Homosexual marriage

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by inked

I think you contradict yourself here. The pressure from the infertile couples is not driving cloning at present. But, if gay "marriage" is instituted then the necessity for cloning would be enhanced by the "infertility" of gay couples who would no doubt feel obliged to stridently demand it. I can hear the pre-echoes of the gay argument for goverment sponsored cloning even now. The argument is to assert parity and then demand special status.

I didn't say the pressure from the infertile couples is driving cloning. That's not the case at all. And if infertile couples of today aren't demanding cloning, then gay couples won't either.

[The Gaffer]

Wow, gay marriage and its stem cell research hidden agenda.

I think we have a contender for Paranoid Right-Wing Delusion of the Week, people.

[Nurvingiel]

Er, yes Inked. Children are not required or desired by the married couple. Some married couples choose to have children. Some unmarried couples choose to have children.

Saying that gay marriage would somehow correlate to an increase in stem-cell research and/or human cloning is definitely making too many assumptions.

Firstly, for those gay couples who do want to have/take care of children, adoption and surrogacy are already two perfectly legal and possible options that exist.

Why would someone circumvent these options and demand a clone of themselves? Human cloning is not necessarily about reproduction or fertility; I think you're talking about a whole different animal here (if you'll forgive the pun ). Same with stem-cell research. Why would someone demand a science in its infancy (again, sorry about the pun ) when other options already exist? What you say does not make any sense.

[Valandil]

Oh dear. It appears that inked is taking the flak that should be more appropriately directed at me.

I'm hardly paranoid about this - and don't think it's the whole reason behind the push for gay marriage, by any means. However, a bit of observation shows us that Point A generally leads to Point B, which leads to Point C, etc.

Let me ask it this way:

For those of you who oppose research involving human cells - which could include cloning, fusion of genomes, stem-cell research, whatever - and who also favor homosexual marriage: If the law allows/allowed for homosexual marriage, would you be more sympathetic to allowing whatever cellular research you're otherwise opposed to - because it shows promise of granting homosexual couples the child they cannot naturally have otherwise? (EDIT: including supporting changes in laws that prohibit such research?)

Just curious.

[inked]

It's okay Val, I can take it. *snif, snif*

But it's so much easier to attack Inked than to think and answer Valandil's question, isn't it precioussessssssssss?

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Valandil

For those of you who oppose research involving human cells - which could include cloning, fusion of genomes, stem-cell research, whatever - and who also favor homosexual marriage: If the law allows/allowed for homosexual marriage, would you be more sympathetic to allowing whatever cellular research you're otherwise opposed to - because it shows promise of granting homosexual couples the child they cannot naturally have otherwise? (EDIT: including supporting changes in laws that prohibit such research?)

Well I'm not against research on human cells but if I were, I don't see how I'd be more inclined to support such research if gay marriage was allowed. As I said in my previous post, if something was to make me reassess my view on cellular research, it would be if infertile couples suddenly started lobbying for it. That would be completely independent of whether gays were allowed to marry or not. I believe many people think like me - I mean, why would married gays be so important on people's view on cloning when there are already so many infertile couples out there?

[Butterbeer]

OFF TOPIC.

(just thought i'd save you some time Spock )

..throws some flak at Val, just to make him feel at home ...

Stranger in a strange land, Inked???

ON topic:

Actually, being serious, some of the works of Robert 'Rober' Heinlein throw some interesting perspectives on the whole gay marriage / cloning issue.
In the book mentioned above, a Martian comes to earth, and we are all (humans - and Inked! - well he's a talking lion! ) strange and new to it ... he absorbs our culture and views everything from an alien viewpoint...

i beleive the word "strange" bears some relevance here ...

So: How much is the argument here about that something is different or strange or new?

... and how much about various religious codes may or may not condone it?

Is gay marriage a good thing or a bad thing?

