San Diego mayor changes his mind on same-sex marriage

[Larkinn]

I disagree. Why is there such resistance in Japan to gay marriage (and even to homosexuality) if it would not damage their society at all?

For the same stupid, irrational reasons there is resistance to it in the US. People think its gross...and rather than letting other people decide what they want to do with their bodies, people want to curtail them because of their own disgust.

Our country already has problems with marriage and the family. Do you put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it? Gay marriage today only hastens the demise of marriage and in the process children are hurt. That is not good for society. You want some evidence in the real world today? Here:

So to protect children from being born out of wedlock, you are going to make it MORE restrictive for people to have marriages?...that is allow less people to get marriages?

Please explain to me how allowing less people to have marriages will allow MORE kids to be raised by married couples.

 

[Kagom]

I never really gave two shits whether the homosexuals marry or don't. The only people who do should be HOMOSEXUALS. Let them fight their own fight. I believe marriage is a religious institution and therefore the government should recognize any legal union performed by a religious group or by the courts as a CIVIL UNION under law seperating church from state. The problem gays and lesbians have with this is they cannot get married in those beautiful churches they want to be married in and the problem with the churches is they don't want to marry the gays. Form your own religion I say to homosexuals...and do as you wish. If the homosexuals created their own religion which believes GOD created Men to be with Men for pleasure, Women to be with women for pleasure, there would be no problem. Modify the bible or something.......say it was Adam and Steve, not Adam and Eve.

We have Mormons for petes' sake, why can't you come up with something original to be recognized?

It's not even that so much as they don't want this "separate, but equal." But I agree, we should just leave the religious institutions alone. If they wanna do a gay marriage, awesome. If not, oh well. Personally, I would like a Catholic wedding, but good luck finding a Catholic priest who'll do a wedding for two guys.

 

[LiberPublicrat2]

It's not even that so much as they don't want this "separate, but equal." But I agree, we should just leave the religious institutions alone. If they wanna do a gay marriage, awesome. If not, oh well. Personally, I would like a Catholic wedding, but good luck finding a Catholic priest who'll do a wedding for two guys.

Fuckin' A. Life's a bitch.

Just kiddin'.

 

[Shogun]

"I disagree. Why is there such resistance in Japan to gay marriage (and even to homosexuality) if it would not damage their society at all? And where exactly is this "mainstream" homosexuality in Japan today? It doesn't exist. Just because homosexual behavior existed in the past among the samuri, it does not mean that it would be good for Japanese society today. And anyway, I don't believe that ancient Japan had gay marriage, did they? Weren't the samurai male lovers primarily accepted in order for one to pass on his skills to a younger man? Did not the samurai have arranged marriages with women? I don't believe their society arranged gay marriages. So I don't see how I am wrong here. And why do you assume that I hate gays? I got nothing against them personally."


You can disagree all day long but the FACT remains that Japan's society has a far longer history than ours despite the REALITY of homosexual status in their past. There are many things in any given culture that will change over time, be it family structure, marriage unions, education, all of which have NO chance of destroying a society. GOOD for japanese society today? I bet thatsame question was asked when women and blacks wanted to vote. This is an opinion, dude. and OPINION. not a fact like an ancient Japanese society still around even after letting samurais be gay openly. If you can show me how you can know that extending equal rights will destroy our society beyond conjecture and rhetoric Id love to hear it.



"I'm not "running to the Bible". lol You guys have an abnormal fear of the Good Book."


The only example that I can think of that you could whip out is ole S&G.. a legend in my book on par with trying to estimate a wildlife population by measuring bigfoot tracks. If I am mistake then please provide an example of a society whose demise was the direct result of allowing gays to get married, have equal protection of the constitution, etc..




"And you haven't proven a thing. All you showed was that Japan used to have a society much like Greece when homosexuality was acceptable. Both societies did not last."


JAPAN didn't last? Where did GREECE go? By that standard do you also think the US is extinct because our modern times do not relfect our colonial ancestors?



"Our country already has problems with marriage and the family. Do you put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it?"


No, I consider that homosexuality is neither the cause of what you consider family problems nor a scapegoat that explains for you why the face of our culture is not a 1950 wet dream. It's not Adam and Steves problem that men and women toss marraige these days. Hell, if anything they WANT to reinforce the concept of long term unions. Divorce rates increased DESPITE homosexuality becoming a mainstream issue. Once again, I won't make false correlations based on anything but facts.



