Shift in Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage
Offline It's interesting to me how those who rail against same-sex marriage have shifted their arguments in recent months.
It used to be that same-sex marriage was decried solely on biblical grounds - that marriage was between a man and a woman only. Current arguments still wind up at the same conclusion, but they take a different path to get there.
Here is the article I'm referring to:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/06/same.sex.marriage.economy/index.html
I agree with what many in the article say, that same-sex marriage shouldn't be allowed just because of positive economic impact. It should be a matter of basic fairness.
But it's the arguments against, like this one, that make me insane:
Tom Pritchard with the conservative Minnesota Family Council also isn't buying the money line. He says the primary argument against gay marriage is that it would de-value heterosexual marriage. He compares it to counterfeit money de-valuing real currency.
"We put in place subprime loans thinking it was going to be a great boon to the economy. Well, there was a big bust and the government has been paying the consequences," Pritchard says. "Well, I think the same thing with marriage."
Apples and oranges. Marriage is a relationship status between two people. And if you're judging your marriage by someone else's marriage, then I'll wager you've got some problems with your marriage. If you think your marriage is devalued by other "substandard" marriages, then shouldn't you be equally outraged by heterosexual marriages that involve abuse, infidelity, etc? Why not ban alcoholics or people with histories of abuse from getting married?
Mr. Pritchard continues:
"Basically we've got a crisis now with divorce, but now we're going to be adding into it counterfeit marriages -- same-sex marriages. And the problem with that is it dilutes the currency -- the value of marriage -- such that I think you're going to have more family breakdown and problems resulting from that."
So, what he's saying that there a problem with the institution of heterosexual marriage. And somehow allowing same-sex marriage will make it worse? Is the threat of same-sex marriage the source of the problems being experienced with heterosexual marriage?
Worthless, empty arguments. Nobody can point to a single, tangible detriment to society that will result from same-sex marriage. It's just god-belief in disguise.
Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.
- Login to post comments
They love to claim that gay marriages will harm straight ones, and I never got how they envisioned that happening.
"Sorry honey, we can't have a meaningful relationship anymore. Somewhere gays are getting married. It has underminded the meaning and value of our straight marriage. Time for a divorce I guess."
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
What a fucking idiot. By his money analogy, he's just hiding his superiority complex towards gays, when he's the one who's clearly intellectually inferior to... well anyone.
Then he goes on to suggest(and correct me if I'm wrong), that same-sex marriages will make heterosexuals get a divorce. what.....the......fuck...??
''Black Holes result from God dividing the universe by zero.''
Gay marriage is like a sub-prime loan?
That's gotta be the biggest crock of shit I've heard today. Out of curiosity, I wonder if there are countries where gay marriage has been around long enough to compare the longevity of gay to straight marriages. If they're basically the same, so much for that argument.
Regardless, this makes the fallacy of asserting intrinsic value, in the same way that my hat has the intrinsic quality "red." Obviously, a marriage has whatever value is assigned to it.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Seriously. Makes "God hates fags" sound like cool hard logic.
Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.
Why Believe?
This is one of the many reasons I despise religion. It has to corrupt language and twist the meaning of words in order to survive. That is why the sillier of the apologists claim that the rational thinking process or application of a systematic and scientific investigation of the empirical world is merely another form of faith which is on equal epistemological footing with revelation, or attempting to outflank rational criticism by appealling that religious assertions are somehow exempt from rational scrutiny (which, by virtue of the same corruption of language, is merely on the same epistemological footing as their assertions anyway). By corrupting the meaning of words and phrases like "rational" and "logic" and especially "scientific investigation", pernicious nonsense that ought to have long ago been ground to dust survives. The nonsense in the OP is another example. Even a cursory examination will clearly indicate that this claim about gay marriage somehow diluting the "value" of marriage is completely meaningless. More precisely, the statement lacks propositional content. It's like saying "science and spirituality go together". It doesn't mean fuck-all.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
Speak of the devil. I visit FSTDT.net today and guess what comes up:
http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=60246
This is a great example of fundyism. And it has a poorly thought out and strained analogy mixed in for good measure.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
British General Charles Napier while in India
Best response from FSTDT:
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Let me translate:
"I am the apla male. You are a subordinate. I want you to coddle my insecurities because my god says you will give me cooties".
I say to him. FUCK YOU! You do not own gays, you are not their boss, and since they pay taxes, they should be given the same rights as you have. OTHERWISE don't take their tax money.
And eating shellfish is an abomination too, but I see pleanty of Red Lobsters around. People like this are stuck in mythological bigoted garbage afraid of change. They have these absurd visions of orgies in the street and pediophilia, just like people burned witches because of their own selfish delusions.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Marriage should not be sold as an absolute, for gays or strieghts in any case. People, especially younger people rush into it without thinking, pop out kids they cant afford and then get stuck in poverty.
It is easyer to get married than it is to get a divorce, I think it should be the oposite. If two people are going to start a family, then it is up to society to prepare them for the work required to meet the economic and emotional challenges.
I don't have a problem with marriage, I do have a problem with the fact that it is sold without pragmatism purely from an emotional appeal, which sets people up for bad marrages, abuse, and financial hardships.
People basically are sold this idea without any clue as to what they are in for. They go into it without conflict resolution skills, or economic safty nets. They often marry people they shouldnt get married to and then are sold the stupid idea of "till death", which sets them up for bitter custody battles and property division.
I was married and I got through my divorce amicably although it did hurt at first. However, because I didn't buy the delusional utopia crap that it would last forever and I knew that my x-wife had her own brain and although I appealed to her to stay at first, I had accepted even before I was married that there are no guarantees in life.
We are to this day still friends and either exchange e-mails or talk on the phone. She is happy and I am as well, and that is what matters. Facing reality helps you cope with life. Forcing utopias that don't exist sets you up for disaster.
The worst bitter marriages happen because the partners project themselves on each other with the attitude "If the other would only do it my way".
Economic skills should be taught. Conflict resolution should be taught. Anger management should be taught. And being willing to let someone go if things don't work out.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog