Jump to content
MURDERcomplexx

Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

Recommended Posts

I noticed that one of the biggest arguments out there is whether or not the government has the right to legalize gay marriage because marriage is a religious ceremony. However, I would have to disagree with this argument completely and say that marriage is indeed secular. You can have a religious church wedding, but in the eyes of the law it will mean absolutely nothing if there are no legal marriage documents signed. You can also be legally married without going through a true religious ceremony. Also, let's flip this around: if government doesn't have the right to legalize gay marriage, then how do they have the right to make it illegal?

Also, to those of you who have participated in any of the rallies and protests, some of those signs are pretty awesome. http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/gaymarr...-Gay-People.htm

 

Share this post


Link to post

I support gay/lesbian marriages cos its their freedom to choose their partners rgdless of gender. I find gay marriages hotter than lesbian marriages. Haha. Cos they are more common?

Share this post


Link to post

I need help for my English project... does anyone know of a study on homosexuality being genetic? All I'm finding on google are news articles, and I'd rather have the actual study.

Share this post


Link to post

In this world everyone can love each other. I agree to gay marriages as a heterosexual or lesbian marriages. Even hatred of gays is a form of racism.

Share this post


Link to post
I need help for my English project... does anyone know of a study on homosexuality being genetic? All I'm finding on google are news articles, and I'd rather have the actual study.

Have you tried doing a search for something like " "scientific study" genetic origin homosexuality" ? You might at least find articles which link to the type of studies you're looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
In this world everyone can love each other. I agree to gay marriages as a heterosexual or lesbian marriages. Even hatred of gays is a form of racism.

Homosexuality is not a race, so therefore it is not racism.

Share this post


Link to post
In this world everyone can love each other. I agree to gay marriages as a heterosexual or lesbian marriages. Even hatred of gays is a form of racism.

Perhaps you mean it is a form of prejudice, since racism means in terms of race only, whereas you can hold prejudice against any group.

Share this post


Link to post
Homosexuality is not a race, so therefore it is not racism.

Indeed! HATRED TOWARDS THE GAY to me is RACISM.

Share this post


Link to post
Indeed! HATRED TOWARDS THE GAY to me is RACISM.

Then please explain to me how "the gay" is a race.

Share this post


Link to post
Indeed! HATRED TOWARDS THE GAY to me is RACISM.

So you believe that there's no such thing as a Caucasian gay, a black gay, an Asian gay, etc., then, outside of mixed-race gay-*insert race* people? And that homosexuals, as a race, have some general defining physical features that can be used to identify them in general?

 

That's just not how it works.

 

Gay is not a race. Gay is a sexual orientation. That's like saying men and women are different races. It makes no sense and is untrue.

 

 

Hatred towards gays =/= racism. Racism is to do with race, and race alone.

 

Hatred towards gays is something different. It's just as wrong to hate somebody for their sexual orientation as it is to hate them for their race, but the two are not the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, the media seems to have most people believing that gays are physically different.

So guys apparently have nasally voices and act..."fabulous"... that the right term? And lesbians are all butch and muscley. And they supposedly sexually harrass others more than straights.

I haven't met many lesbians, any offline to know the difference in their case, but being gay myself I don't really see any "physical" difference between gays and nongays, and I'd assume the chicks aren't all that outstanding either.

 

While it doesn't really have anything to do with race, it would probably be more outwardly effective to classify it as one though, 'cause frankly you call someone "homophobic" or "biggot" and they just blow it off, but go ahead and call them a racist and they go all defensive psychopath on you. Maybe the "racial trait" should just be not being straight. The govt would certainly get off their arses to fix this damn mess quicker if they thought it'd be racism to deny it.

Share this post


Link to post

While it doesn't really have anything to do with race, it would probably be more outwardly effective to classify it as one though, 'cause frankly you call someone "homophobic" or "biggot" and they just blow it off, but go ahead and call them a racist and they go all defensive psychopath on you. Maybe the "racial trait" should just be not being straight. The govt would certainly get off their arses to fix this damn mess quicker if they thought it'd be racism to deny it.

No, I don't think that would work. They'd just be like "Nope, we're not racists! Sexual orientation doesn't determine race, so lol ur stupid!" As it is racists will use anything and everything to justify their behavior and prove they're not racist (even when they are, unless they're the ones who honestly don't care who knows they are racist in which case it wouldn't matter)--it'll just be the same thing here. The people who run our country may be stupid, but they're excellent at finding loopholes, so this would just be another one they'd use.

 

Additionally, straight and gay aren't the only two orientations.

 

Asexual comes to mind, and bisexual.

 

So, how would you handle that? Would that make asexuals and homosexuals the same race, since they're not heterosexual? Or would bisexuals change race depending on who they're sexually active with/attracted to at the moment? That wouldn't make sense, since they don't have the same sexual attractions, therefore that "racially defining feature" groups a bunch of people who have absolutely nothing in common sexually together as the same race. That's like saying there's only two races.

 

And then how would you classify those who are transgender? Would a female bodied-person who identifies as male and is attracted to females be lesbian because of her body or straight because of his gender-identification?

 

 

ETA: Also, how would you handle somebody who is a heterosexual homoromantic? They're sexually attracted to the opposite sex, but they're more than willing to have an emotional but not sexual relationship with somebody of the same sex? Like, use a guy for an example. He's willing to date a girl and have sex with her. He's also willing to go out with another guy, just they wouldn't have sex. What happens to those people, are they classified by their physical sexual attraction, or who they're going out with at the time, or their romantic attraction or what?

Edited by KageSora

Share this post


Link to post
I need help for my English project... does anyone know of a study on homosexuality being genetic? All I'm finding on google are news articles, and I'd rather have the actual study.

You may find this useful: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id...genetic&f=false

I don't know if you've seen it already, but it provides some good information. There's also a segment in the documentary, "For The Bible Tells Me So" that explains some of the studies scientists have done.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm openly bisexual so my opinion on this is probably clear. On a personal level I don't see the point in marriage and think it's not very important, but I respect those who want to get married, and as such I believe gay, lesbian and trans couples should be allowed to get married, and not have it be called a "civil partnership" (which doesn't have the same "rights" or recognition as marriage does in some countries).

 

Love is a very personal thing, and I don't think anyone should restrict peoples love for each other. If they want to get married, let it be so.

Share this post


Link to post
n a personal level I don't see the point in marriage and think it's not very important...

Why is marriage not important to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Why is marriage not important to you?

I can't speak for Takoto, but as someone who doesn't care about marriage for herself...

 

It's not something easily explainable. I just don't care to be married. It's not something I've ever cared about. It's not important to me. I don't like events and a marriage just seems like a big event. I can express to anyone I would stay with that I'm going to stay with them without being married.

In my bf's case, he had a heavily abusive and overly controlling father who didn't respect their mother and he's kind of bitter against marriage because of that.

 

In my case, I understand why others would want to be married and I support equal rights for marriage. Just because I don't want it doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't have the right.

 

/answer from someone you weren't asking

Share this post


Link to post

Bringing this here because GSA is a safe space and I don't think my post really belongs there.

 

I always heard that pansexual was liking the person not the gender. At least, that's how my pan friend describes it. Being bi has nothing to do with only liking cis-gendered folk.

 

I actually find that there's quite a lot of arrogance that comes from my fellow pan-peeps. Being homo/a/sexual, hetero/a/sexual, or bi/a/sexual or whatever else isn't about liking people for their gender. It's still about liking people for who they are, they just happen to be drawn towards a specific gender or sex of people they are sexually/romantically interested in.

 

In technical terms, pan- is liking people of any gender or sex and bi is gender. Though a lot of bi people I know could technically call themselves pan-, they just don't see the point.