"Gay marriage today only hastens the demise of marriage and in the process children are hurt. That is not good for society. You want some evidence in the real world today?"


That is total bullshit. Also, the weekly standard? indeed, what unbiased bastion of objectivity you found there. Hell, lets go ahead and pretend that no other factor plays a role in decreased marraige in this post-modern world besides letting gays get hitched! hehehehehe... Talk about false correlations. You DO realize that societies occur with absolutely no marriage tradition that reflects your schema, right? Society is the product of commerce, dude.. not marriage. Silly offerings from biased sources trying to force together a correlation to fit a particular world view is hardly earth shattering here

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You can disagree all day long but the FACT remains that Japan's society has a far longer history than ours despite the REALITY of homosexual status in their past. There are many things in any given culture that will change over time, be it family structure, marriage unions, education, all of which have NO chance of destroying a society. GOOD for japanese society today? I bet thatsame question was asked when women and blacks wanted to vote. This is an opinion, dude. and OPINION. not a fact like an ancient Japanese society still around even after letting samurais be gay openly. If you can show me how you can know that extending equal rights will destroy our society beyond conjecture and rhetoric Id love to hear it.

Did Japan have gay marriage? I don't think so.

The only example that I can think of that you could whip out is ole S&G.. a legend in my book on par with trying to estimate a wildlife population by measuring bigfoot tracks. If I am mistake then please provide an example of a society whose demise was the direct result of allowing gays to get married, have equal protection of the constitution, etc..

I'm not using religion as an argument.

JAPAN didn't last? Where did GREECE go? By that standard do you also think the US is extinct because our modern times do not relfect our colonial ancestors?

Japan and Greece as COUNTRIES lasted, but the forms of samurai and athenian pederasty did not.

No, I consider that homosexuality is neither the cause of what you consider family problems nor a scapegoat that explains for you why the face of our culture is not a 1950 wet dream. It's not Adam and Steves problem that men and women toss marraige these days. Hell, if anything they WANT to reinforce the concept of long term unions. Divorce rates increased DESPITE homosexuality becoming a mainstream issue. Once again, I won't make false correlations based on anything but facts.

When marriage becomes something that is just based upon the hot desires of two people (as is emphasized by gay marriage) children get lost in the shuffle. Gay marriage changes attitudes toward marriage. It demeans it just like the Hollyweird sluts who marry the stud of the month and then divorce. Thus there are more children born out of wedlock because children are no longer seen as a primary reason for marriage.

That is total bullshit. Also, the weekly standard? indeed, what unbiased bastion of objectivity you found there. Hell, lets go ahead and pretend that no other factor plays a role in decreased marraige in this post-modern world besides letting gays get hitched! hehehehehe... Talk about false correlations. You DO realize that societies occur with absolutely no marriage tradition that reflects your schema, right? Society is the product of commerce, dude.. not marriage. Silly offerings from biased sources trying to force together a correlation to fit a particular world view is hardly earth shattering here

You say that is "total bullshit" and "silly"? I'm supposed to believe you just because you say so and not somebody who has studied and written about this issue quite thoroughly? If society was just the "product of commerce" as you say, then why have marriages with fathers and mothers for children? Are children nothing more than "products" of commerce? You just go to the sperm bank or hire a surrogate to buy your kid -- the gay way?

 

[Larkinn]

Japan and Greece as COUNTRIES lasted, but the forms of samurai and athenian pederasty did not.

So your argument is that gay marriage will cause the decline of...gay marriage?

When marriage becomes something that is just based upon the hot desires of two people (as is emphasized by gay marriage) children get lost in the shuffle.

What makes you think that gay marriage is based solely upon the "hot desires of two people"? You think gays can't fall in love?

Gay marriage changes attitudes toward marriage. It demeans it just like the Hollyweird sluts who marry the stud of the month and then divorce. Thus there are more children born out of wedlock because children are no longer seen as a primary reason for marriage.

Since when have children been the primary reason for marriage?

 

[Shogun]

Hey screaming eagle...


You are just not interesting enough to have this conversation with if you are going to be a giant pussy and dodge providing evidence to support your claim beyond opinionated rhetoric.


I asked for a historic example of a society that was demolished in the same fashion you seem to think ours would be if we extended equal rights to gays. Now, perhaps this paper tiger conjecture is fun for you because you get to vent while knowing damn well that this issue will resolve itslef like they all do. Whatever.

