Arguments For And Against Same Sex Marriage (1/2)

[me25422]

this caller is a fucking bigot.

[me25422]

what do the obama supporters think of obamas newly "evolved" stance on marriage and gays which is that marriage should be between a man and a woman?

[optifog]

My mum is an atheist (as am I) against gay marriage (I'm not). She's just set in her ways. She has gay friends and wants them to have other rights, she just finds it weird and 'uncomfortable', in her words, to think of them having a traditional wedding. Atheists in Europe don't tend to have the same personalities as American atheists do. European atheists aren't necessarily rational, they often just haven't been raised with religion and being atheist is actually just another 'way' to be set in.

[stormbre4ker]

i wanna marry my sheep, i love her and she loves me, why cant we? these laws fail

[heavenlyangelsrhere]

who cares just let them marry. it is between us each and God, anyway, isn't it?

[RyuHayabusa06]

Now, I do think gay couples should be able to visit each other in the hospital, and leave inheritance to their partners, but I don't think any family-based government benefits should be extended to them.

[needleinthehay331]

Why don't you think family-based government benefits should be extended to gay couples?

[RyuHayabusa06]

@needleinthehay331 Simple. Gays cannot have familys, and thus shouldn't get those benefits. I don't believe in gays adopting. Yes, there are lots of children that need homes, but the adoption system wasn't created to as a depot for gay couples to get children. Instead, the government needs to make it easier for heterosexual families to adopt. It is WAY too expensive and too much of a hassle as it stands today. Fix the system.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06:

"Gays cannot have familys, and thus shouldn't get those benefits."

Yes, they can and many have. If they are allowed to adopt even more will. That's like cutting someone's legs off and then saying they aren't allowed into the club because they can't walk. Besides, almost 20% of couples can't have kids because one partner is sterile. So they can't have families.

"I don't believe in gays adopting."

It's a legal issue, what's there to believe or not to believe?

[RyuHayabusa06]

@Trampadoo Gay couples CANNOT have children. They have to go outside of their "union" to do so, and the comparison to sterile couples is ridiculous. Sterile couples have a medical problem which can often times be alleviated. Homosexual couples can never have children because they are simply incompatible on a biological level. 2 men or 2 women cannot make a child and no emotional argument can change that fact.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06: "They have to go outside of their "union" to do so.."

So do many sterile couples, dimwit. I'm sorry but do you even have a clue about artificial fertilisation? XD If the sperm or the eggcells are useless/nonexistent, the woman's unterus is damanged/gone, illnesses etc. they have to go outside of their union, just like gay couples. So all these straight and gay couples should not be allowed to get married and should not have equal rights according to your logic. XD

[RyuHayabusa06]

@Trampadoo Did you just read the first sentence of my response and skip the rest? Sterile couples have a MEDICAL issue that can often times be fixed. Gay couples are biologically incompatible, period. They cannot make kids together under any circumstances. That's the difference. Face it, homosexuality is an abnormality caused by a brain deformation which most scientists believe occurs during development through under or over exposure to certain hormones.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06: "Sterile couples have a MEDICAL issue that can often times be fixed."

Haha, you're not getting out of this. XD Often it can't be fixed without going outside their "union". The problem is usually a natural occurance so who are you to judge what's wanted by nature and what needs to be fixed? These ppl cannot make kids together under any circumstances without a 3rd party, period. And neither can couples where the woman is too old.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06:

Haha, you screwd up. By your logic any couples who cannot produce children by their own without the sperm or egg of a "stranger", e.g. gay couples, many strile couples and old couples cannot be allowed to get married and should not benefit from the same rights as us proper human beings. XD

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06: "Face it, homosexuality is an abnormality caused by a brain deformation which most scientists believe occurs during development through under or over exposure to certain hormones."

