Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

The Secret, Hypocritical TRUTH About Those Opposing Gay Marriage(LOL)

Posted by   + Show Post

 

by on Sep. 18, 2012 at 5:06 PM
Replies (31-40):
LifeIsForLOLZ
by on Sep. 19, 2012 at 11:54 AM
1 mom liked this

I always laugh when I hear "gay marriage will affect straight marriage" or that "allowing gays to marry will undermine the sacredness/institution of marriage". Because it is so illogical, I have a gay couple next door, it doesn't make me love my bf anyless, the devil is not dancing outside our house or anything, and the biggest middle finger to a loving marriage straight or gay is drunken vagas weddings, cheating, and messy divorces that leave kids crying and feeling victimised.

Mommy4000
by Ray of sunshine on Sep. 19, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Oh, it took me a second to get this lol.

Meadowchik
by Silver Member on Sep. 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM

The liberal case against same-sex marriage:

"Same-sex marriage changes the purpose of law. It no longer will serve, in cooperation with other parts of society, to channel behavior and socialization to achieve this synthesis of goods. It will function to extend marriage privileges to a particular group of sexual friendships while excluding many other interdependent care givers. Rather than extending the marital status and privilege to same-sex couples and then gradually to other kinds of caring relationships (which logic will dictate), we should find alternative ways of meeting the dependency needs of same-sex couples, interdependent friends, and dependent but unmarried kin. Tax benefits, legal adoption, welfare transfers, and more refined and accessible legal contracts should be used to meet these needs, not the institution of marriage itself."

http://cslr.law.emory.edu/fileadmin/media/PDFs/Op-Ed_Pieces/Browning.Liberal_Case_Against_Same_Sex_Marriage.3.24.200.pdf

The above is a liberal argument explaining precisely how same-sex marriage would cause the institution to change to something not resembling marriage at all;  that is what not "preserving the sanctity of marriage" literally means.

gdiamante
by Silver Member on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM
1 mom liked this

Good Lord. Does NO ONE learn critical thinking anymore?

Has the concept of satire gone out the window? I suppose some readers would also have a problem with Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal."

Folks, the idea is to poke a hole in hypocrisy. The folks who are so worked up about the "threat" of gay marriage would do better to remove the mote from their own eyes, that mote being the high rate of divorce amongst heterosexual couples.

I've always enjoyed Steve Kelley's work; thanks for posting it, OP.

motha2daDuchess
by Bruja on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

no, please, explain a valid non religious argument against same sex marriage, you said it, you must have facts and thoughts to defend your comment

Quoting AlekD:

Sorry to dissapoint but I am not going to be dragged into a debate about this in a forum that is openly hostile to people who have different opinions on this issue. I'm just saying that maybe charicaturization and memes probably aren't the best way of dealing with such an emotional issue.


motha2daDuchess
by Bruja on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM

hurt feelings? ok then

Quoting AlekD:

Oh...the irony...
Sorry Hun but you are the one jumping to conclusions. I dont happen to be opposed to same sex unions. I never said I was. If you read my posts you would see that I was merely saying that people should act like adults in these debates instead od just making fun of each other. I refused to get involved in this debate because I have learned from experience that online "debates " about these emotionally charged issues never resolve peacefully and instead devolve into name calling, smug self satisfaction and hurt feelings. Not something I want to be involved in.


Quoting LindaClement:

Since you have only shared a talent for leaping to conclusions and reading things that are not written, I'm not sure what kind of disappointment you're claiming to provide... 's pretty scenic so far.

Quoting AlekD:

Sorry to dissapoint but I am not going to be dragged into a debate about this in a forum that is openly hostile to people who have different opinions on this issue. I'm just saying that maybe charicaturization and memes probably aren't the best way of dealing with such an emotional issue.

Perhaps if you were more shy with your opinion and less shy with your information, facts, data or an actual coherent argument, there could be a debate that involved someone hearing your 'side.'


motha2daDuchess
by Bruja on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:47 PM

OMFG.....this is not a President or Mittens argument, this is that there is not a good point to be denying SSM....

Quoting Cake.Lady:

Wait. What?

How aren't there valid points on both sides? Both Romney and Obama's ancestors were polygamists. When did Obama announce his support of gay marriage? Obama's ancestors legally practiced polygamy in...Kenya? Romney's ancestors fled from Utah to another country to practice polygamy. That's HUGE for someone (a presidential candidate) who is completely against the practice. 

Quoting krysstizzle:

There aren't valid points on both sides.


Quoting AlekD:

So...everyone who opposes gay marriage is cheating on their spouse? Yeah that makes sense. There are valid points on both sides of this debate and taking cheap shots doesn't help.



Sorry to be a killjoy it just bothers me to see stuff like this from either side of the political spectrum.



kailu1835
by Ruby Member on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM

 Not so secret lol

motha2daDuchess
by Bruja on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:50 PM

if you don't understand the point,you shouldn't respond....just makes you look dumb

Quoting Meadowchik:

I guess the OP would have a point if members of gay couples never cheated on one another.


motha2daDuchess
by Bruja on Sep. 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM

just because "liberal" is in the title, doesn't mean anything.....fyi, that is some guys opinion, nothing more

Quoting Meadowchik:

The liberal case against same-sex marriage:

"Same-sex marriage changes the purpose of law. It no longer will serve, in cooperation with other parts of society, to channel behavior and socialization to achieve this synthesis of goods. It will function to extend marriage privileges to a particular group of sexual friendships while excluding many other interdependent care givers. Rather than extending the marital status and privilege to same-sex couples and then gradually to other kinds of caring relationships (which logic will dictate), we should find alternative ways of meeting the dependency needs of same-sex couples, interdependent friends, and dependent but unmarried kin. Tax benefits, legal adoption, welfare transfers, and more refined and accessible legal contracts should be used to meet these needs, not the institution of marriage itself."

http://cslr.law.emory.edu/fileadmin/media/PDFs/Op-Ed_Pieces/Browning.Liberal_Case_Against_Same_Sex_Marriage.3.24.200.pdf

The above is a liberal argument explaining precisely how same-sex marriage would cause the institution to change to something not resembling marriage at all;  that is what not "preserving the sanctity of marriage" literally means.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)