A small government argument against gay marriage

Started by Iraave, August 26, 2015, 01:38:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

kroz

Quote from: supsalemgr on September 10, 2015, 02:14:27 PM
If one is married by a minister it is a marriage. I have no problem with folks being married in different locations if it is a religious marriage. This is becoming more of a norm.

You are right, sup.  I'm glad you clarified that!

Iraave

Quote from: Dori on September 10, 2015, 07:56:42 AM
Simple to fix, get government out of marriage.  It was a religious concept anyway.  People don't need a government sanctioned piece of paper to live together or pro-create, being half the kids in this country are born to single parents.  The whole institution of what marriage was supposed to be has been ruined.

Well, at least one person on this so-called "conservative" forum gets it. Just read Dori's post a few times and maybe you'll really get it.

As for most of the rest of you (I said MOST not saying all of you), I just see a lot of hatefulness, bitterness, and name calling.

I'm against government control of marriage, and that makes me a Marxist? I'm a Christian that grew up reading the Bible, learning about a Jesus who preached love and forgiveness, and I actually try to live by those principles.... and yet I'm told that:

Quote from: SolarStupid God Damned Kid! It's ignorance like your's that's killing this Nation! This issue, the Fag one, has absolutely nothing to do with Liberty, and everything to do with breaking down American culture and dividing the country.
God you fuckin idiots really piss me off! You, yes you, are the perfect example of useful idiot!

Do you really think Jesus would approve of the hatred and bitterness in your heart? Just asking. Not making any judgments. If taking the Lord's name in vain were a big enough sin to be made illegal, you'd be in jail, yeah?

Anyways, I realize most of you here don't actually believe in freedom of religion. Like I said, you'd probably freak if a Muslim DMV worker tried to deny a drivers license to women. Hey, I'd freak too. I'm not a leftist and if anyone tries to defend Obama, I'll rail against him equally as viciously.

Just admit, it, though: you don't want freedom of religion, you just want your own popular and current interpretation of Christianity to be enforced by the government. You don't want smaller government as a principle, you want to make the government smaller only if it serves your own personal interests. You wouldn't complain if the federal government legalized conceal and carry (and I also believe strongly in the right to bear arms! in fact that's extremely important to me), but you get mad if it legalizes people born different from you the right to get tax and insurance benefits.  So, stop saying you care about civil liberties, too! Because you don't.

The fact is, Solar, you believe in big government, and you are strongly against religious liberties -- unless either serves your specific religious views. Just admit that. It's all I'm asking.

And that's why I don't consider you a true conservative, in case I haven't made that clear enough.

Ultra

Just read the OP, and the rest of the thread. So what's the deal? The thread title is about an argument against gay marriage but the OP seems to argue against government banning gay marriages. What's up with that? Did I misread the OP?

Iraave

Quote from: Ultra on September 12, 2015, 02:57:23 PM
Just read the OP, and the rest of the thread. So what's the deal? The thread title is about an argument against gay marriage but the OP seems to argue against government banning gay marriages. What's up with that? Did I misread the OP?

Eh, the title was supposed to be more of a challenge: give me a small government argument against gay marriage. I should have worded it a lot better, though, to be honest. Unfortunately most arguments against gay marriage I've encountered are based on religion, as opposed to small government. Ughhh I just want the government out of marriage in general.

Ultra

Quote from: Iraave on September 12, 2015, 03:04:48 PM
Eh, the title was supposed to be more of a challenge: give me a small government argument against gay marriage.

I'll take a crack at it. It is a waste of public time and money to pretend that a duck is a horse, no matter how much you want it to be.

Iraave

Quote from: Ultra on September 12, 2015, 03:24:06 PM
I'll take a crack at it. It is a waste of public time and money to pretend that a duck is a horse, no matter how much you want it to be.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. And I respect this argument a lot.

At the same time, how much public time and money were wasted on feeding and clothing Kim Davis while she was in jail?

Also, outside of Christianity and Islam and a handful of other religions, a lot of people do not see gay marriage differently than heterosexual marriage, unless the only purpose of marriage is to procreate.

And here's my issue: is procreation the only purpose of marriage? There are so many parentless children around the world desperately in need of parents.... but who is going to adopt them?