IVE posted my evidence that your claim is silly. I've provided historic evidence. I don't care if you THINK that kids will be confused. This is not a standard that means anything to anyone besides you and those who think like you and, Im pretty sure, your opinion is not the standard for reality.


Ill ask one last time.

Can you show me evidence of a culture that imploded because gays were open and equal in their homosexuality?

 

[Shogun]

Japan and Greece as COUNTRIES lasted, but the forms of samurai and athenian pederasty did not.


uh.. so there are no more samurais because...... uh.. they were GAY?


hehehehe..

WOW.


The range of silliness in America never stops amazing me.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Hey screaming eagle...


You are just not interesting enough to have this conversation with if you are going to be a giant pussy and dodge providing evidence to support your claim beyond opinionated rhetoric.


I asked for a historic example of a society that was demolished in the same fashion you seem to think ours would be if we extended equal rights to gays. Now, perhaps this paper tiger conjecture is fun for you because you get to vent while knowing damn well that this issue will resolve itslef like they all do. Whatever.

IVE posted my evidence that your claim is silly. I've provided historic evidence. I don't care if you THINK that kids will be confused. This is not a standard that means anything to anyone besides you and those who think like you and, Im pretty sure, your opinion is not the standard for reality.


Ill ask one last time.

Can you show me evidence of a culture that imploded because gays were open and equal in their homosexuality?

I'll answer one last time. Read about the disintegration of marriage in Scandinavia and Norway in particular.

Some excerpts:

Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood.
…
And now that married parenthood has become a minority phenomenon, it has lost the critical mass required to have socially normative force. As Danish sociologists Wehner, Kambskard, and Abrahamson describe it, in the wake of the changes of the nineties, "Marriage is no longer a precondition for settling a family--neither legally nor normatively. . . . What defines and makes the foundation of the Danish family can be said to have moved from marriage to parenthood."

So the highly touted half-page of analysis from an unpublished paper that supposedly helps validate the "conservative case" for gay marriage--i.e., that it will encourage stable marriage for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike--does no such thing. Marriage in Scandinavia is in deep decline, with children shouldering the burden of rising rates of family dissolution. And the mainspring of the decline--an increasingly sharp separation between marriage and parenthood--can be linked to gay marriage.
….
British demographer Kathleen Kiernan, the acknowledged authority on the spread of cohabitation and out-of-wedlock births across Europe, divides the continent into three zones. The Nordic countries are the leaders in cohabitation and out-of-wedlock births. They are followed by a middle group that includes the Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, and Germany. Until recently, France was a member of this middle group, but France's rising out-of-wedlock birthrate has moved it into the Nordic category. North American rates of cohabitation and out-of-wedlock birth put the United States and Canada into this middle group. Most resistant to cohabitation, family dissolution, and out-of-wedlock births are the southern European countries of Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Greece, and, until recently, Switzerland and Ireland. (Ireland's rising out-of-wedlock birthrate has just pushed it into the middle group.)

These three groupings closely track the movement for gay marriage. In the early nineties, gay marriage came to the Nordic countries, where the out-of-wedlock birthrate was already high. Ten years later, out-of-wedlock birth rates have risen significantly in the middle group of nations. Not coincidentally, nearly every country in that middle group has recently either legalized some form of gay marriage, or is seriously considering doing so. Only in the group with low out-of-wedlock birthrates has the gay marriage movement achieved relatively little success.

This suggests that gay marriage is both an effect and a cause of the increasing separation between marriage and parenthood. As rising out-of-wedlock birthrates disassociate heterosexual marriage from parenting, gay marriage becomes conceivable. If marriage is only about a relationship between two people, and is not intrinsically connected to parenthood, why shouldn't same-sex couples be allowed to marry? It follows that once marriage is redefined to accommodate same-sex couples, that change cannot help but lock in and reinforce the very cultural separation between marriage and parenthood that makes gay marriage conceivable to begin with.

