Ruling: Gay couples should have the same rights as hetrosexul couples

rebornFixer

Hope&Anger wrote:

If, as in hot topic of study, you mean a couple of articles in a couple of magazines written for social workers . . . yes, it is.

And it's true that there is violence in LGBT relationships, but society never cared about it because we've made such relationships shameful. We'll learn more about same-sex violence, and hopefully come up with resources to prevent it.

Hey, I am probably as pro-gay marriage as you are, and I totally agree with your second statement. Just pointing out that we cannot generalize about the relative merits of hetero- vs. homosexual relationships.

Abookamongstthemany

cornnifer wrote:

Its quite simple. When i say marriage is sacred, i mean it. Those who don't take it seriously, who do not think it is significant, should not be getting married. Certainly not someone who thinks its "outdated, old fashioned and insignificant".

But why do you care what they do? You can hold your marriage sacred.

cornnifer

Hope&Anger wrote:

And how would you propose to do it? Would you make everyone sign a statement at the clerk's office saying "I swear I take marriage really seriously?"

Or maybe we ought to get a priest or a rabbit or an imam to sign off on their sincerity -- and turn ourselves into an authentic theocracy.

i said i would do it. i didn't say say i can or will. it was obviously a hypothetical and i answered honestly and accordingly.

Hope&Anger

farfromglorified wrote:

Hehe....I'm now convinced that prominent "social scientists" would all agree that heterosexual couples are unmarried and abusive while all homosexuals are pious and law abiding.

*sigh* I knew it wouldn't last.

I guess you missed the news - it was in the papers, you know -- but married couples are outnumbered in the US now:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003305384_married15.html

And you're a smart person, you know it's all about the trends. The trends are that heterosexuals are not getting married, they are delaying marriage, they are getting divorced, they are staying single longer.

And of course, same-sex couples have many of the same problems as heterosexual couples. Of course, they don't have marriage, so we don't know about divorce. We know that kids raised in these families are doing well. And it's true that there are trends reflecting violence in same-sex couples -- things we should worry about. But does that mean that the rates of domestic violence in heterosexual families isn't increasing?

farfromglorified wrote:

Try not to get too excited.

Nah -- I always knew it wouldn't last.

Hope&Anger

cornnifer wrote:

i said i would do it. i didn't say say i can or will. it was obviously a hypothetical and i answered honestly and accordingly.

Okay -- I assumed that you were talking about things that might actually happen rather than your hopes and dreams.

If wishes were horses . . .

cornnifer

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

But why do you care what they do? You can hold your marriage sacred.

Personally i don't care what they do. It doesn't effect ME directly. It does effect the society and culture i live in, however. Briken families effect the world i live in. i have a big enough heart to be concerned about kids other than my own. teach in any middle to large sizeed city and you will see EXACTLY what i'm talking about. If two people that don't truly value, appreciate, and respect the institution of marriage want to participate in said institution, i can't stop them. But i sure as hell don't endorse it.

Hope&Anger

cornnifer wrote:

Personally i don't care what they do. It doesn't effect ME directly. It does effect the society and culture i live in, however. Briken families effect the world i live in. i have a big enough heart to be concerned about kids other than my own. teach in any middle to large sizeed city and you will see EXACTLY what i'm talking about. If two people that don't truly value, appreciate, and respect the institution of marriage want to participate in said institution, i can't stop them. But i sure as hell don't endorse it.

And what does this have to do with two people of the same sex who "truly value, appreciate and respect the institution of marriage and want to participate in said institution?" What's your objection to them again?

Jackhammer

Muhuhahahaha

I didn't read the thread because I just know who's arguing about what.

Just wanted to say, it's a very important matter, so I'm on the good guys side.
Means, same rights for every one, of course ^^

farfromglorified

Hope&Anger wrote:

*sigh* I knew it wouldn't last.

I guess you missed the news - it was in the papers, you know -- but married couples are outnumbered in the US now:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003305384_married15.html

And you're a smart person, you know it's all about the trends. The trends are that heterosexuals are not getting married, they are delaying marriage, they are getting divorced, they are staying single longer.

And of course, same-sex couples have many of the same problems as heterosexual couples. Of course, they don't have marriage, so we don't know about divorce. We know that kids raised in these families are doing well. And it's true that there are trends reflecting violence in same-sex couples -- things we should worry about. But does that mean that the rates of domestic violence in heterosexual families isn't increasing?

First, it would be awesome if what you say above actually related to your earlier generalizations and the conclusions you attached to them.

Second, it would be sweet if the Seattle times related to "social scientists".