XD Did you just shoot off your whole own leg? Hahaha! If it is caused by the mother's hormones, one of many not unlikely theories of what might be one of the factors, that's a natural occurence and an enormously common one.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06: So what? So the influences the hormones of the mother have on their babies mean that we should single those people out and not grant them equal rights? You've basically stated yourself that the cause is natural. You completely fail to make a point with the sterile and old couples there and there is no negative influence coming from gay ppl. They are gaining equal rights in more and more countries so eat your heart out. XD

[RyuHayabusa06]

@needleinthehay331 Because gay couples cannot have families, thus they shouldn't get family-based benefits.

[RyuHayabusa06]

Proponents of same-sex marriage rely upon emotional arguments, but really, arguments based upon biology and family establishment and entitlements should win out over emotion. Unfortunately, those who are religious are the ones leading the fight for traditional marriage and are doomed to fail because they cannot impose their religion upon others. Really, if gender doesn't matter, why does number matter? Or blood relation? If you think that same-sex marriage is ok, then polygamy is ok too.

[needleinthehay331]

No, we don't. Logically, two adults, acting within the boundaries of the law (homosexuality is not against the law) should not have benefits denied to them.

Numbers and blood relation shouldn't matter either. I totally support polygamy and incest if people want to do that. Now, I can understand if the government restricted marriage to incestual couples in an effort to try and decrease the number of couples who engage but, they should still be allowed if they want to.

[RyuHayabusa06]

@needleinthehay331 This is the problem with those who argue for gay marriage. If gender, blood relation, number of participants do not matter, then just get rid of marriage all together because it means nothing. This is the problem. You want to destroy each and every social norm that exists, and basically undermine society as a whole. This is why the USA and Europe are doomed. Nothing matters except what ever makes you feel good. I am an atheist, and I hate that I'm labeled a liberal.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06: What is your problem? Many courties on Europe have gay marriage/civil union with equal rights since 15-10 years. Please elaborate on the problems this has caused.

"Nothing matters except what ever makes you feel good."

What an insult. So heterosexual love is fine no matter what but homosexual love is "just what makes you feel good"? What else is straight love about? Marriage however covers rights, duties and protection and that is what people want, both straight and gay.

[RyuHayabusa06]

I am an atheist and I do not support gay marriage. Marriage has always been about the establishment of a family unit and as a way to ensure inheritance rights and paternity of children. Gays cannot have a family. They must rely upon heterosexual procreation because they are biologically incompatible. Homosexuality is largley the result of prenatal hormonal abnormalities. Human society shouldn't be redefined because a small percentage of the population has a developmental abnormality.

[needleinthehay331]

So, then straight couples who are infertile should not be allowed to adopt since they also must rely on heterosexuals who procreate.

You forgot about IVF though...

[RyuHayabusa06]

@needleinthehay331 Nonsense. Infertility is a medical issue, and one that can often be corrected through various medical procedures. Comparing a medical issue to a complete biological incompatibility is ridiculous. This same argument is always given and it's rather obvious why it fails. You just want to be accepted as normal, that's it. It's all emotions, but the fact that male-female union is the basis for the continuation of the human species and the fabric of human society will not change.

[Trampadoo]

@RyuHayabusa06 "..but the fact that male-female union is the basis for the continuation of the human species and the fabric of human society will not change."

How can an atheist be so ignorant? What do you know about nature's methods to regulate the population and to avoid conflicts? How can you ignore all the variations of sexuality in nature? We are doing quite well producing a shitload of people including millions of unwanted children. How is that a criteria for denying civil rights?

[YoungJaedong]

Flying spaghetti Monster!

[HelplessVictim]

"It's unnatural because it's scientific."

I facepalmed when I heard that.

[ABear23462]

My twin brother says the bible tells him he can't interact with me because I'm gay - if he does interact with me he'll go to hell. BUT he can't answer the question: Why can you interact with people you work with that you know are gay? So can profit? It's okay to interact with gay people so you can profit, but you can't interact with your twin brother. Nice. HYPOCRITE!!

[ArrogantAtheist]

Atheists FTW!!

[lunchboxboy]

i understand now, David's an idiot.

