South Africa OKs Gay Marriage

Really, its embarrising that a country that used to be a plot device for the 80's LETHAL WEAOPN 2 as Neo-Nazi-like baddies with ole Apartheid....well, now okay with Gay Marriage, an issue for which Americans seem to have serious problems with.

Really, what is a logical argument against what is legally their Constitutional right?

The answer to this whole issue is simple. What has to happen is that the State will recognize what it calls "Civil Unions" whether they be between man and woman, woman and woman or mam and man. All divorce laws will apply to these people.

"Marriage" always was and still is an institution which comes out of religion. Thus if a particular religion does not allow "gay marriage" then gays will just have to go find some religion that does. Then they can have their religiou srvice and then go down to city hall to make it official --- or not --- depending on whether they are religious.

Same thing for straight people. They can go get "married" by the clerk of the court and also do it in Church.

The state would simply stop recognizing religious ceremonies as civil unions. Case closed.

Oh, right. Let's keep them **** out of Heaven. :rolleyes:

I think using the Bible, or the Church, or any other division of organized religion in a debate against Gay Marriage is just a poor excuse, and easy way to draw support to your side. Of course some people will find sympathy for religion.

But, the Bible IS NOT the official word of God. We will never know the official word of God. For all we know, he/she is gay. The Bible is just an interpretation of religion, and any passage denouncing homosexuality is all a matter of the writer's opinion. Besides, the Bible also views women as inferior's and object's at times... Why aren't all of the uptight Jesus-freaks protesting over laws making wife-battery illegal?

I think, for the time being, I will side with the factually-existent constitutional right over the possibly-non-existent and/or inaccurate religion.

I am gay but against gay marriage, for social reasons more than religous reasons.

Feel sorry for the adopted son who end up with two "dads". Prime target for any bullies in school.

God gave Moses the Ten Commandments and they are in the Bible - The Book of Exodus Chapter 20. That's pretty much the official word of God. There are also seven references in the Bible forbidding gay unions; also incest and beastiality.

You can make gay marriage legal by the laws of man, that's fine, but the Catholic Church will never recognize it. South Africa, I wish you well.

When constitution was written, I am sure no one had heard of gay marriages :p

No, but they heard of "The pursuit of happiness."

I am not against Gay marriages, I was just joking. But I think it will require a lot of modifications in the law to plug any loop-holes that may arise if we just modify the definition of marriage to apply to any two individuals. But what's the hurry, let it take a couple of years to finish the work. Better than discussing this for the next 50 years and not doing anything about it.
Since the topic is about comparing with South Africa, I would also like to mention that last year in India, a lesbian couple wanted to marry and filed a case. The judge rejected it saying that the (Indian) society has still not accepted homosexuality as normal. I think it is logical though. However in US, I think it is not such a big deal and people have accepted it for many years. What is stopping it to implement this legally? Same question raised by RRA... Any answers??

For one thing, an attempt by some to impose their standards of morality on others.

For another, precedent and convention. People always have trouble, in general, in accepting new and radical ideas.

Also, organized religion. Not just the Catholic Chirch, either.

We have gay-marriage for a while now, I`m not bothered with it.

If 2 people love eachother and want to get married, who am I stop stop them?
Many "famous" tv-personalities are openly gay, some of them are married.. nobody seems to have a problem with that.

About gay-parents having children... I don`t really have a problem with that.
Better to be raised in a family with 2 parents of the same sex that love their child, then some mom-father families that are total crap.
The will maybe be bullied with it at school, but homosexual people are so "normal" over here that I don`t think that`ll be a real big problem in a few years.

Just my 2 cents

I am 100% against Gay marriage. God made Man to intercourse with Women, and not for two individuals of the same sex to pretend they are enjoying it. Homosexuality is not natural. I have a feeling marriage between homosexuals will destroy the future of traditional marriages. How about marrying a cousin or a donkey?

Are gay couples even allowed to adopt? Wouldn't it change the kids personality? Behaviour at school? What about telling friends about their parents?

God gave Moses the Ten Commandments and they are in the Bible - The Book of Exodus Chapter 20. That's pretty much the official word of God. There are also seven references in the Bible forbidding gay unions; also incest and beastiality.