Third, it would not be cool if domestic violence rates were increasing for heterosexual couples. Thankfully that is not the case. Domestic violence rates have been steadily declining for decades.

Fourth, it would be nice if you also acknowledged the apples v oranges issues over and above "they don't have marriage". For instance, comparing data on domestic violence for hetero/homosexual couples can be very difficult since all cases go very underreported but even more so for homosexual couples.

Finally, rather than saying things like "We know that kids raised in these families are doing well" it would be better if you said "We know that most kids raised in these families are doing well" which would be the accurate statement. Furthermore, it would be nice if you also said "we know that most kids raised in heterosexual families are doing well".

But hey, just some observations. Let gays marry! But let them marry because they deserve the rights of choice that the rest of us have, not because of bad generalizations and erroneous expectations that gays won't get divorced, beat each other and raise bad kids in large numbers just like heterosexual couples do.

Hope&Anger

farfromglorified wrote:

First, it would be awesome if what you say above actually related to your earlier generalizations and the conclusions you attached to them.

It would be peachy if you had read what I said before:

Hope&Anger wrote:

Among heterosexuals, the divorce rate is up; couples "shack up" and have kids; domestic violence never seems to stop; and on and on and on.

Which simply restates what I said above, which was:

Hope&Anger wrote:

The trends are that heterosexuals are not getting married, they are delaying marriage, they are getting divorced, they are staying single longer.

except I added some additional information.

farfromglorified wrote:

Second, it would be sweet if the Seattle times related to "social scientists".

Oh sweetie pie, I guess you just looked at the link and didn't bother to read the article, which reports on a study done by the American Community Survey conducted by the Census Bureau which employs some of the most well-respected social scientists -- specifically demographers -- in the country.

farfromglorified wrote:

Third, it would not be cool if domestic violence rates were increasing for heterosexual couples. Thankfully that is not the case. Domestic violence rates have been steadily declining for decades.

You're thinking of domestic violence rates against women. Of course, there's been a countervailing increase in domestic violence against men. Perhaps you've forgotten about that???

All of this is, as you note below, affected by how we put together statistics. This is often dictated by arrests, and as you correctly point out, much domestic violence never gets reported. In addition, some studies have suggested that the availability of resources -- such as domestic violence shelters -- actually dampens the arrest rate because women (and increasingly, men) leave the home before an arrest occurs.

My view of this is shaped by what goes on in my community, where the local domestic violence shelter has been filled to capacity. From their perspective on the ground, things seem to be worse over the past 5 years or so. But you're right, I shouldn't substitute my own community with what's going on in the rest of the country and the world.

farfromglorified wrote:

Fourth, it would be nice if you also acknowledged the apples v oranges issues over and above "they don't have marriage". For instance, comparing data on domestic violence for hetero/homosexual couples can be very difficult since all cases go very underreported but even more so for homosexual couples.

Ya got me.

farfromglorified wrote:

Finally, rather than saying things like "We know that kids raised in these families are doing well" it would be better if you said "We know that most kids raised in these families are doing well" which would be the accurate statement. Furthermore, it would be nice if you also said "we know that most kids raised in heterosexual families are doing well".

Sure. Fine. Whatever. Maybe I'll start talking about the means, the medians, the modes, for even more accuracy.

farfromglorified wrote:

But hey, just some observations. Let gays marry! But let them marry because they deserve the rights of choice that the rest of us have, not because of bad generalizations and erroneous expectations that gays won't get divorced, beat each other and raise bad kids in large numbers just like heterosexual couples do.

Right?? Did you say Right?? Is marriage one of those fundamental rights that someone told you were basic to all of human existence? It doesn't seem like it would be.

farfromglorified

Hope&Anger wrote:

It would be peachy if you had read what I said before:


Which simply restates what I said above, which was:

except I added some additional information.

Oh sweetie pie, I guess you just looked at the link and didn't bother to read the article, which reports on a study done by the American Community Survey conducted by the Census Bureau which employs some of the most well-respected social scientists -- specifically demographers -- in the country.

You're thinking of domestic violence rates against women. Of course, there's been a countervailing increase in domestic violence against men. Perhaps you've forgotten about that???

All of this is, as you note below, affected by how we put together statistics. This is often dictated by arrests, and as you correctly point out, much domestic violence never gets reported. In addition, some studies have suggested that the availability of resources -- such as domestic violence shelters -- actually dampens the arrest rate because women (and increasingly, men) leave the home before an arrest occurs.

My view of this is shaped by what goes on in my community, where the local domestic violence shelter has been filled to capacity. From their perspective on the ground, things seem to be worse over the past 5 years or so. But you're right, I shouldn't substitute my own community with what's going on in the rest of the country and the world.


