LGBT rights discussion

Invisusira's playground

Moderators: Aergis, Invisusira

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Sagara » Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:10 am

bldavis wrote:
Amirya wrote:
Sagara wrote:A more interesting concept would be: you might marry you best friend, or just about anyone of consenting age, without feelings or whatever.

Near as I can tell, there's currently nothing written in any law that says when you obtain an opposite gender spouse, you must also love them as a spouse.

accordingly to law marriage has nothing to do with love
all it does is provide certain rights and privileges to the two people who signed the marriage contract


And that's what so interesting! Any concept of feelings or caring is left right out of the entire marriage thingie.
In a pure logical context, there's no reason to stop marriage between any two consenting adults.
When that day comes, seek all the light and wonder of this world, and fight.

Worldie wrote:I used to like it [mean] back on Sylvanas.

Queldan - EU Stormrage (H) - Good night, sweet prince.
User avatar
Sagara
 
Posts: 3272
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:04 am
Location: Belgium

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby bldavis » Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:14 am

exactly
im not trying to step on toes or pick a fight, but love thy neighbor doesnt extend to allowing said neighbor the same rights and privliges you enjoy through a marriage contract?

one thing that i thought of last night is
oregon is a common law state, live together for 7 years and you are considered married
does that go for LGBT couples as well?
Image

Brekkie:Tanks are like shitty DPS. And healers are like REALLY distracted DPS
Amirya:Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego.
Flex:I don't make mistakes. I execute carefully planned strategic group wipes.
Levie:(in /g) It's weird, I have a collar and I dont know where I got it from, Worgen are kinky!
Levie:Drunk Lev goes and does what he pleases just to annoy sober Lev.
Sagara:You see, you need to *spread* the bun before you insert the hot dog.
User avatar
bldavis
 
Posts: 6111
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:04 pm
Location: Searching for myself. If i get back before I return, please have me stop and wait for myself.

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Passionario » Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:26 am

Treck wrote:I feel like im late to the party, but LGBT rights? that doesnt sound right.
Shouldnt it be "human rights".

It's complicated.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights establishes rights that are available to "All human beings" or "Everyone" - except for Article 16, which talks about the right to marry and to found a family. Said right is available to "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion".

As you can imagine, proponents of gay marriage interpret this as "People can marry anyone, as long as everyone involved is of full age", while their opponents read it is "People can marry anyone, as long as one party is an adult man and the other is an adult woman".
If you are not the flame, you're the fuel.
User avatar
Passionario
 
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:52 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:55 am

The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9505
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit


Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Sagara » Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:29 am



Classy move. I'll be the cynic saying it's probably not that important to Henson to lose Chik-fil-a, but at the very least, it's a statement.
When that day comes, seek all the light and wonder of this world, and fight.

Worldie wrote:I used to like it [mean] back on Sylvanas.

Queldan - EU Stormrage (H) - Good night, sweet prince.
User avatar
Sagara
 
Posts: 3272
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:04 am
Location: Belgium

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Shoju » Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:08 am

This will be my last post in this thread, since it appears that my presence only seems to derail the conversation.


I would respectfully disagree that this isn't about me Lieris. Just because I happen to be heterosexual makes this issue no less of an issue for me. It is also about poptart, and skye, and gab, and lev, and nika, and invis. It's about all of us. It is pretty easy to say that it isn't about us (meaning: Heterosexuals), because we are heterosexual, and this... 'particular' portion of human rights may not involve my lifestyle, but that doesn't mean that the next topic wont. It is about all of us, because like Treck said, it's about Human Rights. (props to you, the non native english speaker for making what I felt was a fantastic comment)

My personal feelings about the LGBT community don't matter, and I've tried to keep them out of the discussion. I have no problem with anyone who is gay. Some of my best friends in life have been gay. I didn't care. Being gay doesn't define them as a human being anymore than being hetero defines me as a human being, or that I'm half Mexican, or that Treck is European, and so on and so forth.

