Republican senator announces support for gay marriage

[epan]

Well that depends on who you ask because the sexual intercourse that occurs between homosexuals is exactly the same intercourse that can be practiced between a heterosexual couple as well. In strict medical terms sexual intercourse encompasses more than “traditional sexual intercourse.”

Exactly the same?

I will interject that I disagree with that statement. The physical act cannot possibly be exactly the same.

Having said that, I think what you mean is that the intimacy of sex transcends gender, and that gay sex is an intimate emotional and physical experience. Is that what you are trying to say?

I would point out that two heterosexuals having an “adulterous affair” may also experience sexual intimacy and love. In an emotional sens, in a neurotransmitter/pleasure sense, the acts are identical. I agree with you, if that is what you mean by “exactly the same”

The physiological response to sex is not gender/gender specific.

This site is about morality and religion. It is not about the physiology of sexual relations, per se.

 

[JimG]

I think that the law does not concern itself with that.

But I am no lawyer. Are you making a point that I am missing?

I am just startled if the law makes no distinction between men and women, between mothers and fathers, that’s all. Does the law never mention maternity or paternity? I am hoping that somewhere, the law recognizes that humanity consists of two sexes. I am hoping that the law recognizes reality. But any more, one does not hope for much.

 

[epan]

I am just startled if the law makes no distinction between men and women, between mothers and fathers, that’s all. Does the law never mention maternity or paternity? I am hoping that somewhere, the law recognizes that humanity consists of two sexes. I am hoping that the law recognizes reality. But any more, one does not hope for much.

Yes, of course the law includes paternity and maternity.

However, paternity and maternity which were once strongly linked to marriage, are now not linked to marriage.

My understanding is that legally, gender distinctions which once were considered vital to the marriage contract are no longer existent. That is the basis of the legal action.

The solution is to restore legal gender distinction in marriage. Simply fighting gay marriage is a short sighted and losing battle plan. Too little, and too late.

I better tactic would be to regroup, and get to the core issues. Gay marriage is not a core issue. It is a result of letting the core issues just slip on by over the past years.

 

[holyrood]

Heterosexual sex compromises physical health all the time and I don’t mean STD’s. As far as how I know is because I know homosexuals and I have seen how they act with one another. The only difference is that they are of the same sex. Other than that everything else is the same. Same problems, same joy, same love.

I’ve heard plenty of health professionals say you can always tell the old homosexual men in the nursing homes because parts of their bodies are destroyed. Many of them are wearing colostomy bags. I suspect you’re smart enough to figure out that this is a clear and obvious difference between a man and a woman having normal intercourse, and two men having ‘sex.’ I can only assume you think it’s funny to play games.

As of about two weeks ago, I also saw a study confirmed that the average age of death for homosexual men is significantly lower than the rest of the population. Clear difference. I love how we’re all supposed to be fighting the great crisis of homosexual men dying young, yet when the lowered life expectancy is brought up, I often see liberals claim it’s not actually true. Can’t have it both ways.

Some statistics and facts: sdadefend.com/Health/Homo-sheet.htm Some of this is very graphic. Note the sources: CDC, New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association, American Journal of Public Health, Nebraska Medical Journal.

So if you don’t care then why do you care so much about secular gay marriage? No one is asking the church to accept it.

We all know that as soon as homosexual ‘marriage’ is created, the next step is going to be that a church that refuses to perform marriage rites is now going to be guilty of discrimination if they refuse to do it for homosexuals.

 

[JimG]

. . . .
We all know that as soon as homosexual ‘marriage’ is created, the next step is going to be that a church that refuses to perform marriage rites is now going to be guilty of discrimination if they refuse to do it for homosexuals.

Of course, the gay lobby denies this, but it will come. But before we get to that point, they will first destroy businesses that refuse to comply. That’s already happening.

 

[josh987654321]

I am amazed at the few christians on here who are actually supporting same sex relations such as same sex marriage.

I don’t understand how people’s religion can be christian and they could think that christ would be okay with their views in support for same sex relations, Christ would of course object to any acts of homosexuality which include same sex marriage.

