Same-Sex Marriage

Into statistics? Curious what everyone else thinks? Then start a poll here.

What is your stance on same-sex marriage?

I support same-sex marriage.
45
75%
I am against same-sex marriage but support civil unions.
4
7%
I oppose both same-sex marriage & civil unions, but I support some rights for same-sex couples (e.g., hospital visitation).
1
2%
I oppose any official recognition of same-sex couples, but I oppose a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
2
3%
I support a constitutional amendment declaring marriage to be between one man and one woman and banning recognition of same-sex couples.
6
10%
I support a constitutional amendment to once again make homosexual acts illegal and banning same-sex marriage.
2
3%
 
Total votes : 60

Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:29 pm

The issue of same-sex marriage is arising in many states. Some have amended their constitutions to ban the recognition of same-sex couples. Others have, both with and without court involvement, enacted laws allowing recognition via civil unions, domestic partnerships, or in the case of Massachusetts, outright marriage.

In this forum of mixed atheistic and religious backgrounds, what stance do you hold regarding same-sex marriage? Why have you chosen the stance you have taken?
Last edited by NH Baritone on Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby spongebob » Sat Feb 02, 2008 8:34 am

I think I've made my position clear on this, but just in case...

I don't so much "support" same-gender marriages or unions as I don't oppose them. Such a rule has no impact on me or my family, so I can't say I have a horse in the race. But I see no logical, rational, reasonable, humanitarian reason to oppose such unions. And since I'm an atheist, I have no religious reason to object to them, quite contrary to the way I was raised, which was to oppose homosexuals at all costs. I believe that people should be allowed to form relationships as they choose and I have no objection to people of the same gender choosing to do so. I also don't care if people choose to form polygamous relationships. I happen to think such things are stupid, but it's their life; they can do with it as they choose.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:43 am

Come on, PorousCelluloseRobert!

Surely you support education for your neighbors' children. And plentiful water for the town down the road. And quality health care for war veterans.

Just because an issue doesn't have a direct impact on you, it effects your society, and that has a great impact on the quality of your life and the lives of people you care about. True independence is impossible. We're all interdependent. I trust that, even if you have libertarian leanings, you really don't behave as if anything that doesn't feed you or wallop you is irrelevant to you.
Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby spongebob » Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:45 pm

I'm a true Libertarian. Live and let live. That's how I keep my keen sense of objectivity. You won't find me at a Republican rally, but I would no more likely attend a gay pride rally. If asked, I have no problem stating what I think people should be allowed to decide for themselves, but I don't spend my time thinking of ways to further causes that I have no direct impact on my own life, either. You simply can't fight every fight. And I don't apologize for this attitude, either.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby nobody » Sat Feb 09, 2008 4:10 pm

SB wrote:I'm a true Libertarian. Live and let live. That's how I keep my keen sense of objectivity. You won't find me at a Republican rally, but I would no more likely attend a gay pride rally. If asked, I have no problem stating what I think people should be allowed to decide for themselves, but I don't spend my time thinking of ways to further causes that I have no direct impact on my own life, either. You simply can't fight every fight. And I don't apologize for this attitude, either.

Well said spongebob...I agree completely. I have recently found myself at home in the Libertarian Party for two basic reasons -their emphasis on personal liberty and responsibility as well as their "live and let live" attitude. I just don't care if people of the same gender want to marry each other. It does not affect me in the least and so I have no right to tell them that they cannot.
I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man,
nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine. -John Galt
nobody
resident
resident
 
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 3:46 pm
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Affiliation: Atheist

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby chattanoog » Sat Feb 23, 2008 6:34 am

I support same-sex marriages 100%. Even when I was a believer, this part of me felt this way. I am not homosexual, but I believe the connection a homosexual may have with someone of the same gender would feel the exact same for me when I connect with a man. I do not think in any way that homosexuality is "chosen," which is why I support it. It is something about you that you cannot change if you know it is there.

:-)

Cheers.
chattanoog
new recruit
new recruit
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:34 pm

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby Atheist37 » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:55 pm

I support government recognition and regulation of relationship commitments. I don't think it matters one bit why the legal commitment is formed, whether it's because of a sexual attachment, or mutual admiration, or simply a desire to support and care for each other. Two sisters for example could enter into a legally binding commitment that allows them to share financial and health decisions. Or let's say a wealthy older woman wants to care for an emotionally fragile younger man, for companionship but free of sexual relations. It seems to me that there are lots of reasons why such partners would like to have the rights and responsibilities of a legally binding relationship commitment. And I don't think such legal commitments need to be limited to a couple. Three or more people could mutually agree to a commitment.

So I voted in favor of "gay marriage" but in reality you could say I'm opposed to all legally recognized "marriages". In France, for example, the government only recognizes civil unions and leaves it to churches to record and preside over marriage.
User avatar
Atheist37
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:21 am
Location: Tualatin, Oregon
Affiliation: Atheist

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Sat Feb 23, 2008 8:45 pm

Atheist37 wrote:I support government recognition and regulation of relationship commitments. I don't think it matters one bit why the legal commitment is formed, whether it's because of a sexual attachment, or mutual admiration, or simply a desire to support and care for each other. Two sisters for example could enter into a legally binding commitment that allows them to share financial and health decisions. Or let's say a wealthy older woman wants to care for an emotionally fragile younger man, for companionship but free of sexual relations. It seems to me that there are lots of reasons why such partners would like to have the rights and responsibilities of a legally binding relationship commitment. And I don't think such legal commitments need to be limited to a couple. Three or more people could mutually agree to a commitment.

