The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Philosophy

Philosophy Philosophy discussion about everything from politics to daily living to ethics and morals


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 15th, 2010, 05:15 AM   #21
Representative
 
Joined: May 2009
From: USA
Posts: 225

Are you saying that gay marriage is a "slippery slope"? If we go down that road where will it end? - Will it lead to polygamy or pets with property rights as you intimated in your previous posts? The argument is insupportable.
Nemo is offline  
Old January 15th, 2010, 04:09 PM   #22
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo View Post
Are you saying that gay marriage is a "slippery slope"? If we go down that road where will it end? - Will it lead to polygamy or pets with property rights as you intimated in your previous posts? The argument is insupportable.
No, I'm saying that marriage is no longer a viable institution. When did marriage start anyway? People get divorced, and the families as we used to know them do not exist like that anymore. Children end up having more than one set of parents, having to choose their last names, etc. etc. I don't see the need for marriage and from a Government point of view they should be dealing with men and women in their own right. When their children are born, the children should be registered with a name that they will keep for the rest of their lives, and won't change from one parent to the next.
deanhills is offline  
Old January 15th, 2010, 09:04 PM   #23
Intern
 
WanderingStar's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 37

It is marriage. Just plain and simple marriage!
WanderingStar is offline  
Old January 16th, 2010, 06:06 AM   #24
Representative
 
Joined: May 2009
From: USA
Posts: 225

Philosophically, I would have to agree. Marriage may be an "honorable estate", but for many it is a disappointment. Most people get married for love, which is a mistake because love never lasts and is all to soon replaced with the drudgery of domestic life. Marital bliss becomes sacrificed to material obligation - mortgages, car payments and an endless series of bills - that takes all the joy out the relationship. Even the children end up being more burden than blessing. It all boils down to responsibility - financial responsibility - which is to say money, or the lack thereof - the debits and credits of a bankrupt estate. How much better it would be if lovers could be good friends. A true friend is one for all seasons; one to share life?s joys and sorrows - in good times and in times of trouble - for all time. However, friendship takes work, both in finding it and keeping it. Love is but a passing fancy; friendship lasts. As Dr Goldsmith put it: "Marriage strips love of all its finery; and if friendship does not appear to supply its place, then there is an end of matrimonial felicity." Oliver Goldsmith, "A True History for the Ladies," The British Magazine (July 1760).

Many marriages nowadays end in divorce. It is primarily because they are ill-fated from the start; like undercapitalized business ventures, they are bound to fail. How foolish people can be when they are in love. How stupidly they behave without a care for the consequences. Did they really think that they could live on love? How absurd. Where did their love go? How could two persons who loved one another so passionately end up hating each other? Is love and hate but two sides of the same emotion? And what is to be done with the detritus of a marriage foundered on the rocks? I don?t know. The law is an inadequate remedy for people?s personal problems. Divorce is a losing proposition: the husband loses, the wife loses, and the children - the ones who ought to be entitled to two loving and responsible parents - they are the big losers. But how can you stop people from getting married, however improbable the proposal? You might as well try to stop the tide from coming in - it is an irresistible force. People ought to be required to prove their financial responsibility before the state issues them a license to marry; for surely, as the old saying goes: "When the money?s gone, love flies out the window."
Nemo is offline  
Old January 16th, 2010, 07:23 AM   #25
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,821