 

I just find it kind of an attack when people who are pan- tell me that they like the person, not the gender. That's ridiculous, IMO. Everybody likes people for different reasons, some people just happen to only be romantically/sexually attracted to people who happen to be a certain gender or sex. There's nothing wrong with that and being pan- doesn't make you better than everyone else. I just don't like what is being implied when some pan- people describe themselves as "liking the person not the gender". =|

 

And yeah, this is a commonly held belief I've heard and an argument I've had many times.

Share this post


Link to post

I have heard the same, Sock, and I agree with what you've said. I strongly dislike the implications of the 'person not the parts' statement. I can't find the words to explain why men don't appeal to me as romantic and sexual partners, just that...well, the 'switches don't flip'. Guys are nice, I can comprehend the visual cues that others perceive as attractive (god that sounded mechanical), but that wibbly feeling I get about attractive women just isn't there. My girlfriend is pansexual and she can certainly name off a lot of things she finds attractive across the panoply of the human form, including the private bits. There are plenty of human beings she doesn't find attractive, just as there are plenty of women I don't find attractive.

Share this post


Link to post

I know that my best friend is pansexual, and she described it as.. well, she didn't really describe it, I guess, she just said "I just don't care what sex you are or what gender you consider yourself to be. If I like you and find you attractive, I LIKE YOU AND FIND YOU ATTRACTIVE. I don't see sex or gender as being important when it comes to the person I like. I just don't."

 

She doesn't care who other people date and is extremely supportive of people dating and marrying whoever they want. I'm thankful for that. I wouldn't know what to do if she tried to make me feel bad for being completely straight. :V

Share this post


Link to post

Bringing this here because GSA is a safe space and I don't think my post really belongs there.

 

 

 

I actually find that there's quite a lot of arrogance that comes from my fellow pan-peeps. Being homo/a/sexual, hetero/a/sexual, or bi/a/sexual or whatever else isn't about liking people for their gender. It's still about liking people for who they are, they just happen to be drawn towards a specific gender or sex of people they are sexually/romantically interested in.

 

In technical terms, pan- is liking people of any gender or sex and bi is gender. Though a lot of bi people I know could technically call themselves pan-, they just don't see the point.

 

I just find it kind of an attack when people who are pan- tell me that they like the person, not the gender. That's ridiculous, IMO. Everybody likes people for different reasons, some people just happen to only be romantically/sexually attracted to people who happen to be a certain gender or sex. There's nothing wrong with that and being pan- doesn't make you better than everyone else. I just don't like what is being implied when some pan- people describe themselves as "liking the person not the gender". =|

 

And yeah, this is a commonly held belief I've heard and an argument I've had many times.

See, this could be because I'm probably a decade older than the average population here, but once upon a time 'I like the person and not the parts' was how bi people described themselves. I call myself bi even though pan is probably more technically correct to how I understood it: liking the whole spectrum instead of just feminine females and masculine males. But then it probably fits me because I see this other definition, of pan meaning having the potential to like anyone as a person and bi meaning having the potential to jump on any bones, as kind of insulting to bisexuals.

 

To say that bisexuals are operating on logic-free physical lust for unadulterated genitals, but on the other hand that there are these other people who are bi except that they actually care what you're like as a person--to me that seems like continuation of some of the negative stereotypes of bisexuals, i.e. that we're emotionless and promiscuous. I like my lovers as people, of course I do, that's why I get involved with them. tongue.gif

 

Edit: lol superfluous now that I think about it, we were already talking about that.

Edited by Sadako

Share this post


Link to post

When I identified as bi earlier, I just referred to myself as "open minded" and left it at that. o_O I never really understood the "pan" sexuality part.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm personally against it.

In my opinion (and religion) I personally think against gay relationships and marriges. This is backed by the opinion that, well, it simply wasn't meant to happen.

 

The body is meant for a guy and a girl to... get together to have a child. If the world's people were to suddenly all turn towards same sex relationships, where would the next generation go? Simply put, it wouldn't be there.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.