[AceOfSevens]

I love the irony of a guy talking on the phone to an Internet show and condemning unnatural things. Pretty much everything we do in modern industrial countries is unnatural. So what?

[KoiosDusklight]

It's also rather curious, the way people seem to assume that natural means good for you.

[pmfcal]

@ AtheistExperience, FFreethinker et al: I like you posting excerpts from the ACA TV show, but those intros which are longer the 5sec are really, really annoying. There is no need to waste time watching them again and again.

[bleunt]

Oh, the sound quality...

[NLPNVC]

"Marriage is self-gratifying" that's like saying castration is erotic.

[Katalyzt]

The caller is not thinking clearly.

Katalyzt

[playgrrrr]

i dont get it. that infertility argument doesnt make sense at all. there is a difference between being hindered from having children because of disease/injury/malfunction of the reproductory organs and not having been meant to have children in the first place. homosexual couples and heterosexual couples just arent the same. there isnt even anything religious about that. its just how things are.

[Kaimosae]

Well the process that infertile hetero couples go through is exactly the same as same-sex couples...there is no difference in that circumstance.

Ppl are so hung up on the sexual part of same-sex couples...what's the big deal? Get over it already!

Yes, heterosexual couples have different sexual organs and homosexual couples have the same...who the fuck cares...the love between the two are the SAME!

[sabboth42]

People can't get over the idea of two men having sex. It's kinda sad really that others can't get over the sexual aspect and never get to the emotional part of the relationships.

[whoarentyou]

Well, that is kinda interesting too... what do they consider 'more' wrong... the sexual part? or the emotional part of a homosexual relationship? I do have to kinda expect that at least someone who doesn't disagree with anal sex in itself, has to object to homosexual anal sex... or think of it as reverse... maybe they object to cunnilingus, or perhaps fellatio...

Or I'm sure some people think it's okay to be bisexual (maybe for women only... some). But not to be homosexual.

Just possible sides

[sabboth42]

The general tend I keep seeing is that most heterosexuals just can't get over the idea of two men having sex, while alot of heterosexual males would willingly and joyfully watch lesbian sex. It shows the stigma, stereotype, and trend of prejudice in this country. Americans just can't stop fixating on what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms.

[whoarentyou]

exactly

[whoarentyou]

you missed the point, the point is saying that marriage is for having children is wrong, because marrying is for the purpose of having children, then you shouldn't then be allowed to have children unless you are married.

[oggasteen]

well, the infertility/fertile-but-don't-­have-kids argument is a response to the claim that the point of marriage is to raise kids.

and you're right, homo and hetero couples simply aren't the same, but what are you gonna make of that difference? are you gonna treat them differently? black/white/straight/gay/male/­female--people are different....who cares? just value them as human beings.

[KARIN094]

Not to long ago there was a segment on NPR discussing using skin cells from (females) to produce a baby. What I do remember quite clearly is that (no male) was required!

The caller was simply a indoctrinated religious prejudice fool.

[Alphasys]

"It's obviously unnatural because it's scientific." Worst arguement I've ever heard. The basis of science is knowledge of nature, last time I checked. I just can't believe what those callers say at times. The ignorance displayed by some of them is plain shameful.

[mma171]

So you're saying if a doctor wanted to create a genetically superior race of humans or a biological weapon that it would be OK. I think some kind regulation must be used.

[WhiteNaturalist]

There is absolutely no reason why gays shouldnt be able to marry. However, there should be a law against gays getting artificially inseminated. If you cant use your equipment in the proper way then youre out of luck.

[xzenogear1984]

So what about Straight couples does this go across the board? or does it just stop at gay couples.

[WhiteNaturalist]

Straight couples too!

[WhiteNaturalist]

Trained medical physicians should be using their talents to help people with more relevant needs like AIDS or cancer, not trying to add another person to the mix.

[sabboth42]

Guess that goes for heterosexuals to. Remember, your not getting rid of anyone, heterosexuals have homosexual children.

[shihouka]

Maybe i should point out that it is in fact possible for two women to have biological child, although it is expensive. Only impossible part so far is for two men to have a child, but who's to say this wont be solved one day as well.