You can make gay marriage legal by the laws of man, that's fine, but the Catholic Church will never recognize it. South Africa, I wish you well. [/b][/quote]No, the Catholic Church only recognizes the pedophiles they protect. Whether or not "god" "gave" Moses the ten commandments or not is a fairy tale.

Well, since men seem to be also having intercourse with each other, I suppose we could say that God made man to do that as well, couldn't we?

And I suspect that they're not "pretending" to enjoy it, but rather really are.

How will gay marriage destroy the future of traditional marriage? I don't see that happening, since maybe 90% or more of the general population is heterosexual.

Yes, in the United States gay couples are permitted to adopt. And as in any parent-child relationship, the parents influence the child's personality and behavior in school. But there's no reason to assume that the effect of that influence in the case of gay couples and their children will be a negative one.

And what about the kids telling their friends at school? It's only because some members of society have an intolerant view of homosexuality that could cause a problem here.

I will agree with you about one thing, though:

People should absolutely not be permitted to marry donkeys.

After all, donkeys are already abused enough when they are "un-naturally" mated with horses to produce mules. Why abuse them even more by mating them with people?

How is homosexuality "unnatral?" There are many species of animals which practice it. Is that unnatural? Is it natural for a woman to give a man oral sex but not for a man to give another man oral sex?? What about man on woman vs woman on woman?

Thats right. Anyone having sex with a donkey would make an ass of themself.

Thats right. Anyone having sex with a donkey would make an ass of themself. [/b][/quote] You beat me to it SC!

Very funny. It gives taking it up the ass a new meaning.

A newly promoted Captain was assigned to a post in Iraq.

On his first inspection he noticed a rather young and good looking donkey standing happily next to a rusty old jeep without an engine, and asked a Sergeant what the donkey was for.

"Well sir..", began the soldier hesitantly, "We're a very long way from civilization, and men have, er - um, needs, Sir..."

"What exactly do you mean, Sergeant. Spit it out, man."

"Well Sir... when the men get really desperate for a woman, they use the donkey."

"I see", replied the Captain with a cough. "If it keeps the men satisfied, I suppose it's OK with me".

When he had been at the outpost for about a month he noticed the donkey was missing and stopped a soldier as he walked past his tent.

"Tell me, soldier, where is the donkey tonight?"

"It's Private Smith's turn with the donkey this month, sir"

The Captain thanked him and went back into his tent wishing he had a woman.

The next month he heard the donkey neighing loundly and stopped the sergeant as he was passing his tent.

"Tell me sergeant, what's the donkey like?"

"Good as gold, sir. We'd be lost without him."

"Yes - but what do the men actually DO with it?"

"Do sir? The usual, sir, you know..."

"Yes, but what exactly?"

"Well...we just climb on and ride him to paradise, sir."

The Captain was almost beside himself with excitement, but managed to control himself and dismissed the sergeant.

After three months he was so desperate for a woman he ordered the sergeant to fetch the donkey. The Sergeant shrugged his shoulders and led the happy animal into the Captain's tent. The Captain dropped his pants, stepped onto a stool and fucked the donkey so hard it collapsed.

When he'd finished, he beckoned the Sergeant over and asked: "Is that how the men do it?"

"No sir," the sergeant said. "They men usually use the donkey to ride into town to the whorehouse."

Good one! I like that one.


Don Cardi

See what those poor guys in Iraq have to go through? :p

True, but then again, how do we know if that story about the donkey was planted or not?


Don Cardi

I think a definition of "natural" is in order here. There seems to be variety.

The word natural is derived from nature, correct?

I believe my penis was designed for two functions; elimination of liquid waste and procreation. That's the nature of the penis. To perform the procreation part it contains very sensitive nerves and lots of blood vessels.

The rectum was designed for elimination of solid waste. No sex organs in there.

I think you see where this is leading.

I think the hand was designed for something else, no sex organs there. Yet men seem to put it contact with their sexual organ for pleasure lots.

Same with the woman's mouth... but let's keep this PG.

So MC, by your definition, then, oral sex is un-natural as well.

May I also suggest, that by your definition, heterosexual sex while wearing a condom is un-natural, since the penis is not being used for one of the two natural purposes you mention, but merely for pleasure?