The very nature of ‘homosexuality’ means using the organs in a manner in which they are not intended to be used for.

How can any supreme being be ‘okay’ with that, in miss using their creation?

What on earth are you christians, who support same sex marriage thinking?

If you are christian and are thinking of supporting same sex relations such as marriage, please contact your local priest, or view the churches stand on it.

“It’s silly to try and make unequal things such as homosexual unions and hetrosexual unions equal”

So it’s not whether we want to make homosexual unions and hetrosexual unions equal with marriage, it’s whether or not we want to pretend that homosexual unions are equal to hetrosexual unions.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Elizabeth502]

standard definition.

you contradict yourself. it was a euphemism. now, it’s a standard.

No, I did not.

i think we all have a sense of what “marital relations” means.

Good, then let me reiterate, so that the entire class understands:

Marital relations = euphemism for the standard called male-female sexual intercourse.

This is not rocket science, except for those (perhaps not you) who pretend it is, to score a point below zero on the number line.

 

[_Abyssinia]

That is really, really uncharitable and just plain untrue.
How many married gay couples do you personally know?
I know many, and they have all wanted to get married for the same reasons as many heterosexual couples want to get married, the ones you listed above–because they want to support and stay with each other for life, and even bring up children together.

And so far, the ones I know have stayed together longer than the married heterosexual couples I know–and that includes a few Christian ones.

Besides, if you are going to stop couples from marrying because you think their marriage won’t last, well…you’ve got about a million or so weddings to stop ASAP, Graduate-style.

When Portman’s son came out, he was probably shaken, yes…to finally taking off his blinders to understand and see something important he didn’t see before.

.

These are the statisics and it is not homphobic to point it out

• 75.5% of men who are married and 85% of women who are married say they are faithful to their spouses wheras for homosexual males only 4.5% reported being faithful to their partners

Source: Wiederman, ‘Extramarital Sex,’ page 170.

• Laumann, The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253
• ‘Among women there was just a 52 percent chance that a first marriage would survive for 20 years, according to the report from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics. Men appeared to be slightly more successful, with a 56 percent chance of a first marriage surviving for two decades.’

NBC News - Breaking News & Top Stories - Latest World, US & Local News

Go to NBCNews.com for breaking news, videos, and the latest top stories in world news, business, politics, health and pop culture.

www.nbcnews.com

• Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census 2003 - 2004 found that 5% of homosexual unions last more than 20 years
• National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2001 found that 66% of marriges last longer than 10 years, 58% of traditional hetrosexual marriages last longer than 20 years

Loading…

www.cdc.gov

• Reported in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, Dr M Pollack, phD reported that, ‘few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners’
• Published in the Journal AIDS a study on homosexual men inthe Netherlands said the ‘duration of steady partnerships’ was 1.5 years

Loading…

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

• University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann said In The Sexual Organization of the City, ‘typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in ‘transactional’ relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months’
• Average homosexual relationships last between 2 and 3 years

Source: Male and female homosexuality: a comprehensive investigation by Marcel T Saghir, Eli Robins

• David P McWhirter and Andrew M Mattison found that in a study of 156 men in homosexual relationships found, ‘only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships’

Source: The male couple: how relationships develop by David P McWhirter and Andrew M Mattison

• Studies have shown gay marriages last for a shorter duration than heterosexual marriages. Research from Stockholm University found that in Norway, male male marriages are 50% more likely to end in divorce than heterosexual marriages, female female marriages are 167% more likely to end in divorce than heterosexual marriages. In Sweden, divorce risk for male gay ‘unions’ is 50% higher than for heterosexual marriages, divorce risk for female gay ‘unions’ is nearly double that

 

[rossum]

Race does not equal sexual practices.

But both may result in discrimination.

Race is genetic, inherent, inborn although it is truly a false difference.

How old were you when you decided to be heterosexual (I assume) rather than homosexual? Sexual orientation is not a free choice, apart perhaps for bisexuals.

Sexual practices are none of the above. We have outlawed racial discrimination in this country.

And discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is also outlawed in many cases.

rossum

 

[rossum]

These are the statisics and it is not homphobic to point it out

• 75.5% of men who are married and 85% of women who are married say they are faithful to their spouses wheras for homosexual males only 4.5% reported being faithful to their partners

Source: Wiederman, ‘Extramarital Sex,’ page 170.

How many of those men were married to their partners? A reasonable comparison would only involve married homosexual couples or only involve non-married heterosexual couples. Comparing married couples to casual relationships is apples and oranges.

rossum

 

[twoshoes]

Ok fair enough We’re on the same page on this issue anyways, certainly with regards to how he handled this politically.

These sort of issues have made me closer to the Church. Govts role in every day life has been so imposing. There’s only one voice(other than Gods of course) that will resist and stand up to government. The Church will not buckle under pressure on these moral issues, you’d expect that from your representatives, but that’s just not how it works today in the political realm .

I agree completely with your last statement, in what I have seen most, not all but most politicans are in it for self, that is why there values are like a lief in the wind.

 

[twoshoes]

But both may result in discrimination.

How old were you when you decided to be heterosexual (I assume) rather than homosexual? Sexual orientation is not a free choice, apart perhaps for bisexuals.

And discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is also outlawed in many cases.

rossum

You confuse race with life style. I can not discriminate by race, and I do not. But I can and must be discriminate in my judgement of the life style I live. Homosexual and heterosexuality are sexual practices, one being in accordance to natural law, and one being a diviation to natural law…You are equating sexual practices to Love and Race. they are as different as apples and oranges.

 

[epan]

These are the statisics and it is not homphobic to point it out

• 75.5% of men who are married and 85% of women who are married say they are faithful to their spouses wheras for homosexual males only 4.5% reported being faithful to their partners

Source: Wiederman, ‘Extramarital Sex,’ page 170.

Perfect example of misrepresentation to try to make a point, which detracts from the credibility of the poster.

I don’t have the exact numbers in front of me, but when the question is phrased differently, it turns out that approximately 50% of married men have cheated on their wives, and more than 40% of married women have cheated on their husbands.

Additionally, you try to equate the behavior of MARRIED heterosexuals to UNMARRIED homosexuals. It is not a valid comparison.

Can’t you see that it gets difficult to trust anything that you post, when you use sources like the Witherspoon Institute, and other similar biased sources? If you make no effort at accuracy, then don’t expect people to take you seriously.

 

[twoshoes]

You claim to be a Catholic so hopefully you have an understanding of what is referred to as the marital embrace. This is to be open to life (children) with the potential to create life even if a pregnancy does not result.

Two men or two women cannot engage in a marital embrace. They cannot create a new life between them. There is exactly ZERO potential for life when two men or two women engage in homosexual activity.

Despite all of the Leftist “equality” baloney you cannot put two men or two women together and have equivalence of a husband and wife. It’s not the same biologically, physically, emotionally or theologically.

Get the difference?

Lisa

You as so right Lisa, not only is marriage a contract between a man and a woman, but it also is a contract between parents and children. That is one thing homosexuality can not do create life, the reason for sex. The bible tells us sex is for procreation not entertainment, natural law tells us sex for procreation is between a man and a woman. how easily they leave children out of the mix.

 

[JMJSHJ]

Rand Paul’s take on what to do about so-called “Same Sex Marriage”.

Rand Paul says tax code should remove mention of marriage

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that while he believes in the “historic and religious definition of marriage,” he believes the federal tax code should be reformed in a way to make it “more neutral” and not exclude same-sex couples.

“I’m an old-fashioned traditionalist. I believe in the historic and religious definition of marriage,” Paul said in an interview with the National Review. “That being said, I’m not for eliminating contracts between adults. I think there are ways to make the tax code more neutral, so it doesn’t mention marriage. Then we don’t have to redefine what marriage is; we just don’t have marriage in the tax code.”

Read more: thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/287991-rand-paul-says-tax-code-should-remove-mention-of-marriage#ixzz2Nc58i3A6

If you do that, isn’t that ultimately the same as “civil unions”?

