Social Consequence of Gay Marriage

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

What do you think they will be?

Let’s imagine the Constitution is amended to allow for gay marriage. What will be the cultural and political consequences, and why do you think that these things would happen?

 

[Dale_M]

What do you think they will be?

Why not ask what have the social consequences been? After all, in the US, the state of Massachusetts has had gay marriage for eight years. And several counties (Canada, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands) have had it for about the same length of time. Rather than speculate about the social consequences, surely there is evidence of any consequences by now.

BTW, there is no need to amend the US Constitution to allow gay marriage. The Constitution doesn’t forbid it. That is why several states have been able to allow for such marriages.

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

Why not ask what have the social consequences been? After all, in the US, the state of Massachusetts has had gay marriage for eight years. And several counties (Canada, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands) have had it for about the same length of time. Rather than speculate about the social consequences, surely there is evidence of any consequences by now.

Possibly, although the interpretation of the evidence must be highly speculative, right? After all, lots of things have been happening in all these countries (Islam in Spain and the Netherlands, for example! Economic unrest everywhere!). How do we know what is caused by gay marriage, and what is not?

BTW, there is no need to amend the US Constitution to allow gay marriage. The Constitution doesn’t forbid it. That is why several states have been able to allow for such marriages.

It may be that the constitution would be so amended in order to make explicit the rights of men to marry men, and of women to marry women. But, if you wish, maybe it’s just a ruling from the Supreme Court, that declares that all states must allow gay marriage because it is constitutional.

 

[Dale_M]

Possibly, although the interpretation of the evidence must be highly speculative, right?

Surely a discussion based on facts, and what those facts mean, is better than a discussion of mere possibilities. Let’s face it, on highly charged political issues, all kinds of wild claims get made. Since there is already a body of evidence, why not discuss it?

It may be that the constitution would be so amended in order to make explicit the rights of men to marry men, and of women to marry women. But, if you wish, maybe it’s just a ruling from the Supreme Court, that declares that all states must allow gay marriage because it is constitutional.

Its not a matter of what I wish, its a matter of law. The US Constitution doesn’t forbid same-sex marriage. The only reason to amend the Constitution would be to forbid such marriages.

As for the matter of recognizing same-sex marriages in states which do not allow them, that is a tricky question and a Supreme Court ruling might be necessary. I don’t understand all the legal issues, but I suspect that the court would support the rights of states to set their own laws. A similar situation might be persons with a permit to carry a concealed weapon not being allowed to carry that concealed weapon in a state which doesn’t allow it.

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

Surely a discussion based on facts, and what those facts mean, is better than a discussion of mere possibilities. Let’s face it, on highly charged political issues, all kinds of wild claims get made. Since there is already a body of evidence, why not discuss it?

Great. Let’s discuss it. What do you think the consequences have been?

Its not a matter of what I wish, its a matter of law…

I’ll bet that, several years down the road, if the Supreme Court decides that States can make their own laws about marriage, then there will be an amendment to the constitution that will remove this ability for States, and will recognise gay marriage. I’d put down a good £20, but only if the Supreme Court decides that States have that right.

 

[Carolus_Martell]

I think it’ll bring doom to our society as we know it.

 

[JimG]

One might look to what the consequences of contraception have been, for an answer.

The widespread acceptance of artificial contraception made the ultimate acceptance of gay marriage all but inevitable.

The breaking of the link between sex and procreation ensured the virtual destruction of marriage. But the deformation of marriage into a shadow of its former self was also helped along the way by such things as no-fault divorce, the legalization of abortion, the state as the national daddy, and the inculcation of children into sexual experimentation at ever earlier ages.

Breaking the link between sex and procreation ensured that all the social ills that Pope Paul VI warned about in Humanae Vitae would come about, and indeed they have. Gay marriage is just a step further down the path. So we can see the consequences around us. Gay marriage will just further ensure the meaninglessness of marriage.

 

[Publisher]

I think it’ll bring doom to our society as we know it.

You “think it’ll bring doom”…yet there is no evidence for it yet…and in many of these nations and US states…nothing really has changed…straight people still get married and divorced with the same regularity…well…maybe not married…I’ve read that marriage is on the decrease…but divorce is alive and well.

I’m amazed how “it’ll bring doom” to our society…after all…it’s only 1% of a very small population…5-10% of the general population are gay and lesbian…only 1-2% of the 5-10% of the sub group want to get married…amazing assertions with no basis in fact other than “doom and gloom” might happen…could happen…what if it happens…not any “it happened and this is why” proof.

I’d think if the same energy was spent on divorce as it was on gay marriage by religous people…divorce might decrease…but divorce is something that effects too many people making the laws and filling our churches…it would be too controversial to try to outlaw divorce…too many straight people would not stand for it…the small number of gay and lesbian people however that want to get married are easier targets and to deny same sex marriage to individuals that want to enter into affect no one but gay people…while divorce…well…a different story there on it’s impact to our society.