We see this process at work in the radical separation of marriage and parenthood that swept across Scandinavia in the nineties. If Scandinavian out-of-wedlock birthrates had not already been high in the late eighties, gay marriage would have been far more difficult to imagine. More than a decade into post-gay marriage Scandinavia, out-of-wedlock birthrates have passed 50 percent, and the effective end of marriage as a protective shield for children has become thinkable. Gay marriage hasn't blocked the separation of marriage and parenthood; it has advanced it

WE SEE THIS most clearly in Norway. In 1989, a couple of years after Sweden broke ground by offering gay couples the first domestic partnership package in Europe, Denmark legalized de facto gay marriage. This kicked off a debate in Norway (traditionally more conservative than either Sweden or Denmark), which legalized de facto gay marriage in 1993. (Sweden expanded its benefits packages into de facto gay marriage in 1994.) In liberal Denmark, where out-of-wedlock birthrates were already very high, the public favored same-sex marriage. But in Norway, where the out-of-wedlock birthrate was lower--and religion traditionally stronger--gay marriage was imposed, against the public will, by the political elite.

Norway's gay marriage debate, which ran most intensely from 1991 through 1993, was a culture-shifting event. And once enacted, gay marriage had a decidedly unconservative impact on Norway's cultural contests, weakening marriage's defenders, and placing a weapon in the hands of those who sought to replace marriage with cohabitation. Since its adoption, gay marriage has brought division and decline to Norway's Lutheran Church. Meanwhile, Norway's fast-rising out-of-wedlock birthrate has shot past Denmark's. Particularly in Norway--once relatively conservative--gay marriage has undermined marriage's institutional standing for everyone.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp?pg=2

 

[jasendorf]

Unfortunately ScreamingEagle... all your quoted subject matter says is that marriage rates went down... says nothing about how those societies are doing... last time I checked, Norway, Denmark, et. al. are all doing pretty damn good in just about every societal measure available.

 

[Shogun]

and, the weekly standard is hardly a source worth considering due to it's obvious bias against homosexuals.


now, can you give me something that has no reason to fall on either side of this issue? something a little more factual and a little less opinion? Im asking for the same standard of objectivity that science requires. I gave you an example of an ANCIENT CULTURE that is rich in history where homosexuality once took on a prized role. This culture is STILL HERE TODAY and didn't implode and then come back as a gay hating japan.

I want to know, in accordance with your original claim, what SOCIETIES HAVE EVER BEEN DESTROYED BY HOMOSEXUALITY?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Unfortunately ScreamingEagle... all your quoted subject matter says is that marriage rates went down... says nothing about how those societies are doing... last time I checked, Norway, Denmark, et. al. are all doing pretty damn good in just about every societal measure available.

My original premise was that gay marriage damages the structure of society and I believe I have given plenty of evidence for that.

(However, if you think children being born out of wedlock is a good thing for children and society that is your opinion...and another argument.)

What a witty answer. You miss the point entirely. Marriage should be reserved simply for two people of the opposite gender because that is what forms the structure of our society. If you can prove that gay marriage would not damage that structure, then you might have a case but so far all evidence points to the opposite. I don't see any point in disrupting an institution that has been proven a basis for a healthy society throughout history and across cultures in order to pander to only about 2% of our population. Ridiculous.

 

[Shogun]

My original premise was that gay marriage damages the structure of society and I believe I have given plenty of evidence for that.

(However, if you think children being born out of wedlock is a good thing for children and society that is your opinion...and another argument.)

THEN SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

and remember that biased sources are about as interesting as lectures on the master race in mein komph.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

THEN SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

and remember that biased sources are about as interesting as lectures on the master race in mein komph.

What is it you don't understand?

Stanley Kurtz is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a contributing editor at National Review Online. He has written on some of the most controversial issues of the day — campus free speech, affirmative action, grade inflation, feminism, gay marriage, and the role of religion in public life. With a doctorate in social anthropology from Harvard University, Kurtz has also written at length on the social roots of Middle East terrorism and the role of women in the Muslim world. He has been published in the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Policy Review, Commentary, and the Chronicle of Higher Education. After conducting field research in India, Kurtz published extensively on religion, family life, and psychology in non-Western cultures. Formerly a Dewey Prize Lecturer in the social sciences at the University of Chicago, Kurtz has also won numerous teaching awards for his work in a great books program at Harvard University.

If you can come up with better credentials...

 

[Shogun]

hehehehe..

ok, dude. whatever. If you think what amounts to opinion editorial is anything remotly close to unbiased fact then I can see that there is no use in continueing this.


Hell, even L. Ron Hubbard and David Icke can flaunt their titles and venues too.


I'd have gone for ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of a society destroyed by homosexuality but since all you have to offer is some dudes diatribe against gays then I guess Ill go ahead and claim victory here and move on.

 

[Larkinn]

I'll answer one last time. Read about the disintegration of marriage in Scandinavia and Norway in particular.