[anectdote you can skip if you want]
Hell, I had a roommate for a year shortly after I moved out of my parents house, and for 4 months, I had NO CLUE he was gay. It wasn't until I came home from work one day, and his boyfriend was over. It was humorous. The table had been hastily cleaned off, but obviously set for two. The couch had a blanket on it, and a couple of pillows. More than I had ever seen him sit / relax with. I thought "SWEET! He someone over! So I cleaned up a bit, and had to go to the bathroom. As I went down the hall, I saw some clothes. "Oh! Well, she looked a little "big" but, hey! Whatever!" I went in the bathroom to take a leak, and there were two pairs of Men's boxers on the floor. "oh.... It's a dude."

I was shocked, but not in a bad way. Suddenly, his behavior, and his secrecy, and his nondescript talks of plans made sense. He was nervous that I wouldn't approve. He knew my upbringing. So I tried to make the bathroom less... messy, and went back out, plopped on the couch, and watched the end of some baseball game.

When he emerged from his room later, he was embarrassed, and began to apologize. I told him to stop, I walked over, and gave him a hug, and I told him "If they make you happy, that's all I care about. Not whether the razor is for the legs, or the face."

And that was when I FULLY realized, that he was still my friend, he was still the same guy, he just didn't like women in the same way I did. Our friendship was better for me knowing. He died almost 3 years ago from Cancer, with the same man at his side. 11 years they spent together, the last few of them through some of the most terrible pain I have seen a human endure. I didn't care that they were gay. I cared that they loved each other, and that we could rationally, civilly, without getting angry have good talks about faith, and religion, and their desire to get married.
[End of Anecdote]

I don't write the anecdote to garner sympathy for my position of trying to defend poptart's words. I write it, to get you to understand MY POSITION. I don't care who you love. I don't care who you sleep with. Honeslty, I care more about the staggering divorce rate than I do about whether or not you are gay.

This is a very important topic for me. One that I feel everyone should care deeply about. It is a civil rights debate that is going on in more than just the USA, or a few other places. Like Treck said. This isn't about JUST LGBT rights. This is about Human rights. It is about the separation of rights from religion, and realizing that no matter what your religion, or faith, or lack of faith tells you, it is important that we are protecting everyone's rights.

That means both sides. I have defended poptart, because so few have. I defend him, because I understand where he is coming from. I understand that position very well. And I disagree with those people who feel his words were anything but civil. But in the interest of this being a rational talk, I'm bowing out. Too many people want to see me as Shoju "the problem" in this discussion. This isn't a discussion of WoW, or some other equally unimportant bullshit video game, or how I feel that Blizzard is bordering on jumping the shark with WoW. This is about You, me, and everyone else, trying to make a better world.

So in closing

I support gays rights to marry, or be joined in a civil union, or whatever you want to call it, so that their relationship is just as legally legitimate as a hetero marriage.

I support people of faith standing up for their religious beliefs, even when they know that it isn't a popular stance to take. I would be saddened if they didn't. It's a tough line to walk at times for those who claim to be a person of faith. If you speak out, you risk being condemned. If you don't speak out, you are condemned for not having the courage of your convictions.

I support both of these sides just as much as I support an artist's right to create a 'shocking' or 'thought provoking' painting, song, sculpture, or film. Even if I find it appalling, or revolting, or narrow minded, or whatever.

I feel this way, because I feel that everyone's rights should be protected, and I hope, that if the day ever came when my rights were being infringed upon, they would stand up and say "No. That's not right."
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5069
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Koatanga » Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:44 pm

I am also a hetero male. I am married and have a seven-year-old daughter.

I strongly support the right of same-sex couples to formalise their relationship in a way that is recognised by the law.

I strongly support people who have religious beliefs to be free to practice their religion.

I strongly feel that people should not impose their religion, or the teachings thereof, on people who do not believe in that religion, nor should they judge the behaviour of a person based on religious beliefs not held by that person.

