Same sex marriage laws

[Elric]

If you still refuse to allow our hypothetical siblings to marry, you must provide justification for homosexual marriage other than “mutually consenting adults”.

Mate, you have not even tried to answer my question. Why?

I dont actually see why I have to provide justifacion for anything to be honest. Why shouldnt the homosexuals be allowed to marry if siblings cant?

Why the asertion that they are the same thing when they clearly are not?

 

[Elric]

Because they love each other. They mutually consent, regardless of the fact that they are indeed siblings. Why can’t you let siblings marry?

Thats dodging my question.

But to answer yours, they are related (extremly closley at that).

I think that they will need a lot of help to over come the major shock they have recieved, but it isnt really thier fault as they didnt know.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

Mate, you have not even tried to answer my question. Why?

I dont actually see why I have to provide justifacion for anything to be honest. Why shouldnt the homosexuals be allowed to marry if siblings cant?

Huh?

I’m asking for why you think gay marriage should be allowed.

Why the asertion that they are the same thing when they clearly are not?

They ARE the same. If one’s justification for homosexual marriage is that marriage should be allowed between any two consenting adults, then you should allow these siblings to marry, because they consent to the relationship. (There’s the answer to your question, I’m not the first to say it. If you won’t accept this, what kind of answer do you expect? )

Thats dodging my question.

But to answer yours, they are related (extremly closley at that).

I think that they will need a lot of help to over come the major shock they have recieved, but it isnt really thier fault as they didnt know.

Why can’t you let siblings marry?

 

[Elric]

Huh?

I’m asking for why you think gay marriage should be allowed.

No you are not, your playing games and aserting that incest and homosexuality are the same without explaining how they are.

They ARE the same.

You didnt explain how.

If one’s justification for homosexual marriage is that marriage should be allowed between any two consenting adults, then you should allow these siblings to marry, because they consent to the relationship. (There’s the answer to your question, I’m not the first to say it. If you won’t accept this, what kind of answer do you expect? )

That doesnt answer the question, its basically a cop-out.

Why can’t you let siblings marry?

Already answered.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Tim,

My advice, don’t bother. You state your case a plain as day and yet those in favor of SSM will continue to close their eyes to polygamy or incestuous marriage.

They will give you their reasons as typical ‘consenting adults’ can do as they choose and marry as SSM and then tell you "incestuous marriage or polygamy ‘aren’t the same’!

OF COURSE THEY AREN’T THE SAME!!!

That’s not our point!!!

Our point is that your logic and reasons for allowing SSM should also FORCE you to condone incestuous marriage or polygamy!!

DON’T YOU GET THAT?!?!?!

 

[KarenNC]

Our point is that your logic and reasons for allowing SSM should also FORCE you to condone incestuous marriage or polygamy!!

DON’T YOU GET THAT?!?!?!

Nope.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Nope.

Wow. You finally answered a question!

 

[Elric]

Tim,

My advice, don’t bother. You state your case a plain as day and yet those in favor of SSM will continue to close their eyes to polygamy or incestuous marriage.

He didnt state a case, he repeatedly asked why couldnt siblings marry.

I asked an apparently simple question and only one person has even tried to answer that question. You have not tried to answer it, all you can do is make snide remarks any try to portray yourself as a martyer.

They will give you their reasons as typical ‘consenting adults’ can do as they choose and marry as SSM and then tell you "incestuous marriage or polygamy ‘aren’t the same’!

So what exactly is wrong with that?

OF COURSE THEY AREN’T THE SAME!!!

That’s not our point!!!

Well perhaps you should stop treating them as if they are the same.

Our point is that your logic and reasons for allowing SSM should also FORCE you to condone incestuous marriage or polygamy!!

DON’T YOU GET THAT?!?!?!

Why should it force that?

That is the question being asked.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

He didnt state a case, he repeatedly asked why couldnt siblings marry.

I asked an apparently simple question and only one person has even tried to answer that question. You have not tried to answer it, all you can do is make snide remarks any try to portray yourself as a martyer.

So what exactly is wrong with that?

Well perhaps you should stop treating them as if they are the same.

Why should it force that?

That is the question being asked.

We have all answered your questions several times, but you refuse to accept the answer we give you! I asked why siblings coudn’t marry because it is hypocritical to say that two men can get married because they consent, but siblings can’t get married despite the fact they fill the same criteria of mutual consent.

If your criteria is mutual consent, you must allow mutually consenting siblings to marry just as you allow two mutually consenting persons of the same sex to marry.

