Bill to allow gay marriage in Pennsylvania

[zulater]

the promise of commitment to what, exactly?
I swear I'm not trying to paint you into a corner here by begging the question, I'm just trying to get a precise answer nailed down.

Pretend I'm from another planet and have never heard of this "marriage" concept. What is it's purpose?

To feed divorce lawyers.

[Seven]

the promise of commitment to what, exactly?
I swear I'm not trying to paint you into a corner here by begging the question, I'm just trying to get a precise answer nailed down.

Pretend I'm from another planet and have never heard of this "marriage" concept. What is it's purpose?

Marriage is a personal contract to be intimately and emotionally committed to only one lover.

[zulater]

Marriage is a personal contract to be intimately and emotionally committed to only one lover.

By that definition gays shouldn't be excluded from it.

[Dwinsgames]

By that definition gays shouldn't be excluded from it.

what he omitted is it is a religious ceremony , and based on the Bible that the religions are based being Gay is not permissible thus they would not / should not perform a ceremony ...

BUT we will see Gays trying to file suit against the churches for discrimination ..its just the next can of worms we will face

[zulater]

what he omitted is it is a religious ceremony , and based on the Bible that the religions are based being Gay is not permissible thus they would not / should not perform a ceremony ...

BUT we will see Gays trying to file suit against the churches for discrimination ..its just the next can of worms we will face

Agreed./

[steeldawg]

Actually in fairness gay males probably aren't really much more promiscuous than straight males. The difference is the abundance of willing partners if you're gay. Seriously if you're single and straight you're always looking and usually willing. But other than prostitutes there's not many one night opportunities with self respecting woman and girls available to you. That's not to say straight woman don't ever engage in one night stands. They just don't make a practice of it. Maybe once or twice in their lives they might indulge. But not nearly as often as single men want them to.

This is exactly my point gays are no more promiscuous than straights, The thing is males are more promiscuous than woman so in a gay scenario the guy is more likely to find a willing partner. Like this a gay guy makes sexual advances at 6 guys and lands 3 , a straight guy makes sexual advances at 6 women but only lands 1, there is a difference in the number of partners but there is no difference in the promiscuity, because if women operated on the same level of promiscuity as men the number would be equal. Its evident with lesbians they have low numbers of partners and aren't very promiscuous so it has nothing to do with them being gay. someones sexual orientation has nothing to do with them being a slut.

[Chidi29]

I agree, but that doesn't mean the morality discussion isn't relevant to the overall conversation in my opinion. While the two topics are separate they also go hand in hand. I don't come to this forum to nod my head in agreement with every politically correct opinion, I come here to explore new ideas and see what other people are thinking. Whether that be about the Steelers or gay marriage, I'm not going to hesitate to take the conversation in a certain direction if I'm interested to. I really don't feel like the discussion on this thread got out of hand. I think it has all pertained to gay marriage for or against in one way or another. I think we drew some interesting conclusions and I've really enjoyed some of the varied responses that were posted. There are still several ideas that I'd love to see put into dialogue here but it seems as if the brakes have been tapped. To me, that's unfortunate. This is a "discussion" board after all. I thought I was tackling an interesting point of view - something beyond "Yes gay marriage should be legal because *PC talk*" or "No gay marriage should not be legal because *religious talk*." If you disagree, I truly am sorry. I know I'm not for everyone

I'm all for discussion...especially in the offseason when Steelers' talk is a bit tough to come by. And I don't want it to be a place where we all just pat each other on the back and never disagree. That's boring.

But I feel part of what was being discussed wasn't very constructive or relevant. It doesn't lead us any further to an answer. So we just go around in circles for two days until eventually one of the Admins gets fed up and locks the thread.

[steeldawg]

what he omitted is it is a religious ceremony , and based on the Bible that the religions are based being Gay is not permissible thus they would not / should not perform a ceremony ...

BUT we will see Gays trying to file suit against the churches for discrimination ..its just the next can of worms we will face

Marriage is only a religious ceremony if you want it to be one, If not it only requires a contract and a judge no religion is required.

