Gay Marriage: Is It Perhaps Moral to Oppose It Independent of Religion?

[FinalHeart95]

So, where should we stand? To support legal gay marriage is to support the following:

1) Happiness for the couple (or rather, more happiness than not legal gay marriage presumably)

2) Less expected income for the state per year

3) The same population we'd have anyway

Fixed.

Also, you know that whole "pursuit of happiness" deal? Yeah, there's no "pursuit of more income for the state".

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

But without god, what's moral?!

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismmyths/p/AtheistsMorals.htm
http://mwillett.org/atheism/moralsource.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/nontheism/atheism/morality-and-atheism.html

I'm fairly sure that Nimcha was being sarcastic.

 

[direkiller]

Yeah, and they're failing at it. The only way they'll succeed at that is if they count 'grow up to be upstanding and model citizens' as 'damage.'

Most of the studies i have seen say there is only one abnormality in kids raised by L/G parrents compared to outer family structures: there much more likely to be bullied growing up(which is a problem with how outer people raise kids)

 

[cthulhlu]

if gays get married the percentage of married couples would go up, the percentage of children being adopted would go up, the moral of roughly 10% of the population would increase significantly and there would be more couples to buy houses.
BUT THE INVISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY WOULD BE SLIGHTLY MORE ANGRY THEN HE IS NOW! RRRRAAAAAAAARRRR! BOW BEFORE HIM AND GIVE HIM MONEY!

 

[BlackWidower]

Yeah, and they're failing at it. The only way they'll succeed at that is if they count 'grow up to be upstanding and model citizens' as 'damage.'

Most of the studies i have seen say there is only one abnormality in kids raised by L/G parrents compared to outer family structures: there much more likely to be bullied growing up(which is a problem with how outer people raise kids)

Funnily enough, I heard something similar, which might be related. They are disproportionately more likely to feel (what they describe as) homophobia.

 

[Handbag1992]

if gays get married the percentage of married couples would go up, the percentage of children being adopted would go up, the moral of roughly 10% of the population would increase significantly and there would be more couples to buy houses.
BUT THE INVISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY WOULD BE SLIGHTLY MORE ANGRY THEN HE IS NOW! RRRRAAAAAAAARRRR! BOW BEFORE HIM AND GIVE HIM MONEY!

Only when he starts heating his churches. If common sense didn't turn me to Atheism frostbite would have.

 

[theguruofreason]

There are so many problems with the OP I almost don't know where to start. What you appear to have done is abstracted the notion of gay marriage from a context of within the actual United States, and then given it the context of some bizarre, non-existent country in which all people contribute to society, marriages and only marriages produce children, benefits of legal marriage are distributed with the expectation that the married couple will have children, married couples contribute less in taxes, and that there is no extra benefit of marriage being legally recognized by the state compared to simply being married informally. All of these notions are demonstrably false. Let's take them one at a time:

1. All people contribute to their society: Do I even have to explain this one? Every one of you knows someone who is a leech on society. Expecting every baby generated to have a positive contribution to society and the "power" of the country is so wildly naive that I don't even know what to say, OP, I really don't.

2. Marriages and only marriages produce children: This is represented by a clear lack of understanding of word definitions in the OP: "A common byproduct is children, which is the real goal here." A byproduct is not a real goal. Marriage is not necessary to create children (I can't believe I'm explaining this...), nor do all marriages of heterosexuals produce children. Using your kind of argument, infertile people should not be allowed to legally marry either.

3. Benefits of legal marriage are distributed with the expectation that the married couple will have children: What the hell do hospital visitation rights have to do with procreation? Benefits of legal marriage are distributed to encourage marriage (how obvious is that?!). Marriage has been shown to be a stabilizing social factor. When people get married and stay married they often end up having a lower incidence of disease and death due to disease, among other advantages. Marriage is good for society regardless of whether or not marriages produce children.

4. Married couples contribute less in taxes: While there is a small tax-benefit of marriage, married couples often actually produce more in taxes than non-married people when you account for other variables such as propensity for crime, stability at work, general demeanor, incidents of disease, etc. The benefits of marriage creating stability for two people often result in them being better producers for their country.

5. There is no extra benefit of marriage being legally recognized by the state compared to simply being married informally: The social benefit of a group being legally accepted by its government didn't come to mind? If homosexuals are not allowed to marry while heterosexuals are, this creates a social air of heterosexuality as the norm and heterosexuality as deviant and abnormal. Legally endorsing a lifestyle bears obvious social fruits. You can see this with heterosexual marriage: being unmarried by a certain age comes with a negative stigma. Legalizing gay marriage will do a lot for the gay community socially. If nothing else, this makes it worth doing.

I think if you reexamine the OP with this in mind, you'll see how trite and superfluous it is. Nothing about it makes any sense.

 

[masticina]

Such a nice movie indeed

Brilliant on so many things.. and funny to boot yes even the swastika dancing scene. Yes the biggest evils are worth laughing about. Pointing at and saying "You are such a weird thing"

And religious people who want to use their holy books to limit basic human rights.. well they deserve to be laughed at!

Well, not to mention it was intended to be tasteless. The whole goal was to find a play so horrific that it would close opening night.

And in that context, it was GLORIOUS.

Early on, a lot of Youtubers treated it like a love letter to the Third Reich. And they may still...I learned a long time ago not to read Youtube comments. It's...Saddening.

A loveletter to Hitler where he is played by a rather.. odd hippy. That is acting rather gay to say the least not to mention all the generals around him are. Very odd to!

But most never get that far. A shame really it is a good movie and Springtime for Hitler is hilariously wrong.

 

[cthulhlu]

if gays get married the percentage of married couples would go up, the percentage of children being adopted would go up, the moral of roughly 10% of the population would increase significantly and there would be more couples to buy houses.
BUT THE INVISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY WOULD BE SLIGHTLY MORE ANGRY THEN HE IS NOW! RRRRAAAAAAAARRRR! BOW BEFORE HIM AND GIVE HIM MONEY!

Only when he starts heating his churches. If common sense didn't turn me to Atheism frostbite would have.

But frostbite is proof that jesus fixed everything by dying for our sin's, he's the reasone we havent had a war since 10ad....