And are either of the above any less un-natural than homosexual sex?

And if they're all un-natural, which, if one accepts your definition, they are, are any of the three any more wrong or less wrong than the others?

Or is it possible that there are three natural uses for the penis:

1) The elimination of liquid waste,
2) Procreation, and
3) To provide physical pleasure

That would seem to me to be quite likely, since, after all, sex is fun.

This is becoming a really shitty conversation. :p


Don Cardi

To be seriously honest, I think it'll become legal in the United States someday. I mean Canada, the traditionally catholic/conservative Spain, Holland(and Belgium as well, I believe), and South Africa......its inevitable.

Gay/lesbian marriage, since 2001.
Gays/lesbians adopting children: not yet, probably because the Catholic party will be against it, despite of how half of their memebers feel. Maybe it will be aproved on federal level, but not on the level of the three substates within Belgium.

Pl and Salad,

You are both 100% correct. No argument here (sort of). But as this thread unravels.......if one believes in God and the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, then physical stimulation between the two, with any part of the body is natural and welcome. Kissing is a wonderful and bonding sensation. Anal intercourse or oral stimulation can have the same effect; total submission, physical and emotional love. The culmination of the physical exchange is the act of procreation. Condoms are not condoned by the Catholic Church because they prevent procreation. Masterbation is a sin, but yeah lots of us do it. Catholics are not born without sin and they sin their whole lifes, but that doesn't mean you don't stop trying to be good; it's a journey.

In conclusion, I don't expect non-believers to understand any of this, but I thought I'd share it.

God gave Moses the Ten Commandments and they are in the Bible - The Book of Exodus Chapter 20. That's pretty much the official word of God. There are also seven references in the Bible forbidding gay unions; also incest and beastiality.

You can make gay marriage legal by the laws of man, that's fine, but the Catholic Church will never recognize it. South Africa, I wish you well. [/b][/quote]The bible entails more than the 10 commandments. The commandments are a mere sliver in the some-odd hundred pages that make up the book.

And, as I already said, any passage forbidding gay unions is the word of the author. Not God. I would hope God doesn't say, "Well, you've donated a fair portion of your yearly salary to charity every year since you were 25, you kept an open mind about your peers no matter what, you've been an active and faithful member of the holy church since childhood, and you personally helped clean up Africa... But you're gay. Straight to Hell with you, shabbat shalom mother-fucker!"

Oh yeah?

Well I still say sex is fun, procreation or not. :p

Right up there with drugs and rock and roll (j/k about drugs).

MaryCas,

God Intended this, God Intended that...

Okay, what did God intend with Men having tits?

I mean really....

I guess they would have to wear a Bro or a Mansiere. :rolleyes:

I wonder if you could say the same after you had sex with me... Couldn't resist.

Was that a proposition?

Yes, but you should know, I'm a black widow.

I'd take the challenge.

Yeah, but I still believe that a Man banging another Man is the most horrendous things a Man can do.

And its okay for them to marry? Man & Man?

Nasty perverted uneducated bastards.

Also, I agree with MaryCas.

Totally.

You've heard about the pot and the kettle, I presume?

Well, if you do that's fine and dandy. Perhaps you would care to repond to this, then?:

I'll make it easy for you. Here's what MaryCas said that you "totally agree with"

Here is my response that I'd like you to respond to:
And, when your done responding to that, I'd like to hear yout response to my questions about your previous contribution to this thread, which you have so far conveniently avoided.

This post of yours:

And my response:

Debate and argument become fairly meaningless when one person makes a point, or points, and the other doesn't respond.

So, whenever you have a chance......

"Nasty perverted uneducated bastards."

I'm against Gay Marriage but what in the world does education have to do with someone being gay?
And there are a lot more perverted things going on in this world than just 2 men or 2 women having sex.

How about nasty and perverted? That a fair description?

I think I addressed that in the 2nd part of my post

Dear people, in the quotes below, you can see the difference between
1. someone who carries my total disrespect and
2. someone I don't agree with, but who I respect and who I consider normal

I think I addressed that in the 2nd part of my post [/b][/quote]So you consider homosexual sex to be perverted, although there are more perverted things going on in the world?

I guess it's not fair to ask about "nasty", since that word carries many meanings and I'm not sure which one the original poster means in this case.

I think I addressed that in the 2nd part of my post [/b][/quote]So you consider homosexual sex to be perverted, although there are more perverted things going on in the world?

I guess it's not fair to ask about "nasty", since that word carries many meanings and I'm not sure which one the original poster means in this case. [/b][/quote]I don't consider homosexuality to be perverted but the poster may, I think words like nasty and perverted are different for each person. If he thinks homosexuality is perverted I was just saying there are much more perverted things out there.

I was watching the Simpsons I think a year ago and on the episode it used the word "cuckold". After doing research I found a cuckold is a man who likes his wife to have sex with other men. I'm sure people will read this and say that that is nasty or perverted and other people who will say ok whatever and go on reading. Some people might think oral sex is nasty and perverted.

I can't/don't take objection to what people find gross or nasty, but when someone says uneducated that I can find objection with.

I think a cuckold is a man who's wife has committed adultery.

I don't think his "liking it" is part of the equation.

It would make the relationship easier if he did

Plawrence, when you see those Gay priests getting caught raping little kids, then you'd know what I mean by nasty and perverted. What were they rapping?

Little boys.

I love the simplistic logic that people have against homosexuality, kinda like that fella from Afghanistan, the one that hates wicked people as well. Osama something. Can anyone help me out here?

Really, he thinks homosexuality is "evil" and not what God intended, as MaryCas and Vito seem to believe.

All I know is, no way I want to agree with something in general with someone like that...

What do priests raping young boys have to do with gay marriage?

That's as bad as heterosexual men raping young girls, which, I presume by your definition, would also be "nasty and perverted."

Does that mean there's something wrong with heterosexual relations between two adults?

Dunno why. Maybe you should ask Sodom Hussein though. :rolleyes:

I'd take the challenge. [/b][/quote]Do you know what a female black widow does to the male after having sex with him? She chops his head off. I like that very much. Still interested? :p

Depends on which head she chops off.

You get to choose. I don't think it makes that much difference. Good one Plaw!

Vito, by what you just posted you have a problem with pedophiles not gays.

One problem is that many group gays with pedophiles, molesters, etc. This same mindset is as logical as the ideals of "Super Ancient Aryan Races" that guys like that Adolf once believed, or whatever.

Then again, many people back in the 1950s and 60s in the South really believed that if such things as intermarriage between blacks and whites, especially in the South, would lead to the country breaking down or society being destroyed, blah blah blah. Same garbage was said when people tried to keep the women and blacks from voting, or whatever progressive rights.

If I'm not wrong, gay marriage is legal from today in UK. Elton John should be among the first gays to wed.

Although I am not proud to be from the country that added the word "apartheid" (apartness) to the world dictionary, I am proud that that same country was the first in the world to legalize same sex marriage (as well as prostitution, euthanasia and perhaps in the near future also soft drugs, cannabis and marijuana that is, NOT all the other drugs that are in fact worse for you than alcohol).

The days when the church / organized religion had something to say in politics we call the dark ages (1000 - 1500 AD) over here in Europe.

As many people in the West (Europe and USA) might agree, a period of "Enlightment" where organized religion is seperated from politics so everyone can truely be free would be a good thing in eg: The Middle East looking at extremists there.

However, when I hear Mr Bush talking about "evil", "crusades", abortion, gay marriage, "right" and "wrong" etc I sometimes wonder wether the pilgrims who founded the US did in fact escape from the Enlightment in Europe. What was the date again, 1492? Mmmm...

Don't worry, our prime minister Jan Peter "Harry Potter" Balkenende will continue to lead the World towards freedom ;-)

The USA never had a period of Enlightment, nor did the Middle east had it. Result: too much focus on religion, every problem is created around religion, every conflict is being connected with religion. Ever see that in Europe? No, because it's not a good thing.

Enzo, you are making things too easy. First, USA never had an Enlightenment because they were already enlightened, since the American Revolution was basically founded on Enlightenment ideas to the point that this Revolution took even place BEFORE the French Revolution itself. Plus, from an historical point of view, Europe had a lot of religious conflicts, all over the continent, the last one in Northen Ireland.

Then they need a new one, just like the Arabic world needs one. Btw, did the Arabs ever had an Enlightment?

Then they need a new one, just like the Arabic world needs one. Btw, did the Arabs ever had an Enlightment? [/b][/quote]Not just Arabs, everyone living in Islamic countries need that. So does the religious right in the US.

Islam is almost 1400 years old. It's about time that such a period begins.

Yeah, I know, but since their territories kinda overlap each other, I hoped no one would notice. Damn, you.

But for the rest, you're absolutely right.

If you look at the correct definition of Marriage, it is, as instituted by God, a faithful, exclusive, lifelong union of a man and a woman joined in an intimate community of life and love.

But I have a question for you, since you are in favor of Gay marriage, how could a Homosexual union not contradict the nature of marriage?

Gay marriage simply can't cooperate with God to create new life; it is immoral, ugly and wrong. The natural purpose of sexual union can't be achieved by a same-sex union.

Do you think it can?

The Bible clearly says that Homosexuality is immoral, wrong and unnatural and that homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God.

"Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." Romans 1:26-27.

Because we live in a freak world. See this freako now was about to marry his horse?


It might be 90% the general heterosexual population at the moment, but with these news laws allowing Gay marriages, traditional marriage will be affected by Gay marriage. But I am sure the message shouldn't be hard to understand; after all when Gay marriage becomes totally legal, it will ruin every contrast of Western civilization.

Marriage isn't just a commitment between two individuals plus some papers signed; it is both a natural commitment and a sacred union because it is rooted in the divine plan for creation.

Don't tell me you wouldn't be shy to tell your best friend at school that your Father is Gay? Isn't it different from everybody else?

I'd pee my pants off.

The intolerant view of homosexuality that some members of society have that you mean is the same that my parents used to have over myself hanging out with friends who smoke cigarettes: it is wrong. Because they may influence me in starting to smoke, it is wrong.

Why is it wrong?

Because it's unhealthy and may influence my life and future with serious Health problems.

Is GAY marriage really a decent act?

:rolleyes:

Decent or not, if they don't violate other's rights, they can do what they are pleased to because decent is subjective. If you can't make an argument as how marriage of gay people could violate your rights, then it is fine by me if two gay people get married.

Whats the governments stance on gay marriage in Iran?


DS

They hang you for being gay. Remember, it is an Islamic regime here. :rolleyes:

Well, Vito.....

If you want to give me all the religious arguments against gay marriage, I can't argue those points.

But, of course, I don't think that religious arguments should be considered.

I believe that our laws should be free of religious influence.

The only thing that matters, as I see it, is the right of people to do as they wish as long as exercising those rights do not interfere with the ights of others.

Just one example, if I may: The Bible speaks against sodomy, which includes, among other things, oral-genital contact. Should that be illegal as well?

You still haven't told me how traditional marriage will be affected by gay marriage.

Will fewer heterosexual couples marry? Will their marriage now mean les to them? Will they have fewer children? Will the divorce rate increase?

Again, how exactly will gay marriage affect heterosexual marriage?


You don't really know how you would feel if your parents were both gay, do you?

Neither do I, of course, but I'd suggest that perhaps, being brought up by two gay parents for your entire life would seem like the most natural thing in th world, and you wouldn't have a problem telling people.

You would have been brought up in an environment in which being a homosexual was nothing to be ashamed of, so why would you have a problem telling people?

Yes, I imagine that there would be some children who might be ashamed of the fact, but I don't consider it to be a big deal.

If a black man marries a white woman, and their child is white, would the child be ashamed that her father is black?

Some would, some wouldn't.

BTW, when you say you would "pee your pants off", are you speaking of what would happen if you had t tell someone your father was gay, or if someone told you that their father was gay?

As far as influencing the behavior or personalities of the children, I hope that you're not suggesting that there's more of a likelihood of the child growing up to be gay. Studies have shown this not to be the case.

I guess that there are a lot of closet homosexuals there then.


DS

I don't understand the above.....

I mean, I imagine that there are, but what does that have to do with the discussion?

I asked Afsthana what the her government felt about Gay Marriage. She said that they hang people in her country for being gay. So my reply about there being a lot of closet homosexuals was a reply to her post about hanging gays in Iran.