[zulater]

This is exactly my point gays are no more promiscuous than straights, The thing is males are more promiscuous than woman so in a gay scenario the guy is more likely to find a willing partner. Like this a gay guy makes sexual advances at 6 guys and lands 3 , a straight guy makes sexual advances at 6 women but only lands 1, there is a difference in the number of partners but there is no difference in the promiscuity, because if women operated on the same level of promiscuity as men the number would be equal. Its evident with lesbians they have low numbers of partners and aren't very promiscuous so it has nothing to do with them being gay. someones sexual orientation has nothing to do with them being a slut.

Did it ever occur to you that it's nature's plan that men's sexual appetite is to be somewhat contained by the female? That to keep men from being total whorebag sluts, nature made it so we would have to work to obtain it. That sex isn't to be taken for granted, that in order to succeed we'd either have to stand out in some way or give something of ourselves to show ourselves worthy. Look at animals in nature. The female in heat usually doesn't hook up with the first suitor that comes along. Nature makes her more choosy than that. She looks for favorable traits that will be passed on to her brood.

Well in effect that's the way it works with hetrosexuals. And maybe as an animal species that sort of give and take is good for the mind and soul as well as your physical well being.

One last poor analogy and I'm done. Two men are like a highway without a speed limit or warning signs on the curves. In other words it's a wreck waiting to happen.

[zulater]

A religious take on it might be that it's God's plan that a woman saves a man from his very nature. That the right woman completes us and makes us strong enough to turn our weakness into a mutual strength. I do think that when you find the right one, the bond between a man and a woman makes both whole.

[GoSlash27]

Just so you all know, gays can't sue churches for refusing to marry them. 1st Amendment. They *can* get their tax exempt status revoked for political advocacy, but that's very difficult to pull off and usually doesn't work.
You should also know that there are already churches out there that are more than happy to perform the service for them. They'd do it tomorrow if the government would let them.

[GoSlash27]

I'm all for discussion...especially in the offseason when Steelers' talk is a bit tough to come by. And I don't want it to be a place where we all just pat each other on the back and never disagree. That's boring.

But I feel part of what was being discussed wasn't very constructive or relevant. It doesn't lead us any further to an answer. So we just go around in circles for two days until eventually one of the Admins gets fed up and locks the thread.

As I stated up- stream, we've already agreed on an answer; get the government out of the "marriage" business and there's nothing to fight over.
Now we're just talkin'.

Speaking of... we haven't heard from SteelGal on this subject yet. I'm looking forward to that...

- - - Updated - - -

Marriage is a personal contract to be intimately and emotionally committed to only one lover.

That's it? A monogamy pact?

[Seven]

By that definition gays shouldn't be excluded from it.

No, not strictly by definition. But that's ignoring everything else that has already been discussed in this thread. It's easy to make a decision when you pare down the debate and focus on one sole aspect, but unfortunately things aren't that simple. There are far more aspects to this issue than we've even come close to discussing. I don't think we have been able to effectively separate the intellectual discussion from the emotional one, and they're two different things.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm all for discussion...especially in the offseason when Steelers' talk is a bit tough to come by. And I don't want it to be a place where we all just pat each other on the back and never disagree. That's boring.

But I feel part of what was being discussed wasn't very constructive or relevant. It doesn't lead us any further to an answer. So we just go around in circles for two days until eventually one of the Admins gets fed up and locks the thread.

Fair enough.

[Seven]

That's it? A monogamy pact?

Emotionally, that's what I feel it should mean and that's what I want it to mean. I realize my perspective isn't the end all be all, though. I'm sure there are many who value marriage for just about everything but an agreement of monogamy, but in spirit, I feel that's what marriage is.

