Same-sex marraige: honestly, what is the point?

[HappyCatholic01]

“However, same-sex marriage is infertile - there can be no children”.

So does this mean I cannot get married if I am in menopause?

Women have before. See Sarah and other biblical figures. God has yet to impregnante a man through divine intervention or natural means.

 

[HappyCatholic01]

Gay couples that can’t marry are denied a number of important rights and protections given to straight married couples. That’s a pretty straightforward reason, without getting into tinfoil hat logic.

I didn’t realize authentic Catholic teaching from the Catechsim was tin-foil hat logic…

Recall that the genesis of marriage benefits was the the societal benefit procreation via a man and woman brought to society. The giovernment prior to 2008 wasn’t in the habit of giving people benefits “just because.”

 

[BlaineTog]

Credible source? Go ask any lawyer.

So in order to prove your point, you expect me to rack up a billable hour or two? I’m sorry, I don’t find that convincing.

I didn’t realize authentic Catholic teaching from the Catechsim was tin-foil hat logic…

I don’t know how more clear I can make this: I’m not arguing that gay marriage should be legalized. I’m arguing that gay couples have a number of very straightforward and obvious motives for wanting to be allowed to get married. I’m speaking strictly about motivations.

 

[jonathan_hili]

For Catholics, at least, that’s certainly untrue. A central part of marriage is its unitive aspect for the couple. It isn’t supposed to be a business relationship between the couple formed solely because they both happen to want children.

Sure, I’m not saying that marriage is solely a state or government issue but that it inevitably involves (and rightly so) the state and civil society.

 

[jonathan_hili]

Here are some perspectives from a societal standpoint which may or may not be interesting to you.

Thanks, Jwinch. Much appreciated!

 

[HappyCatholic01]

So in order to prove your point, you expect me to rack up a billable hour or two? I’m sorry, I don’t find that convincing.

I don’t know how more clear I can make this: I’m not arguing that gay marriage should be legalized. I’m arguing that gay couples have a number of very straightforward and obvious motives for wanting to be allowed to get married. I’m speaking strictly about motivations.

But the origin of the benefits for married straight couples was extended for reasons that cannot be met by gay couples. It isn’t about fairness for the same reason it isn’t unfair that certain tax deductions exist for people who have dependents. It isn’t unfair that people without dependents cannot claim those deductions.

 

[fix]

So in order to prove your point, you expect me to rack up a billable hour or two? I’m sorry, I don’t find that convincing.

I don’t know how more clear I can make this: I’m not arguing that gay marriage should be legalized. I’m arguing that gay couples have a number of very straightforward and obvious motives for wanting to be allowed to get married. I’m speaking strictly about motivations.

This is nothing new. People have been passing on money and other things for years without being married. Any legal issues can be secured through other legal devices without redefining a natural institution. Nothing these people want warrants manufactured reality.

 

[Forkfoot]

They want it because they’ve been told they can’t have it. When they ask “Well how come those people can have it but I can’t?”, they’re told a bunch of beliefs that they themselves don’t subscribe to. That feels unjust to them, so they object. Their objection is objected to by the other party, so they object again, louder. It gets louder and louder and before you know it it’s all over the news and you’ve got lots of people saying “Hey yeah, why can’t they get married? That doesn’t seem very fair.”

And meanwhile evil corruption and manipulation is happening throughout the highest levels of government and beyond, and they’re glad people are so focused on whether or not two dudes should be allowed to say they’re married.

 

[BlaineTog]

Sure, I’m not saying that marriage is solely a state or government issue but that it inevitably involves (and rightly so) the state and civil society.

Agreed.

But the origin of the benefits for married straight couples was extended for reasons that cannot be met by gay couples. It isn’t about fairness for the same reason it isn’t unfair that certain tax deductions exist for people who have dependents. It isn’t unfair that people without dependents cannot claim those deductions.

Once again, I’m not trying to argue for gay marriage. I’m explaining why gay couples want to get married, which is the topic of the thread.

This is nothing new. People have been passing on money and other things for years without being married. Any legal issues can be secured through other legal devices without redefining a natural institution. Nothing these people want warrants manufactured reality.

I’m sorry, but I’m going to need some sort of compelling data beyond your word that shows this is the case. At this point, I simply don’t believe you.

They want it because they’ve been told they can’t have it. When they ask “Well how come those people can have it but I can’t?”, they’re told a bunch of beliefs that they themselves don’t subscribe to. That feels unjust to them, so they object. Their objection is objected to by the other party, so they object again, louder. It gets louder and louder and before you know it it’s all over the news and you’ve got lots of people saying “Hey yeah, why can’t they get married? That doesn’t seem very fair.”

