Gay marriage declared legal across the US in historic supreme court ruling

[rygD]

Or... people should be free to live their lives any way they like so long as it doesn't directly harm others... However, if the 'harm' is moral objection too effing bad. Mind your own business.


I would love to be in a world where this is the case, but I have to keep a lot secret, even from you guys, even from my parents... you might say you are open minded, but the focus of my entire life has been to explore that which exists outside of what is accepted.


I am what those religious nuts fear... but I'm smart enough not to let them know that.

But are you not causing harm for yourself and others by keeping things hidden?  This helps justify claims that people who do or think these things are deviants.  Nothing changes if everyone sits around and accepts the things they disagree with.  If you won't act out, at least speak out.


Just because you don't recongize any authority other than yourself does not mean that they aren't there in some form.  People have been punished, imprisoned and killed for doing things others that the masses allow to determine what is and is not acceptable.  Instead of hiding in fear, raise awareness or show others that they aren't the freaks they feel or are told they are.

One of the only things I am certain of is that decriminalizing anything and everything that doesn't directly harm others is the only way to minimise all the damage that is created around whatever the subject is.

 Good call, I agree.

Ideally, the state should decouple current benefits and rights from an umbrella concept (now called marriage), or alternatively just rename the concept instead. E.g. if one marries in church then one automatically gets a registered partnership in state, but it is the partnership which gives the rights, not the marriage.

Why should people that are married get special treatment.  This can lead to discrimination and has been used for fraud due to people getting married only to obtain benefits.  I am seriously opposed to marriage being something that is recognized by government and government institutions/agencies.  I am not opposed to people spending their lives with those they love.  This does not mean a man and a woman exclusively, or even only 2 individuals, just consenting adults that fully understand their choices.  They should not be forced to stay with those they no longer feel attachment to (not that divorce is that difficult a process now).  Obviously, I cannot stand arranged marriage.

Failing that, governments should not have anything to do with it.

You die unexpectedly, that will you always meant to make being left unwritten. What happens to your stuff? It goes to your family. Your family is a bunch of assholes who sell off your stuff and have your dog put down because no one wants to deal with it. Meanwhile, your "life partner" of 20 years get jack all. If they're "lucky" they'll get the bill for your funeral. If only there were some sort of government recognized institution that gave someone equal (if not greater) rights as a family member than those you share blood with.
You're in an accident. You could really use some comfort as you lay in the hospital bed in agony but only family members are allowed to visit. If only there were some sort of government recognized institution that gave someone equal (if not greater) rights as a family member than those you share blood with.


Things are going well. You and your "life partner" have moved in together. You're effectively sharing an income, which is problematic when tax time comes. Getting insurance is a pain with no way to formally share policies. If only there were some sort of government recognized institution that gave someone equal (if not greater) rights as a family member than those you share blood with.


If only. Unfortunately I know of no such thing.


So what were we talking about? Gay something or other?

No, the items belong to those that physically possess or have access to them.  My blood family does not have physical access to these things.  If I failed to ensure those that are intended to get these things can do such then that was my fault, and I am to blame.  Courts should not make decisions on my behalf.  For example, if I had a bank account that had money in it with a large number of digits and I gave no one else access to it in some way then it belongs to the bank.

Also, I don't want a funeral, and have expressed this for decades.  If someone chooses to have one they should pay for it, since it is for them, not me.  As for disposing of the carcass, it makes sense to me to throw it somewhere that other animals and such can make use of it.  Since that is largely frowned upon I don't really care what happens to it.  Feed it to the dog in our little story.  Throw it in a medical waste bin.  Burn it.  I won't be using it anymore.

If I don't want to be in the hospital I will leave.  If there is a restriction that "only family" can visit patients the problem is with the hospital.  I have falsely claimed to be a family member of patients in hospitals before.  More recently a list of people has been left with security stating who the patient wants to have access to them.  I would have a problem with the hospital allowing any of my blood family in.  They are just as capable of causing additional harm to me as anyone else.  So really, your example does not apply to me.  If I am not able to express that I want only 2 people to visit me, and no one else, I would rather have no visitors.  If the decision comes down to keeping me artificially alive or not I would prefer to be dead or used for testing new procedures.  If I have not expressed that, and I have not provided means to pay for my treatment then I guess they have no option but to let me die...oh, wait, that makes the most sense and is what I prefer.