[steeldawg]

Did it ever occur to you that it's nature's plan that men's sexual appetite is to be somewhat contained by the female? That to keep men from being total whorebag sluts, nature made it so we would have to work to obtain it. That sex isn't to be taken for granted, that in order to succeed we'd either have to stand out in some way or give something of ourselves to show ourselves worthy. Look at animals in nature. The female in heat usually doesn't hook up with the first suitor that comes along. Nature makes her more choosy than that. She looks for favorable traits that will be passed on to her brood.

Well in effect that's the way it works with hetrosexuals. And maybe as an animal species that sort of give and take is good for the mind and soul as well as your physical well being.

One last poor analogy and I'm done. Two men are like a highway without a speed limit or warning signs on the curves. In other words it's a wreck waiting to happen.

Even if that where true, nature created gay people, so if women were created with a purpose then so were gay people. And lets not make women out to be saints here they are not as promiscuous as men but they are still up there. When I was in college Girls were crazy there was ass on tap, they certainly weren't looking for suitable males to breed children. Also I think with women wanting to use more contraception to prevent pregnacy shows their desire to have more recreational sex. Now there is nothing wrong with any of this a persons body is their business, if someone wants to have 1 partner or 20 partners they can and that should also haveno bearing on wether that person should be allowed to marry.

[GoSlash27]

Emotionally, that's what I feel it should mean and that's what I want it to mean. I realize my perspective isn't the end all be all, though. I'm sure there are many who value marriage for just about everything but an agreement of monogamy, but in spirit, I feel that's what marriage is.

What is the purpose of a monogamy pact? If 2 people decide that they want to be together and understand that infidelity will not be tolerated, then shouldn't that fact alone make them want to be faithful to their partner?

[steeldawg]

What is the purpose of a monogamy pact? If 2 people decide that they want to be together and understand that infidelity will not be tolerated, then shouldn't that fact alone make them want to be faithful to their partner?

I agree its not like couples who want to be monogamous only start after they are married.

[zulater]

Even if that where true, nature created gay people, so if women were created with a purpose then so were gay people. And lets not make women out to be saints here they are not as promiscuous as men but they are still up there. When I was in college Girls were crazy there was ass on tap, they certainly weren't looking for suitable males to breed children. Also I think with women wanting to use more contraception to prevent pregnacy shows their desire to have more recreational sex. Now there is nothing wrong with any of this a persons body is their business, if someone wants to have 1 partner or 20 partners they can and that should also haveno bearing on wether that person should be allowed to marry.

I get all of what you're saying. My only point is about the way we're hard wired by nature. Yeah obviously as thinking beings we can override our natural inclinations, but it doesn't just go away. That's why even those of us that aren't religious feel guilt, remorse and oft times shame when we step outside the parameters of our assigned stereotypical sexual roles.

[steeldawg]

I get all of what you're saying. My only point is about the way we're hard wired by nature. Yeah obviously as thinking beings we can override our natural inclinations, but it doesn't just go away. That's why even those of us that aren't religious feel guilt, remorse and oft times shame when we step outside the parameters of our assigned stereotypical sexual roles.

but for gays that is their natural sexual role since they are born with the natural attraction to the same sex. So they hardwired to be naturally attracted to the same sex and asking them to go against that would be asking to act unnatural. That is the very reason that no matter how hard we have tried to rid people of homosexuality we just cant do it, it is in their very nature to be gay.

[GoSlash27]

I get all of what you're saying. My only point is about the way we're hard wired by nature. Yeah obviously as thinking beings we can override our natural inclinations, but it doesn't just go away. That's why even those of us that aren't religious feel guilt, remorse and oft times shame when we step outside the parameters of our assigned stereotypical sexual roles.

Pretty much what steeldawg said. As a thinking being, there are some inclinations that just plain can't be overridden. Your attraction to women, for example. You weren't taught to like women. You didn't learn it through example by your parents or peer pressure. You didn't sit down, weigh the options, and make the conscious decision to be straight based on social pressure or morality.
All you know is pretty girls made you feel funny from a very young age and you wanted one even if you didn't know what you were supposed to do with her.
You might be able to convince yourself to have sex with men and avoid sex with women if you really tried, but you'd never be able to convince yourself to actually become attracted to men or to stop being attracted to women.
It's that hard- wiring you're talking about, and gay folks are wired that way. They're no more capable of resisting it than you are. You may prefer the term "faulty" and steeldawg may prefer the term "natural", but whatever you choose to call it, it's different.

