rurounihime: (callisto by morbideclipse)
rurounihime ([personal profile] rurounihime) wrote2006-12-02 10:35 pm

Ranties

More bullshit about preserving the sanctity of marriage.

I'm still waiting for that Magical RebuttalTM from the "sanctity of marriage" people. You know the one I'm talking about: It will supposedly refute the challenge made to fix divorce rates, domestic abuse, spouse-ditching, child abuse, drunken marriages that get dissolved the very next day, and spousal murder BEFORE deigning to say that gay marriage impinges on the "sanctity of marriage."

What sanctity? The sanctity I see, currently, is most certainly not exclusive to heterosexual couples. It isn't confined to divisions of sexuality; marriage sanctity is a huge and rewarding effort made by both spouses, regardless of gender. And frankly, the idea that het-couples magically get to sidestep the requirements being placed on gay marriage just because they are heterosexual is the most hypocritical argument I have heard in a long time.

So. Magical Rebuttal? Let's go, people, pronto. If you seriously believe that the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed by legally recognized gay unions, you better put your money where your mouth is and prove it to me, preferably without using religious reasoning that half the people in the world don't follow or recognize anyway. That's called subjective "proof", and it doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people. If there's a scientifically acceptable reason out there, tell it to me. Because I'm really starting to believe that you HAVE no answer to that argument.

One more thing: If your sentence ends with "it just IS that way," then don't bother wasting your time using it here. You will not like the response I give you. That kind of reasoning would never hold up in a scientific journal or in a competent court of law. We're all critical thinkers. We can be mature enough not to resort to petty tantrum throwing and foot stomping.

I'm open 24 hours.

[identity profile] phoenixacid.livejournal.com 2006-12-03 05:09 am (UTC)(link)
legalizing same-sex marriage would likely be a symbolic step of acceptance towards homosexuality that would promote more people to admit to being gay, or for bisexual persons to choose a same-sex partner, so it could lead to more openingly gay people.

I agree with you on this.

Erm.. to be honest, I didn't phrase it correctly. For the 'more and more people will be gay' part- Their exact words are: If same-sex marriages are legalized, more straight men and women will turn gay. Which will in turn, reduce the world's human population.

What I was trying to say was- just because same-sex marriages are legalized, it dosn't mean that people will turn gay! But it will make gay or bisexual people be more open about it because it's accepted in our society. Being gay or straight isn't something that can be controlled with a switch of a button. You have to be gay to be gay.

Oh god.. I'm not making any sense am I?


[identity profile] smith-seven.livejournal.com 2006-12-03 05:52 am (UTC)(link)
oh, I totally understood! And I think, for some unknown crazy reason, some people really *do* believe (as your friends do, I guess) that having gay parents turns you gay. Or something. Weird. As though having straight parents necessarily makes you straight. I don't get that perspective at all!

Though to be honest i hadn't ever thought about that consequence of legalizing gay marriage, that [livejournal.com profile] rubymiene mentioned above. Maybe it will *seem* like there is an increase in the gay population because more and more people will feel like they can come out... interesting!

[identity profile] rubymiene.livejournal.com 2006-12-03 07:09 pm (UTC)(link)
Hehe, you are making sense, and you're right, people don't 'turn' gay suddenly, they are born gay. But that is not what the religious right is afraid of. They couldn't care less about people who are confused or tormented in their own minds, they are rallying against people who engage in non-conformist behavior and/or who speak out about non-conformist sexuality. These are the people who represent a threat to the power Christian leaders hold over people's behavior in this country, because they make other closeted persons realize that non-missionary sex is much more common than their religious leaders will admit to.