Gays and Marriage

Forums › Off topic › Gays and Marriage

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#106763 31-Jul-2012 13:10

So, last year I asked a similar thing, I'm wondering what the general view people on Geeekzone have on Equal Marriage in NZ.
This is a hot topic now given that a bill was recently drawn that aims to legalise equal marriage in NZ. Some people think this is going to affect their own marriage in some way, others think this destroys marriage all together, and then others think its just going to give people who love eachother the ability to marry, which is what I view also, (given that I'm gay myself).

So, lets keep this polite please, no name calling and such.

My view on this,
Id like to see it brought into law, its time we move into the 21st century, and accept humans for what they are. It wasn't that long ago that women got the right to vote. That didn't destroy the country now did it? Whats the worst that could happen if two people who love eachother get to marry eachother? That wont void your marriage in any way, its just another happy couple who can spend the rest of their lives together. If you want to say it destroys the values of marriage, then why not get abortions and divorce made illegal too? Just saying. Divorce is what destroys marriage here, not love.

-Sam.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 7

18672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7809

Lifetime subscriber

#664564 31-Jul-2012 13:24

Making marriage an option for everyone strengthens the whole family concept and society along with it. I can't see how anyone could think otherwise. Marriage is a social institution that existed long before religion so I can't see why religion has a claim on it in either direction.

Poll

346 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 59

#664575 31-Jul-2012 13:35

I think that if two people, regardless of gender love each other and wish to marry then good on them and they should be able to do so.

As far as adoption of children by same sex couples which many people tie to the same argument I'm of the same opinion, if they wish to adopt a child and love and care for it then more power to them and go for it.

The demeanour of the people in the relationship and how they treat each other and others matters more than if they are the same gender or not.

chiefie

I iz your trusted friend
5877 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 151

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#664576 31-Jul-2012 13:35

gzt: Making marriage an option for everyone strengthens the whole family concept and society along with it. I can't see how anyone could think otherwise. Marriage is a social institution that existed long before religion so I can't see why religion has a claim on it in either direction.

The greatest point exactly.. Marriage is not sacred by religion. :-)

Internet is my backyard...

«Geekzone blog: Tech 'n Chips Takeaway» «Personal blog: And then...»

Please read the Geekzone's FUG

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#664583 31-Jul-2012 13:45

OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it? Marriage is between a man and woman, end of story. Gay and lesbian couples claim to only want the same rights as married couples, and guess what...they do under current laws in a variety of ways including civil unions.

"Man" and "Woman" are also defined terms. When woman wanted the same "rights" as men, we didn't go out and change the definition of "women" so they could enjoy an equal status in modern society.

I am all for non-discrimination and equal rights no matter what your gender or sexual orientation, but a car is a car, and a truck is a truck. Both have the same rules and rights on the road, lets not try to fix something that isn't broken. Isn't this just more PC nonsense?

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

davidcole

6099 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1465

Trusted

#664586 31-Jul-2012 13:47

I want to know how the anti marriage equality proponents think that allowing marriage is going to next lead to polygamy.

Previously known as psycik

Home Assistant: Gigabyte AMD A8 Brix, Home Assistant with Aeotech ZWave Controller, Raspberry PI, Wemos D1 Mini, Zwave, Shelly Humidity and Temperature sensors
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4 4k, ATV4, HDHomeRun Dual
Server Host Plex Server 3x3TB, 4x4TB using MergerFS, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Proxmox Server with 1xW10, 2xUbuntu 22.04 LTS, Backblaze Backups, usenetprime.com fastmail.com Sharesies Trakt.TV Sharesight

tigercorp

668 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 81

#664587 31-Jul-2012 13:47

Same sex marriage should have been legalised when the Civil Union bill was being discussed.

Seriously, "on the basis of your sexuality you're not good enough to be married but here, have civil union which is kinda the same thing but not really". How on earth did that ever get passed in the first place?

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#664588 31-Jul-2012 13:49

The religious argument put forward by many of the opposed is null and void in my opinion.

We live in a secular society and the definition they are looking at changing is for legal recognition. If certain groups choose not to recognise the union in a religious sense, that is up to them and their organisation, however the law should recognise the union.

The church likes to think it owns the construct of marriage and the state should have nothing to do with it - however most don't understand that the legal and spirtual concepts of marriage are not the same thing.

I'm yet to see a valid argument against marriage equality.