[zulater]

but for gays that is their natural sexual role since they are born with the natural attraction to the same sex. So they hardwired to be naturally attracted to the same sex and asking them to go against that would be asking to act unnatural. That is the very reason that no matter how hard we have tried to rid people of homosexuality we just cant do it, it is in their very nature to be gay.

Don't disagree with that at all.But it's also in their nature to feel guilt and shame over their chosen lifestyle. And while you would blame most of that guilt on family and religion I contend that much of that guilt derives from within as it's hard wired into your DNA that you're not as you're supposed to be if you're different.


And again I'm in no way opposed to Gay marriage. I just understand why some are.

[GoSlash27]

Don't disagree with that at all.But it's also in their nature to feel guilt and shame over their chosen lifestyle. And while you would blame most of that guilt on family and religion I contend that much of that guilt derives from within as it's hard wired into your DNA that you're not as you're supposed to be if you're different.


And again I'm in no way opposed to Gay marriage. I just understand why some are.

No doubt, which is why gays have such a high suicide rate. They're not really happy being that way, but they weren't given a choice in the matter. Like I said, I don't envy them.

But the opposition to gay marriage really serves no constructive purpose if you reason it out. Making something legal doesn't condone it, but even if it did... the point of making something illegal is to deter it. Even making homosexuality *itself* illegal wouldn't deter it, because these people aren't making a conscious choice to be gay. All you can do is set up a system that punishes these people for being who they are with no benefit for them or the rest of society.

[steeldawg]

Don't disagree with that at all.But it's also in their nature to feel guilt and shame over their chosen lifestyle. And while you would blame most of that guilt on family and religion I contend that much of that guilt derives from within as it's hard wired into your DNA that you're not as you're supposed to be if you're different.


And again I'm in no way opposed to Gay marriage. I just understand why some are.

Well society has to be the one to blame because society has placed the stigma on being gay, society and religion has taught that gay is wrong unnatural and evil. That's why we are seeing so many people coming out of the closet nowadays because of the acceptance. Nature certainly didn't put labels on gay people, but now we are seeing gays coming out with pride and in force. I don't think its accurate to say they are not happy with who they are because there are plenty who look positively thrilled, Im not surprised the suicide rate is higher among gays but I don't think its because of natural guilt I think its because of guilt brought on by ignorant people and religions telling them there is something wrong with them.

[zulater]

Well society has to be the one to blame because society has placed the stigma on being gay, society and religion has taught that gay is wrong unnatural and evil. That's why we are seeing so many people coming out of the closet nowadays because of the acceptance. Nature certainly didn't put labels on gay people, but now we are seeing gays coming out with pride and in force. I don't think its accurate to say they are not happy with who they are because there are plenty who look positively thrilled, Im not surprised the suicide rate is higher among gays but I don't think its because of natural guilt I think its because of guilt brought on by ignorant people and religions telling them there is something wrong with them.

Yeah well that's no shock that you'd blame it all on religion and society as a whole.

[steeldawg]

Yeah well that's no shock that you'd blame it all on religion and society as a whole.

Who labeled the gays as wrong, unnatural, evil, who classified it as a mental disorder, who was putting gay people to death, who was trying to cure people of being gay, gays certainly weren't doing it to each other. I don't know who else you would blame.

[Seven]

Who labeled the gays as wrong, unnatural, evil, who classified it as a mental disorder, who was putting gay people to death, who was trying to cure people of being gay, gays certainly weren't doing it to each other. I don't know who else you would blame.

Don't blame this solely on religion. I'm not religious, but there were other forces at work here, too. I know atheists who strongly believe being gay is wrong. Just because the religious are the last to adopt the new politically correct view on gay marriage doesn't mean it's entirely their fault that they are only now starting to see equal rights.