So I voted in favor of "gay marriage" but in reality you could say I'm opposed to all legally recognized "marriages". In France, for example, the government only recognizes civil unions and leaves it to churches to record and preside over marriage.

Although I concur that this would be a step in a more humanistic direction, there is something qualitatively different about a couple committing themselves together in a way than involves a romantic, "till death do us part" covenant. And although I'm not absolutely opposed to polygamy, I am sincerely doubtful about its practice in a community, where the older, well-to-do men marry the younger women, leaving the younger men frustrated and bride-less. (This has been the experience of many of the polygamous communities in Utah.)

Even in France, they don't recognize polygamous unions or non-couple relationships.
Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby Atheist37 » Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:47 pm

The question for society to consider is how much do we want government to dictate the parameters of our relationships? What role should the courts play with regard to restricting and regulating the formation of familial unions? The foremost concern for some observers is the huge disparity of power that might exist within the union. So if that really is our concern, shouldn't we also concern ourselves with abuse of power within traditional heterosexual unions? But, to what degree?
User avatar
Atheist37
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:21 am
Location: Tualatin, Oregon
Affiliation: Atheist

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:46 am

Atheist37 wrote:The question for society to consider is how much do we want government to dictate the parameters of our relationships? What role should the courts play with regard to restricting and regulating the formation of familial unions? The foremost concern for some observers is the huge disparity of power that might exist within the union. So if that really is our concern, shouldn't we also concern ourselves with abuse of power within traditional heterosexual unions? But, to what degree?

I concur that the issue of same-sex marriage can lead to the broader question of what role the government plays in marriage. But at this time we have an entire class of people (which includes myself, so this is personal for me) that are unable to participate in the current system, simply because of the person they choose to marry. For example, when my partner died in 2000, I had to pay over $25,000 in state estate taxes because I inherited my half of what we considered our mutual property (house, car, bank account). Had we been able to marry, the taxes would not have been even calculated until after I died.

Currently, the GAO estimates that there are over 1100 laws that provide rights and responsibilities for married partners. Whether those laws are appropriate is really a different question than the gender of the spouses.
Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:31 am

Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby spongebob » Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:27 pm

I want to change my position. I now believe that homosexuality is an abomination and should be considered loathsome and anyone caught performing homosexual acts should face stiff legal penalties, including monetary fines, jail time and public humiliation, possibly even castration. This would be enough incentive to nearly eradicate the practice. Moreover, every man should be expected to marry and produce children, or face public humiliation and financial punishment. This way, all would know that men who either had no children or were not married would never be able to achieve the social or economic status that us "normal" men do.

I'm sure that in a decade or two, this direction would drastically reduce crime, violence, poor morality, laziness, weight gain and obsessive tendencies of all kinds. What are we waiting for, America?
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby NH Baritone » Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:15 pm

spongebob wrote:I want to change my position. I now believe that homosexuality is an abomination and should be considered loathsome and anyone caught performing homosexual acts should face stiff legal penalties, including monetary fines, jail time and public humiliation, possibly even castration. This would be enough incentive to nearly eradicate the practice. Moreover, every man should be expected to marry and produce children, or face public humiliation and financial punishment. This way, all would know that men who either had no children or were not married would never be able to achieve the social or economic status that us "normal" men do.

I'm sure that in a decade or two, this direction would drastically reduce crime, violence, poor morality, laziness, weight gain and obsessive tendencies of all kinds. What are we waiting for, America?

Waiter! Please bring that man a cocktail -- something to counteract an obvious overdose of Rush Limbaugh mixed with excess testosterone. And by no means should anyone else have what he's been ordering this evening. It's clearly gone stale & moldy.
Diversity is the offspring of Liberty. Nonetheless, frightened, mainstream ideologues treat diversity like a bastard stepchild, instead of like a welcome indicator of our overall well-being.
User avatar
NH Baritone
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3040
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:38 am
Affiliation: Agnostic Atheistic Meditator

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby Char » Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:00 pm

spongebob wrote:I'm a true Libertarian. Live and let live. That's how I keep my keen sense of objectivity. You won't find me at a Republican rally, but I would no more likely attend a gay pride rally.


To be fair (and I'm a libertarian too, with a little L on purpose), the democrats are just as bad, just in different ways. The republicans want to take your social liberty, the democrats just want your money and guns.
Char
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:08 am
Affiliation: Agnostic; Anti-Fundementalist.

Re: Same-Sex Marriage

Postby Atheist37 » Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:09 am

Char wrote:
spongebob wrote:I'm a true Libertarian. Live and let live. That's how I keep my keen sense of objectivity. You won't find me at a Republican rally, but I would no more likely attend a gay pride rally.

To be fair (and I'm a libertarian too, with a little L on purpose), the democrats are just as bad, just in different ways. The republicans want to take your social liberty, the democrats just want your money and guns.

Libertarians, in my opinion, simply have not fully thought through the implications of their philosophy. I briefly considered myself a Libertarian until I thought about it for five minutes. If followed to its logical conclusion, a Libertarian society would end in feudalism. Wealth and power would be concentrated in the hands of a very few, with the rest of humanity consigned to ignorance, poverty, and servitude. If that's what you are really attempting to achieve, then I applaud your political choice. If instead you're interested in a progressive society where all people have equal opportunity to make the most of their abilities, then please consider the implications of a truly Libertarian society.
User avatar
Atheist37
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:21 am
Location: Tualatin, Oregon
Affiliation: Atheist

Next

Return to Polls

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests