Why Queers Shouldn't Marry

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 10:10 AM GMT
    I keep reading on these forums that civil unions are "second class" but I disagree entirely. Following this is a copy of my Uni blog I wrote a few weeks ago. I'm interested in hearing your opinion on if you really think homosexuals should be associated with the church.

    Why gay people are always trying to get married is beyond me. If a church and/or religion say they do not accept you, you should just take it in stride and move on. But no, some queers are just too pushy and need to be accepted by everyone and their mother. They need to be loved by everyone! Why?! If they do not accept you for who you are, do not waste your time trying to make them love you. If they do not understand that you are the same person regardless of your sexual orientation, they are either ignorant, dumb, or both and there is no hope for them.

    The U.S. government should not get off the hook, though. No, I do not want to be married under a church that does not accept me, but it is total bull that heterosexual couples are getting lots of extra rights that are being denied to gay couples. You want examples? I’m so glad you asked!

    Heterosexuals are granted the right to visit their partner if for some reason he or she is brought to the hospital. Perhaps wife Betty Sue was hit by a bus and she flew into oncoming traffic and was hit by an SUV. She laid there on the ground, bleeding from the fresh wound on her head and a crowd rushed around her to get her back on the sidewalk, waiting for the ambulance to come. Or maybe husband John was shot at the convenience store he was working at in the wee hours of the night in order to bring more revenue into the house to afford college for his children. He’s rushed to the hospital and he’s probably not going to make it, but his wife Betty Sue is allowed to see him one last time. She is given a chance to say goodbye. The same thing goes for John if he wants to visit Betty Sue after being hit by the bus. What if it was John who was shot at the convenience store but it was his partner Scott who wanted to see John in the hospital in those last remaining hours that he was alive? Nope. Access denied, bitch! There’s not a chance that he’ll be allowed in to see his lover because he legally isn’t considered family. The hospital doesn’t care that they’ve been together for 15 years and they have been raising their adopted daughter Ling-Ling (who they had to adopt from China, by the way, since the U.S. apparently thinks American orphans shouldn’t be burdened with gay parents) together since she was a baby. Nope nope nope, that doesn’t matter at all. There is no certificate saying they have a civil union, and therefore they are denied these visitation rights. The same goes for visitation rights in prisons, too.

    What happens if Unfortunate John actually does die from the bullet wound? Well, it’s quite possible that his house, his car, his money, and everything else will not be going to recently widowed Scott. For example, Scott will definitely be denied the exemption from property tax that is normally given to heterosexual couples in the same situation. But let’s pretend that somehow he does get to have all of this fun stuff. He’ll probably have to sell it anyhow to cover all the hospital bills and the funeral arrangements. It turns out that very few companies are willing to recognize lesbian and gay unions and thereby allow both partners to be covered by company insurance. (Which reminds me, Starbucks is one of the few companies that does grant these “special” rights to lesbian and gay employees, so kudos to you, Starbucks and Starbucks merchants.)
    Oops! Wait a gosh darn second! Did you say John just died? Well it looks like Cute Little Ling-Ling is being sent back to China because only one parent was allowed to adopt her, and unfortunately that parent wasn’t Scott, the only family she really has in the world. Oh well! Must suck to be Ling-Ling! She should write her local congressman about joint adoption, I guess.

    Want more rights granted to heterosexual couples but not homosexual? Here are a few random ones given in a report to the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office: access to military stores, bereavement leave, immigration, insurance breaks, social security survivor benefits, tax breaks, veteran’s discounts (they fought for our country yet it doesn’t matter because they’re gay!?), burial determination, domestic violence protection (!!!), and immunity from testifying against spouse. The list continues, my friends, but I’m not going to go on ranting about each specific issue because I am sure you are all well aware of how to use Google. According to this report, there are 1,138 benefits provided to married couples that gays and lesbians do not have access to.* Look some of the other issues up yourself. What I want to do now is propose to you my plan. It’s a plan that no one will actually listen to and will probably never occur in the United States, but I’m going to tell you re
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    May 20, 2008 10:54 AM GMT
    I'm not queer, pushy or looking to be accepted. I want the option, that's all.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    May 20, 2008 12:44 PM GMT
    Timberoo saidI'm not queer, pushy or looking to be accepted. I want the option, that's all.



    I agree with Tim. The option is whats important.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 12:52 PM GMT
    Civil unions don't have to take place in a church or chapel, yeah?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 1:30 PM GMT
    I think that lesbians should be able to get married cause they will be better at it that heteros, but men, no it just don't work. Only few men can manage it in the modern sense, really we are just interested in close, close friends with open sexual options and a flexable option on ending relationships easily. Unless this changes gays are just going to embrass lesbians and make the whole thing look bad. Look we are men and the whole thing has to be practical to our short attention spans, overactive sex drives, and practical sense of life.

    Lots of religious more than accept gays, etc. mostly old and now leftly Christian sects in the Northeast USA. Look at the good souls of the MCC, or the United Church of Christ, the Congregionalists, the original Pruitans!


    Just my opinions-look at all the "monogomous" here who have a very different the meaning of that word.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 20, 2008 2:09 PM GMT
    Well there's 5 mintues of my life I'll never get back.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 2:22 PM GMT
    If it's going to be the same in all legal ways, why give it a separate name? Because, first, it wont be equal in all ways. Second, it will carry a stigma with it that it isnt the same and it can be granted or taken away or changed in any way by others, because, in truth, gays dont have the "right" to be married.

    Therefore, it makes a considerable difference that the institution of gay union have the same name as that of heterosexuals.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 3:04 PM GMT
    ShawnTO saidWell there's 5 mintues of my life I'll never get back.


    Yeah, to be honest I am developing ADD the older I get, if I have to read a forum post over two paragraphs long I move on.

    Yes gays should be allowed to marry, we deserve to be as miserable or as happy as our heterosexual peers! Besides I would hate to see gay family lawyers settle for a Volvo when they could have a Lexus. icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2008 3:05 PM GMT
    You don't really address anything you talk about in your first paragraph.

    And the gay marriage issue has nothing to do with a church.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 20, 2008 3:21 PM GMT
    Wysiwyg60 said[quote][cite]ShawnTO said[/cite]Well there's 5 mintues of my life I'll never get back.


    Yeah, to be honest I am developing ADD the older I get, if I have to read a forum post over two paragraphs long I move on.[/quote]

    Oh I have no problems reading long posts, provided they're written in an intelligent manner.
  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    May 20, 2008 4:07 PM GMT
    "The list continues, my friends, but I’m not going to go on ranting about each specific issue because I am sure you are all well aware of how to use Google. According to this report, there are 1,138 benefits provided to married couples that gays and lesbians do not have access to.* Look some of the other issues up yourself. What I want to do now is propose to you my plan. It’s a plan that no one will actually listen to and will probably never occur in the United States, but I’m going to tell you re"


    it got cut off.. doesn't anyone wanna know his PLAN!!???!?!??!?!?!


    ....



    ....

    yeah... me neither.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2008 7:47 AM GMT
    For many years Sweden has resisted the push towards gay marriage that occured in the low/nordic/scandavian countries, with the claim that gays, in particular gay men were not interested in "marriage" as it is today - monog etc. Now that has changed and even the governing Moderate party, i.e. the old conservatives, has said that they might support it. Sweden is a very conservative society, notwithstanding their progressive image, but on this issue I think that they may have been on to something.

    Hetero "romantic" marriage is a 18C-19C creation has not always looked as it does today, in fact for most of mideviel europe it did not exist for pesants/serfs/poor. But it is the dominate concept today for most of "red" america, what is going to happen to gay rights and the image of gay people with most hetero when they realize that to gays marriage is all 'bout husband shopping. For once the right wing christians will have been right, it might give a seccond wind to their movement on this issue.

    I was in monog "married" homo relationship for 8 years till I realize I was the only mongo one. Look around monog gays are a minority of a minority.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2008 8:58 AM GMT
    Ok SO! Can we all remember that merriage is not Christian... This is the argument that should be thrown out there. ITS NOT. Its in every culture and religion so to say its chrisitan is a lie and somthing your conditioned to belive.
    As well as when people say "Oh she is born musilum shes a musilum, and He is born christian He is a christian." no Your not, You choose your religion.
    The church wants you to think your born and you stay that way but there "oh my dead gods" lieing.

    One thing Im finding that is a growing concern for me is when. (If the topic comes up I ask) What religion are you to my friends. They say oh (example) Im Catholic. Ok so do you belive in all the stuff you are tought. Them "no" they why are you saying your a catholic. "well because my mom and dad are." No hunny, It does not work like (your race for exaple) its a choice. And they get confused and I just give up.

    Im sick of being told Lies by hire religious officals. In say my friends church or watching them warp somthing even more.

    EXAPLES YAY! Number one, When they say christianity has been around for ever and they can prove it.

    Its not. It started in the middle east and migrated up from there through turky towards europe.
    as well as down all over africa. I came to africa before it came to Europe. That AMAZINGLY at the time there were only tribles in Europe who were pagan. and belived in the goddess and spirits and that fun stuff as well as another fun fact, the empired before jesus came and even before all those religions sputed were as lame as it sounds a shoot of pagan. ( im not pagan)

    Number two (warped views and ideas) I notice in the babtis church my friend goes to It treats praying like Its material (pray for this pray for that, special prayers) and that Is illogical. there actuly asking for way to much if there ever was a god and for unrealistic thing thats can be fixed by themselfs.