Therefore, there is no debate on this issue for me. There is only one way that has any moral credibility, which is to support the rights of same-sex couples to have their relationship legally recognised.

Now here's the odd bit - I support the religious people's right to follow their own religion, so I support them blocking same-sex marriages from taking place in their churches, should they wish to block them. Hence, I think the "civil union" would be the way to go - provided civil union has the same legal rights and privileges of a marriage.
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Levantine » Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:53 pm

FWIW, I'm of the belief that the term 'marriage' should be stripped from the legal system entirely. Gays and straights should be involved in civil unions, and if you want to call it marriage then go get hitched in a church/mosque/synagogue after the fact to get it recognised by 'god', but it would have absolutely no additional legal standing. Easy as pie.
User avatar
Levantine
 
Posts: 7367
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: NQ, Aus

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:27 pm

Koatanga wrote:I am also a hetero male. I am married and have a seven-year-old daughter.

I strongly support the right of same-sex couples to formalise their relationship in a way that is recognised by the law.

I strongly support people who have religious beliefs to be free to practice their religion.

I strongly feel that people should not impose their religion, or the teachings thereof, on people who do not believe in that religion, nor should they judge the behaviour of a person based on religious beliefs not held by that person.

Therefore, there is no debate on this issue for me. There is only one way that has any moral credibility, which is to support the rights of same-sex couples to have their relationship legally recognised.

Now here's the odd bit - I support the religious people's right to follow their own religion, so I support them blocking same-sex marriages from taking place in their churches, should they wish to block them. Hence, I think the "civil union" would be the way to go - provided civil union has the same legal rights and privileges of a marriage.


This is basically me, sans me being married and with a kid.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9505
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Treck » Mon Jul 23, 2012 5:58 pm

Levantine wrote:FWIW, I'm of the belief that the term 'marriage' should be stripped from the legal system entirely. Gays and straights should be involved in civil unions, and if you want to call it marriage then go get hitched in a church/mosque/synagogue after the fact to get it recognised by 'god', but it would have absolutely no additional legal standing. Easy as pie.

I cant say anything other than that i completely agree.
Marriage is an outdated concept, just like everything else that is religion.
Thats why I sorta understand why people say gay's destroy marriage, cause they destroy what they think marriage stands for for them.
If people wanna be recognized as a couple by the state, the state approves them as a couple.
If anyone then wanna sprinkle some magic fairy dust on their union to be recognized by a magical man in the sky, you can still call yours "sacred" and keep the unworthy out of the loop.
User avatar
Treck
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:10 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Amirya » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:18 pm

I've always wondered...

If civil unions between two consenting adults (regardless of gender) are approved, what are the overly religious going to do when those civil unions start being called 'marriages' because they are recognised by faiths that do support same-sex civil unions?
Image

Fetzie wrote:The Defias Brotherhood is back, and this time they are acting as racketeers in Goldshire. Anybody wishing to dance for money must now pay them protection money or be charged triple the normal amount when repairing.
Amirya
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2959
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Jul 23, 2012 6:20 pm

Amirya wrote:I've always wondered...

If civil unions between two consenting adults (regardless of gender) are approved, what are the overly religious going to do when those civil unions start being called 'marriages' because they are recognised by faiths that do support same-sex civil unions?


throw a fit, stomp their feet and say that the government is overrun by socialist atheists/muslims that are anti-american.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 9505
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Lieris » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:02 pm

Levantine wrote:FWIW, I'm of the belief that the term 'marriage' should be stripped from the legal system entirely. Gays and straights should be involved in civil unions, and if you want to call it marriage then go get hitched in a church/mosque/synagogue after the fact to get it recognised by 'god', but it would have absolutely no additional legal standing. Easy as pie.


The abrahamic faiths didn't invent marriage. It doesn't belong to them.