Your paragraph about the "life partner" exactly points out the problems I have with marriage (as a start).  Tax the individual based on income.  I feel that property taxes are immoral (if I spend 40 years saving and building a house in the middle of nowhere with land on which to grow or procure food and live on my own, with those I choose to live with, why should the government have the right to keep asking for money after I have purchased and developed it?).  I am not sure what types of insurance you are talking about, but if an insurance company has difficulty allowing two or more people to be named on a policy then that is a problem with the insurance company, and I would probably not use that one.  I am not going to get into certain varieties of insurance being required, here, as it deals with a lot of other issues and gets extremely complex very quickly.

I get it, you want the government involved in all aspects of your life.  I don't.

Next step: Multi-marriage


you know, there are people so full of love that one person is not enough !!

You joke, but I don't understand why.  If marriage is recognized why limit the number of consenting adults that can be a part of it.  I grew so tired of these discussions years ago I don't know why I am even in this thread.

Edit: To clear up some things, I am legally married.  To be able to allow the person I loved to be with me and take care of them, it was required.  My feelings against marriage were around long before I was put into the situation where I had to decide between being with and taking care of the person I love and living in a way that supported my opinions.  I had already made another decision and had a very short time to make this one, but due to government involvement in marriage that was required to do what I wanted.  This is when my disgust with the government being involved in marriage became much stronger.  I will not further discuss this openly here, however I will share further details privately if anyone really wants to know.

 

[PowerGod]

Next step: Multi-marriage

you know, there are people so full of love that one person is not enough !!

You joke, but I don't understand why.  If marriage is recognized why limit the number of consenting adults that can be a part of it.  I grew so tired of these discussions years ago I don't know why I am even in this thread.

I joke because it is unlikely that this will ever happens... also I'm not so confident that gay marriages will be recognised as "normal" and this is a battle that many will have to fight for many years to come...

Anyway I think the same of you, the marriage is just a bureaucratic thing to keep track of taxes and manage the things after death...

to just share a life with someone you don't need a contract or even a golden ring

 

[rygD]

Oh, yeah, I forgot:  I don't like gold jewelry either.  I prefer white/silvery/grey metals (not sure what to call them).  Copper is nice too, although I don't know if it is used for nice jewelry, and I don't think I would wear it as such.

 

[Null]

As for disposing of the carcass, it makes sense to me to throw it somewhere that other animals and such can make use of it. Since that is largely frowned upon I don't really care what happens to it. Feed it to the dog in our little story. Throw it in a medical waste bin. Burn it. I won't be using it anymore.

I'm not particular about what happens to my body after I die either for the same reason, it's of no further use to me so someone else might as well have use of it, or fun with it either one's fine with me.

 

[rygD]

As for disposing of the carcass, it makes sense to me to throw it somewhere that other animals and such can make use of it. Since that is largely frowned upon I don't really care what happens to it. Feed it to the dog in our little story. Throw it in a medical waste bin. Burn it. I won't be using it anymore.

I'm not particular about what happens to my body after I die either for the same reason, it's of no further use to me so someone else might as well have use of it, or fun with it either one's fine with me.

Careful, when we talk like that everyone else thinks we are weird.

 

[Klumpen]

The real "marriage" is dead for quite some time anyway (foundation of a family, which in turn is the foundation of a formerly very popular branch of civilisation),

otherwise I'd rather suggest finding another term for this kind of union, but it's all highly hypocritical today anyway regardless of the gender of the protagonists.

People should do whatever floats their boat but I'm not too happy about all this redefining and relativising everything up to a point where it doesn't mean anything anymore instead of just adding terms.

 

[Null]

Careful, when we talk like that everyone else thinks we are weird.