[kuzuboshii]

You can hear the stupidity dripping from this callers voice.

[iffypiffy]

Wow. I am actually an athiest and the song in the beginnging of this video is not only stupid, but slightly terrifying. God damn it, why can't athiests just keep to themselves and allow others to do what they want without stupid songs and shit like this.

Oh and marriage is for HUMAN BEINGS, any person should be allowed to marry. One's sexual orientation should not matter, but until governments recognize that fact gays should just foster healthy relationships and screw the legal recognition.

[meloveanna]

i believe gay couples should have their own marriage equivalent as i do atheists. I don't understand other than ignorance why gay couples are not happy with civil unions. They have all the same rights just a different title. I was pro gay marriage for the longest time, but the more i thought about it the more i came to think it didn't fit. I have nothing against gay people, just think they should have their own version of marriage

[TalanOwens]

civil = state level union

marriage = federal

its not the same, look it up - there are a lot of rights that come with marriage that are not given in civil union.

[xzenogear1984]

So your in favor of segregating marriage? All the gay marriages on this side and all the Straight on this side? They don't in fact have the same rights as a straight couples, Jen wouldn't be able to cover her spouse under her insurance which may mean they have to individually pay for their own, like jen said earlier if a one of the persons in the relationship died without a will their partner would not be able to claim them as a beneficiary..these are just two examples there are many more

[meloveanna]

give them all the same rights which is what they want. As Russell said they are not looking for moral approval so just give it a different title to keep everyone else happy.

[xzenogear1984]

But that's the point isn't it give them all the rights they deserve...why would we need to call it by any other name than marriage when that's what it is. That's like saying "Let's no call it a car Let's call it a motor vehicle" there's really no reason to call it by any other name other than to appease the religious community. What your asking for is a sort of segregation among marriages so the religious community can keep their feeling of superiority of their marriages over that of others.

[meloveanna]

both sides win, you can't be a close-minded atheist in this situation. The church still has a say, whether you like that or not

[jtbovis]

not when the church's opinion is based on: invisible magic man said homosexuality is wrong and I automatically believe it.

[meloveanna]

i totally agree, sounds ridiculous! but that doesn't change anything does it?

[xzenogear1984]

your under the impression that marriage is strictly a religious affair..there are many straight atheist couples that don't call it a civil marriage or any other label, it's simply marriage regardless of what you believe in so why would we call it by any other name? Why not label certain marriages as Christian marriages, Mormon marriages, or a atheist marriages...there's no need to put useless labels on things that don't need it, it's simply a way to keep things separate.

[meloveanna]

your points are totally valid, and we can argue about it  for ever, but at the end of the day what i said is just an opinion, nothing more.

[xzenogear1984]

And I completely understand the angle your coming from i'm just saying that theres really no need for it.

[meloveanna]

and that is your opinion, there is nothing everyone will ever agree on. I just don't think gay couples should have marriage, just there own version with all the same rights.

[xzenogear1984]

But you have to agree that if they get all the same rights it's still essentially marriage. So why would we need to call it something else? that's all i'm saying

[meloveanna]

to keep the church happy! i believe i said that.

[xzenogear1984]

But why would we need to keep the church happy when it's such a trivial problem. It would be a form of political correctness like how we don't call midget's midget's we call them small people, so I see where it would work I just don't think it would be completely necessary. OFFTOPIC: I have to give you respect for your musical taste....Bohemian Rhapsody is a great song.

[meloveanna]

i wish i was for gay marriage, but i just don't feel it? i'm not going to lie because it's what all other atheist feel is right. I love gay people, and have many gay friends (not so much the eccentric kind), I just think marriage is between a man and a woman. Funny thing about bring up political correctness is i hate everything that is politically correct, other than this

[xzenogear1984]

I'm sorry but that doesn't really make sense. Your not for Gay marriage yet you believe they should have all the same rights, your essentially saying you want gay's to be able to get married yet you just don't want them to call it marriage. So your issue it seems is with the title not so much the marriage itself. That's like saying I'm completely against rape unless you call it Uncontrolled love,

[ArranoGris]

I love how this guy is asking what gays "want" with marriage. Uhm....dignity? equality? equal treatment?