Single, married, gay, straight, it doesn't matter -- what is the moral argument for having a biological child instead of giving a loving home to a kid who wouldn't have a chance otherwise? Because there are so many kids that need adopting out there. I don't mean this question in a nasty or political way, honestly. It's something I think about a lot and honestly don't know the answer to.

Solar

Quote from: Iraave on September 12, 2015, 03:04:48 PM
Eh, the title was supposed to be more of a challenge: give me a small government argument against gay marriage. I should have worded it a lot better, though, to be honest. Unfortunately most arguments against gay marriage I've encountered are based on religion, as opposed to small government. Ughhh I just want the government out of marriage in general.
So what did you expect, you're in a religion forum.
Go out on the main forum, and you'll find most people have cited what Dori stated here many times over.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Iraave

Quote from: Solar on September 12, 2015, 03:49:00 PM
So what did you expect, you're in a religion forum.
Go out on the main forum, and you'll find most people have cited what Dori stated here many times over.

Well, I didn't originally post this in the religious forum -- some mods moved it over-- but I guess it's appropriate, at this point. Also, for a religious man, you did call me a "stupid god damned kid", and you mentioned how "God you fuckin idiots really piss me off!".

I'm gonna be totally, 100 percent honest. My parents raised me Christian, and they taught me to be loving, forgiving, understanding, and they both would have slapped me for using that kind of language towards anyone. This is why I'm anti-left. This is why I'm anti-Islam. I'm tired of the hatefulness, and I'm also tired of hate being used to justify government legislation of morality.

Jesus defended the people that the law condemned. And again, as I said, Jeasus NEVER ONCE mentioned homosexuality. It was Paul in the New Testament who mentioned it. And yeah, it's a sin. So is taking God's name in in vain (looking at you, Solar), so is envy, so is greed, so is divorce, so is hatefulness. Personally, this is how I try to live: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+5%3A22-23&version=NIV

Ultra

Quote from: Iraave on September 12, 2015, 03:33:13 PM
Okay, now we're getting somewhere. And I respect this argument a lot.

At the same time, how much public time and money were wasted on feeding and clothing Kim Davis while she was in jail?

I don't know, judging by her appearance I'm betting it cost a lot to feed her.

QuoteAlso, outside of Christianity and Islam and a handful of other religions, a lot of people do not see gay marriage differently than heterosexual marriage, unless the only purpose of marriage is to procreate.

I don't agree with this. Mankind has thousands of years to draw upon when it comes to understanding marriage. Most of those times and places were not operating under Abrahamic religions yet the obvious norm has been a man and a woman raising children...the nuclear family. There are exceptions but not enough in my opinion to conclude that marriage between a man and a woman is anything other than the natural norm.

QuoteAnd here's my issue: is procreation the only purpose of marriage? There are so many parentless children around the world desperately in need of parents.... but who is going to adopt them?

I'd say that historically procreation and the raising of the resulting children is the purpose of marriage. Some couples can't have kids for various reasons but that doesn't change the norm.

QuoteSingle, married, gay, straight, it doesn't matter -- what is the moral argument for having a biological child instead of giving a loving home to a kid who wouldn't have a chance otherwise? Because there are so many kids that need adopting out there. I don't mean this question in a nasty or political way, honestly. It's something I think about a lot and honestly don't know the answer to.

Why is this dependent upon gays marrying? As far as I know a single gay man or lesbian can adopt kids if they want to.

The question is about small government and gay marriage. I think it's the responsibility of government in any decent society to not subject the society to harm. For a government to attempt to turn a well-established social institution on it's head and ignore thousands of years of societal norm is at best folly, at worst criminal, and definitely not in the best interest of the society. Only an intrusive government would even consider it.

Iraave

Quote from: Ultra on September 12, 2015, 04:39:23 PM
I don't know, judging by her appearance I'm betting it cost a lot to feed her.

Haha, agreed.

QuoteI don't agree with this. Mankind has thousands of years to draw upon when it comes to understanding marriage. Most of those times and places were not operating under Abrahamic religions yet the obvious norm has been a man and a woman raising children...the nuclear family. There are exceptions but not enough in my opinion to conclude that marriage between a man and a woman is anything other than the natural norm.

