I am probably going to get raked over the coals for this one

riddle me this batman...

Published on November 4, 2004 By alison watkins In Politics

Before I post what I am about to post I want to let everyone know that I am a 23 year old straight female....

What is the big deal about marriage when 50% of it ends up in divorce anyways? Some gay couples I know have been together longer than a lot of straight couples.....

Doesn't human companionship conquer all....I mean I'm getting married and I'm very happy to start this road ahead with my man...shouldn't everyone; gay, straight, bi...whatever deserve this too??

Comments (Page 1)

DPS

on Nov 04, 2004

My definition of marriage : Marriage is a special union between 2 individuals and their God. No other mortal should be allowed to define whether this union is worthy of the term Marriage or not.

Carrying on with that defintion I don't think the government should be regulating or recognizing certain unions as marriage or not and definetly should not be giving people rights or favorable laws depending on wether they are married or not in the government's eyes.

Draginol

on Nov 04, 2004

First question, are YOU married Alison?

historyishere

on Nov 04, 2004

First question, are YOU married Alison?

She has indicated that she is getting married.

*backs slowly away from the thread*

alison watkins

on Nov 04, 2004

thanks history! Draginol...reread....

Lee1776

on Nov 04, 2004

Some gay couples I know have been together longer than a lot of straight couples.....

I'm not sure about the chances of a guy couple staying together for life.

If someone could find the stats on this it would be great. I have only know four guy couples that have gotten married (in Mexico) or have made civil unions. They all never lasted more then four years. I don't know of any famous couples other then Elton John who has stayed together.

Maybe I'm wrong, but in my opinion guys marriages/unions are far from a stable relationships and fall well below the 50% mark.

I think it is just the life style that they particapate in.

That's My Two Cents

alison watkins

on Nov 04, 2004

no one chooses to participate in a lifestyle...it's how they were born

T B

on Nov 04, 2004

Here is my take on the other side of this debate. Why re-define marriage? Marriage (in it's current incarnation here in the US) is between a man and a woman. Currently, gay couples have, or can have, all the rights of a married couple except the right to leave the partner with the others social security income in the event of one passing away (major problem). If something called a Civil Union gives them this right, is that OK? I have yet to hear (or understand) why some activists are so insistent on it being called marriage.

Then there is the argument that once marriage is re-defined to include two individuals (i.e. same sex couples) what is there to stop litigation from making it 3 people, or an adult and a minor same sex couple? (possible legal precedent opens the door). Keep in mind I am playing devil's advocate here. Ever heard of NAMBLA? They are currently using (last I saw at their web site) the same arguments gay activists used to become more mainstream. I have heard that the gay community is not supportive (understated?) of NAMBLA's views (I do not presume to speak for the gay community, but have heard some pretty outspoken activists against this group).

Subatai_Baadur

on Nov 04, 2004

I agree 100%. I think any marriage should be allowed by consent of the individuals involved. I have an ultra-liberal blog if you want to hear any more of my opinions (hahaha, like that will happen).

Subatai_Baadur

on Nov 04, 2004

I agree 100%. I think any marriage should be allowed by consent of the individuals involved. I have an ultra-liberal blog if you want to hear any more of my opinions (hahaha, like that will happen).

latour999

on Nov 04, 2004

What are all the right-wingers afraid of? We recently legalized same-sex marriage in most provinces in Canada, including my home province, and everthing is okay. In fact, I haven't even noticed any difference. To have same-sex marriage doesn't mean that all straight people have to divorce and marry people of the same sex. THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF!!!

messybuu

on Nov 04, 2004

Polygamy. Incestuous marriage. Other forms of marriage that are persecuted and receive no support by the same people who want to fight for people's right to love. That's why I don't care that gay marriage gets screwed over.

greywar

on Nov 04, 2004

I even lean to the lef ton this one but hey the vast majority do not. So guess what? We get to abide, leave, or campaign for change. If you choose to campaign just don't pretend surprise after this. It would be disingenuous.

Iron Rob

on Nov 04, 2004

Then there is the argument that once marriage is re-defined to include two individuals (i.e. same sex couples) what is there to stop litigation from making it 3 people, or an adult and a minor same sex couple? (possible legal precedent opens the door). Keep in mind I am playing devil's advocate here. Ever heard of NAMBLA? They are currently using (last I saw at their web site) the same arguments gay activists used to become more mainstream. I have heard that the gay community is not supportive (understated?) of NAMBLA's views (I do not presume to speak for the gay community, but have heard some pretty outspoken activists against this group).

This "slippery slope" argument always comes up when people argue against gay marriage and gay rights. It's a convenient way for conservatives to avoid saying that they are disgusted by gay people. "It's not gay people we mind so much, but if we let them have equal rights, then all these other groups everyone knows to be evil will eventually get those rights too."

If this argument were actually serious, then why don't conservatives focus their energy on passing constitutional amendments banning polygamy and bestiality and man-boy love and every other evil waiting at the bottom of that slippery slope? Those amendments would pass in an instant, and then we could have the actual discussion about what it is that disturbs conservatives so much about ordinary, consenting, adult gay couples.

DPS

on Nov 04, 2004

I still don't see why are granting Extra Rights to married couples anyway...

Chemicalkinetics

on Nov 04, 2004

Alison, I am not understanding your argument if there is one. Marriage has always been defined. Gay people can live together as long as they want. There is a movement in this country to recongize the union as legal binding and they will receive same right as all marriage. The only difference: the word marriage will not be used. The boarder term civil union will be used instead.

You see, your statement sound as if people are stopping gay people coming together. Are they? Gay people can shag all night long.

Look, marriage is a term to describe something, and you cannot force people to chose word. If everyone call the sky blue, you cannot just tell them to call it red. Now, you, yourself, can call the sky red, and the apple blue if you like, but you can't force others to change their definition. At this point in time, people don't want to call gay union as marriage, but you can call it a marriage if you like.

It is the same reason why I cannot legally marry to six women at the same time, and I cannot marry my donkey. I can shag them all night long and that will be our business. I, however, cannot force others to recongize my defintion of marriage.

People who think marriage is just between two person is crazy. Marriage is more than that, it is also about being a "recongized" union recongnized by the coummunity.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!