Can Anyone Give a Legitimate Non-Religious Reasons Against Gay Marriage

[lilithu]

Out of curiosity (and forgive me if this has been addressed previously) but what difference, if any, do you see between marraige and civil union?

If the rights are the same, there is no functional difference.

However, one is still left with the question of why one group of people can get "married" while another group of people can only be allowed "civil unions." To draw an analogy with the Civil Rights movement, even if separate but equal were truly equal (and obviously it was not), there would be the question of why things were separate in the first place.

Different people may respond to this hypothetical differently. Some may decide that since it's functionally equivalent that's good enough, because there are more pressing inequities to address. And I think that argument would have merit. But for me, even if separate but equal were truly equal I would push for integration. I would argue that such distinctions being codified into the law imply a difference of status and thus encourage people to view the two groups differently.

I used to be in the "marriage, civil union, why fight over words?" camp, because I did not want to waste energy fighting over semantics and because marriage is considered to be a religious sacrament. However, over time I've come to notice many examples where religious groups already make a distinction between the religious sacrament of marriage and civil marriages. If they already are capable of making the distinction, then the "marriage is a sacrament" argument loses a lot of validity. And since they are capable of making the distinction for other groups of people (atheists, divorcees) but not gays and lesbians, that to me suggests that the objection isn't about protecting marriage so much as being against gays and lesbians.

If there were/are religious groups arguing that we should ban all civil marriages and that everyone should have civil unions and you can get "married" in your respected houses of worship, I would support that. So far as I can tell, there is very little support for this solution. And ultimately we have to go with policies that people will support.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Well, maybe the whole yin/yang angle as non-religious could up for debate.

Of course, I would also insert the issue of sexual polymorphism into the argument and how one would determine if an XY chromosomal female is yin or yang.

I will give you this. It's definitely different.

I am not just a pretty face!

Most people, even with chromosomal disorders can associate with one or the other through treatment etc. To be honest, I don't know much about chromosomes (didn't really concentrate in those lectures )

 

[Scruffitude]

A balanced marriage can be based on the yin yang theory. I cant remember which is female and which is male but the two are completely opposite but together complement each other and are balanced each having a small part of the other within. Only heterosexual marriages can be applied to the yin and yang. You cant have Yin and Yin or Yang and Yang because the two would be unbalanced. Therefore homosexuals cannot work because they are not balanced.

Well my first argument against this would be that you're getting your information from Wikipedia...

Seriously, though, this is something I've thought about myself throughout my varied adventures through life. And you're right, everything needs a balance - yin and yang - otherwise there can be no balance. However... if we assume the article is accurate, this is what I take from it.
Yin and Yang don't necessarily represent literal male and literal female. It's probably more of a metaphorical concept, much like masculinity and femininity. Gender identity deals a lot with this, and whether one feels more masculine or feminine despite one's birth sex. My point is, sex is not what matters here. Two people of the same sex can have balance because one tends to be more masculine than feminine. Where relationships don't work in general is when both are masculine or feminine (it should go without stating, but this applies to heterosexual couples as well).
At any rate, MY argument against your argument is a largely philosophical one, and probably just a tad bit esoteric. I do hope that I have not inadvertently offended you or anyone else. This is simply the way I interpret the article you linked. Someone else may interpret it a different way.

 

[gnomon]

I am not just a pretty face!

Most people, even with chromosomal disorders can associate with one or the other through treatment etc. To be honest, I don't know much about chromosomes (didn't really concentrate in those lectures )

It's an interesting subject.

I'm afraid the knowledge out there is not as expansive at this time as I would like. Or I just haven't read enough about it yet.

I was reading about some cases where women, after getting married and trying to conceive, would go to the doctor and find out that they in fact were "male" to start but due to AIS grew up and developed as females. But they are unable to conceive.

There was another story in Mexico where an individual was born male, exhibited female physical characteristics through most of her youth, but then after puberty was male. I can't find the story now. Didn't use the bookmark function often when I first found it.

It sort of blows the mind open to our preconceived notions of sexual maturity. Also, as to who gets to decide an individuals identity.

And such an issue moves beyond the realm of sex and into other aspects of the whole nature/nurture, genetic/environment, etc. debate.

I might be the only one who finds the subject fascinating and sometimes I'm afraid I sound like a wannabe scientist looking at guinea pigs but my own experience with mental disorders has kept me fascinated with the notion of how we are "supposed to be".

 

[Sunstone]

A balanced marriage can be based on the yin yang theory. I cant remember which is female and which is male but the two are completely opposite but together complement each other and are balanced each having a small part of the other within. Only heterosexual marriages can be applied to the yin and yang. You cant have Yin and Yin or Yang and Yang because the two would be unbalanced. Therefore homosexuals cannot work because they are not balanced.

I don't want to discourage you, but your understanding of yin and yang seems to me remedial enough to invalidate your argument. I would encourage you to study the concepts some more and then see if you would still advocate the notion you've come up with. A couple points you might start with: Are yin and yang truly opposites? And are yin and yang necessarily identified with male and female?

 

[lilithu]

yeah heres one:
a marriage is something when a male and female come together to be by each others side for the rest of the lifes (or something similar, who cares anyway)

If you don't care, then why are you posting?

so tell me who gets to be the male and who gets to be the female.
who will give birth to the child, a child cannot have 2 fathers nor 2 mothers.

May I point out once again how closely tied the struggle for BGLT equality is to the struggle for gender equality? In general, the people who oppose same-sex marriages are the same people who think that there are set, proscribed gender roles for women and men. This is the reason why they see same-sex marriage as such a threat to marriage in general. Because people might see non-traditional gender roles within marriage and get the crazy notion that it's ok.

if everyone became gay then what will happen to the population everyone will get married but no kids,

Once again ignoring the fact that gay couples have kids.

or will they then have to do it with a cow or a goat (sorry for the rude language, i appologise)

Dude, do you really think that BGLT folks would rather copulate with farm animals than someone of the opposite sex? :areyoucra I am straight, and I know that I would rather "do it" with someone of the same gender over a cow or a goat. I mean.... seriously. :areyoucra

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Well my first argument against this would be that you're getting your information from Wikipedia...

Seriously, though, this is something I've thought about myself throughout my varied adventures through life. And you're right, everything needs a balance - yin and yang - otherwise there can be no balance. However... if we assume the article is accurate, this is what I take from it.
Yin and Yang don't necessarily represent literal male and literal female. It's probably more of a metaphorical concept, much like masculinity and femininity. Gender identity deals a lot with this, and whether one feels more masculine or feminine despite one's birth sex. My point is, sex is not what matters here. Two people of the same sex can have balance because one tends to be more masculine than feminine. Where relationships don't work in general is when both are masculine or feminine (it should go without stating, but this applies to heterosexual couples as well).
At any rate, MY argument against your argument is a largely philosophical one, and probably just a tad bit esoteric. I do hope that I have not inadvertently offended you or anyone else. This is simply the way I interpret the article you linked. Someone else may interpret it a different way.

It takes quite a lot to offend me!

Yes I had it from Wiki! lol! I have heard it in the concept of male and female marriage. I think it was Yin was female and Yang was male. I heard it at university, but cannot remember the concept very well and cant find it.

You are right, sexual orientation would play a part in this. Just thought I would throw something other than procreation in!

 

[Truth_Faith13]

I don't want to discourage you, but your understanding of yin and yang seems to me remedial enough to invalidate your argument. I would encourage you to study the concepts some more and then see if you would still advocate the notion you've come up with. A couple points you might start with: Are yin and yang truly opposites? And are yin and yang necessarily identified with male and female?

I think Yin is female and Yang is male. They are opposites with a little bit of the other in each for balance. I heard the concept at uni and cannot remember it very well. I will try and find it though. If you can picture the two sides with a small circle of the opposite side in each.

 

[Sunstone]

I think Yin is female and Yang is male. They are opposites with a little bit of the other in each for balance. I heard the concept at uni and cannot remember it very well. I will try and find it though. If you can picture the two sides with a small circle of the opposite side in each.

Thank you. I'm already a bit familiar with the concepts. I don't think you can make a legitimate argument that yin and yang are incompatible with gay marriage.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Thank you. I'm already a bit familiar with the concepts. I don't think you can make a legitimate argument that yin and yang are incompatible with gay marriage.

Here it is Picture of Yin/Yang - Google Search

Which shows the image which explains it better. Maybe not, I thought it was better than the no children one the reason being that putting yin and yin together or yang and yang is not

Edit:-

Yin is usually characterized as slow, soft, insubstantial, diffuse, cold, wet, and tranquil. It is generally associated with the feminine, birth and generation, and with the night. Yang, by contrast, is characterized as hard, fast, solid, dry, focused, hot, and aggressive. It is associated with masculinity and daytime.

 

[lilithu]

I don't want to discourage you, but your understanding of yin and yang seems to me remedial enough to invalidate your argument. I would encourage you to study the concepts some more and then see if you would still advocate the notion you've come up with. A couple points you might start with: Are yin and yang truly opposites? And are yin and yang necessarily identified with male and female?

Yes, yin and yang are truly opposites and yes, they are necessarily identified with female and male.

A balanced marriage can be based on the yin yang theory. I cant remember which is female and which is male but the two are completely opposite but together complement each other and are balanced each having a small part of the other within. Only heterosexual marriages can be applied to the yin and yang. You cant have Yin and Yin or Yang and Yang because the two would be unbalanced. Therefore homosexuals cannot work because they are not balanced.

1. Any argument based on yin and yang is a religious argument. Just because Taoism is not Christian does not mean it's not a religion. If you are making a claim based on faith, then you are making a religious argument.

2. Male and female here do not refer to gentialia. The balance of yin and yang does not require a balance of penis and vagina. Rather, it refers to traits that are traditionally thought of as male and female. Yang (male) is aggressive and yin (female) is receptive. Yang (male) is commanding and yin (female) is nurturing. etc, etc.

a. If people want to argue about the validity of assigning genders to these traits, I think that's a valid point but for a different thread.

b. Lest anyone get the impression that all male traits need to be embodied in one person and all female traits need to be embodied in the other (ie - that someone has to "play the male role" and someone else the "female role") that is NOT true. Within every person there is both yin and yang. And every person will bring a different balance to a relationship. Yes, the concept of yin and yang would predict that those marriages that are out of balance will fail while marriages where yin and yang are balanced will be harmonious. But it may very well be the case that a same-sex couple could be more balanced than a hetero-couple. Yin and yang is about the continuous process of balance, not just throwing a biological male and a biological female together.

 

[Sunstone]

Maybe not, I thought it was better than the no children one the reason being that putting yin and yin together or yang and yang is not

Do you think yin and yang are dichotomous opposites? Just curious.

 

[Sunstone]

Yes, yin and yang are truly opposites and yes, they are necessarily identified with female and male.

We will have to agree to disagree there.

 

[texan1]

Well can anyone? Do any even exist?

It would increase the number of mother-in-laws. Doesn't that prospect scare anyone????

 

[lilithu]

We will have to agree to disagree there.

Right, because you could claim that cats are dogs and we ultimately would still have to agree to disagree.

 

[Sunstone]

Right, because you could claim that cats are dogs and we ultimately would still have to agree to disagree.

There's no need to get so emotional about a simple disagreement. Do you really need everyone in the world to see things exactly as you do, Lilithu?

 

[Autodidact]

Egad! Come on people, you can do better than that! I've been out of this forum for several weeks, and come back for a brief visit. Darn it, I have to post!

Big non-religious reason: Children. Legalize gay marriage = legalize gay adoption. Also increased pressure on doctors to aid in conception (involving a 3rd party) so that gay couples can produce babies. This says to the world, fathers OR mothers are not important. It says two mothers = a mom & dad. It says two fathers = a mom & dad. It says gender in parents is irrelevent to the children.

Who here really believes that a dad (male parent) is unimportant? Or that a mother (female parent) is unimportant? I don't care how many women are in a child's life, that child needs a father. No woman can be a father. No man can be a mother.

Let gay couples adopt children who have no other options. Of course a loving gay home is better than no home. But don't bring a child into the world to deprive it of a father or a mother ON PURPOSE. It's just not fair to the child.

There, I'm leaving now. I'll be sure to lock up on my way out.

And Starfish steps up to the plate! May I invite you to this thread, where we are debating the merits of gay adoption?

1. Are you under the impression that denying the right to get married to the parents of gay children is somehow preventing gay people from becoming parents? Cuz it isn't. Of course, it does make it impossible for the parents to get married--do you think that's a good thing? Is it better for children for their parents to be married, or not?

So, you are making a claim. A claim that children with parents of both sexes thrive better than children with two same-sex parents. That's your claim, right? Do you have any data in support of your claim? Any well-done, blind studies that compare the two family models to see whether this is true? Or are you just making it up? Do you know any gay families to base your opinion on? Or are you just talking out of prejudice?

 

[Autodidact]

Considering that the entire issue is centered around the question of whether or not marriage is legally recognized as having religious importance, it seems impossible to answer your question.

The whole debate is whether or not marriage exists within or outside of the realm of religion.

Well that's easy. Of course it does. Did you really have a question about that? In fact, even under Christianity, marriage was originally civil only, and became religious later in history.

 

[Autodidact]

Well, I thought this topic was about the OTHER side of the argument. There IS another side, by the way.

And... YES it is the issue for homosexuals. Homosexuals believe that marriage does NOT exist within the realm of religion, but is something that is determined as a right by the government.

That's silly, toms. Thousands of gay people have been married in their churches and synagogues. Maybe you don't get out much.

 

[Autodidact]

yeah heres one:
a marriage is something when a male and female come together to be by each others side for the rest of the lifes (or something similar, who cares anyway)
so tell me who gets to be the male and who gets to be the female.

Wow, you've got a lot of learning to do, eselam. Either they're both male, or both female--that's what homosexuality means.

who will give birth to the child, a child cannot have 2 fathers nor 2 mothers.

Yes, they can.

if everyone became gay then what will happen to the population everyone will get married but no kids, or will they then have to do it with a cow or a goat (sorry for the rude language, i appologise)

Are you really worried that everyone is going to become gay? If it were acceptable and legal wherever you are, would you become gay? And what do goats have to do with it?