DS

Ah.....I get it now. You didn't quote her, and your post didn't follow hers, so I was confused.

An important question for people from the USA:

What is more important, God or Freedom?

I believe that freedom is the highest good. Everyone should be free to be able to believe whatever they want, as long as they are not damaging others / other peoples freedom.

The problem with gods is, that people who have a firm religious belief, tend to have a desire to impose their god and their god's beliefs on others.

If I want you to be free to believe in your god, I should be granted the same freedom in return.

Conclusion: If the USA would really love and promote freedom, they would allow gay marriage for this is up the the persons it concerns. Even if you believe in a god, you can't speak for him/her/it (not even if you quote the bible, thora or koran for these books have been written, translated and re-written by humans, it is not a first hand source from whatever god it claims to be) for you are not GOD, are you?

So not allowing people their most desired wish, which is marrying the person they love with al their heart, is civilized?

Strange definition of civilization you have there. But hey, there's freedom of speech, no?

Sigh, when will people learn? IMO, never.

Other passages say something different, and they're larger in number.

If I were gay, and otherwise too, I'd prefer to be happy and marry the person I love, and not entering this kingdom of God.
(Btw, for me there is no God, since I don't believe in him/her/it.)

This is exactly my point on quoting books such as the bible, there are so many quotes to choose from, you can always find one that fits your argument.

Don't mix the power of reason with the power of religion in case you value it for religion has to do with belief, not with reason.

Example: It also says in the bible that you may beat your slave (!) but not till death, unless of course he / she stole from you.

AAh, now you're gonna tell me not to take this particular passage literally, but I should the one that fits your argument? That's not a fair trade and I do belief that all people should be treated equal in equal cases (Don't most gods of the most popular religions all agree with this, loving all their subject equally the same?).

Exactly, one of the problems when there's a discussion with people who use religious arguments.
I believe the arguments should be in favour of people in general, so they can be happy and enjoy life. And not in favour of what some god wishes.

I agree with Vito on just one point that the child will face a lot of discrimination. I am not an expert on this, but I 'feel' that being subjected to constant ridicule can lower the self esteem of the child and in turn affect his/her behavior and personality. He/She may even have problems interacting with society. Let us not talk about exceptions. In your opinion, will the above described problem affect 'majority' of kids having Gay parents? I think it will, what do you think?

Do you believe gay couples should be allowed to adopt young children? Now the child is someone who is not in a position to make choices. What if the child grows up to not like the idea of gay parents? Is his/her rights not involved in this? It is no longer mere 'pursuit of happiness' as Plaw puts it. Ofcourse you can also argue that a child adopted by straight parents might also grow up to dislike the idea of having non-biological parents, but I think that is less likely to happen. Or at the very least a study should be made about the effects of homosexual parents on a child over a period that covers till adulthood and be made available to public, before one can make reasonable laws.

This discussion is only about gay marriage. I don't know if it is okay to extend it to them being able to adopt a child or not, but I go ahead and do.

I think it is okay if the parents be evaluated and be qualified on basis of economical and emotional requirements children are going to need just like a straight couple should be evaluated. I think I'd rather have two moms or dads than being raised in an orphanage.

We all have experienced schools; they can be very tough places. There is always something that number of kids can find to make fun of you. Your skin color, your grades, your parents or yourself being fat, ugly, poor, wearing glasses and so on and so forth... It is not just having gay parents. No child is safe from those who have the habit to make fun of everyone. Maybe if I were gay, and my child was bothered by some kid at school because I'm gay; he or she is better off not to socialize with those kids anyway, because I want him or her to socialize with more open minded people.

I was made fun of for studying too hard, not having the best stationery everyone else could afford and things I don't remember anymore because those kids were not important to me after giving the situation a little thinking. They are always there to make fun of you no matter what. Children either face this fact or have courage problems for the rest of their lives, regardless of what they might have or have not.

About the children not liking the idea of having gay parents, what about the children raised in vegan families? They don't have much choice either about eating meat, but we certainly can't make parents give meat to their children if they are not willing to, there have been healthy children raised on vegan diet. I think we should think beyond our customary ways of life and accept that just like there could be gay children raised in straight families, there could be straight children raised in gay ones.