"Homosexual Marriage Doesn't Effect My Marriage" (VANITY)

03/09/2004 | DameAutour

[MeekOneGOP]

Whoops ! fyi ! ...

[antiRepublicrat]

Are there really people out there who would be gay but for the fact that they can't get married to a member of the same sex?

Not a chance. Levels would remain the same.

If gay marriage becomes legal then after the dust settles you'll probably simply see the same spectrum of people getting "married" as you do with hetersexuals -- from Britney Spears weekend weddings to lifelong commitments. In the beginning you'll get a whole bunch of idiots not ready for marriage who are just doing it because they can, for stupid activist reasons. Expect that to throw the gay divorce stats way off in the first few years as these people realize their mistakes, and expect those against gay marriage to gloat about it. We won't know if a gay marriage is as stable as a heterosexual marriage for at least 10 years.

Who knows, in the end it might actually do something to tone down the stereotypical promiscuous behavior among homosexuals.

[richardtavor]

It kind of makes you wonder that if they are only 2 to 4% of the population, how are they having this much impact????Always a question for me.

[Modernman]

Marriage is, and will remain, one of the indicators of financial stability. That is to say, married people tend to do better monetarily than non-married people. One of the leading indicators of poverty for children is whether their parents are married.

So, among heterosexuals, there is no real reason that marriages will all of a sudden break down or that people will start abandoning straight marriages in favor of gay unions.

[Modernman]

It kind of makes you wonder that if they are only 2 to 4% of the population, how are they having this much impact????Always a question for me

A few reasons I can think of:

1) Better education and higher income levels mean that homosexuals are good at organizing politically and have the financial means to do so.

2) Anti-gay discrimination has lead to the creation of various activist groups that work to protect the interests of homosexuals.

3) Geographical clustering- large numbers of homosexuals live in places that are proximate to power: New York, Washington, Los Angeles. Living there gives homosexuals a greater ability to influence policy than if they lived, for example, in Idaho.

[The Grammarian]

if anyone tells me why they should not be extended these same privileges then i will listen. one thing though: you may not bring religion into the argument at all.

All right. Marriage as a public institution is a bit more concerned about the structure of society than it is about the so-called special rights of particular groups. In other words, the state gives breaks to married couples because the tendency in marriage is toward producing children (which is flatly impossible within a same-sex 'marriage'), and those children will grow up to be--hopefully--upstanding, productive members of society.

For arguments in a similar vein, but in a different format, see the following article.

[TBRK]

Everyone is missing the point. What homo marriage does is confirm that this activity is normal, natural, and okay. Only in the liberal controlled modern world would this even be considered. The homos and the liberals are trying to hide what the homo "sex act" really is. A normal person should be sick at their stomach just thinking of such a thing! There are clinics to help these people become normal, but this is hidden. The homo life span is shorter and 75% of them have a S.T.D. These people are the sickening filth of the earth and anything that legitimizes them is pure evil.

[MortMan]

In what sense is redefining marriage "inflationary"? If it's in the number-of-marriages sense, that's also an argument for banning, say, interracial marriages.

Actually, the point is more along the lines of devaluation. Once the dollar was no longer associated with a specific amount of gold, it was allowed to "float" in value, inevitably winding up less valuable in the long run. By redefining the basis of marriage, I believe that the "value" of marriage (note - NOT the relationship itself, but the social value) will inevitably deteriorate, affecting anyone who is married.

The change will not be pronounced by those who hold themselves in a traditional marriage, but will imposed by the societal devaluation of marriage itself.

This argument also works against no-fault divorce (in fact, against most divorces outside of the biblically described valid reasons).

[COURAGE]

Well, it does mine. Thank you.

[little jeremiah]

What you are suggesting is like advising someone living in the midst of a landfill or sewer to have a nice clean house and there will be no stench. "Gay rights" radicals and their fellow libertines are turning our country into a moral sewer. The stench is going to carry everywhere. Unless someone lives on a long dirt road somewhere in the midst of the wilderness, the destruction of marriage is going to affect everyone.

Ever lived even near a landfill or sewage treatment plant? They stink, no matter how personally clean you are.

[lentulusgracchus]

Not to nag, but the verb you want is "affect".

"Affect" = "have an influence or effect upon"

"Effect" = "effectuate", "bring about", "cause to happen"

[lentulusgracchus]

If marriage loses its importance and significance, how can you say it wasn't effected?

You're quite correct. The really radical gays who are driving the process would like to abolish marriage altogether, because it throws a residual, Levitical shadow over their own deviant sexual arrangements. The radicals regard the gays who want to get "married" as trimmers, shallow and timid "mainstreamers" who dream of being Ozzie and Harriet instead of wanting to rape Ozzie and Harriet and bury them and their memory in shallow graves, etc., etc.

In the radical paradigm, even gay "marriage" is a reminder of the canonical origins of marriage, and belittling it in all its aspects is their constant, busy work.

[lentulusgracchus]

Hanging window....AM, please remove my redundant post 72, thanks.

[TexanAmerican]

I'm sure the PC police will hang me for this, but Rev. Phelps is right.

[lentulusgracchus]

Geographical clustering- large numbers of homosexuals live in places that are proximate to power: New York, Washington, Los Angeles. Living there gives homosexuals a greater ability to influence policy than if they lived, for example, in Idaho.

In addition to that, someone somewhere posited that the high percentage of gays in DC has put them in contact with many policymakers. Putting their best foot forward (ever hear of a "pride parade" in DC?), they have been schmoozing decisionmakers assiduously for 30 years. As a result, many policymakers -- most spectacularly including the current "conservative" President -- have been influenced to adopt "gay-friendly" attitudes and policies w/o regard to further consequences of their doing so.

We can expect more of the same. Schmoozing and good behavior in DC, chickenhawking, chicken-skinning, and open predation in Burbland.

[lentulusgracchus]

What the secular world does or does not condone should not affect your values.

The "secular world" doesn't comprehend everything that is done outside a church or temple. Your statement implies that moral values based in revealed truth should be closeted, and the amorality of Babylon prevail in the public places.

You have articulated the homosexuals' position on public morality.

Being a sovereign People, we need not apologize to anyone who isn't the God of Israel for what we decide to make our public morality. The fact that our mores are deeply Jewish and kohein in their origins -- particularly as regards personal modesty and where we set the boundaries between public and private, and private and deeply personal -- and that those mores were subscribed to by Christian Europe is something of which we can justly be proud, not apologetic, and something that we can openly recognize as inuring to our benefit as a society.

We don't need to take anything off anybody, or suffer the sodomites to strike words out of our mouths, or inscriptions and symbols off our buildings and out of our mind's eye. We will not be censored by the trashy little commissar-wannabes of political correctness.

"Political correctness", by the way, is a term of art invented by the Nazis. Its purposes and uses ought to be obvious, and repellent, to every freedom-loving American.

[RonHolzwarth]

reply to:
"I'm sure the PC police will hang me for this, but Rev. Phelps is right."

Gotcha!

Did you know that the Rev. Phelps has at least two websites?

GodHatesFags.com

and

GodHatesAmerica.com

You better get out of the United States of America
REAL QUICK, then,
since you believe he is right that:

GOD HATES AMERICA!!!

Because that is what you just claimed!

[BikerNYC]

If marriage loses its importance and significance, how can you say it wasn't effected?

I think we should be more concerned about how Britney Spears' little walk down the isle did more to hurt the importance and significance of marriage than the damage done by two old women who have been together for over 50 years getting married out in SF.

[breakem]

where's the call for constitutional amendments banning adultery and divorce? No one here is really serious about defending marriage, they're just afraid some queers will be happy.