A lot of non-religious and same sex couples don't want a civil union, they want a marriage.

Civil partnerships for same sex couples are legal in the UK but marriage is important enough that even our conservative government is pushing it through. Put simply there should be one law for all, not one law for the gays, one for the straights, one for the atheists, religious exemption on law X, sharia courts for the muslims, rabbinical ones for the jews etc.

Marriage is also much better as regards recognition abroad. Most EU states do not recognise civil partnerships even if its opposite sex.

All couples should be able to have a marriage, regardless of sexual orientation or faith (or lack thereof).
Lieris
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1522
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:49 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Treck » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:06 pm

Lieris wrote:A lot of non-religious and same sex couples don't want a civil union, they want a marriage.

For a non religious couple, whats really the differance?
User avatar
Treck
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:10 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Nikachelle » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:19 pm

Civil unions don't have the same rights/privileges as married couples, for one.
User avatar
Nikachelle
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 8406
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:39 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby bldavis » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:23 pm

Klaudandus wrote:
Amirya wrote:I've always wondered...

If civil unions between two consenting adults (regardless of gender) are approved, what are the overly religious going to do when those civil unions start being called 'marriages' because they are recognised by faiths that do support same-sex civil unions?


throw a fit, stomp their feet and say that the government is overrun by socialist atheists/muslims that are anti-american.

so...what they do now?

i think levie's point is a great one, and i whole heartedly agree

plus that eases the headaches with religions and marriage
such as the RLDS church and polygamy
civil unions are locked to 2 consenting adults, and a CU is what provides the spousal rights
marriage can be however many you want, you just only get spousal rights/privileges with the one person in a CU with you
Image

Brekkie:Tanks are like shitty DPS. And healers are like REALLY distracted DPS
Amirya:Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego.
Flex:I don't make mistakes. I execute carefully planned strategic group wipes.
Levie:(in /g) It's weird, I have a collar and I dont know where I got it from, Worgen are kinky!
Levie:Drunk Lev goes and does what he pleases just to annoy sober Lev.
Sagara:You see, you need to *spread* the bun before you insert the hot dog.
User avatar
bldavis
 
Posts: 6111
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:04 pm
Location: Searching for myself. If i get back before I return, please have me stop and wait for myself.

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Lieris » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:25 pm

Treck wrote:
Lieris wrote:A lot of non-religious and same sex couples don't want a civil union, they want a marriage.

For a non religious couple, whats really the differance?


Again, what does marriage have to do with religion?

I think I explained well enough regarding the difference especially on an international level.
Lieris
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1522
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:49 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Levantine » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:40 pm

Just putting it out there but in my head, the solution I put forth would destroy the concept of marriage being a legal term. Civil partnerships would be the same as marriage is now, just with a different name because apparently Churchies are fucking loud and annoying on this subject. I'm currently not able to get to a computer to put my thoughts down properly so I'd imagine some gets lost in the clipped nature of my phone typing.

Would there be international dramas if the country didn't have marriage at all and instead had civil unions? I'd imagine if the two were identical in all but name probably not, but I'm bad at eu.
User avatar
Levantine
 
Posts: 7367
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: NQ, Aus

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Lieris » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:53 pm

The term marriage has too much significance though. It's too entrenched in people's psyche and in law to be suddenly excised and given exclusively to the religious (and again, not all religious groups are against same sex marriage and some gay people are religious). Doing that to pacify the louder religious folk is not a good reason.

Regarding civil unions, an opposite sex couple can have one in France. They go over the border to Italy and boom, they are in a state where their "marriage" is not recognised. http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/fa ... dex_en.htm

Civil unions in France are often seen as a stopgap for opposite sex couples because you can't inherit from your spouse when he/she dies but you get the point.