Ya got me.


Sure. Fine. Whatever. Maybe I'll start talking about the means, the medians, the modes, for even more accuracy.


Right?? Did you say Right?? Is marriage one of those fundamental rights that someone told you were basic to all of human existence? It doesn't seem like it would be.

You would have been saying the same thing if you were still trying to link your generalizations to your conclusions about individual choices. And you would have been saying the same thing if you weren't attempting to contrast homesexual and heterosexual relationships by highlighting the extreme bad of one end and the extreme good of the other.

And no, civil marriage is not a right. But to have a will and to act accordingly is. And that means you, gay straight or whatever, should never be told by the state what contracts you may enter and what you may not, nor should that state have any say in the structure, content or purpose of those arrangements.

Finally, please stop passing along bad data. There is no "countervailing increase in domestic violence against men". Rates against men are also down, though not as sharply as rates against women.

Hope&Anger

farfromglorified wrote:

You would have been saying the same thing if you were still trying to link your generalizations to your conclusions about individual choices. And you would have been saying the same thing if you weren't attempting to contrast homesexual and heterosexual relationships by highlighting the extreme bad of one end and the extreme good of the other.

And no, civil marriage is not a right. But to have a will and to act accordingly is. And that means you, gay straight or whatever, should never be told by the state what contracts you may enter and what you may not, nor should that state have any say in the structure, content or purpose of those arrangements.

Ah, that's better. There's the "we're-all-free-floating-autonomous-individuals-making-free-choices-freely-and-the-state-is-slavery" ffg that I was looking for. I feel better now. I was starting to respect your reasoning a page or two back. I can return to thinking you live in a world of your own -- which must be very nice for you.

farfromglorified wrote:

Finally, please stop passing along bad data. There is no "countervailing increase in domestic violence against men". Rates against men are also down, though not as sharply as rates against women.

My statistics come from the Census Bureau and the Center for Disease Control, but I guess you've got something better. In any event, these statistics, as you have pointed out, just reflect the arrest rate and may not accurately reflect what's going on in the house. So actual violence in the home may be going up, as I think it is, or it may be going down, but I think you'll agree that it's a continuting problem.

farfromglorified

Hope&Anger wrote:

Ah, that's better. There's the "we're-all-free-floating-autonomous-individuals-making-free-choices-freely-and-the-state-is-slavery" ffg that I was looking for. I feel better now. I was starting to respect your reasoning a page or two back. I can return to thinking you live in a world of your own -- which must be very nice for you.

My reasoning a page or two back came from the exact same place. Perhaps you're only now upset because that reasoning also prevents making or removing laws affecting the choices of individuals by assigning those individuals with the attributes commonly associated with their neighbors of a similar race or class or sexual preference.

And no, I don't live in a world of my own. I live in a body and a mind of my own.

Jackhammer

FarFromGlorified, stop arguing. You know you're on the good side, and there's more of us everyday.

It's only a matter of time

Edit: Sounds scary, huh?

Hope&Anger

farfromglorified wrote:

My reasoning a page or two back came from the exact same place. Perhaps you're only now upset because that reasoning also prevents making or removing laws affecting the choices of individuals by assigning those individuals with the attributes commonly associated with their neighbors of a similar race or class or sexual preference.

I'm not upset. I find you utterly fascinating.

All state policy-making is based on assumptions about groups of people in its effort to promote the public welfare -- obviously a function of government that you despise. And the worst thing of all about the state -- it doesn't appreciate what's special and unique about you you you.

I don't object to making assumptions as long as those assumptions are routinely and regularly and vigorously questioned.

farfromglorified wrote:

And no, I don't live in a world of my own. I live in a body and a mind of my own.

But that body and mind are slaves to the state. So I guess that's not so nice. My sympathies.

TheGossman

gays should have the same rights, they should be aloud to get married anywere, they should have to go through the same fuckin torture a married couple goes through, the fighting, coming home screaming, where is my dinner? or, where is my fuckin strap on! why do you think gays are so happy all the time? Because they don't have to get married. But on the side note, it doesn't bother me.

Hope&Anger

TheGossman wrote:

gays should have the same rights, they should be aloud to get married anywere, they should have to go through the same fuckin torture a married couple goes through, the fighting, coming home screaming, where is my dinner? or, where is my fuckin strap on! why do you think gays are so happy all the time? Because they don't have to get married. But on the side note, it doesn't bother me.

Ah yes . . . the "misery loves company" argument. My own personal favorite.