[mma171]

I don't anyone, gay or straight, should be able to have artificial insemination. There are more than enough orphans to adopt.

[willowtreephoto]

It's such a natural urge to have children that I think it's a borderline human right to have children of your own.

BUT, adoption should be promoted, I'd like to see national network commercials for it or something.

[AtheistKang]

I think it should be greatly discouraged, but not illegal.

Same thing with abortion. People should be encouraged to use condoms and abortion should be strongly discouraged, but not illegal.

[mma171]

Exactly.

[winterstellar]

Say what? On what grounds? There are no secular moral reasons to deny gays any rights that non-gays have, that's just the way it is. There are only fairy-tale/religion-based arguments against gayness or gay marriage. : )

[MagnusIan]

Oh no! Gay marriage! Head for hills! ; )

[3R3MITE]

I am an atheist that does not support gay marriage.

[therock27374]

Even if it was a civil ceremony instead of a religious one?

[3R3MITE]

Yes.

[willowtreephoto]

Why?

[3R3MITE]

The purpose of life is survival, advancement and expansion of our species. How does homosexuality contribute to the natural progression of our species?

Recent studies show homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from a psychiatric problems than do heterosexuals. We see higher rates of suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse. This is suggests that it is neither healthy nor is it beneficial to our evolution, in my opinion.

[tehinfidel]

[citation needed]

[SoraCross]

Maybe that's because the Christians are driving them CRAZY!

[MyEye6]

What does it matter about the expansion of our species? We have over 6 BILLION people all over the world, we are very far from any sort of extinction so it shouldn't matter. And what about couples that are infertile? Do they count to, or even couples that just don't want children, should they be deprived of rights because they don't "contribute to the natural progression of our species"?

[neveralmostthere]

it's not healthy because people treat them as if they are abnormal. if people accepted them and didn't make a big deal about the fact that they love differently, there would be no problem. and as far as advancing the species, the same argument for sterile couples applies. should they also be treated differently because they can't increase the population? same sex couples can't reproduce as you expect them to but there are already plenty of breeders and accident babies to maintain the population.

[ArranoGris]

Sounds like a good study. Can you give me the name of it please? And a link to a write-up or a journal it was published in?

[ArranoGris]

Dude, there are lots of things that don't contribute to the "expansion" of our species. Take me for instance. I don't WANT to have kids. Does that make me a different class of human? One who can't contribute to mindlessly populating the planet? These people are different from you in one way: they're gay. They want the same right you already have: to marry the person you love. Denying them that is unconstitutional and wrong, no matter what your little eugenics mind things.

[sabboth42]

You miss something crucial that most aren't smart enough to tie together, homosexuals are under constant attack from political figures, religious figures, media figures, peers in schools. That's why the psychiatric problem rate and suicide rates are so high.

[whoarentyou]

Also consider that some of the problems mentally that homosexuals can experience are from direct intervention from parents and such things as reparative therapy, which has led to suicides. because they aren't accepted accepted and just ridiculed and saying they shouldn't accept themselves as who they are.

[sabboth42]

Also true.

[unquenchablefire]

"They want to get something"

That something is equality.

[mma171]

Technically, homosexuals have the exact same rights as straight people. They have the right to marry someone of the opposite gender. What gay people want are additional rights for everyone.

[TalanOwens]

no straight people have the right to marry who they are attracted to - you can't set that equal.

[mma171]

The law doesnt acknowledge attractiveness because it is a subjective quality. It just sees gender, which is an objective quality.

[mma171]

Just to clarify myself. Im not saying that gays shouldnt have the right to marry. Im just stating that in the eyes of the law they have the same rights already, which is the right to have a heterosexual marriage. Straight people dont have the right to marry same sex partners either.