Of course, a man and a woman marrying, and fitting into their society in both a socioeconomic and geographic sense, and raising a family that follows in the same path, generation after generation, would be ideal. I am never going to argue against that point. However, we do not live in an ideal world.

I live in New York City, and I know a couple (both girls) that are the kindest, most generous, encouraging, and amazing people I've ever met. One is a lawyer, and one is a filmmaker (you've probably spent money seeing one of her films at some point). They're very close friends to me and their kindness and selflessness puts most actual Christians I've met to shame.

The way their face lit up when they realized they could legally get married made me truly believe in the actual existence of the type of love that Jesus talked about -- in a way I'd never seen in any church before. Actual, honest, real love. I babysit their dogs and I know they'd make better parents than a divorced, hateful so-called Christian.

I grew up with straight parents that divorced, cheated on each other, treated each other like garbage, lied constantly, and had hearts filled with hatred and deceit..... And yes, I'm a straight man, and I was raised by Christian parents, but I don't think that justifies government legislation of marriage in this country.

QuoteI'd say that historically procreation and the raising of the resulting children is the purpose of marriage. Some couples can't have kids for various reasons but that doesn't change the norm.

Right, but how does that legitimize an argument against gay marriage when there are so many kids without decent parents that could use an adoption?

QuoteWhy is this dependent upon gays marrying? As far as I know a single gay man or lesbian can adopt kids if they want to.

It's not, I'm just adding some more perspective to it.

QuoteThe question is about small government and gay marriage. I think it's the responsibility of government in any decent society to not subject the society to harm. For a government to attempt to turn a well-established social institution on it's head and ignore thousands of years of societal norm is at best folly, at worst criminal, and definitely not in the best interest of the society. Only an intrusive government would even consider it.
So what is an intrusive government, at this point?

Solar

Quote from: Iraave on September 12, 2015, 04:30:38 PM
Well, I didn't originally post this in the religious forum -- some mods moved it over-- but I guess it's appropriate, at this point. Also, for a religious man, you did call me a "stupid god damned kid", and you mentioned how "God you fuckin idiots really piss me off!".

I'm gonna be totally, 100 percent honest. My parents raised me Christian, and they taught me to be loving, forgiving, understanding, and they both would have slapped me for using that kind of language towards anyone.
So you admit, you're a lib? Only an idiot lib would be offended. for anything! Grow a set and let em drop.

QuoteThis is why I'm anti-left. This is why I'm anti-Islam. I'm tired of the hatefulness, and I'm also tired of hate being used to justify government legislation of morality.

Jesus defended the people that the law condemned. And again, as I said, Jeasus NEVER ONCE mentioned homosexuality. It was Paul in the New Testament who mentioned it. And yeah, it's a sin. So is taking God's name in in vain (looking at you, Solar), so is envy, so is greed, so is divorce, so is hatefulness. Personally, this is how I try to live: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+5%3A22-23&version=NIV

Reading comprehension issues? Where did I ever say I was a religious man?
Believing in God does not make one a worshiper.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Ultra

Quote from: Iraave on September 12, 2015, 05:06:54 PM
I live in New York City, and I know a couple (both girls) that are the kindest, most generous, encouraging, and amazing people I've ever met. One is a lawyer, and one is a filmmaker (you've probably spent money seeing one of her films at some point). They're very close friends to me and their kindness and selflessness puts most actual Christians I've met to shame.

The way their face lit up when they realized they could legally get married made me truly believe in the actual existence of the type of love that Jesus talked about -- in a way I'd never seen in any church before. Actual, honest, real love. I babysit their dogs and I know they'd make better parents than a divorced, hateful so-called Christian.

I'm sure they're delightful but what is the first thing they did once they were married...or after the honeymoon? I'm betting they filed for some sort of marriage benefit.

I'm at a disadvantage here. I was raised in a Catholic family but once I was given the choice I left the church and never went back, I'm not into organized religion. I might be wrong about this but from what I remember it is the child/children which results from marriage that pleases God so the lesbians can't have the kind of love Jesus talked about. Plus, IIRC Jesus was very clear as to what a marriage is and two women wasn't even close to what he had in mind.

