Posted on 02/05/2010 11:44:29 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
In discussing a new study confirming that polygamy is a staple within gay "marriages," a New York Times article has suggested that doing away with the concept of spousal fidelity in marriage represents an "evolution" that "might point the way for the survival of the institution."
NYT columnist Scott James reported January 28 on a project by San Francisco State University's Center for Research on Gender and Sexuality examining various aspects of homosexual relationships. James says the study, which is scheduled for release this month, "reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many."
"Some gay men and lesbians argue that, as a result, they have stronger, longer-lasting and more honest relationships," the article continues. "And while that may sound counterintuitive, some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage — one that might point the way for the survival of the institution."
Colleen Hoff, one of the study's researchers, remarked: "With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating, but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.”
Steve Weinstein, the editor-in-chief of the gay news service EDGE Boston, said that the research could be placed into "the category of 'studies that confirm the painfully obvious.'"
James also admits that "none of this is news in the gay community, but few will speak publicly about it," with many expressing fear that "discussing the subject could undermine the legal fight for same-sex marriage."
Joe Quirk, author of the sex-themed bestseller "It's Not You, It's Biology," argued that "the combination of freedom and mutual understanding can foster a unique level of trust."
“If innovation in marriage is going to occur, it will be spearheaded by homosexual marriages," said Quirk.
Tell me again why people who wallow in same-sex ‘love’ want to get married?
Oh yeah, it’s all about the money. Tax breaks, insurance, etc.
Uhhhhhhhhh . . .
I thought that maybe it was about
DEMANDING TO BE TREATED AND SEEN AS
THE SAME
while screaming through every pore and orifice possible
at the loudest volumes possible
ABOUT
HOW DIFFERENT
THEY WERE AND WERE DETERMINED TO STAY DIFFERENT, IF NOT BECOME *MORE* SO . . . of course . . . insisting on being
TREATED as THE SAME . . . by a long list of institutions
they have spent a lifetime demonstrating they mostly wanted no part of . . .
curious to the max . . .
until one recalls the origin, roots of such . . . silly notions.
I don't really believe that, because traditional marriage came about to protect children, women and property.
Gay couples can go to a lawyer and draw up a package that gives them all of the responsibilities and privileges of marriage.
Then they can put on any kind of ceremony they wish.
This is about co-opting an institution and forcing reluctant, discreet people to engage in a display of validating and celebrating something they have no desire to validate or celebrate. This is about power.
I want to marry my dog to get the tax benefits.
How many years have we been told gays are not promiscuous?
And then, to justify same-sex marriage, we are told it would help promote monogamy within the gay community.
And now, they boast of promiscuity?
But hey, what do I know? I’m just one of those “breeders.”
Because they're already perverts - it doesn't surprise anyone when perverts act perverted.
I scoff at Hoff.
From the movie, The Harrad Experiment, people were sometimes misled to believe an "open" marriage was a good idea. (Yes, Colleen, openly nonmonagamous 'straight' marriages were called "open marriages" decades ago.) I knew some couples who decided maybe that was the way to go.
Not one marriage survived such experimentation then, nor did the marriages of those who tried that later.
Not one.
Traditional 'straight' marriages, with and without children, and with a reasonable presentment of fidelity have frequently survived decades, in contrast.
As for the gays, my bet is that this has been about tapping 'spousal' medical benefits all along, and not establishing any long term monogamous relationships.
Attempting to tear down the institutions you claimed you wanted to emulate does not strengthen your case advocating a sick parody of the sacrament of Holy Matrimony.,
This garbage from the NYT is all about deconstructing and destroying marriage. It’s not possible to give most gays children, but they can’t stand recognition and benefits to straights raising their own so this Slimes article idiotically promoting infidelity is the latest salvo in the Leftist/gay attempt to destroy marriage which, to the extent accomplished, they believe will benefit their feckless, out of touch socialist ideology.
So whats the point of “marriage” again?
LOL!
You are absolutely correct. They want to overthrow thousands of years of recorded history in order to exhort power over others.
They want to re-write our 1st Amendment religious freedom by having Congress craft a law which forces churches and ministers to act contrary to their faith, or receive consequences for “discrimination” for staying the course.
They are attempting to use the power of the federal government to establish their religion and ease their guilty consciences.
I don’t think its about medical benefits.
I think its about tearing down society
“We had to destroy the institution to save it.”
Oh, that’s rich.
You see it all the time, not just with that bunch.
The entire concept of "equality" to a liberal is not one of bringing the low up, but tearing down those who have excelled/succeeded and reducing everyone and everything to the lowest common denominator.
For those who worship their groin, regardless of orientation, this is about feeling better about themselves, sure.
But the economic benefits of the medical insurance provided to 'spouses' in situations where the applicants are very high risk because of their sexual behaviour cannot be ignored. Promiscuity among any group spreads disease, and in that particular group especially so due to the innate nature of their activities involving pathogen sources which most 'straight' couples would not normally encounter.
I think it’s polyandry? Shhhhh, it’s a little secret my gay male friend told me... They can still go to bars and pick up someone new... together....
Ping.
Did I not say same-sex marriage was a way to get to polygamy?
Gee, wouldn’t that benefit another segment as well?
Hey, the more out of traditional families, the less kids and more degradation of society... it’s what any social engineer would want.
Lord have mercy.
The main reason that gays want to be married is the same reason that Satan wants to destroy everything that is holy. Whatever gays may say about their reason for wanting to get married, the driving force that leads them to degrade themselves also leads them to destroy what God has instituted and blessed. Their abominations know no bounds.
I totally approve of that message in your post.
“”With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating, but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.””
LOL! I’m sure. What do you expect from perverts?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.