• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should other types of marriage be legalized

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,796
Reaction score
412
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Gay marriage was legalized awhile back. In 50 years, there will probably be talks of recognizing civil unions between siblings and cousins and then in another 50 years, polygamy. Do you think any of the other types of marriage should be legalized other than gay marriage?
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Gay marriage was legalized awhile back. In 50 years, there will probably be talks of recognizing civil unions between siblings and cousins and then in another 50 years, polygamy. Do you think any of the other types of marriage should be legalized other than gay marriage?

No, and homosexual pseudomarriage should be outlawed and made a capital offense.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I would prefer we just get the government out of marriage altogether. But until that happens I am fine with it being legal between any consenting adults. The only issue with polygamy is it can cause tax issues. But, again, that won't be an issue if we get government out of the marriage game.

ETA: I highly doubt any legislature is going to go out of its way to actively legalize marriage between siblings.
 

Multicam

New member
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
21
Reaction score
9
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
29,773
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.

Aww, look at you, all threatened, for no good reason...
 

Gaztopian

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
481
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Since hypocrisy isn't an argument, there's no basis for proscribing any marriage that meets the standard of consent, including polygamy and incest. And since we can always hire vets to ensure animals' welfare, society can regulate bestiality. And since love is beautiful, and bigotry is ugly, don't be a judgemental **** and decry transspiecism.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It is not clear to me that marriage survives as a legal institution. Ever since we no longer needed it to get sex there has not been a lot to be gained from it, and now with the way insurance and work benies are going marriage is losing the rest of its point. Hell, even gays can get "married" now, why would I want to do that?
 

Southern Dad

Presidential Candidate
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
2,932
Reaction score
657
Location
Shady Dale, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Let everyone marry whomever, and how ever many he or she wishes. It's funny to see those that fought so hard for same sex marriage are now so opposed to polygamous marriage. When you struck down that a marriage was between one man and one woman, you opened Pandora's Box. There's not way to get that sucker closed again. Besides what is the real problem with polygamous marriage? It's not like those in a polygamous relationship aren't going to live together and have kids anyway. Now, it will just give them some pieces of paper to frame and put on the wall.
 

TheGoverness

Little Miss Sunshine
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
35,043
Reaction score
37,631
Location
Houston Area, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Gay marriage was legalized awhile back. In 50 years, there will probably be talks of recognizing civil unions between siblings and cousins and then in another 50 years, polygamy. Do you think any of the other types of marriage should be legalized other than gay marriage?
Yes. If it's between consenting adults I don't see why not.
 

Howler63

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,899
Reaction score
553
Location
Just this side of senility.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The number of people who would marry their sister, or a goat are so small as to be ignored. A healthy society can afford it's miscreants as long as they don't exceed 10% or so.`

I couldn't care less.
 

Un biased

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
1,642
Reaction score
522
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Slippery slope much ?
 

Multicam

New member
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
21
Reaction score
9
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Well then, that's just absolutely terrible.

Why do you want gay marriage to be a crime?

You can't call a dog's tongue a dog's tail, and magically make the tongue the tail. Similarly, you can't just call something marriage and by calling it so make it so. Traditionally marriage has been defined as a covenant or agreement between a man and woman which by its very nature has the goals of procreation and the education of children, as well as the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

Same sex marriage denies psychological, physiological, and biological differences between men and women that find complementarity in marriage. Same-sex marriage also denies the primary purpose of marriage, which is to perpetuate the human race through children (yeah, marriage is about keeping the human race alive, not about sexual pleasure, as many people today seem to think it is).

It is best for a child to be raised by a natural father and mother. Looking at the difficulties faced by orphans or those raised by relatives or foster parents, this point becomes clear. A child living in a same-sex "marriage" will always be deprived of his natural father or his natural mother.

Same-sex "marriage" also turns a moral wrong into a civil right. Bear this in mind: sexual behavior and racial treatment are very different. A man and woman may differ in height, weight, skin color, accent, wealth, and fame, but none of these things are impossible obstacles to marriage. Supposed "marriage" between those of the same sex cannot occur because of a biological obstacle that can never be removed. It doesn't matter what race, age, bodily shape, or wealth they have; by the fact that they are the same sex, marriage is impossible for them. Racial barriers: possible to overcome. Sexual barriers: impossible to overcome.

Finally, there is no such thing as a family in same-sex "marriage". If one of the "spouses" wants a child, they have to go through tons of artificial means. The natural tendency of same-sex unions is not to create families. Therefore it does not fulfill the basic reason for marriage, and furthermore deserves no state-sponsored rewards for marriage because it does not provide conditions for a stable, affectionate atmosphere beneficial to upbringing of children.

In short, same-sex is an imposter seeking to claim it is what it is not, and saying it is deserving of rewards that it is not. It is not even marriage by any traditional meaning. Understand: normal heterosexual marriage is the only way to perpetuate the human race; homosexual marriage by its very nature leads toward extinction. Do the math for yourself; it's not hard. Same-sex marriage is an imposter and furthermore an outright liar and abuser, intended or not, of children. And that is why I say it should be a crime.
 