Even if on a national level civil partnership and marriage confer the same rights, on an international recognition and immigration level it doesn't work out like that.
Lieris
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1522
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:49 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Fridmarr » Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:04 pm

Lieris wrote:The term marriage has too much significance though. It's too entrenched in people's psyche and in law to be suddenly excised and given exclusively to the religious (and again, not all religious groups are against same sex marriage and some gay people are religious). Doing that to pacify the louder religious folk is not a good reason.
You could say the same thing about opposite sex marriage, but that's hardly a good reason. The idea is that there is no legal concept of marriage exactly because of that overarching significance you refer too which goes well beyond the legal associations with the term. Legally there is just civil unions for everyone.

That doesn't stop anyone from getting married, so marriage does not become an exclusively religious thing. Folks can still get married but that relationship only has value to the couple and whatever entity they associate it with.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 6465
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Koatanga » Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:56 pm

Lieris wrote:The term marriage has too much significance though. It's too entrenched in people's psyche and in law to be suddenly excised and given exclusively to the religious (and again, not all religious groups are against same sex marriage and some gay people are religious). Doing that to pacify the louder religious folk is not a good reason.

Regarding civil unions, an opposite sex couple can have one in France. They go over the border to Italy and boom, they are in a state where their "marriage" is not recognised. http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/fa ... dex_en.htm

Civil unions in France are often seen as a stopgap for opposite sex couples because you can't inherit from your spouse when he/she dies but you get the point.

Even if on a national level civil partnership and marriage confer the same rights, on an international recognition and immigration level it doesn't work out like that.


There will always be an international problem, as long as some countries don't allow same-sex marriage/union/whatever. A same-sex proper marriage performed in Finland would not be legal in the US because the US only recognises a marriage between a man and a woman. Calling it a marriage instead of a Civil Union makes no difference.

Currently, there are more countries recognising Civil Unions between same-sex partners than there are countries that recognise marriage between them. In that respect, you're better off getting a Civil Union.

I checked New Zealand, by the way. The Civil Union had every right and privilege that a marriage has except that people in a civil union cannot adopt jointly (although they may adopt individually). One presumes we still have a fear that the parents will pass gay to their adopted child, conveniently ignoring the fact that every single gay person in the world came from a straight coupling.
Un-Retired. Ish. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Passionario » Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:39 pm

In view of the spirit of universal love and acceptance that is currently dominant in this thread, would it be too forward of me to ask those fine ladies and gentlemen who don't believe in the existence of a higher power to kindly refrain from making quips about God as "magical fairy in the sky" or "imaginary friend"?

As far a internet communities go, Maintankadin is a remarkably mature place. We recognize that belonging to a particular gender does not give us a license to make sexist jokes about our counterparts of the opposite sex; we understand that being a member of a given race does not entitle us to make racist remarks towards those whose skin happens to have a different color; we agree that having citizenship in a given country is not a free pass to launching nationalist diatribes based on offensive foreign stereotypes, and so forth.

Which, to be honest, makes these casual anti-theist insults all the more hurtful. :(
If you are not the flame, you're the fuel.
User avatar
Passionario
 
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:52 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby Treck » Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:52 am

Nikachelle wrote:Civil unions don't have the same rights/privileges as married couples, for one.

Over here its pretty much exactly the same thing.
I think the term civil union was even removed as they realized there was in essence no difference at all and calling it two different things didnt make sense.
People who have registered a partnership in another country, is officially counted as if they were married by all laws and regulation in sweden.
User avatar
Treck
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:10 am

Re: LGBT rights discussion

Postby KysenMurrin » Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:12 am

Civil partnerships in the UK are identical to marriage, too, even down to inheritence and responsibility for a spouse's children. It's mostly just the cultural baggage, the widespread perception of one being lesser, that drives the push to have marriages equalised also (that, and gay people who are religious - religious elements are specifically excluded from civil partnership ceremonies).

(There's also a much smaller push to allow civil partnerships for opposite-sex couples.)
KysenMurrin
 
Posts: 4957
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:37 am
Location: UK

PreviousNext

Return to Arkham Asylum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest