By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Slimebeast on 17 July 2010
Edit Thread
highwaystar101 said:
Slimebeast said:

They should not allow it to be called marriage. Some legal unity, partner registration I am fine with, but in that case polygamy should be allowed too. And siblings should be allowed to register partnership with each other and so on. And maybe even a child with his mother (as long as he's an adult), but wouldn't that be awkward? You see the point. Are you all pro-gay marriage people in favor of polygamy and in favor of a son marrying his mother?

And about the right to adopt, society isn't ready yet for gay couples to adopt kids. Being adopted is very sensitive. The suicide rate among adopted kids is much higher than among other kids. You burden these children too much by risking them to get bullied for having gay parents.


Why not? I'm pro-gay marriage and in favour of polygamy, I don't really see the taboo. And whilst I personally find the idea of incest repulsive, I'm not going to demand that these people have less right to be together than any other two people, because like everyone else they should have the right to love whoever they want.

Mind you, in my opinion all relationships akin to marriage should be a civil union, and a marriage should only be recognised by the institution that grants it. This way a marriage holds no more rights than a civil union, it is is only a recognition of  relationship by an independent group.

If Islam, christianity and other religions want to be bogged down by millennia old dogmas about homosexuality and not recognise the relationships, then so be it. Just as long as they don't affect the rights of the homosexuals to love who they want.

...

And as brought up already, the right for gay couples to adopt will become more accepted as it becomes more normal. As with anything controversial it's not going to be accepted straight away by the masses, but in time it will be accepted as the norm.

Besides I know of a few people whose parents have come out as homosexual after they born, and they live with either two mothers or two fathers. By that reasoning should we deem those parents who already have children, but have realised their sexual preference, as less capable parents as those who are heterosexual? Going to the extreme, should we take their children off them for being homosexual and give them to heterosexual couples? Of course not.

What exactly do u mean by civil union? Does that mean that, unlike today, there would be no governmental involvement with any partnership - no judicial or economical matters, no inheritance between couples? From the governments point of view all citizens are looked upononly as individuals?

I'll wait for your definition before I reply.