TheGoverness

Little Miss Sunshine
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
35,043
Reaction score
37,631
Location
Houston Area, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
You can't call a dog's tongue a dog's tail, and magically make the tongue the tail. Similarly, you can't just call something marriage and by calling it so make it so.

That's just complete gibberish. SSM is in fact marriage. In fact I can marry anything I wanted to if it's legal on paper.

Traditionally marriage has been defined as a covenant or agreement between a man and woman which by its very nature has the goals of procreation and the education of children, as well as the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

Marriage has not always been traditionally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman.

Same sex marriage denies psychological, physiological, and biological differences between men and women that find complementarity in marriage.

That is absolute hogwash. SSM does not in ANY way deny the differences between men and women.

Same-sex marriage also denies the primary purpose of marriage, which is to perpetuate the human race through children (yeah, marriage is about keeping the human race alive, not about sexual pleasure, as many people today seem to think it is).

The primary purpose of marriage isn't for procreation. And if it is, do you support denying infertile people the right to marriage, since they cannot conceive children?

It is best for a child to be raised by a natural father and mother. Looking at the difficulties faced by orphans or those raised by relatives or foster parents, this point becomes clear. A child living in a same-sex "marriage" will always be deprived of his natural father or his natural mother.

There are so many people out there who aren't raised by their biological parents, or even by both biological parents (single moms, single dads, grandparents, aunts and uncles, foster parents, etc.) and their kids turn out completely fine. Same goes with same-sex couples.

Same-sex "marriage" also turns a moral wrong into a civil right.
That's also complete gibberish.

Bear this in mind: sexual behavior and racial treatment are very different. A man and woman may differ in height, weight, skin color, accent, wealth, and fame, but none of these things are impossible obstacles to marriage. Supposed "marriage" between those of the same sex cannot occur because of a biological obstacle that can never be removed. It doesn't matter what race, age, bodily shape, or wealth they have; by the fact that they are the same sex, marriage is impossible for them. Racial barriers: possible to overcome. Sexual barriers: impossible to overcome.
I hope you realize that back in the 60's most people believed interracial marriage to be "against nature". Even today quite a bit of people still believe that. Same thing with how SSM is viewed, but thankfully the tide in this country has changed in support of SSM.

Finally, there is no such thing as a family in same-sex "marriage".
Completely untrue.

If one of the "spouses" wants a child, they have to go through tons of artificial means.

So what?

The natural tendency of same-sex unions is not to create families. Therefore it does not fulfill the basic reason for marriage, and furthermore deserves no state-sponsored rewards for marriage because it does not provide conditions for a stable, affectionate atmosphere beneficial to upbringing of children.

Marriage is not solely for procreation and for the well-being of the children. There are plenty of married couples that have no children at all, should their marriage licences be revoked because of that?

In short, same-sex is an imposter seeking to claim it is what it is not, and saying it is deserving of rewards that it is not. It is not even marriage by any traditional meaning.

SSM is not an imposter. It's a marriage between two consenting adults just like any other married couple.

Understand: normal heterosexual marriage is the only way to perpetuate the human race; homosexual marriage by its very nature leads toward extinction.

We have 7 Billion people on this planet. The last thing we need is more people.

Do the math for yourself; it's not hard. Same-sex marriage is an imposter and furthermore an outright liar and abuser, intended or not, of children. And that is why I say it should be a crime.

So in short, all you've basically said throughout this entire post is that:
"I'm against SSM because I'm against it!"
 
Last edited:

Multicam

New member
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
21
Reaction score
9
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
TheGoverness,

Hitler said Jews needed to be exterminated, and many people agreed with him, but his saying so didn't mean that Jews had to be exterminated, it only meant he THOUGHT they had to be exterminated. If someone, even legal authorities, says same-sex marriage is marriage, it doesn't make it marriage, it only means that person or authority says and believes it to be marriage.

Please explain why marriage has not always been traditionally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. Show proof for your claims. If you want proof that marriage has traditionally been a covenant between a man and a woman, I can give it to you, and will be glad to.

Same-sex "marriage" doesn't deny the differences between man and women, it denies the idea that they find complementarity in marriage. Please read more carefully.

Did the first modern humans marry for sexual pleasure? True, that was likely a part of it, but the underlying reason for that desire was and is procreation. Explain to me how it's not.

There are exceptions to some rules (bear in mind: not to all rules). Evidence shows clearly children are best off with a mother and a father, particularly if that mother and father are their natural parents.

Please do more than just say what I'm saying is gibberish. Just saying I'm speaking gibberish is being childish.

Don't go off on a rabbit trail. What I was saying was whether racial barriers were insurmountable and whether sexual barriers were insurmountable. I was not making a statement about racism or the lack thereof. I was and am addressing same-sex marriage. Please read more carefully.