Twitter: ajobbins

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#664592 31-Jul-2012 13:53

If two males want to get married does not bother me in the least, I think Jobbins and Biddle would make a nice Husband & Husband

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267

Trusted

#664593 31-Jul-2012 13:56

I'm ambivalent, so I guess if asked I'd say I support it. I don't mind who marries who.

My question is what's wrong with civil union? Isn't it the same as a marriage?

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 671

Trusted

#664594 31-Jul-2012 13:59

I support it. Thankfully NZ is a secular country and people here are mostly liberal thinking type.

Do whatever you want to do man.

KevinL

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 20

Trusted

#664595 31-Jul-2012 14:00

scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it? Marriage is between a man and woman, end of story. Gay and lesbian couples claim to only want the same rights as married couples, and guess what...they do under current laws in a variety of ways including civil unions.

"Man" and "Woman" are also defined terms. When woman wanted the same "rights" as men, we didn't go out and change the definition of "women" so they could enjoy an equal status in modern society.

I am all for non-discrimination and equal rights no matter what your gender or sexual orientation, but a car is a car, and a truck is a truck. Both have the same rules and rights on the road, lets not try to fix something that isn't broken. Isn't this just more PC nonsense?

The issue is under current legislation a civil union doesn't have all the same legal rights and benefits that a marriage would. If they redefined civil unions to have exactly the same legal rights and benefits as marriage, then maybe there would be less argument - but if civil unions and marriage are exactly the same, why not call it the same thing?

I don't believe it's PC nonsense, I think it's a clear case of equity - much in the same way as we gave women the right to vote.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

davidcole

6099 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1465

Trusted

#664597 31-Jul-2012 14:03

I think, for example, one of the differences is married couples can adopt. AFAIK Gay and Lesbian couples can't (but as individuals they can).

MikeSkyrme

272 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Trusted

#664598 31-Jul-2012 14:05

KevinL:
scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it? Marriage is between a man and woman, end of story. Gay and lesbian couples claim to only want the same rights as married couples, and guess what...they do under current laws in a variety of ways including civil unions.

"Man" and "Woman" are also defined terms. When woman wanted the same "rights" as men, we didn't go out and change the definition of "women" so they could enjoy an equal status in modern society.

I am all for non-discrimination and equal rights no matter what your gender or sexual orientation, but a car is a car, and a truck is a truck. Both have the same rules and rights on the road, lets not try to fix something that isn't broken. Isn't this just more PC nonsense?

The issue is under current legislation a civil union doesn't have all the same legal rights and benefits that a marriage would. If they redefined civil unions to have exactly the same legal rights and benefits as marriage, then maybe there would be less argument - but if civil unions and marriage are exactly the same, why not call it the same thing?

I don't believe it's PC nonsense, I think it's a clear case of equity - much in the same way as we gave women the right to vote.

I think your point re a civil union not having the same legal rights as a marriage is what really hits the nail on the head. What can a couple in a civil union not do that a married couple can do?

For the record, I personally do not care who marries who, male or female.

Michael Skyrme - Instrumentation & Controls

kyhwana2

2572 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 233

#664600 31-Jul-2012 14:05

scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it?

Go look up the word "literally" or "decimate". Words get redefined all the time. People who don't like change need to either get over it.

[Mod (N8): Removed non constructive comments]

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267

Trusted

#664602 31-Jul-2012 14:09

KevinL: The issue is under current legislation a civil union doesn't have all the same legal rights and benefits that a marriage would. If they redefined civil unions to have exactly the same legal rights and benefits as marriage, then maybe there would be less argument - but if civil unions and marriage are exactly the same, why not call it the same thing?

I don't believe it's PC nonsense, I think it's a clear case of equity - much in the same way as we gave women the right to vote.

I can't argue with that, but I have to admit I thought civil union and marriage (and de facto for that matter) already had the same rights (with the exception perhaps of adopting).

If, instead of allowing women the vote they had made up a new term and had women "vote" separately from men yet both "votes" carried the same weight/power, would that have been acceptable? I don't see why not, what difference does it make? But then, I would say that, since I am a man.

On one hand, I say, why should people care? If two people want to marry let them. On the other hand, I say if you can already get "married" what's the difference? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Can we legalise polygamy while we're at it? I (seriously) don't see why marriage should be limited to only two people.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 7