And you never gave me an answer to that question from the start, that’s why I kept asking! Your only answer was, “Because they are siblings”. Why can’t siblings marry?

 

[iamrefreshed]

Why should it force that?

That is the question being asked.

Simply because if your criteria for allowing SSM is that the two participants are ‘consenting adults’ THEN you must allow ANY two consenting adults the same right. Including those who are related.

There, I answered your question.

Now answer the one that has been posed to you numerous times.

Why can’t siblings get married?

 

[john_ennis]

Next, you didnt actually answer why you cant be in favor of one but not the others (which is what I was asking for).

.

YOU CAN BE IN FAVOR OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND NOT INCESTUAL MARRIAGE,

but if you are, ought to be able to say why one is right and one isn’t.

Most same-sex marriage supporters say that their philosophy for believing as they do, is that “what consenting adults do shouldn’t be restricted by someone else’s morals.”

IF that is your philosophy, then it is perfectly valid for anyone to say, “Then surely you must accept incest among consenting adults, as well as polygamous marriages.”

IF that is not your philosophy, then it is a reasonable question: “Why DO you support same-sex marriages?”

Peace.

 

[john_ennis]

Mate, you have not even tried to answer my question. Why?

I dont actually see why I have to provide justifacion for anything to be honest. Why shouldnt the homosexuals be allowed to marry if siblings cant?

Why the asertion that they are the same thing when they clearly are not?

They’re not the same thing.
They’re not.

Please, we all agree they’re not the same.

BUT, those of us who oppose same-sex marriages, can’t for the life of us think of a reason for supporting same-sex marriage but denying incestual marriage.

We suspect that those who say we shouldn’t restrict same-sex couples’ ability to marry, but then will say that we should restrict incestual couples’ right to marry, are being inconsistent.
I even believe that they’re being arbitrary–going by what they feel is right, or what *seems *normal or abnormal, and they don’t even HAVE an underlying philosophy.
One thing’s for sure: the underlying philosophy must not be something like, “let consenting adults do what they want.”

Help us understand it.

Peace
John

 

[Elric]

If your criteria is mutual consent, you must allow mutually consenting siblings to marry just as you allow two mutually consenting persons of the same sex to marry.

Why must you?

And you never gave me an answer to that question from the start, that’s why I kept asking! Your only answer was, “Because they are siblings”. Why can’t siblings marry?

So “because they are siblings” doesnt count as an answer?

 

[Elric]

Simply because if your criteria for allowing SSM is that the two participants are ‘consenting adults’ THEN you must allow ANY two consenting adults the same right. Including those who are related.

But they are not the same thing, so why should you?

There, I answered your question.

No you didnt, but you did contradict yourself.

Now answer the one that has been posed to you numerous times.

Why can’t siblings get married?

I have answered this, show me what is wrong with my answer before you start saying I didnt answer.

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

But they are not the same thing, so why should you?

But they are.

1. Two men (joe and john) are adults. They are also homosexuals. They are consenting adults. They want to marry, should we allow them?
   You say yes.
2. Two women (jane and hilda) are adults. They are also homosexuals. They are consenting adults. They want to marry, should we allow them?
   You say yes.
3. Two Heterosexuals (Bob and Olga) are adults. They are consenting adults. They want to marry, should we allow them to?
   well here is the kicker Bob and Olga grew up on opposite coasts. They are both adopted (two different families). Their birth parents are the same, but they did not know this till they feel in love and applied for their marriage license, where a blood test revelaed that they where related.
   So do we allow them to marry?
4. Two heterosexuals (Jane and Martin) are adults. They are consenting adults who want to marry. should we let them?
   They are both adopted. The birth parents are not the same but they where adopted by the same family. They feel in love and want to marry. SHould we let them?
5. Olga, Bob and Sharon all are in a partnership together. They are all adults, consenting and not related to each other. They want to have a marriage (all three of them) should we allow them all to marry each other?
6. Olga and Bob are both consenting adults. Olga grew up in NYC and Bob has grew up in Europe. They did not know it till after they fell in love but Bob is Olga’s uncle (black sheep of the family) shoild they be allowed to marry?

In all 6 examples the people are adults and consenting (only thing in common). So should they all be allowed to marry? If not why.

 

[john_ennis]

If a person’s reason for being against incestual marriage is, “because they’re related,” and that’s it.

Then they should be okay with banning same-sex marriage because, “they’re both the same sex,” and that’s it.

Both reasons fail to get to the underlying issue of why either practice is right or wrong.

Peace.
John

 

[Elric]

YOU CAN BE IN FAVOR OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND NOT INCESTUAL MARRIAGE,

but if you are, ought to be able to say why one is right and one isn’t.

Define right?

Oh and there isnt a need to “shout”.

I think for most people they think that it goes without saying why incest ect are not right and they dont actually think about them, because they are seperate issues.

Personally I think that there is something disturbing about wanting to marry you sibling (or other relation) and polygamy tends to be self destructive and not very intimate.

Most same-sex marriage supporters say that their philosophy for believing as they do, is that “what consenting adults do shouldn’t be restricted by someone else’s morals.”

IF that is your philosophy, then it is perfectly valid for anyone to say, “Then surely you must accept incest among consenting adults, as well as polygamous marriages.”

Thats the thing, why is a valid asertion to make?

You are suggesting that they are the same thing and you are suggesting that they should be treated the same way.

IF that is not your philosophy, then it is a reasonable question: “Why DO you support same-sex marriages?”

I dont really, I simply believe that monogomus life partners should have similar/same rights as married couples. Provided they are not related or there is more than two of them.

 

[Elric]

If a person’s reason for being against incestual marriage is, “because they’re related,” and that’s it.

Then they should be okay with banning same-sex marriage because, “they’re both the same sex,” and that’s it.

Why should they be ok with that?

You are trying to treat them as the same thing, even though they have different reasons and you have already stated that they are not the same thing.

Both reasons fail to get to the underlying issue of why either practice is right or wrong.

Well why do you believe that incest is wrong?

 

[Elric]

They’re not the same thing.
They’re not.

Please, we all agree they’re not the same.

Apparently that isnt the case. There are posters who are suggesting/stating that they are the same, which is why I have to ask questions like that.

BUT, those of us who oppose same-sex marriages, can’t for the life of us think of a reason for supporting same-sex marriage but denying incestual marriage.

I think that there is a little more to it than that.

To be perfectly honest I have never even considered comparing homosexuality to incest ect, they have always been quite seperate things in my mind. So I can see why they would allow one but not the other.

We suspect that those who say we shouldn’t restrict same-sex couples’ ability to marry, but then will say that we should restrict incestual couples’ right to marry, are being inconsistent.

On the surface that would be an accurate assumption, but I think we all know that it isnt a case of inconsistency.

I even believe that they’re being arbitrary–going by what they feel is right, or what *seems *normal or abnormal, and they don’t even HAVE an underlying philosophy.
One thing’s for sure: the underlying philosophy must not be something like, “let consenting adults do what they want.”

Help us understand it.

Well I guess that first you have to understand that their opinion has nothing to do with incest, paedophillia, polygamy, beastiality, necrophillia, rape or anything else.

They are not thinking about (much less talking about) any of these things, they are only refering to homosexuality/homosexual marriage. The rest are completly seperate issues to them and there is an extremly good chance that they would share your own belief on them.

Bringing in the other “issues” isnt proving a case, its basically trapping someone and building a bit of resentment towards yourself because your trying to tell them what to think basically. It wont change their opinion on homosexuality/homosexual marriage, but it does help them to resent you as well as christianity which isnt a good thing.

There probably is a need for a better reason than simply “conscenting adults doing what they want” or more accuratly a better way to express ones opinion.

 

[PapaSquash]

Personally I think that there is something disturbing about wanting to marry you sibling (or other relation) and polygamy tends to be self destructive and not very intimate.

I simply believe that monogomus life partners should have similar/same rights as married couples. Provided they are not related or there is more than two of them.

“Finding something disturbing” is entirely subjective.

“Tends to be self destructive and not very intimate” is very close to many conservative opinions of the “gay” lifestyle

Why monogamus? Why sexual? Why not Spinster Aunts so they can make medical decisions for each other? or why not two male heterosexual, erstwhile bachelor business partners who “play the field” but use a civil union to simplify inheritance. Why not partners-in-crime so they can’t be forced to testify against each other?

Who gets to decide where to draw the line at “nearly the same as ‘marriage as human society as known it since the beginning’ but just this much different”

Who gets to define if a marrige is valid for immigration purposes? (I mean, “Living together as husband and wife” is so prior millenia. )

If any two people can join together, can it be for whatever reasons they decide? Or is sex maybe something sacred after all?

If your reason for denying marriage to any of the above is “that’s not marriage” or blended-family half-siblings with no blood relation “because its icky,” then how do you refute those who use the same arguments against same sex marriage?