Why is my statement that there's no such thing as a family in same-sex marriage "completely untrue"? Elaborate, don't just make that statement. Making a statement that something is not true is not the same as showing why you think that that something is not true.

I have nothing against using artificial means to have a child. But while artificial means is only required for some heterosexual couples, it is required 100 percent of the time for homosexuals, raising the question of whether the two forms of union are actually equal. Artificial means isn't wrong, but homosexuals require it to have children. Heterosexuals don't. The issue is heterosexual marriage versus homosexual marriage, not artificial means.

SS"M" is between two consenting adults, but that in and of itself makes it neither marriage nor even a naturally right thing to do.

That comment about not needing more people could be taken as an argument for population control. I'm not saying that's what you meant, but please be more careful what you write. And what's more, you're dodging the issue. If everyone became homosexuals, the human race would go utterly extinct within a hundred years. Homosexuals require heterosexuals in order to survive and avoid extinction, plain and simple. You cannot get around this argument, especially not by running off down rabbit trails concerning global population.

You know deep down I have made a rational and logical argument with many convincing points showing why same-sex marriage is wrong and isn't even marriage, and you don't want to accept it simply because you don't believe the way I believe. You don't appear to be looking at my argument logically; it seems like you're just glossing over and half-reading my points without giving them serious consideration because you have already decided I am wrong.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,642
Reaction score
20,547
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
No other types of marriage should be legalized, and gay marriage should be made a crime.

Crime against who? Can you say why it's wrong without referring to religious principals?
 

Un biased

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
1,642
Reaction score
522
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
TheGoverness,

Hitler said Jews needed to be exterminated, and many people agreed with him, but his saying so didn't mean that Jews had to be exterminated, it only meant he THOUGHT they had to be exterminated. If someone, even legal authorities, says same-sex marriage is marriage, it doesn't make it marriage, it only means that person or authority says and believes it to be marriage.

Please explain why marriage has not always been traditionally defined as a covenant between a man and a woman. Show proof for your claims. If you want proof that marriage has traditionally been a covenant between a man and a woman, I can give it to you, and will be glad to.

Same-sex "marriage" doesn't deny the differences between man and women, it denies the idea that they find complementarity in marriage. Please read more carefully.

Did the first modern humans marry for sexual pleasure? True, that was likely a part of it, but the underlying reason for that desire was and is procreation. Explain to me how it's not.

There are exceptions to some rules (bear in mind: not to all rules). Evidence shows clearly children are best off with a mother and a father, particularly if that mother and father are their natural parents.

Please do more than just say what I'm saying is gibberish. Just saying I'm speaking gibberish is being childish.

Don't go off on a rabbit trail. What I was saying was whether racial barriers were insurmountable and whether sexual barriers were insurmountable. I was not making a statement about racism or the lack thereof. I was and am addressing same-sex marriage. Please read more carefully.

Why is my statement that there's no such thing as a family in same-sex marriage "completely untrue"? Elaborate, don't just make that statement. Making a statement that something is not true is not the same as showing why you think that that something is not true.

I have nothing against using artificial means to have a child. But while artificial means is only required for some heterosexual couples, it is required 100 percent of the time for homosexuals, raising the question of whether the two forms of union are actually equal. Artificial means isn't wrong, but homosexuals require it to have children. Heterosexuals don't. The issue is heterosexual marriage versus homosexual marriage, not artificial means.

SS"M" is between two consenting adults, but that in and of itself makes it neither marriage nor even a naturally right thing to do.

That comment about not needing more people could be taken as an argument for population control. I'm not saying that's what you meant, but please be more careful what you write. And what's more, you're dodging the issue. If everyone became homosexuals, the human race would go utterly extinct within a hundred years. Homosexuals require heterosexuals in order to survive and avoid extinction, plain and simple. You cannot get around this argument, especially not by running off down rabbit trails concerning global population.

You know deep down I have made a rational and logical argument with many convincing points showing why same-sex marriage is wrong and isn't even marriage, and you don't want to accept it simply because you don't believe the way I believe. You don't appear to be looking at my argument logically; it seems like you're just glossing over and half-reading my points without giving them serious consideration because you have already decided I am wrong.

Godwin's Law - TV Tropes



Brining Hitler into any argument which is unnecessary to support your radical ideas is unwise ,It generally shows off how weak your position is .
 

BitterPill

Ignorance Is Virtue
DP Veteran
Joined
May 16, 2016
Messages
2,792
Reaction score
744
Location
SoCal
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Let everyone marry whomever, and how ever many he or she wishes. It's funny to see those that fought so hard for same sex marriage are now so opposed to polygamous marriage. When you struck down that a marriage was between one man and one woman, you opened Pandora's Box. There's not way to get that sucker closed again. Besides what is the real problem with polygamous marriage? It's not like those in a polygamous relationship aren't going to live together and have kids anyway. Now, it will just give them some pieces of paper to frame and put on the wall.

Then polygamy would be legal. It has been in the past, yet that Pandora's Box was closed.
 
Top Bottom