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo View Post

Many marriages nowadays end in divorce. It is primarily because they are ill-fated from the start; like undercapitalized business ventures, they are bound to fail. How foolish people can be when they are in love. How stupidly they behave without a care for the consequences. Did they really think that they could live on love? How absurd. Where did their love go? How could two persons who loved one another so passionately end up hating each other? Is love and hate but two sides of the same emotion? And what is to be done with the detritus of a marriage foundered on the rocks? I don?t know. The law is an inadequate remedy for people?s personal problems. Divorce is a losing proposition: the husband loses, the wife loses, and the children - the ones who ought to be entitled to two loving and responsible parents - they are the big losers. But how can you stop people from getting married, however improbable the proposal? You might as well try to stop the tide from coming in - it is an irresistible force. People ought to be required to prove their financial responsibility before the state issues them a license to marry; for surely, as the old saying goes: "When the money?s gone, love flies out the window."
Just to add my 2 cents. We have been married almost 35 years. Due to bad health we have much less money than when we married. But our love is much deeper and different once the lust went away. We have been through so much cancer, stroke, heart attacks,diabetes even the death of a child. Money is gone, health is gone, but the love is stronger than ever.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old January 17th, 2010, 12:59 AM   #26
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo View Post
Philosophically, I would have to agree. Marriage may be an "honorable estate", but for many it is a disappointment. Most people get married for love, which is a mistake because love never lasts and is all to soon replaced with the drudgery of domestic life. Marital bliss becomes sacrificed to material obligation - mortgages, car payments and an endless series of bills - that takes all the joy out the relationship. Even the children end up being more burden than blessing. It all boils down to responsibility - financial responsibility - which is to say money, or the lack thereof - the debits and credits of a bankrupt estate. How much better it would be if lovers could be good friends. A true friend is one for all seasons; one to share life?s joys and sorrows - in good times and in times of trouble - for all time. However, friendship takes work, both in finding it and keeping it. Love is but a passing fancy; friendship lasts. As Dr Goldsmith put it: "Marriage strips love of all its finery; and if friendship does not appear to supply its place, then there is an end of matrimonial felicity." Oliver Goldsmith, "A True History for the Ladies," The British Magazine (July 1760).

Many marriages nowadays end in divorce. It is primarily because they are ill-fated from the start; like undercapitalized business ventures, they are bound to fail. How foolish people can be when they are in love. How stupidly they behave without a care for the consequences. Did they really think that they could live on love? How absurd. Where did their love go? How could two persons who loved one another so passionately end up hating each other? Is love and hate but two sides of the same emotion? And what is to be done with the detritus of a marriage foundered on the rocks? I don?t know. The law is an inadequate remedy for people?s personal problems. Divorce is a losing proposition: the husband loses, the wife loses, and the children - the ones who ought to be entitled to two loving and responsible parents - they are the big losers. But how can you stop people from getting married, however improbable the proposal? You might as well try to stop the tide from coming in - it is an irresistible force. People ought to be required to prove their financial responsibility before the state issues them a license to marry; for surely, as the old saying goes: "When the money?s gone, love flies out the window."
A wonderful posting thanks Nemo. And agreed, marriage seems to be an institution that many people still dream about. It can't be completely obsolete yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
Just to add my 2 cents. We have been married almost 35 years. Due to bad health we have much less money than when we married. But our love is much deeper and different once the lust went away. We have been through so much cancer, stroke, heart attacks,diabetes even the death of a child. Money is gone, health is gone, but the love is stronger than ever.
Wow! Not that is awesome! Must be great for your children to see you two together Dodge, and what an accomplishment. Something that money definitely cannot buy.
deanhills is offline  
Old May 12th, 2010, 12:35 PM   #27
Analyst
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 57

Well! I am totally against it because it is not liked in our religion and many other religions also. One more thing I'd like to add here that this gay or lesbian relations did not lasts long. What do you guys think about it?
irahat is offline  
Old May 12th, 2010, 12:47 PM   #28
Representative
 
Delta's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 369

Quote:
Originally Posted by irahat View Post
Well! I am totally against it because it is not liked in our religion and many other religions also. One more thing I'd like to add here that this gay or lesbian relations did not lasts long. What do you guys think about it?
Well I don't like religion and neither do a lot of people. I don't see how that's an argument at all. Where do you get the notion that gay and lesbian relationships don't last long? You do realize that something like 1/3-1/2 of straight marriages end in divorce.
Delta is offline  
Old May 12th, 2010, 01:01 PM   #29
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,907

Quote:
Originally Posted by irahat View Post
Well! I am totally against it because it is not liked in our religion and many other religions also. One more thing I'd like to add here that this gay or lesbian relations did not lasts long. What do you guys think about it?
Let's put aside religion for a moment. Is it not liked by YOU? Do you think it is fair to forbid two consenting adults from doing what they want as long as they aren't harming anyone?

