Debate club: Gay marriage

[Lanky Wanker]

So today after school there was a debate club thing and the topic was gay marriage, but I didn't go because I (thought I) knew how it would end which would've just annoyed the shit out of me. In a school full of homophobes, you wouldn't expect much to happen, especially when most of them are Muslim and the person arguing against it was planning to basically quote the Quran throughout the whole debate. Surprisingly, the side arguing for gay marriage won, although those arguing against it seemed to think this was due to a lack of time or something stupid. I was sat right in the middle of a prelude to the debate at lunch, but eventually gave up and moved away after hearing this guy's stupid, overused arguments:

1. "The definition of marriage is a man and a woman." < he repeated this one about 5 million times
2. "The kids will be bullied."
3. "The cost of social workers and everything for gay couples adopting kids will be too much."
4. "Society doesn't/won't accept it"
5. "If we allow gay marriage, are we gonna let people marry animals next?"

He also basically contradicted himself by saying we could just extend civil partnership to give gay couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples, like being able to visit your loved one in hospital where you usually wouldn't, as my (obviously) annoyed bisexual friend pointed out to him. Anyway, ridiculous arguments aside, I'm glad he lost the debate. :cool: This actually gives me some kind of hope for humanity.

[.45]

Here's my take on the issue:

In supporting a ban on gay marriage, people are only ultimately taking a right away from themselves. Sure, I'm not gay and therefore would not want to marry another man (not that I will ever marry a woman either) - however, if I wanted to I should be able to. And what is to stop a gay man from marrying a gay woman? Wouldn't that technically be "gay marriage"? The whole thing is just legislation of bullshit religious "morality" I am an ordained minister (nothing more than a joke as I am atheist) and I will perform a marriage ceremony for anyone who wants to get married. IDGAF if "the man" says it's wrong.

[Prometeo liberado]

This type of debate would never have happened in my day or school. This just proves that by keeping issues like this relevant, hopefully one day they will cease to be controversial.

[Lanky Wanker]

This type of debate would never have happened in my day or school. This just proves that by keeping issues like this relevant, hopefully one day they will cease to be controversial.

Yeah, hopefully. Me and my friend were saying how pointless it is, but I suppose it kinda paid off. The people who were arguing in favour of it (one was a friend of hers) are quite liked in school so that helps open people up a bit.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

So today after school there was a debate club thing and the topic was gay marriage, but I didn't go because I (thought I) knew how it would end which would've just annoyed the shit out of me. In a school full of homophobes, you wouldn't expect much to happen, especially when most of them are Muslim and the person arguing against it was planning to basically quote the Quran throughout the whole debate. Surprisingly, the side arguing for gay marriage won, although those arguing against it seemed to think this was due to a lack of time or something stupid. I was sat right in the middle of a prelude to the debate at lunch, but eventually gave up and moved away after hearing this guy's stupid, overused arguments:

1. "The definition of marriage is a man and a woman." < he repeated this one about 5 million times
2. "The kids will be bullied."
3. "The cost of social workers and everything for gay couples adopting kids will be too much."
4. "Society doesn't/won't accept it"
5. "If we allow gay marriage, are we gonna let people marry animals next?"

He also basically contradicted himself by saying we could just extend civil partnership to give gay couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples, like being able to visit your loved one in hospital where you usually wouldn't, as my (obviously) annoyed bisexual friend pointed out to him. Anyway, ridiculous arguments aside, I'm glad he lost the debate. :cool: This actually gives me some kind of hope for humanity.

1. The "definition" of marriage is decided by what society's elite's need. A man to work and a woman to stay at home and raise the future wage slaves is ideal. Some societies it is one man, many woman, etc. The definition of marriage, in my opinion, is 2 consenting adults that love each other.

2. "The kid will be bullied". Well, this comes because of the intolerant society that we live in, and the person making this argument is contributing to that society.

3. "The cost of social workers..." This, in my opinion, is just plain stupid and I don't even want to take the time to refute this.

4. "Society won't except it". That was an argument against inter-racial marriage as well. What's the difference now, because it pisses Allah and Jesus off?

5. The "animals will marry people" argument is ridiculous. If marriage is a union between 2 consenting adults, and an animal cannot give legal consent, then such a union cannot happen. This goes for children, furniture, etc.

To those who are religious and make arguments that it is not good in the eyes of god and it is unnatural...

...do you really think millions of people around the world claim to be gay just to piss off Jesus?

[Veovis]

...do you really think millions of people around the world claim to be gay just to piss off Jesus?

I do.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I do.

lol

[sithsaber]

Based on the Abrahamic and pretty much all other religious definitions (liberalization of religion that ignores dogma doesn't count) marriage is strictly between man and woman. However, the "sanctity" of marriage has already been trampled upon. Divorce, abuse, infidelity and even changing power dynamics all have given marrriage almost zero true religious meaning. The marriage our society is based on is closer to the archaic practices of viewing women as the possession of man. For all you godless commies out there marriage is a meaningless social contract designed to bind someone to another with punishments possible for deviance. Marriage means nothing in modern society, but it does have the power to legitimize a same sex union as a valid lifestyle. :bored:

PS
I didn't even think of that last sentence when i started writing. Legalizing gay marriage would have a major effect on society, just in ways that wouldn't be evident at first. It would cause a large schism between the church and state along with changing millennium old perceptions on what is deemed acceptable. It could even affect the argument on whether humanity has a duty to be propagate vs fulfilling ones desires.

:confused:

[Lanky Wanker]

1. The "definition" of marriage is decided by what society's elite's need. A man to work and a woman to stay at home and raise the future wage slaves is ideal. Some societies it is one man, many woman, etc. The definition of marriage, in my opinion, is 2 consenting adults that love each other.


We were talking about all this today in sociology, give my poor brain a rest from school. :crying: Good ol' me reppin' the Marxist view of the family though.



This goes for children, furniture, etc.


:lol: I doubt anyone would want to marry and make sweet passionate love to their armchair though.

[NewLeft]

If someone wants to marry their dog then go ahead.

[Drosophila]

Adolescents tend to be selfish, Randian assholes.

[Misanthrope]

If someone wants to marry their dog then go ahead.

A dog does not have the ability to consent. Don't validate the comparison of a homosexual human being to a dog.

[Game Girl]

We were talking about all this today in sociology, give my poor brain a rest from school. :crying: Good ol' me reppin' the Marxist view of the family though.



:lol: I doubt anyone would want to marry and make sweet passionate love to their armchair though.

I don't know. I'd marry my bed. I'm pretty much already sleeping with it. (BAD JOKE, I KNOW! DON'T KILL ME!)

[dodger]

A dog does not have the ability to consent. Don't validate the comparison of a homosexual human being to a dog.

I do have sympathy with New Left's throwaway remark, dear Lobos. It seems there is a great army of experts commentators Church Leaders, do- gooders legislators, pundits and somebodies dog barking. I don't think the general public care. Or if they did care they don't any more. I just think we need to leave folk to get on with their lives. If minor changes to the laws help that fine...I applaud. Heavens we all of us have more pressing problems...all of us. Another way of expressing it "nobody gives a toss about homosexuals marrying!!" or even "a tinkers cuss!" Good luck to'em.......

[NewLeft]

A dog does not have the ability to consent. Don't validate the comparison of a homosexual human being to a dog.
You're right, it was a stupid remark. I wasn't thinking. I apologize if I offended anyone.

[Lanky Wanker]

you're right, it was a stupid remark

#578

[NewLeft]

#578
Hey, you're really funny. Let's be friends.