[Seven]

What is the purpose of a monogamy pact? If 2 people decide that they want to be together and understand that infidelity will not be tolerated, then shouldn't that fact alone make them want to be faithful to their partner?

You could ask what the purpose is of just about anything we do. What's the purpose of winning an award or celebrating a birthday? Nothing about a lot of what we do physically exists or has a purpose, but it's still meaningful. It evokes emotional pleasure or gives us an excuse to have a party or ceremony, a bookmark or anchor in our life that we can reflect on. It's all about tradition. But we're going in circles. I think you have a pretty clear idea of what I think marriage should be by now.

[GoSlash27]

You could ask what the purpose is of just about anything we do. What's the purpose of winning an award or celebrating a birthday? Nothing about a lot of what we do physically exists or has a purpose, but it's still meaningful. It evokes emotional pleasure or gives us an excuse to have a party or ceremony, a bookmark or anchor in our life that we can reflect on. It's all about tradition. But we're going in circles. I think you have a pretty clear idea of what I think marriage should be by now.

Actually, I don't. And not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm not sure you do either. Or at the very least you're having trouble expressing it.
Marriage as a tradition exists everywhere humans exist, and it exists because it serves a useful role in society. Before you can make a judgement call on whether changing marriage is a good thing or a bad thing, you have to have a clear understanding of why we get married in the first place and what purpose it serves.

[Craic]

I think its because of guilt brought on by ignorant people and religions telling them there is something wrong with them.

And I think that a good amount of it is because there's something deeper down going on within many who are gay, and both their sexual orientation and suicidal aspirations are a result of it. I am not saying everyone, or even a vast majority, but a good number of them.

The ugly little secret that many don't want to talk about is that past traumatic experience, especially sexual experience, has a lot of lasting consequences. Let me illustrate for you. I was counselling someone a long, LONG time ago (story changed enough that no one would ever be able to guess who it is, though this was years before I was ever on this board anyway). That person was gay. S/he told me that the older brother/sister tied them down to a bed and let the friends take their turns at the person. Mom and dad never believed that it was happening, and it happened a few times.

Now, this person is gay/lesbian. Honestly, my first comment back to them was, "of course you are, and if I went through all that, I probably would be too. What else do you do when the two closest people to you of the opposite sex, your own family, destroy your trust in that sex so thoroughly?" By the end, that person could absolutely see the choices that were made, were made based off the incidents that happend as a child/teenager, and NOT out of "nature."

In short, it falls into the same overall bin as sex-workers. You'd be amazed at the vast majority of sex workers that report sexual abuse of one type or another when they were young. It messes up sexual develop something fierce, involves levels of the psyche so deeply that no one can really understand it, and ends up sending people down all types of paths (hence, why rape victims will sometimes look to almost be nymphomaniacs within a few months).

All of that to say, it is simplistic in the extreme to lay the blame on "society" and "religion," when there are so many other factors involved. The biggest problem, IMO, is that there's such a rush to say "it's okay and there's nothing wrong with you," that for those who there actually IS something wrong with, they're being driven further into their problems.

And no, I don't believe the above equals all homosexuality. There are some people for whom the above is true, and others for whom it is not.

[Seven]

Actually, I don't. And not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm not sure you do either. Or at the very least you're having trouble expressing it.
Marriage as a tradition exists everywhere humans exist, and it exists because it serves a useful role in society. Before you can make a judgement call on whether changing marriage is a good thing or a bad thing, you have to have a clear understanding of why we get married in the first place and what purpose it serves.

I have a very clear idea of exactly what I think marriage should be. If you can't understand, or rather don't see meaning in my version of it, that's fine. But Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean someone else's "judgement call" is invalidated. By that token I shouldn't believe in gay rights, since I don't have a "clear understanding" of why people are gay or what "purpose" being gay serves. But I suppose a difference between the two circumstances will be fabricated.