    I find a kid in our class says "Don't thank me, thank god" Well sorry buddy than you because there are little words of advice, God cannot interfear with mans responsabilaties on earth, he said that himself.

    So stop taking shit and warping it. untill you know your self.


    Back to marrage: I THINK MARRAGE SHOULD BE BANNED.
    Its not christian its warped and its meaningless materialistic wants. Im fine with commonlaw.

    Thank you.
  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    May 21, 2008 1:10 PM GMT
    muchmorethanmuscle saidHey stop trashing gay men and saying they're not worthy of being married because they can't be monogamous. There are plenty of straight men that have proven to be slutty trash as well.


    i agree, thats a really harsh generalization considering heterosexuals haven't quite gotten monogamy figured out yet given the divorce rate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2008 8:55 PM GMT
    While it is true that hetero dont have relationships worked out yet, women keep hetero men under control. This has been a theme in literature, art and history for thousands of years from the basic concept of equal marriage under early forms of Christianity* (all that Mary stuff) to the notion of Republican womenhood and civic virtue. Something that has been considered more important since the advent of democracy/republican values(not the Republican Party)-there is lot on this subject look at the discussions on republican virtue in Early America 1790-1830....

    What do you speculate that the divorse rate for gay men will be? As a percentage of marriages, where do u think that it will fall? Without the restraining effect of women, how long do u think that gay male marriages will last? Man, its gona be a disaster.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2008 9:10 PM GMT
    What do you speculate that the divorse rate for gay men will be? As a percentage of marriages, where do u think that it will fall? Without the restraining effect of women, how long do u think that gay male marriages will last? Man, its gona be a disaster.

    Well until someone does some hard fact finding and research, I am not going to say the vast majority of gay relationships are non-monogamous. I can think of several without effort in my circle of friends that are monogamous, and to be honest, they are healthier relationships then many heterosexual ones I have encountered.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2008 9:13 PM GMT
    Regardless of Civil Unions, or marriage, or Domestic Partners or what is totally equal or fair or not, what bugs me is just the plane old fact that straight people have this right, this power over us and thus can vote for us or against us. Even if they vote for us, it still sketches me out, that they have this authority over us, they get to assign rights to us, if they decide to. We are not equal human beings in their eyes and even the more liberal ones who then decide or "come around" to voting on our behalf still see us that way.

    I do know I will never live in any state that at least does not have domestic partner laws and I wish every gay person would move out those states that dont and take all their creativity and taxes and revenue with them. It would decimate those states economies.

    If the only real power we have is economic, we should flex it more to get what we want. I would settle for government recognition of Civil Unions and abandon the marriage plight, being able to visit ones partner and have survivorshop/insurance rights is the most important of things we could have. The religious aspect I could care less about.
  • HereNBoston

    Posts: 221

    May 21, 2008 10:50 PM GMT
    studd saidWhile it is true that hetero dont have relationships worked out yet, women keep hetero men under control. This has been a theme in literature, art and history for thousands of years from the basic concept of equal marriage under early forms of Christianity* (all that Mary stuff) to the notion of Republican womenhood and civic virtue. Something that has been considered more important since the advent of democracy/republican values(not the Republican Party)-there is lot on this subject look at the discussions on republican virtue in Early America 1790-1830....

    What do you speculate that the divorse rate for gay men will be? As a percentage of marriages, where do u think that it will fall? Without the restraining effect of women, how long do u think that gay male marriages will last? Man, its gona be a disaster.




    actually its been about the same here in massachusetts lol not much has changed except that gay men and women enter into marriage and fail at about the same rate. one of the lesbian couples that were the first to get married i think is already divorced. it seems like you're basing everything on this premise that heterosexual marriage hasn't changed much throughout this time... the dynamics of relationships and family in general have changed so much recently. You're trying too hard to compare gay relationships to heterosexual ones and you really just can't. The dynamic is different and the interactions are. I met couples who have been together for 15-20 years and even much more. once they got married not a lot really changed. To them it was just a formality because they made that commitment a decade or more prior to the laws even being changed.

    Don't worry so much about what the failure rate will be, that won't really matter... what'll matter is they have the right to enter into legally recognized relationships with all the benefits and risks of failure.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 21, 2008 11:11 PM GMT
    Studd's view on this matter just reinforces for me how weak the 'Gays shouldn't marry' belief is.

    I'm reminded of my childhood, being in grade school and being one of two students out of 30 whos parents were still together in their first marriage.

