Comments on: Marriage is for Breeders, Part IV: Where I Stand http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235 Mon, 20 May 2013 22:59:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: noname http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2809 noname Mon, 27 Mar 2006 23:20:16 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2809 So marriage should only be for people who are having kids? I can see why you're still single. And f.y.i. the statistics of straight people molesting children are much higher than homosexuals. So marriage should only be for people who are having kids? I can see why you’re still single.

And f.y.i. the statistics of straight people molesting children are much higher than homosexuals.

]]> By: D. Fletcher http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2808 D. Fletcher Fri, 17 Feb 2006 23:07:55 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2808 That's right, John, but it's a start. Brown vs. BofE was just a start, but imagine where we might be without it (the starting point 50 years ago). This is why, I don't think we should wait for Belgium, or Spain. We need to start, the sooner the better. That’s right, John, but it’s a start. Brown vs. BofE was just a start, but imagine where we might be without it (the starting point 50 years ago).

This is why, I don’t think we should wait for Belgium, or Spain. We need to start, the sooner the better.

]]> By: John C. http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2807 John C. Fri, 17 Feb 2006 23:04:30 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2807 D. I also think that you may be right. Legislation could be a step toward social support. But, 50 years after Brown vs. the Board of Education, the problems of racism persist, in spite of public minded denials to the contrary. It will require much more than legislation to create the support you envision. D.
I also think that you may be right. Legislation could be a step toward social support. But, 50 years after Brown vs. the Board of Education, the problems of racism persist, in spite of public minded denials to the contrary. It will require much more than legislation to create the support you envision.

]]> By: D. Fletcher http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2806 D. Fletcher Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:49:29 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2806 I think you're right, John C. Relationships don't depend upon the state. However, successful relationships may have been helped by a very supportive government and social support system. A public "marriage" is really an announcement to the social support system that you would like... support. Many relationships don't need that support, but many others do. Legalizing gay marriage would be a step towards showing social support for these kinds of relationships, which would help foster better and more long-lasting relationships, and also perhaps kindle the desire for many gay people to enter into such relationships. Commitment, to my mind, is always preferable to the other, and yet commitment is hard for many, and perhaps even more difficult for those without legal and social support systems in place. I think you’re right, John C. Relationships don’t depend upon the state. However, successful relationships may have been helped by a very supportive government and social support system. A public “marriage” is really an announcement to the social support system that you would like… support.

Many relationships don’t need that support, but many others do.

Legalizing gay marriage would be a step towards showing social support for these kinds of relationships, which would help foster better and more long-lasting relationships, and also perhaps kindle the desire for many gay people to enter into such relationships.

Commitment, to my mind, is always preferable to the other, and yet commitment is hard for many, and perhaps even more difficult for those without legal and social support systems in place.

]]> By: John C. http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2805 John C. Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:38:28 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2805 D. I don't particularly care how the children turn out in terms of sexual orientation (this isn't entirely true, of course, but it is true enough (I just think that gays will always have a hard time of it; we do not lose our prejudices quickly even when they are clearly wrong)). "<i>The right to marriage needs to be separated from potential parenting skills, I think.</i>" I don't believe there is a need to separate this, as it is already clearly separate. However, as from the example of no-fault divorce, there are wide-ranging effects that these social policies regarding the decisions of two individuals "who are just minding their own business" make. I do not believe we should make these decisions quickly or lightly. Since we have the opportunity to observe the effects in other cultures, it might be appropriate to do so. Having said that, if it is wrong to legislate the difference, then it should be eradicated now. I just don't know that it is morally wrong to legislate the difference. Gay people who wish to marry now, can. They won't get a certificate, but they can find a priest/minister/etc and hold a ceremony. Nothing tangible hinders them in doing this. Gay people have every right to fall in love, have lasting relationships, kiss, have sex, etc. The personal work of relationships is not dependent upon national decree and thank goodness for that. For that matter, if it is an issue of legal rights, for issues pertaining to gay partners, it is my (somewhat ignorant) understanding that visitation rights, power of attorney rights, etc. can be given to one's partner through proper legal documentation. The problem is that such things are given automatically to hetero couples with the marriage certificate. Is this fair? No. Should it be the case? I doubt it. But, if you love that person, are you willing to go through the rigomarole (sp?) for them? Probably. So, is it about marriage or is it about the legal rights surrounding marriage? D.
I don’t particularly care how the children turn out in terms of sexual orientation (this isn’t entirely true, of course, but it is true enough (I just think that gays will always have a hard time of it; we do not lose our prejudices quickly even when they are clearly wrong)).

“The right to marriage needs to be separated from potential parenting skills, I think.”

I don’t believe there is a need to separate this, as it is already clearly separate. However, as from the example of no-fault divorce, there are wide-ranging effects that these social policies regarding the decisions of two individuals “who are just minding their own business” make. I do not believe we should make these decisions quickly or lightly. Since we have the opportunity to observe the effects in other cultures, it might be appropriate to do so. Having said that, if it is wrong to legislate the difference, then it should be eradicated now. I just don’t know that it is morally wrong to legislate the difference.

Gay people who wish to marry now, can. They won’t get a certificate, but they can find a priest/minister/etc and hold a ceremony. Nothing tangible hinders them in doing this. Gay people have every right to fall in love, have lasting relationships, kiss, have sex, etc. The personal work of relationships is not dependent upon national decree and thank goodness for that.

For that matter, if it is an issue of legal rights, for issues pertaining to gay partners, it is my (somewhat ignorant) understanding that visitation rights, power of attorney rights, etc. can be given to one’s partner through proper legal documentation. The problem is that such things are given automatically to hetero couples with the marriage certificate. Is this fair? No. Should it be the case? I doubt it. But, if you love that person, are you willing to go through the rigomarole (sp?) for them? Probably.

So, is it about marriage or is it about the legal rights surrounding marriage?

]]> By: D. Fletcher http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2804 D. Fletcher Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:16:51 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2804 What evidence are you talking about John C.? You mean, children reared by gay parents in Canada? So, we'll need to wait at least, 18 years before we can make a clear judgment about how successful these children turned out. And what will that judgment be based on, exactly? That if the children didn't turn out gay, the parents were successful? The right to marriage needs to be separated from potential parenting skills, I think. And I don't think we should wait and watch Canada, Spain, Belgium, and the rest of the civilized world to see how they dealt with gay marriage, before we give the opportunity. Gay people who wish to marry now, should. What evidence are you talking about John C.? You mean, children reared by gay parents in Canada? So, we’ll need to wait at least, 18 years before we can make a clear judgment about how successful these children turned out.

And what will that judgment be based on, exactly? That if the children didn’t turn out gay, the parents were successful?

The right to marriage needs to be separated from potential parenting skills, I think.

And I don’t think we should wait and watch Canada, Spain, Belgium, and the rest of the civilized world to see how they dealt with gay marriage, before we give the opportunity. Gay people who wish to marry now, should.

]]> By: John C. http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2803 John C. Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:10:33 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2803 But we do have evidence becoming available. Shouldn't we wait until we see what happens in Canada and the Netherlands and other societies where gay marriage is legal before we commit here? I agree that all the reports put out thusfar are put out by people with obvious agendas. Shouldn't we wait until clear, unbiased (to whatever extent possible), and relevant data is available? You are right that we don't have the social institutions to support gay marriage here (although I have serious doubts that legislation will dispel the bias that makes things thus). But we do have evidence becoming available. Shouldn’t we wait until we see what happens in Canada and the Netherlands and other societies where gay marriage is legal before we commit here? I agree that all the reports put out thusfar are put out by people with obvious agendas. Shouldn’t we wait until clear, unbiased (to whatever extent possible), and relevant data is available?

You are right that we don’t have the social institutions to support gay marriage here (although I have serious doubts that legislation will dispel the bias that makes things thus).

]]> By: Rusty http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2802 Rusty Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:28:53 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2802 LOL! Well, I'm glad we've cleared that up. LOL!

Well, I’m glad we’ve cleared that up.

]]> By: D. Fletcher http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2801 D. Fletcher Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:12:38 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2801 I read the question again too. It's unanswerable except to say, I don't know. –Weenie Too I read the question again too. It’s unanswerable except to say, I don’t know.

–Weenie Too

]]> By: Chris Williams http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235&cpage=1#comment-2800 Chris Williams Fri, 17 Feb 2006 17:45:03 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=235#comment-2800 OK, Rusty, I read your question again and here's my answer: I don't know. -Weenie OK, Rusty, I read your question again and here’s my answer: I don’t know.

-Weenie

]]>