 

[_Abyssinia]

I will post the same as what I posted on another thread about gay ‘marriage.’

Legalizing gay ‘marriage’ impacts religious liberty, and it impacts the meaning of marriage. It weakens the true meaning of marriage. Legalizing gay ‘marriage’ has influence on public policy which effects everybody. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court redefined marriage in 2004 that was used to force exposure of homosexual behavior to elementary students.

Parents in Lexington, Massachusetts 2006 filed a lawsuit because their second-grader was a read a book about two princes who fall in love called The King and King. That lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge. Federal appeals court affirmed that saying: ‘It is a fair inference that the reading of King and King was precisely intended to influence the listening children toward tolerance of gay marriage.’

Civil unions in Illinois could force Catholic Charities out of adoptions.

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

I think it’ll bring doom to our society as we know it.

How?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

You “think it’ll bring doom”…yet there is no evidence for it yet…and in many of these nations and US states…nothing really has changed…straight people still get married and divorced with the same regularity…well…maybe not married…I’ve read that marriage is on the decrease…but divorce is alive and well.

I’m amazed how “it’ll bring doom” to our society…after all…it’s only 1% of a very small population…5-10% of the general population are gay and lesbian…only 1-2% of the 5-10% of the sub group want to get married…amazing assertions with no basis in fact other than “doom and gloom” might happen…could happen…what if it happens…not any “it happened and this is why” proof.

I’d think if the same energy was spent on divorce as it was on gay marriage by religous people…divorce might decrease…but divorce is something that effects too many people making the laws and filling our churches…it would be too controversial to try to outlaw divorce…too many straight people would not stand for it…the small number of gay and lesbian people however that want to get married are easier targets and to deny same sex marriage to individuals that want to enter into affect no one but gay people…while divorce…well…a different story there on it’s impact to our society.

For such a small amount of people, they certainly have a powerful voice and must have tons of money behind them. Why is it so important to have gay marriage? Homosexual couples already have all the rights of married ones.

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

One might look to what the consequences of contraception have been, for an answer.

The widespread acceptance of artificial contraception made the ultimate acceptance of gay marriage all but inevitable.

The acceptance of gay marriage will make gay marriage inevitable…

Gay marriage will just further ensure the meaninglessness of marriage.

How so? And what are the social consequences?

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

For such a small amount of people, they certainly have a powerful voice and must have tons of money behind them. Why is it so important to have gay marriage? Homosexual couples already have all the rights of married ones.

They want a certificate that says it, from the state, I think.

What if a religion wants to marry a man to a man? Why should the State stop this? Why should the State favour the views of one religious group over another in this matter?

Shouldn’t they give certificates to every married couple, or none?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The acceptance of gay marriage will make gay marriage inevitable…

How so? And what are the social consequences?

Homosexual “marriage” is a travesty. A very mocking and poor imitation of the real thing.

 

[Brandon_Rimmer_1]

Legalizing gay ‘marriage’ impacts religious liberty, and it impacts the meaning of marriage. It weakens the true meaning of marriage. Legalizing gay ‘marriage’ has influence on public policy which effects everybody. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court redefined marriage in 2004 that was used to force exposure of homosexual behavior to elementary students.

Parents in Lexington, Massachusetts 2006 filed a lawsuit because their second-grader was a read a book about two princes who fall in love called The King and King. That lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge. Federal appeals court affirmed that saying: ‘It is a fair inference that the reading of King and King was precisely intended to influence the listening children toward tolerance of gay marriage.’

Are you saying that a consequence for a society accepting gay marriage will be acceptance of gay marriage in society?

Why is this a bad thing?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

They want a certificate that says it, from the state, I think.

What if a religion wants to marry a man to a man? Why should the State stop this? Why should the State favour the views of one religious group over another in this matter?

Shouldn’t they give certificates to every married couple, or none?

Why do they want a certificate? That seems silly.

 

[meltzerboy]

What do you think they will be?

Let’s imagine the Constitution is amended to allow for gay marriage. What will be the cultural and political consequences, and why do you think that these things would happen?

I’m not sure; perhaps, after an initial backlash, more charity and tolerance for cultural and religious diversity and more freedom of expression?

 

[fix]

They want a certificate that says it, from the state, I think.

What if a religion wants to marry a man to a man? Why should the State stop this? Why should the State favour the views of one religious group over another in this matter?

Shouldn’t they give certificates to every married couple, or none?

What if 3 people want to marry? Should that be allowed? What if a man wants to marry his sister? Should that be allowed?

 

[stewstew03]

I thought American Protestants abandoned the institution of marriage in the 70s…

Once you give up the idea that marriage is sacred, gay marriage becomes inevitable; then polygamy, etc.

 

[stewstew03]

I’m not sure; perhaps, after an initial backlash, more charity and tolerance for cultural and religious diversity and more freedom of expression?

Yes, the State will save us from ourselves and lead us to nirvana…