Sorry I forgot we're supposed to be blending in, so that the humans don't notice the invasion until it's too late. h34r:

 

[ekianjo]

This does not mean a man and a woman exclusively, or even only 2 individuals, just consenting adults that fully understand their choices.

Mmm, I wonder what you think about Mormons who have multiple wives (not all of them but that practice still endures...) and other religious groups where polygamy is allowed and recognized.  

Plus "understand choices" depends a lot on how you have been educated in the first place. If you have been educated in a place where women are told it's ok to be beaten up and treated like shit, you don't know that there are better options out there in the first place. 

 

[rygD]

This does not mean a man and a woman exclusively, or even only 2 individuals, just consenting adults that fully understand their choices.

Mmm, I wonder what you think about Mormons who have multiple wives (not all of them but that practice still endures...) and other religious groups where polygamy is allowed and recognized.  

Plus "understand choices" depends a lot on how you have been educated in the first place. If you have been educated in a place where women are told it's ok to be beaten up and treated like shit, you don't know that there are better options out there in the first place. 

I am fine with people attempting to live their lives with others as stated in what you quoted there.  The biggest problem isn't one man having multiple wives/husbands (and the Mormons have been fighting the polygamist reputation for a long time, since the big church declared it unacceptable. At least that is what they say to the rest of the world.  No clue what they say internally, since many religious organizations put on an artificial "nice and pretty" face to the public).  The real issue is that no one ever fully understands their choices about anything.  

Marriage, even amongst those that believe in their understanding of it, is largely seen as disposable in some parts of the world, regardless of what the people involved say.  Here is another of my issues with it.  Why bother?  I am not saying that people should stay together if they are unhappy, or that everyone splits up, just that it doesn't seem to work the way it is thought of, at least over here.  The only way to make it into something permanent is to dehumanize some parties involved, which then largely removes consent.  Sure, they may say "yes", but that does not mean that they have much choice.  It works much better to remove all the formalities and let people be people.  There are stripped down versions like this in some places that still have minor ceremonies (oaths...) and a bunch of legal stuff I feel is screwing over some of those involved, maybe not initially, and maybe not everyone, but some people sometimes.  Then there is something I feel is slightly better, common-law marriage, which can fulfill the needs of those who want to be married, yet it is still backed by the government and can have legal complications.

What I want is for people to live how they want with whom they want.  Laws and governments should stay far away from that.

 

[WizardStan]

I get it, you want the government involved in all aspects of your life. I don't.

*whoosh*

 

[kasp]

You know why all these people are against gay marriage?  It's because they know individually they are weak like a single stick.  However bundled together they form a mighty faggot.

Anyways jokes aside good for them, I don't know why so many people give a shit about the relationship status of other people. The fact they can spend so much energy on the "sanctity of marriage" yet not lift a finger to deal with real issues like children starving to death, or homelessness or the X number of messed up things in the world just shows how out of whack their priorities are.

 

[FaeMinx]

Or... people should be free to live their lives any way they like so long as it doesn't directly harm others... However, if the 'harm' is moral objection too effing bad. Mind your own business.


I would love to be in a world where this is the case, but I have to keep a lot secret, even from you guys, even from my parents... you might say you are open minded, but the focus of my entire life has been to explore that which exists outside of what is accepted.


I am what those religious nuts fear... but I'm smart enough not to let them know that.

But are you not causing harm for yourself and others by keeping things hidden? This helps justify claims that people who do or think these things are deviants. Nothing changes if everyone sits around and accepts the things they disagree with. If you won't act out, at least speak out.

Just because you don't recongize any authority other than yourself does not mean that they aren't there in some form. People have been punished, imprisoned and killed for doing things others that the masses allow to determine what is and is not acceptable. Instead of hiding in fear, raise awareness or show others that they aren't the freaks they feel or are told they are.

Yes, there is a degree of harm caused from keeping things hidden. But as I do not recognize this life and everything it entails as my be all and end all, the harm to me is minimal if bordering on non-existent. Patience is my middle name.

To others... cast not pearls before swine.


Loudly proclaiming your right to be as you are in an alien and unsympathetic environment is not only rude, it is incredibly self-centered and short sighted.


You will create resistance to what you are, setting things back hugely with unnecessary conflict and negative uninformed assumptions that will be incredibly hard to dissolve by those who come after you.


I am incredibly patient. I would much rather plant thousands of seeds almost invisibly, that flourish long after I have gone, than to go on some personal crusade that has every chance of doing more damage.


Besides, while I support so many types of 'deviants' and freaks, me becoming more vocal and creating a scene certainly wouldn't make these people appear any less freaky.


I would only add to that impression to the people that feel threatened.


Because, I am deviated... I am a freak of 'human' nature.


This is not self-depreciation, just an honest assessment.


P. S. For a long time I lived my life in fear of the machinations of one individual and the organizations he was a part of, but no more.


It was that fear that kept me from living my life true to myself. Not fear of how people would react to me.


I keep things secret for the benefit of those not yet ready to deal with it.

I get it, you want the government involved in all aspects of your life. I don't.

*whoosh*

I understand your point. Another reason I choose to do things the way I do.

 

[elwing]

I definitely don't understand why people gets angry about this...either they should be unconcerned or happy that a discrimination form disappears...

 

[kasp]

I was at the pub the other day and this guy was telling me why he hated "faggots" so much. 

He said it was because what they would do is get people blind drunk then sleep with them and in the morning chant "You're one of us now" or something to that effect.  That gay people were predators and deviants.

The guy seemed to get pretty angry when I suggested was so specific it must have happened to him.     

The resistances to gays are caused by an irrational hatred fueled by bigotry, ignorance, prejudice or religion. However people don't want to admit those are the real reasons so they always hide behind "tradition"  You should really question your viewpoint if you can't be honest about the real reason behind it.

 

[Nintendo]

This is interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/GP4B5d8zDVo?feature=oembed
@2:55 ( https://youtu.be/GP4B5d8zDVo?t=116 )

 

[FaeMinx]

Careful, when we talk like that everyone else thinks we are weird.

Sorry I forgot we're supposed to be blending in, so that the humans don't notice the invasion until it's too late. h34r:

It's already too late. Enough of us have landed and integrated into humanity as human beings that what it means to be human now includes what we bring to the table.

We are in the process of absorbing humanity... but you are right, no need to cause a panic now. It is our job to pose the questions... it is up to them to make the choices... We never force ourselves on a species... that would undermine our very essence.


... Slow and steady wins the race...

 

[FaeMinx]

I was at the pub the other day and this guy was telling me why he hated "faggots" so much.


He said it was because what they would do is get people blind drunk then sleep with them and in the morning chant "You're one of us now" or something to that effect. That gay people were predators and deviants.


The guy seemed to get pretty angry when I suggested was so specific it must have happened to him.


The resistances to gays are caused by an irrational hatred fueled by bigotry, ignorance, prejudice or religion. However people don't want to admit those are the real reasons so they always hide behind "tradition" You should really question your viewpoint if you can't be honest about the real reason behind it.

Funny enough, I really liked Gay people and always sought them out over and above straight people.

I started avoiding them like the plague after I found out that someone I assumed was a friend had been drugging me and doing who knows what to me. It was a shocking revelation, especially as I was nieve to the fact he was into boys.


I just didn't get it. Much later I uncovered that he had been molested by his father, so unfortunately my experience of what makes someone Gay is pretty sick and twisted.


As I personally am not attracted to males, I can't relate to how that would occur naturally to a person.


My only experience is that it is a result of damaged people inflicting that damage on innocence, which results in distorted and twisted perceptions that become inseparably linked to natural sexual expression / exploration.


I know there are wonderfully enlightened and truly loving Gay people out there, and I wish them the best, and would be delighted to know them. I even have no problem with the extreme sexual extroverts.


I do have a problem with people who are Gay because of something twisted happening in their youth. I don't blame them, but I wouldn't entrust anything precious to their care.

 

[Bosbeetle]

We as the netherlands are being surpassed on so many levels by the US now, gay rights, use of marihuana... The only small things we have left is abortion and euthanasia but those will be covered soon... and then the netherlands only "unique" aspects will be that our country is realtively small, and most of it is below sea level....

But I think it's great that there's another country where marriage is not linked to gender anymore... I think gender should not be mentioned in any law or legal text, just say "person"  there are so many unbalanced laws (like any law mentioning the words "father" or "mother" like there should be a legal difference between the two)... 

 

[rygD]

Loudly proclaiming your right to be as you are in an alien and unsympathetic environment is not only rude, it is incredibly self-centered and short sighted.

That is not what I do or suggest, though.  I want acceptance and fair treatment of the whole spectrum of life (and other things) and their right to exist unmolested by others.  With humans, this means acknowledging that people are different in many ways, and allowing them to be what they are, think how they think, feel how they feel, etc., and to not attack them for it.  Many of the things I try to be supportive of are not issues of my own, but those that I care about.  I will proclaim loudly that those like them should not be shunned.  And that is where the whole topic of gay marriage, and marriage in general, play into this.  If there was no special treatment of people that are married then I doubt gay marriage would have been as much of an issue.  For those that are religious and view it in that light, they could probably find a way to do right in the eyes of their deity.  For those that want it for social or other reasons, they could still have their rituals/ceremonies or however they want to deal with it (not sure why ceremonies are involved, though, which is yet another topic).

You will create resistance to what you are, setting things back hugely with unnecessary conflict and negative uninformed assumptions that will be incredibly hard to dissolve by those who come after you.

Assuming you are correct, what is the proper way to handle the situation?  Things don't change or get better by ignoring problems.  At least conflict makes people aware of it, and lets them know that something is bothering these people.

As for my heavy handed approach, a light touch is often ignored and brushed aside.  I have experienced the organized heavy handed approach used to attack non-issues and be viewed as acceptable.  Telling someone "stop, now" or "let them think/feel/be what they want" is far less harmful than a lot of what I have seen, and it needs to be done publicly so that others know it is not acceptable.

I could discuss many forms of unfortunately common discrimination and opression that are still present all around the world, often times affecting half or more of a population, but I think we are all aware of these things.  By trying to get others to stop, regardless of what some might think, we are not making things worse for them.  Sure, it might suck in the short term, but that is because humans don't like being told they are wrong or that they need to change how they treat others, and they like to help those they see as like themselves, and get rid of those that are different.  As more people see that what they are doing is harmful things can get better for the groups that are discriminated against.

I was at the pub the other day and this guy was telling me why he hated "faggots" so much. 

He said it was because what they would do is get people blind drunk then sleep with them and in the morning chant "You're one of us now" or something to that effect.  That gay people were predators and deviants.

The guy seemed to get pretty angry when I suggested was so specific it must have happened to him.     

The resistances to gays are caused by an irrational hatred fueled by bigotry, ignorance, prejudice or religion. However people don't want to admit those are the real reasons so they always hide behind "tradition"  You should really question your viewpoint if you can't be honest about the real reason behind it.

I have heard equally silly claims.  I never seriously considered that some of them might be based in fact since I don't see it being contagious.  I think that in some cases your list of causes can include an "and" instead of an "or".  Everyone should always question their own point of view.

 

[rygD]

We as the netherlands are being surpassed on so many levels by the US now, gay rights, use of marihuana... The only small things we have left is abortion and euthanasia but those will be covered soon... and then the netherlands only "unique" aspects will be that our country is realtively small, and most of it is below sea level....

But I think it's great that there's another country where marriage is not linked to gender anymore... I think gender should not be mentioned in any law or legal text, just say "person"  there are so many unbalanced laws (like any law mentioning the words "father" or "mother" like there should be a legal difference between the two)... 

I am out of likes, so I just want to say I fully agree with your last sentence, and have recently been discussing how in some places, perhaps more in the past than present, that after a divorce, it was often the mother that got custody of children, even if the father would provide a more stable and safer home. (The leading cause for divorce is marriage, btw.)  Oh, and there are parts of the US that are below sea level.  You probably win for "most" of it being below sea level, though.  Just be happy for what you have, and not sad that others have it too.