QuoteI grew up with straight parents that divorced, cheated on each other, treated each other like garbage, lied constantly, and had hearts filled with hatred and deceit..... And yes, I'm a straight man, and I was raised by Christian parents, but I don't think that justifies government legislation of marriage in this country.

Forget about Christianity for a second. Mankind has decided over a period of thousands of years that a father and mother result in the best upbringing for children. It has nothing to do with whether or not they're pleasant people or if the child is happy. It has to do with the end result.

QuoteRight, but how does that legitimize an argument against gay marriage when there are so many kids without decent parents that could use an adoption?

Gay marriage isn't necessary for kids to be adopted by gays, although I do think it's a bad idea for gays to adopt.

QuoteSo what is an intrusive government, at this point?

A government that pretends that marriage needs to be redefined, does so, and then puts people in jail for not accepting the new, clearly asinine definition.

Solar

Quote from: Ultra on September 12, 2015, 05:41:10 PM
I'm sure they're delightful but what is the first thing they did once they were married...or after the honeymoon? I'm betting they filed for some sort of marriage benefit.

I'm at a disadvantage here. I was raised in a Catholic family but once I was given the choice I left the church and never went back, I'm not into organized religion. I might be wrong about this but from what I remember it is the child/children which results from marriage that pleases God so the lesbians can't have the kind of love Jesus talked about. Plus, IIRC Jesus was very clear as to what a marriage is and two women wasn't even close to what he had in mind.

Forget about Christianity for a second. Mankind has decided over a period of thousands of years that a father and mother result in the best upbringing for children. It has nothing to do with whether or not they're pleasant people or if the child is happy. It has to do with the end result.

Gay marriage isn't necessary for kids to be adopted by gays, although I do think it's a bad idea for gays to adopt.

A government that pretends that marriage needs to be redefined, does so, and then puts people in jail for not accepting the new, clearly asinine definition.
Well said.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Iraave

Quote from: Solar on September 12, 2015, 05:39:11 PM
So you admit, you're a lib? Only an idiot lib would be offended. for anything! Grow a set and let em drop.

If I talked trash on your religious idols, you'd probably be offended. Oh wait.....

Man, can't you just admit that you're strongly opposed to religious freedom? You want your interpretation of Christianity to reign in America via the government. You oppose civil liberties, and you want big government. Why is that so hard to admit??

Man as an actual right wing, conservative, believer in small government and civil liberties, this forum is just laughable. Obama stripped our right to bear arms while at the same time spying on us. Ughhhhh how do you people not get this?? Did you never read the Bible?

Iraave

Quote from: Ultra on September 12, 2015, 05:41:10 PM
I'm sure they're delightful but what is the first thing they did once they were married...or after the honeymoon? I'm betting they filed for some sort of marriage benefit.

I'm at a disadvantage here. I was raised in a Catholic family but once I was given the choice I left the church and never went back, I'm not into organized religion. I might be wrong about this but from what I remember it is the child/children which results from marriage that pleases God so the lesbians can't have the kind of love Jesus talked about. Plus, IIRC Jesus was very clear as to what a marriage is and two women wasn't even close to what he had in mind.
Hey man, Jesus came for the worst of us. We have to love him.

QuoteForget about Christianity for a second. Mankind has decided over a period of thousands of years that a father and mother result in the best upbringing for children. It has nothing to do with whether or not they're pleasant people or if the child is happy. It has to do with the end result.

This is where I'm going to start having to disagree. Marriage is a tentative and tenuous institution... and the fact that straight couple in this country have over a half and half divorce rate should make that clear...

QuoteGay marriage isn't necessary for kids to be adopted by gays, although I do think it's a bad idea for gays to adopt.

QuoteOkay, fine. But the fact is, unadopted children are born every hour and every second, and they need a family....  (http://unadopted.org/why-we-exist/)

QuoteA government that pretends that marriage needs to be redefined, does so, and then puts people in jail for not accepting the new, clearly asinine definition. [/quote.]

QuoteI don't see it that way, and the only reason I believe in love and acceptance, is because I read the Bible and the New Testament. Am I wrong for feeling that way? Should the Bible and Jesus have told me otherwise? Please... tell me if the Bible was wrong.