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Valandil

For those of you who oppose research involving human cells - which could include cloning, fusion of genomes, stem-cell research, whatever - and who also favor homosexual marriage: If the law allows/allowed for homosexual marriage, would you be more sympathetic to allowing whatever cellular research you're otherwise opposed to - because it shows promise of granting homosexual couples the child they cannot naturally have otherwise? (EDIT: including supporting changes in laws that prohibit such research?)

I still think you're mixing apples with oranges. Neither stem cell research or cloning is going to be the road homosexuals are going to take if they want children. So why make it one in the first place if it's likely not to be used?

If cloning and stem cell research are ever going to be part of the mainstream medical field, I think they will only be used to cure illnesses and to grow transplant organs. Using them for giving childless couples children, when there are many other, easier ways to obtain that is IMO like shooting a musquito with a canon.

Secondly, I don't think that because you supports one controversial topic that you automatically have to support the next one even if they might have a tiny connection between them.

[Butterbeer]

you are not worried by a massive GAY clone army in resplendent uniforms inspired by the village people, marching on the free world and insisting on equal rights to wedlock then?

what of the gay cloned threat to the apples and orange selling industry? Don't forget the pear industry either ..apples and pears!

...

[The Gaffer]

Well, I thought it was pretty evident that we DID take it seriously, gave it thought, thanked Valandil for raising it, and discussed it. Isn't that what forums are for?

Looking at your follow-up post, Val, it seems that you've observed correctly that people who oppose gay marriage (often but not always) also oppose stem cell research.

I guess you've pointed out a potential link in those people's minds that most of us had ever thought of.

Trying to see it from that perspective, I think to make the connection I would have to be a) absolutely convinced that stem cell research is immoral and b) genuinely of the belief that gays are somehow on the march to bring society to its knees.

a) is fine, but b) is paranoia, IMO.

[Butterbeer]

and what of c) the fruit sellers issue?

[Insidious Rex]

Im guessing this is part of the Gay Agenda fears of christian conservatives? That gays will first take over marriage then our school systems thereby brainwashing our children and finally will clone themselves and create a gay army and take over the world. And then all children will be taken away from their families and the homosexual sex camps will begin...

And then they will make the gay death star!

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

Using them for giving childless couples children, when there are many other, easier ways to obtain that is IMO like shooting a musquito with a canon.

I smell a Monty Python reference...

And then they will make the gay death star!

Yes, and don't forget the Flamin' hot Pink Super Star Destroyers.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Im guessing this is part of the Gay Agenda fears of christian conservatives? That gays will first take over marriage then our school systems thereby brainwashing our children and finally will clone themselves and create a gay army and take over the world. And then all children will be taken away from their families and the homosexual sex camps will begin...

And then they will make the gay death star!

Actually, that doesn't sound too far off sometimes.... Kidding.

but here's something, and I don't say it is the whole issue in a nutshell, I only offer it as a certain perspective on a certain area in this whole issue...

Just bieng gay is untraditional right? And Gay Marriage would be extra-untraditional.
And if I'm right in assuming, most gays are rather radical thinkers, and therefore could be classified as left-wing. Completely untraditional isn't it?

Now Marriage is tradition. Moral, Institutional, whatever...it has always been that Marriage is something to be held in an elevation, even if the couples are not etc...

Working logically from that, and seeing that we live in an age where unmarried couples (that is including heterosexual couples) live together and have kids for years before getting married, why do gays want to be married so badly?

It can't be the legal aspect anymore, because we know that you can get "civil partnerships" or whatever that give you married couples benefits.

And SURELY, SURELY it can't be because it "just won't feel right until" they are legally married.

The most anti-tradition kind of people want tradition to give them a nodding approval?

It can only be this: they want their voice to be heard, blah blah, and they don't give a creek nickel about what things should stay the way they are for either moral or societal reasons.

I tell you, its political, except that hey can make it seem like they're "victims" in cruel age of "intolerance".

