 |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jq
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 1089
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:55 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
You are correct about the polygamy thing too. Whether people want to or not, in order to make marriage equal for all, that would need to be discussed as well. |
I disagree. I don't think polygamy would add equality. It lessens the value of the woman. It inherently places the man in a position of status over the woman and therefore degrades overall equality. Comparing gay marriage to polygamy is unfair; gay marriage subscribes to the same monogamous code of ethics that comes with straight marriage. Polygamy is not the same, and allowing it would not increase equality, in a nation such as ours which is placed 67 in the world for women's equality.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nov 30, 2007, 9:40am, jq wrote: | Quote: |
Nov 30, 2007, 5:57am, Kizzume wrote: | Quote: |
You are correct about the polygamy thing too. Whether people want to or not, in order to make marriage equal for all, that would need to be discussed as well. |
I disagree. I don't think polygamy would add equality. It lessens the value of the woman. It inherently places the man in a position of status over the woman and therefore degrades overall equality. Comparing gay marriage to polygamy is unfair; gay marriage subscribes to the same monogamous code of ethics that comes with straight marriage. Polygamy is not the same, and allowing it would not increase equality, in a nation such as ours which is placed 67 in the world for women's equality. |
Far be it from me to disagree with jq, but I think that dealing with polygamy is important. I think that it's unfair to recognize one consenting relationship over another. To be honest I think that the analysis that polygamy limits the rights of women is pure bs. While it's true that the concept of traditional marriage combined with polygamy CAN be harmful, I don't think that it would be true under the new scope of government recognized relationships. Polyamory isn't simply man with multiple women, there are times that it's woman and multiple men. There is nothing wrong with that relationship and I don't think that the government should be in the business of limiting human relationships that are consensual.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jq
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 1089
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
I just think if it got legalized, there would be certain churches and religious groups pushing women into it. It has happened before and it could do it again. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2787
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Multiple partners of whatever gender is what I am referring to.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redstaterebel
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nov 30, 2007, 9:40am, jq wrote: | Quote: |
Nov 30, 2007, 5:57am, Kizzume wrote: | Quote: |
You are correct about the polygamy thing too. Whether people want to or not, in order to make marriage equal for all, that would need to be discussed as well. |
I disagree. I don't think polygamy would add equality. It lessens the value of the woman. It inherently places the man in a position of status over the woman and therefore degrades overall equality. Comparing gay marriage to polygamy is unfair; gay marriage subscribes to the same monogamous code of ethics that comes with straight marriage. Polygamy is not the same, and allowing it would not increase equality, in a nation such as ours which is placed 67 in the world for women's equality. |
NO ONE DISAGREES WITH RED STATE REBEL! >
Ok, I'm kidding.
Seriously - I am not actually comparing gay marriage to polygamy in terms of equality or morality. I brought it to question the definition of marriage - as defined by the Government.
Current: One man and One Woman
If gender is removed, it looks like this:
One Person and One Person
If we can take gender out of the definition, why not quantity?
See what I mean?
Many in tis country would object to polygamy based largely on what you have stated above, BUT - many people object to gay marriage as well. How does the government pick and choose which is Ok and which is not? In the spirit of freedom and equal rights, shouldn't the government get out of the business of telling us which is acceptable?
Can of worms thing. Which shouldn't scare us or deter us - let's talk about it and sort it out. I think baby steps - the current pressing issue is that for gay couples there is no legal status - survivor benefits, health insurance, co ownership, etc. Civil Unions would fix that immediately - there would be a little uproar - but minor and it would blow over.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
RSR, the problem is that states enacting civil unions fixes nothing. Look at Mass. We can see that the on a local/state level the couples are treated equally but when we examine the federal level we see that the couples are prevented from equal treatment because of DOMA. Federal DOMA prevents the recognition of ANY union between same sex partners.
So in it's current status, civil unions are little else than a band-aid on a gunshot wound.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2787
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
There really should have been more uproar when DOMA got signed.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redstaterebel
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dec 1, 2007, 4:56pm, debateman wrote: | Quote: |
RSR, the problem is that states enacting civil unions fixes nothing. Look at Mass. We can see that the on a local/state level the couples are treated equally but when we examine the federal level we see that the couples are prevented from equal treatment because of DOMA. Federal DOMA prevents the recognition of ANY union between same sex partners.
So in it's current status, civil unions are little else than a band-aid on a gunshot wound. |
True - we do need a federal answer to this.
A Mass. civil union needs to be recognized by every other state - Either congress needs to repeal DOMA or Superme Court needs to consider the constitutionality (really big word) of it.
Kizz makes a good point about DOMA - you would think that one of the Bush Presidents, or Reagan would have signed this one - not a democrat.
I really think the Clinton DOMA signature and don't ask, don't tell policy hurt the cause more than any republican measure could have. It's kind of bi-partisan now.
That's the past - we need to move forward - Members of the gay community and straight supporters of these measures need to stand up and battle with the strongest weapon that they have - their voting block. This is a perfect year to do it - with a democratic congress safe next year and the presidential election favoring democrats at the moment.
Something like this:
Dear Mrs. Clinton,
Propose something meaningful, or our 5 million votes are staying home.
Ran out of patience,
Gay Community.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2787
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can't imagine Hillary doing ANYTHING for the gay community. Appropriate little letter. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redstaterebel
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think any of the Presidential candidates will - nor the congress. Too much of a hot button issue. These are pro's at avoiding things like this.
I think the best hope is the Supreme Court.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2787
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redstaterebel wrote: | I don't think any of the Presidential candidates will - nor the congress. Too much of a hot button issue. These are pro's at avoiding things like this.
I think the best hope is the Supreme Court. |
I am 99.999999999999999999999999% sure that you are absolutely correct.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kizzume wrote: | | redstaterebel wrote: | I don't think any of the Presidential candidates will - nor the congress. Too much of a hot button issue. These are pro's at avoiding things like this.
I think the best hope is the Supreme Court. |
I am 99.999999999999999999999999% sure that you are absolutely correct. |
Which basically means that anyone without a lifetime appointment lacks the balls to do something about ti.. FIGURES
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2787
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
That pretty much sums it up.
I think the only way something like this is going to change is after something major society-wise happens, or after some sort of tragedy happens. Maybe if we start having more gay characters be just regular people in movies and tv shows instead of comic relief. Maybe if a lot of things. A lot has changed since the late 80's, and I think a lot will continue to change. Let's just hope the change is for the good.
It could even be something that would happen after a civil war. There is some polarization that is happening that I think is going to show its ugly head over the next few years.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
| |
|
