- Joined
- Sep 22, 2005
- Messages
- 11,430
- Reaction score
- 2,282
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
If there is gay marriage then it'll look straight marriage look bad because of the comparatively higher likelyhood of divorce or financial instability.
But still, there are so many things that concern me [about normalizing/legalizing gay marriage]. What effects will this have on children growing up in the coming decades? Is gay-ness purely a matter of genetics or is it often a choice, or a matter of early learned/mimicked behaviors? I don't know, and I doubt the ivory-tower eggheads know either, but it worries me.
Will activists insist that schools teach second-graders that gay marriage is normal and acceptible and fine and that anyone who says otherwise is a bigot? Even if the kid's parents are opposed on religious grounds? We seem to be headed that way already.
I really do worry that setting the precedent, the principle, of radically altering a traditional institution like marriage (that is in enough trouble already!) for the sake of the 1% to maybe 7% of the population that might want to do that, could open the door to lawsuits/legislation by forty-dozen different special intrests/fetishists/etc GAWD KNOWS WHATALL suing to have marriage redefined to accomodate their special circumstance. Our culture is so damn "diverse" already that we can barely stay together as a nation...way too many "ism's"... I don't know if we can handle much more shaking up of the foundational institutions of our society. Honestly, it worries me.
As someone who leans libertarian, I am tempted to say "do your thing, I'll do mine; respect my space and we're cool."
However, I'm enough of a conservative to wonder and worry about the overall, long-term effects on society, including the Law of Unintended Consequences, of so radically changing a traditional institution that has long been the main building-block of society.
And yet you are a libertarian?
A mock poll, intended to mock people... I probably shouldn't bother to reply, but hope of intelligent debate springs eternal, so...
Here's what I posted on this subject in another thread:
A mock poll, intended to mock people... I probably shouldn't bother to reply, but hope of intelligent debate springs eternal, so...
Here's what I posted on this subject in another thread:
Dude, in my very first "greeting" post, I said that I was small-L libertarian-ish, Constitutionalist, Conservative. I never claimed to be a full-on capital-L Libertarian. I never have fit under a label very well.
Please define ''harmed''.
This has nothing to do with capitalization of letters.
Why does your lean say libertarian? Make is say something else then.
Are you suggesting I go find your greeting post and read it every time before I reply to your posts?
"Harm"
Pronunciation: \ˈhärm\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hearm; akin to Old High German harm injury, Old Church Slavic sramŭ shame
Date:before 12th century
1 : physical or mental damage : injury
2 : mischief, hurt
3 : wrong, evil
"Harmed" is the past-tense form of "harm."
And yet you are a libertarian?
I'm sorry, Cil, did you say something?
Oh, you said you get to define what "libertarian" means when someone is labeled "lean libertarian"?
Why does your lean say libertarian? Make is say something else then.
I get to define what "libertarian" means when someone is labeled "lean libertarian."
Let's get back to the thread topic, ask me a question.
Dude, in my very first "greeting" post, I said that I was small-L libertarian-ish, Constitutionalist, Conservative. I never claimed to be a full-on capital-L Libertarian. I never have fit under a label very well.
With a 50% divorce rate, why do gays want to get married?
Look all I am saying is that its easy to say that I believe in liberty and freedom as it relates to me. That aspect of freedom is easy. Even a dictator embraces that. We all want our own personal freedom and we are all quick to point out when its infringed.
However, its much harder to extend the same philosophy of freedom that we embrace ourselves to others that we don't agree with. Thats hard. Its hard to say that I don't agree with this groups beliefs or how they live their life, but my personal beliefs alone, even if I am in the majority, are not sufficient justification for denying them a right or privilege.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?