister, etc) that wants to file as a legal "union" for purposes of taxes, benefits, rights, etc. However when it comes to marriage and the few but special rights that are entitled to them, I have drawn the line at one woman and one man. This is probably pretty close to what you think too, TomK...but I dont want to speak for you.

Pretty much--I was talking about giving gay (or otherwise) financial rights. Hey if we're friends and I have no other obligations--I should be able to leave all my money to you if I want. It's as simple as that. It's not a GAY issue, that's a Libertarian issue.

Marriage rights--and for me I'm including the right to adopt kids--should be for heterosexual couples.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

John D'Oh
Jan 9 2007, 12:57 PM
The 89th Key
Jan 9 2007, 12:54 PM

The general umbrella of my social views probably stems from my religious foundations, sure. But when it comes to specific issues, I wont cite religion as evidence for or against gay marriage. It's just not a fair playing field to do so. It's like going to court and saying you are going to examine a witness on the stand to prove your innocence, but the only problem is that the witness is your "invisible friend"! :lol:

But if you happen to agree with what your invisible friend in every regard, even though you don't quote him directly, then isn't it the same thing?

No, it's not.

There's a difference between agreeing with him and getting my ideas from him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Mikhailoh
Jan 9 2007, 09:38 AM
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.

Daniel,

It's not really a good idea to be asking for clarification on someone's viewpoint and then saying you don't believe them. It's fine to ask further questions, but dismissing their viewpoint like that is a conversation-killer for sure. Very disrespectful as well.

It's very disrespectful to say that the only benefit to society in the legal recognition of their relationships is to keep them from spreading their disease, whether satire or not.

89th is often flippant- his comment about flipping a coin in this thread in response to comments made to me comes to mind. 89th and I are sometimes frustrated in trying communicate with each other.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
As of late you don't seem to like the way anyone communicates.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Hey, right now, EVERYTHING pisses me off because I'm quitting smoking. I yell at everyone, swear at everyone, and I don't like anyone. There were some robins walking on my grass this morning. I shot them, cooked them, and ate them.

Arrrrr.... :devilgrin:

Cut Daniel some slack, man... :lol2:
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:40 PM
Mikhailoh
Jan 9 2007, 09:38 AM
Daniel
Jan 9 2007, 01:28 PM
Hmm, my view is that marriage is civil and religious, such as it is now, and frankly, I just don't believe that people get their ideas about marriage through non-religious reasoning.

Daniel,

It's not really a good idea to be asking for clarification on someone's viewpoint and then saying you don't believe them. It's fine to ask further questions, but dismissing their viewpoint like that is a conversation-killer for sure. Very disrespectful as well.

It's very disrespectful to say that the only benefit to society in the legal recognition of their relationships is to keep them from spreading their disease, whether satire or not.

89th is often flippant- his comment about flipping a coin in this thread in response to comments made to me comes to mind. 89th and I are sometimes frustrated in trying communicate with each other.

No, the only time I become frustrated, is when you become frustrated with me and shut down. Oh noes...there goes me being flippant again. :rolleyes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Um, yeah. Saying the only benefit to the legal recognition of their relationships is to to keep them from spreading their disease is not a mode of communication I like, Kenny didn't like it, and many people didn't like it. What I am saying to you is I wish you would have sought a balanced solution between the parties. Dismissing one person's point of view is...kind of what you are saying I am doing in this thread. But you're right. I meant to kill the conversation with 89th. It was wrong and I'll try to be more respectful to him. Sorry, 89th.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 5