I’m sure something like this is part of it as well.

 

[HappyCatholic01]

Agreed.

Once again, I’m not trying to argue for gay marriage. I’m explaining why gay couples want to get married, which is the topic of the thread.

I’m sorry, but I’m going to need some sort of compelling data beyond your word that shows this is the case. At this point, I simply don’t believe you.

I’m sure something like this is part of it as well.

Well, if you aren’t defending their position, then what is the point?

We know why they claim to want marriage rights. They are also wrong. So the why behind it is irrelevant.

If we were discussing the merits of their argument, that would be one thing, but since we aknowledge their argument is flawed, we are then just discussing why people who are wrong have strong feelings.

 

[fix]

Agreed.

Once again, I’m not trying to argue for gay marriage. I’m explaining why gay couples want to get married, which is the topic of the thread.

I’m sorry, but I’m going to need some sort of compelling data beyond your word that shows this is the case. At this point, I simply don’t believe you.

I’m sure something like this is part of it as well.

Google is your friend. All you have to do is search and you can see for yourself.

 

[Slavonic]

This is nothing new. People have been passing on money and other things for years without being married. Any legal issues can be secured through other legal devices without redefining a natural institution. Nothing these people want warrants manufactured reality.

Do you even read the news? There is a Supreme Court cases that centers around the the issue of inheritance taxation for a Lesbian couple that had a marriage in Canada that was legally recognized by the State of New York. Clearly, not all legal benefits provided to married couples are available to couples of the same sex.

 

[BlaineTog]

Well, if you aren’t defending their position, then what is the point?

To help answer the OP’s question.

We know why they claim to want marriage rights.

Yet the thread is explicitly asking about their motivations.

Google is your friend. All you have to do is search and you can see for yourself.

“Google it” is simply not a compelling argument. If this information is as easy to acquire as you say, then it is not unreasonable to ask you to present it, particularly since you supposedly already possess knowledge of it. My Google-Fu is pretty good but I’m not sure I could formulate efficient search terms for such a saturated area of interest. If you already know where it is, please, provide a few links so we can get on the same page.

 

[fix]

Do you even read the news? There is a Supreme Court cases that centers around the the issue of inheritance taxation for a Lesbian couple that had a marriage in Canada that was legally recognized by the State of New York. Clearly, not all legal benefits provided to married couples are available to couples of the same sex.

They have separate legal documents or they are “married” and the government will not recognize that “marriage”?

 

[Slavonic]

Slavonic;10822952:

Do you even read the news? There is a Supreme Court cases that centers around the the issue of inheritance taxation for a Lesbian couple that had a marriage in Canada that was legally recognized

by the State of New York. Clearly, not all legal benefits provided to married couples are available to couples of the same sex.

They have separate legal documents or they are “married” and the government will not recognize that “marriage”?

They could get no legal document that would have gotten them out of the Federal inheritance tax beside a marriage.

 

[fix]

They could get no legal document that would have gotten them out of the Federal inheritance tax beside a marriage.

They have no business acting as if they were married so I see no reason for the issue.

 

[Captain_America]

Don’t be distracted by the sand tossed in our faces.

The purpose of gay marriage is to cause the moral revaluation of sodomy. . . to “normalize” unnatural perversion.

(Yeah, old fashioned words, right?)

It’s a nice very Orwellian example of defining deviancy away. It’s not a disorder if it’s considered acceptable and normal.

 

[Muze]

“However, same-sex marriage is infertile - there can be no children”.

So does this mean I cannot get married if I am in menopause?

It just means you’re an exception under the standard.

Although you could actually become fertile again with medical intervention. The oldest woman to give birth was 64.

 

[Captain_America]

One of the great temptations of our era is that we individuals think we are wiser than those who lived 1,000 years ago.

Yeah, there’s more information and some more knowledge.

But is there more wisdom?

The Bible is awfully clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. Let’s not forget this.

As a Catholic, I take the Bible most seriously.

 

[Muze]

I would love to see a credible source that shows how a gay couple could provide themselves all the current legal rights and privileges of marriage. From what I’ve seen, the entire gay community seems to be ignorant of such an option.

They aren’t ignorant. Some of them even do it. Getting the privileges is secondary to shoving it in the face of religious people who think that homosexual acts are a sin.

visitatin

inheritance

What else do you want?