Furthermore, who said gay and lesbian relationships can't last? I personally know some gay people who have better relationships than straight people I know.
myp is offline  
Old May 13th, 2010, 08:25 AM   #30
Analyst
 
prasanth5's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 73

I think gay marriage can be at the most called 'intimate friendship' and nothing else. The same is true for lesbian marriage too.
prasanth5 is offline  
Old May 17th, 2010, 10:08 AM   #31
Analyst
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta View Post
Well I don't like religion and neither do a lot of people. I don't see how that's an argument at all. Where do you get the notion that gay and lesbian relationships don't last long? You do realize that something like 1/3-1/2 of straight marriages end in divorce.

OK put aside religion for a moment but I didn't agree with you about 1 half or one third marriages ends up in divorce because you are only talking about your part of the world. Please take a world wide survey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prasanth5 View Post
I think gay marriage can be at the most called 'intimate friendship' and nothing else. The same is true for lesbian marriage too.
I agree with you Prasanth! These were just only friendship not a last long relationship.
irahat is offline  
Old May 17th, 2010, 04:09 PM   #32
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,944

Now, I don't think much of marriage, in all honesty. Though I have promised my friend I'd marry her if she's worried about being old alone. Provided she and I are not attached to anyone. It means something to her, that's fine.

That's sparked an interesting thought. Her family's Christian, and mine's Jewish. I wonder where we'd get married...

In regards to gay marriage, I have absolutely no problem with it. And if one of my future male partners really wants to be married, then I'll consider it. Same goes for any future female partners.

Same sex couples may have a very intimate romantic relationship. Trust me, I speak from experience.
Dirk is offline  
Old May 23rd, 2010, 05:41 AM   #33
Analyst
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 56

I don't support gay relationships and gays cannot be married as you stated that people of the same sex cannot be married when marriage is between people of the opposite sex.
alexmike is offline  
Old May 23rd, 2010, 10:19 AM   #34
Analyst
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexmike View Post
I don't support gay relationships and gays cannot be married as you stated that people of the same sex cannot be married when marriage is between people of the opposite sex.
Well!! I am really amazed that an analyst from America is against the gay or same sex marriage. I think generally people around the world didn't like this kinda relationship which I think is against the ethics of the society.
irahat is offline  
Old May 23rd, 2010, 03:40 PM   #35
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,944

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexmike View Post
I don't support gay relationships and gays cannot be married as you stated that people of the same sex cannot be married when marriage is between people of the opposite sex.
That is merely a formality. Marriage exists only in law. It can easily be altered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by irahat View Post
Well!! I am really amazed that an analyst from America is against the gay or same sex marriage. I think generally people around the world didn't like this kinda relationship which I think is against the ethics of the society.
I disagree with you. Firstly, recognise that the world is made up of many different societies, making up a single Terran society. Just as humanity can be considered one society, realise also that any Terran society is made up of cultures, which form their own societies. Geography is another thing. For example, speaking from experience, I could say that in German society, gay marriage is entirely acceptable. But in Jewish society, attitudes toward the concept of gay marriage vary. You can make distinctions between orthodox Jews, liberal Jews like my family, and Jewish atheists, like myself. Only the first would probably be especially opposed.

However, in your society, for example, in Pakistani society, or even Middle Eastern society (in general, i can think of exceptions), the idea of gay marriage is disapproved of.

You can divide by Urban/rural, North/South, East/West, LDC/MDC, etc. It's not fair to represent one social perspective on the whole world, Irahat, whether it be that of America, or of the Middle East. You don't see me representing the social clime of Western Europe, or Jewish culture as the collective Terran society. I would appreciate if nobody else did.
Dirk is offline  
Old May 26th, 2010, 10:20 AM   #36
Analyst
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
That is merely a formality. Marriage exists only in law. It can easily be altered.



I disagree with you. Firstly, recognise that the world is made up of many different societies, making up a single Terran society. Just as humanity can be considered one society, realise also that any Terran society is made up of cultures, which form their own societies. Geography is another thing. For example, speaking from experience, I could say that in German society, gay marriage is entirely acceptable. But in Jewish society, attitudes toward the concept of gay marriage vary. You can make distinctions between orthodox Jews, liberal Jews like my family, and Jewish atheists, like myself. Only the first would probably be especially opposed.

However, in your society, for example, in Pakistani society, or even Middle Eastern society (in general, i can think of exceptions), the idea of gay marriage is disapproved of.

You can divide by Urban/rural, North/South, East/West, LDC/MDC, etc. It's not fair to represent one social perspective on the whole world, Irahat, whether it be that of America, or of the Middle East. You don't see me representing the social clime of Western Europe, or Jewish culture as the collective Terran society. I would appreciate if nobody else did.

I am not talking about any general society or about Pakistan or Asia.I am talking about the whole world. OK! Just experience the first looks of the person whom you tell that you are a gay! I bet They'll give you a weired look first up!
irahat is offline  
Old May 26th, 2010, 02:21 PM   #37
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,944

Quote:
Originally Posted by irahat View Post
I am not talking about any general society or about Pakistan or Asia.I am talking about the whole world. OK! Just experience the first looks of the person whom you tell that you are a gay! I bet They'll give you a weired look first up!
I'm not gay. I'm bisexual. And it's not a topic that often comes up. Weird looks don't bother me, I only require they don't treat me any better or worse than anyone else, for the difference in sexual preference.

People give me a weird look when I say I'm Jewish. Doesn't mean they're anti-Semitic.
Dirk is offline  
Old May 26th, 2010, 02:34 PM   #38
Intern
 
Black Angel's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
From: Fuhgeddaboudit, New York
Posts: 21

I think that the gays deserve a better term, other than marriage seeing as how [straight] people have made a mockery of it since the beginning. Straight people have gotten married for money, for property, for green cards, for fun, so that they don't have to testify in court, etc.. etc.. I think that the Gays deserve a term that represents and honors the love, respect and commitment that they have and treat their partners with. "Marriage" would not be the term for that.

I say this as a Straight woman who is currently engaged.
Black Angel is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2016, 11:37 AM   #39
Vice President
 
Aufgeblassen's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: Central FL
Posts: 9,794

Quote:
Originally Posted by LiberalDemocraticTom View Post
[FONT="Palatino Linotype"]The thread as seen here inspires this thread.

I said that marriage is the action of being united with the opposite sex. Therefore, gay marriage shouldn't be gay marriage because they're not marrying the opposite sex.

What could be a better term?
Deviate pseudo-marriage would be good.
Aufgeblassen is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2016, 12:20 PM   #40
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 4,350

A it is a marriage between gay people...any other term would be pointless and merely further complicate a complex issue.
tecoyah is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Philosophy

Tags
gay , marriage , term



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Romney win would change little at the Fed in short term myp Current Events 1 April 1st, 2012 03:59 PM
Mid-Term Elections David Government and Politics 14 August 30th, 2010 12:42 PM
Senate confirms Bernanke for another term myp Current Events 6 January 31st, 2010 03:05 AM
Bernanke appointed to another term myp Current Events 4 September 2nd, 2009 10:09 PM
Gay marriage, civil unions and the sanctity of marriage omej Government and Politics 8 June 1st, 2009 12:28 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.