 

[_Abyssinia]

Perfect example of misrepresentation to try to make a point, which detracts from the credibility of the poster.

I don’t have the exact numbers in front of me, but when the question is phrased differently, it turns out that approximately 50% of married men have cheated on their wives, and more than 40% of married women have cheated on their husbands.

Additionally, you try to equate the behavior of MARRIED heterosexuals to UNMARRIED homosexuals. It is not a valid comparison.

Can’t you see that it gets difficult to trust anything that you post, when you use sources like the Witherspoon Institute, and other similar biased sources? If you make no effort at accuracy, then don’t expect people to take you seriously.

Marriage has not been redefined in all US states so you have to look countries where marriage has been redefined everywhere and when you look at Sweden and Norway, which I gave the stats for, ‘married’ lesbians and gays are divorcing at far higher rates than hetrosexuals are divorcing in those countries, so even when same sex marriage is available for homosexuals, stability and longitude of ‘marriage’ is lower for homosexuals than for hetrosexuals

 

[epan]

If you do that, isn’t that ultimately the same as “civil unions”?

There seems to be two logical choice to choose from:

Option one: Recognize the importance of marriage as a social institution, with support of the State. In this case, roll back the law to make divorce more difficult. Reinstate legal gender differences in marriage. Roll back no fault divorce. Reinstate adultery laws. Under these circumstances, traditional marriage would have the support of the authority of the State.

Option two: Recognize that in fact, the State no longer supports marriage (which is true at this point in time). Accept that fact, and eliminate legal marriage, but replace it with civil union contracts which are available to all. Under the current circumstances, this may be the only option which is available. The problem here is not that gays want to marry. The problem is that the legal definition has already been changed so much, that gays can’t really be denied the right to marry, and they see it as clearly as any lawyer.

It is no accident that the two attorney’s who filed on the prop 8 matter are perhaps the two best Constitutional trial lawyers in the US, and neither of them are gay, BTW. They just accurately assessed that state of the law, and decided to pursue the matter. In the Federal Court, the defendant didn’t even bother to prepare a case. They showed up with no credible witnesses, and no legal arguments which held any substance. So, it appeared that they actually agreed with the plaintiff, and were just showing up to collect a fee from their client.

 

[josh987654321]

When it comes to homosexuality, I feel that for some people common sense just isn’t common anymore, I mean the best answer I think is to show people the ugly truth, that the very nature of homosexuality is to use your organs in a manner in which they are not designed to be used for, how can anyone claim homosexuality as a normal or natural behaviour to be acceptable for society?

Just because they have homosexual desires is no excuse for acting on them, homosexuality is a disordered desire, that should be controled, not embraced, people have all kinds of desires, it doesn’t make it right simply because we desire it.

To be homosexual is no different to a hetrosexual who is in love with a sibling or an underaged child, or a married hetrosexual who is in love with another women, they would just know that their desires are off-limits and to be controled.

I know I have said these things a few times, I apologise for repeating myself here, I just hope that when someone comes here to ecourage homosexuality, that they will find my post and know better.

Thank you for reading
Josh.

 

[rossum]

You confuse race with life style. I can not discriminate by race, and I do not. But I can and must be discriminate in my judgement of the life style I live. Homosexual and heterosexuality are sexual practices, one being in accordance to natural law, and one being a diviation to natural law…You are equating sexual practices to Love and Race. they are as different as apples and oranges.

Do you treat remarried divorcees the same as you do active homosexuals? Both are sinning. If you treat them the same then you are not discriminating. If you treat them differently then you are discriminating. A great many people are sinners. Do you treat all sinners the same or are some sinners to be treated differently?

rossum

 

[fix]

Marital relations is a euphemism for sexual intercourse with the intended anatomical parts which, by differentiated sex, fit together. (Traditional sexual intercourse, not merely “sexual practices.”)

Right, it is called the marital act for a reason. Deviations are not the authentic marital act. This was well understood until deviant behavior became more common.