    30 students, 28 being from 'broken homes'. I would really love for someone to explain to me exactly how gay marriages will destroy the fabric of society, destroy traditional family values, and lower the sanctity of the 'great' institution of marriage.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14385

    May 22, 2008 12:56 AM GMT
    The truth of the matter is that gay marriage will do absolutely no damage to traditional heterosexual marriage. Straights have already seriously damaged the institution of marriage with their persistantly high divorce rates and broken homes. I personally think that many straights are scared of granting gays the right to marry because most gays tend to stay in their marriages much longer which would make the straight majority look quite bad. Its not just fairy tale religious beliefs that play a role against gay marriage, it is the fear of many straights that gays can handle marriage far better then them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 22, 2008 4:41 PM GMT
    MunchingZombie said

    And the gay marriage issue has nothing to do with a church.


    The gay marriage issue has everything to do with church! Marriage is a religious institution!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 22, 2008 4:42 PM GMT
    HereNBoston said
    it got cut off.. doesn't anyone wanna know his PLAN!!???!?!??!?!?!


    ....



    ....

    yeah... me neither.


    Wow, some people can be assholes and use poor sentence structure. Go figure.
  • ShawnTX

    Posts: 2484

    May 22, 2008 4:43 PM GMT
    You really need to educate yourself on world religions if you want to make this a religious argument. Firstly, marriage is not strictly a religious institution, and secondly, not all religions are anti-gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 22, 2008 4:52 PM GMT
    ShawnTO saidWell there's 5 mintues of my life I'll never get back.


    Hm. You're right. Everything important should be able to be summarized within 2 paragraphs, otherwise it's not worth reading. Everything should be in black and white and solutions to societal problems are always going to be either this or that; there will never be a third option and if one shows its presence it should be ignored because that makes things much too complicated.

    Yes, because the republican and democratic parties prove this holds true in all cases.

    This is why I have no hope for the gay community. You all live up to the stereotypes of being empty-headed twinks and clearly haven't picked up a book since you were required to in high school.

    Here's the rest of the article, for the sheer fun in receiving more hate.

    Peace.

    "but I’m going to tell you regardless because I have a big head and believe that somewhere, out there, someone actually cares.

    It’s really quite simple, if you want your union to be recognized under God, get married in a church (or wherever, dependent upon your religion of choice). If your religion does not accept you for who you are, well, all I can say is balls, it sucks to be you, too. Now, if you want your union to be recognized by the government, get a civil union. That goes for both heterosexuals and homosexuals my friends. If you want to be able to visit your partner in the hospital while she’s bleeding from her head, lying there unconscious before you with mere hours before death, make sure you make a stop at city hall. If you want to be recognized under the eyes of God AND the government, go for the package deal, the combo meal of unions, if you will.

    What it all boils down to is that I want you to keep church separate from state! We already have problems with the damn Pledge of Allegiance, but that’s just lame poppycock compared to what actually matters, you know, the whole “life and death” thing. That’s right, I said it; it’s pure poppycock. Lesbians and gays are not asking for special rights by asking to have unions; they’re asking for equal rights. Don’t you remember learning about how taboo it was to have someone who was white want to marry someone who was black? And now it’s completely normal. It turns out that blacks and whites can actually raise a family together and not cause the world and/or entire suburb to collapse. Who knew?

    I feel before I leave I should ask a question regarding the sanctity of marriage, even though it should be clear that it isn’t marriage I am fighting for. Now, please, explain to me how gays and lesbians are damaging this so-called precious sacrament when the divorce rate in the United States is as high as it is. According to divorceform.org, 43% of marriages have been predicted to end in divorce, but that number was actually increased in 2002 to a whopping 50%! How many of you out there have divorced parents? Hate to tell ya this, but according to Christian doctrine it looks like your parents are going to Hell.** But this, of course, is legal, because, as we all know, not all marriages work out and life in a troubled marriage is more of a hell than life after a divorce. And of course, there are all the celebrities getting married and re-married and then re-married once again. Brad Pitt, I’m looking at you, you sly devil you.

    But whatever, right? No one really seems to cares if heterosexuals are breaking the God-given rules, but lord forbid should a loving lesbian couple want to get married and be accepted by society. That sort of love, of course, would simply be madness. We simply can’t have any more love in the world. Much too dangerous.

    *Source: http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/a/benefits.htm
    **Source: The Bible Matthew 5:32"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 22, 2008 4:54 PM GMT
    ShawnTO saidYou really need to educate yourself on world religions if you want to make this a religious argument. Firstly, marriage is not strictly a religious institution, and secondly, not all religions are anti-gay.


    You're putting words in my mouth. Nowhere did I make the assumption that all religions are anti-gay.