Some excerpts:

And their culture is just falling apart. I mean just last week I read about the revolution that was formenting in Norway. Social unrest all over the place.

 

[Larkinn]

My original premise was that gay marriage damages the structure of society and I believe I have given plenty of evidence for that.

(However, if you think children being born out of wedlock is a good thing for children and society that is your opinion...and another argument.)

I'd still like to know how letting LESS people get married will somehow make LESS people be born out of wedlock? Plenty of gays have children these days...let them get married and they will be born in wedlock.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

hehehehe..

ok, dude. whatever. If you think what amounts to opinion editorial is anything remotly close to unbiased fact then I can see that there is no use in continueing this.


Hell, even L. Ron Hubbard and David Icke can flaunt their titles and venues too.


I'd have gone for ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of a society destroyed by homosexuality but since all you have to offer is some dudes diatribe against gays then I guess Ill go ahead and claim victory here and move on.

Your claim/demand that I'm saying/must prove that "a society [is] being destroyed by homosexuality" is a tad hysterical. What I've actually claimed is that gay marriage contributes to the decline of marriage. Thus I believe that since gay marriage is a factor in the "destruction" or undermining of marriage it is also a factor in the destruction of society as we know it - because marriage and the nuclear family have been key to the foundation and structure of our society.

Via Kurtz's argument you can see the negative effects of gay marriage upon Skandinavian countries, especially Norway. Kurtz has shown how gay marriage is one of the factors that contributes to marital decline. More children are being born out of wedlock. He demonstrated that the "conservative case" for gay marriage collapses in view of what is happening in Skandinavia. Same-sex marriage undermines the institution of marriage. Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.

Furthermore, societal attitudes are being changed to the point where there is little distinction between legalized marriage and cohabitation. Sweden is actually the model for America's most radical anti-marriage activists. Sweden adopted the world's first same-sex partnership legislation in 1987. Swedish marriage has weakened substantially since 1987. Same-sex partnerships are pushing Sweden toward recognition of triple and quadruple parenting. Sweden's same-sex partnerships have opened the way for a drive to abolish marriage and recognize polyamory.

You think that would be good for America?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes, the same stupid emotional epiphany that all liberals indulge in while reason goes flying out the window. If one were to stop and think that marriage is really about children and the structure of society, they would oppose gay "marriage" which is nothing more than an emotional aberration.

Except that liberals want to un-do the classic structure of our society and replace it with what THEY think society should look like.

 

[Shogun]

what you believe and what are facts may, in this case, are two different things.


"If you can prove that gay marriage would not damage that structure, then you might have a case but so far all evidence points to the opposite."

I've given you historic examples of homosexuality in Japan that did not damage it's structure.. whatever that means.

The countries with the longest track records today are already exhibiting problems.[

Like Japan? Greece?


Asking you for unbiased evidence to support your OPINION is hardly hysterical. Asking you to give me ONE EXAMPLE where your assertions have happened is hardly hysterical. Im still waiting, by the way.

ps.. society is not based on marriage. sorry, but it's not. Also, considering the reality of many, MANY cultures that function just fine with marriage traditions FAR removed from your own schema your original opinion pretty much falls on it's face.

Good greif, dude. Colonial Marriages were ARRANGED for christs sakes and you want to lecture me about nuclear families? dude. I told you, I dont care to hear your OPINION. Show me the EVIDENCE.


because marriage and the nuclear family have been key to the foundation and structure of our society

thats simply not true. our society would function just as well no matter what our marriage traditions looks like. the constitution wasnt written in order to preserve nuclear families.



your Kurt's stuff means nothing to me. His opinion uses weak ass correlations and relies on a political ideology lens. This is not what I mean by unbiased. Unbiased is, you know, facts and historic examples that don't rely on opinoinated drivel for interpretation. Kinda like how Japan's history of Samurai was not only revered but allowed that ancient culture to thrive despite it's open homosexuals. Can you show me one single example of one single culture that totally crashed and burned because of gays? Im not asking if you can blame gays for a,b,c and d. Im asking if you can provide worthwhile evidence to defend your opinon about gays in a society.


Also, of you dont mind, show me how "weak" we are for allowing couples to find their own relationship instead of parental prearrangement. Dont fear change, dude. It happens all the time without hving to get all chicken little about it.

BUT, if you can provide some evidence Ill be more than happy to take a look.