Gay people shouldnt say that they want equal rights; they should be saying that they want to adjust or modify existing marriage rights.

[ArranoGris]

This isn't about them having the right to marry another person of the opposite sex. This is about the 14th amendment and whether or not it's okay to deny people rights. The Constitution has nothing to say about marriage specifically, but if you go read the 14th amendment you'll see that we have no legitimate, non-religious basis on which to deny these people the right to marry the person they love. And all these states passing measures are in violation of the 14th amendment.

[whoarentyou]

I'd have a solution for this, but neither gay couples or strait couples would like it...

Make 'marriage' a purely religious ceremony, with no legal bindings between the two. It would destroy the definition of marriage as far as that would go, and make every current marriage also considered a 'civil union' as well, or whatever word someone wants for it...

The the deal would be, all legal binding things can be attained by any couple. And 'marriage' would purely be between you and your church.

[mma171]

Whoarentyou, I would have no legal marriage bindings for anyone. I would like that.

[whoarentyou]

It would just be a solution... the people who want to 'preserve the sanctity of marriage' would get it... their church would marry people, and then the law could deal with all the legally binding aspects of ANY relationship...

so we'd leave it up to churches to 'marry' people, and leave it up to the courts to give 'couples rights'

so you'd aquire each one seperately

[mma171]

When has the government ever done anything legitimate?

[TalanOwens]

orientation is not subjective

[grapevinewrath]

I didn't know Jen was gay. :)

[3R3MITE]

The ACA is all Jews, Marxists and Homosexuals, unless there is someone that I'm unaware of.

If you are an Atheist and opposed to any or all of those things, check out books by Ben Klassen such as Nature's Eternal Religion or A Revolution of Values.

[tehinfidel]

From WP:

"Klassen attracted several hundred white racial loyalists as members from the US, Canada, Sweden, Ukraine, Russia, Poland, Germany, Italy, Spain, Australia and South Africa.

Ben Klassen first popularized the term Racial Holy War (RaHoWa) within the white racialist movement."

[tehinfidel]

It may not be shown in this clip, but it is mentioned elsewhere in the episode.

It's always either religion or bigotry that provide the only arguments against gay marriage. No one has yet to make a genuine, secular, reasonable claim of personal harm that would come of it.

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

*nod*

The only "secular" argument against Gay Marriage I've heard (from people who aren't against all marriage) is, "Because it's gross" or some variant of that.

So yah.

Very weak, arguments left when you get through religious bigotry.

[3R3MITE]

So?

[tehinfidel]

Oh ha ha, so clever. Here's the part where the bigot plays the nonchalant card, and acts as if his reasoning should be transparent and universal.

Obvious troll is obvious.

[TalanOwens]

wow the caller is soo uninformed, there are hundreds of rights that you gain from marriage at the frederal level. To say 'what do THEY (as if gay people are not humans) gain' just makes him look stupid. Civil union is a state level relationship and is not equal to the rights afforded to heterosexual couples (ex. if a gay couple were to leave the state they were married in, their relationship is no longer recognized...) civil union is like saying you can sit in the room, but in the back corner.

[BionicDance]

STOP DANCING AROUND THE POINT!

We homosexuals want marriage rights for everything discussed, yes, but also because we don't want to be second-class citizens anymore, and that requires that we get marriage as a right, dammit!

Technically, the caller is correct; we want approval. Not moral, but social. We want to no longer be discriminated against. If you're against gay marriage but in favor of straight marriage, it's bigotry no matter HOW you dress it up. Period.

[Paintball5225]

some people..

[C0ldhead]

"Coz Santa Clause will take you to Hell"

Westboro Baptist Church, i dont like them!

Ill call out to the late George Carlin for doing his stuff, had it not been for him, then I would never had meet gays :D

Lucky me you know, else I would prolly be in Church this sunday!

Yes, same-sex Marriage should be allowed, tho Idd wish this vid had the rest of the of the Call when the Bigot Caller, starts contradicting himself and ends up arguing against Marriage for anyone. LOL