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Just bieng gay is untraditional right?

Not necessarily...define 'gay'.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

Not necessarily...define 'gay'.

Well, I mean "out of norm" sexual behaviour, though I don't say "completely unknown" throughout history...

[Jonathan]

C'mon Hector. First of all the assumption that most gays are radical is flawed. There are many conservative gays out there, gays who go to church, who are traditionalists and who vote republican

Why do gays want to be married so badly? You should be able to figure this one out yourself. Getting married isn't the key issue here. The wish to be treated in the same way as heterosexual couples. The wish to be considered equals in the eyes of society. If gays want to marry or just remain unmarried is secondary, but of course many gays want the RIGHT to marry - no matter if they're never going to anyway!

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

C'mon Hector. First of all the assumption that most gays are radical is flawed. There are many conservative gays out there, gays who go to church, who are traditionalists and who vote republican

And I acknowledge this...I have heard of them. Though perhaps you are bunching up "republican-voting" with "church going", whereas the church-goers may be the one's bieng elected Bishops or whatever in the Episcopal Church, and are completely liberal.
But that aside...

Why do gays want to be married so badly? You should be able to figure this one out yourself. Getting married isn't the key issue here. The wish to be treated in the same way as heterosexual couples. The wish to be considered equals in the eyes of society. If gays want to marry or just remain unmarried is secondary, but of course many gays want the RIGHT to marry - no matter if they're never going to anyway!

That reasoning that says it's because of the way they want to be treated, it's just not that convincing for me.
I know they want to be treated as equal citezens just like Joe next door, but perhaps we in the US have progressed that far? It's rare these days to hear about "gay-haters"...these days a lot of people are angry with (angry, not hating) them BECAUSE of the Gay Marriage issue. I don't think that saying that to them (gays) will or should convince them, but that's what it seems to be.
As for in the "eyes of society", thats up to THEM, them as responsible people. Whatever stereotypes there are about the AIDS afflicted-gay, it is NOT the fault of heterosexuals. Some are responsible gays, some are not...but that issue of bieng seen well in the "eyes of society" is completely for them to accomplish personally. Though I admit, the ACLU doesn't help IMO...

[Spock]

...kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out

this blather is exhausting

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

That reasoning that says it's because of the way they want to be treated, it's just not that convincing for me.
I know they want to be treated as equal citezens just like Joe next door, but perhaps we in the US have progressed that far? It's rare these days to hear about "gay-haters"...these days a lot of people are angry with (angry, not hating) them BECAUSE of the Gay Marriage issue. I don't think that saying that to them (gays) will or should convince them, but that's what it seems to be.

I don't understand your reasoning. Should the gay marriage movement stop up and think "were making matters worse, let's settle and forget all about this issue"? As far as I know, Americans in particular are eager to stand up and fight for their rights. Can't you relate to those gays and gay couples who feel society and the government view them as inferiour to heterosexual couples? Can't you relate to their fight for the rights that they think they are entitled to?
Heck, if I pay my taxes and do my share for the country, I sure want the government to treat me the way other taxpayers are treated

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

As for in the "eyes of society", thats up to THEM, them as responsible people. Whatever stereotypes there are about the AIDS afflicted-gay, it is NOT the fault of heterosexuals. Some are responsible gays, some are not...but that issue of bieng seen well in the "eyes of society" is completely for them to accomplish personally. Though I admit, the ACLU doesn't help IMO...

I disagree. A society, based on whatever traditions it has, might just continue have a negative view on gays or gay marriage or whatever. It wouldn't matter how responsible the gays are. In that situation, the only right thing to do is to start a debate and talk about it.

Also I think it's wrong to see gays as a group separated from the rest of us. You could never say "oh we're so responsible but the gays (or democrats, blondes or even chocolate-lovers) aren't". If the majority of the people in a society are responsible, then so are the gays (and chocolate-lovers like myself too )