Gay Rights, Marriage, Children, Whats Wrong With It?

[kanook]

Hi all, Just thought I would ask the question to see what my fellow Atheists feel about it, the question of Gay Rights.

I am a heterosexual male, I have been married to my beautiful wife for Twenty One years, and we dated for 4 years before getting married, so thats a total of 25 years together, and we have a seventeen year old son who is a computer addict and swears we are being unfair for making him empty the dishwasher :D

Anyway, when I grew up in Brisbane, I had Gay friends, both male and female. These people were great friends and I found them to be kind, caring, considerate and wonderful friends!

My question is that are our laws that deny these people the right to marry and adopt children based on our leaders religious beliefs?

This is the only reason I can think of! You cant say that because someone is gay then they cant love. You cant say because someone is gay then they cant be married, I mean I love my wife and we got married because we love each other, so why cant gay Australians share the same basic rights that we heterosexual Australians have??

We have laws in this country that protect peoples rights to their religious beliefs, we make a law that protects peoples rights when it comes to pretend Gods but we wont make a law that gives the simple right of marriage to another human being?

What are you views?

[pedrico]

My question is that are our laws that deny these people the right to marry and adopt children based on our leaders religious beliefs?
Others will disagree, but I think you'll find most of our laws have their roots in christian doctrine.

[riddlemethis]

Let's look at the specific law and see what it says.

[ugu80]

See my post in Priests, Sexual Abuse and Homosexuality:

Denial of homosexual marriage (and adoption) is a denial of human rights.

[Dane]

Others will disagree, but I think you'll find most of our laws have their roots in christian doctrine.
That's true. The law moving away from religion, though, has allowed women to rise above the status of property in marriage, given them the right to vote, decriminalised homosexuality (very recent :confused:) and in other places more civilised than us, recognised euthanasia and gay marriage.

[Logic]

I'm of the 'don't know why gay people want to get married (cause I don't) but if they really feel the need then they should be able to' school of thought.

[ugu80]

I'm of the 'don't know why gay people want to get married (cause I don't) but if they really feel the need then they should be able to' school of thought.


Because they love each other and want a public commitment to a life together, just like heterosexuals.

[nari]

Heaps of heteros never get married - they can't see the point. But if they - or homosexuals - want the marriage thing, then I can't see any problem. Why not?

I sense the real reason is religious in origin - it's a sin. It's also a sin to "know" someone's wife/husband but nobody these days takes too much notice of that....

nari

[Logic]

Because they love each other and want a public commitment to a life together, just like heterosexuals.

I think you misunderstood me, I don't understand why heterosexuals feel the need to get married to show their commitment. However, each to their own and like I said if someone wants to then they should be able to regardless of sexual preference.

[ugu80]

I think you misunderstood me, I don't understand why heterosexuals feel the need to get married to show their commitment. However, each to their own and like I said if someone wants to then they should be able to regardless of sexual preference.


Same. Its an over-rated cultural anachronism, but it's important to some people.

[Kosmos]

I'm of the 'don't know why gay people want to get married (cause I don't) but if they really feel the need then they should be able to' school of thought.


It is quite simple, your legal rights and status change as a defacto/married couple. Marriage is more than a simple ceremony, it is a binding legal contract that permits a relationship to be legally recognised and under which both parties have attained additional rights.

But in answer to the question, I see absolutely no reason whatsoever why gay and lesbian people should not be allowed access to this. These people should be able to obtain the same legal status as hetero couples do via marriage.

[Logic]

It is quite simple, your legal rights and status change as a defacto/married couple. Marriage is more than a simple ceremony, it is a binding legal contract that permits a relationship to be legally recognised and under which both parties have attained additional rights.

Sorry, under the new defacto laws there are no legal reasons to get married anymore. (Except maybe if you are gay then you could experience problems with superannuation etc...but for heterosexuals no). It's tradition.
p.s I'm no lawyer, but that was the advice I was given by a family law expert

Perhaps the defacto laws for gay people need to be reviewed as well?!

Anyway, thread derail.

[nari]

Aye, de facto = marriage status. Exactly the same issues arise in marriage as in de facto relationships; and they are dealt with in the same way.

I would expect gay couples with kids will become the norm within years - and we might stop worrying about the lack of mother/father figure in such relationships. Who knows?

It's speculation that may turn out goodly (sic) or badly.... it's worth thinking of those kids trapped in unsatisfactory hetero relationships...and there are many of them.

nari

[Flyingphil172]

I don't think any atheist has ever had a problem with this. Anyone know of one that does?

Only the usual religious suspects seem to hold the opposition, presumably due to various statements in the bible and koran.

[atheist_angel]

I'm for same-sex marriage, yet I'm opposed to opposite-sex marriage. :rolleyes:

I think we need to evolve 'beyond' marriage, but I think same-sex couples need to be seen as equals and equally qualified to raise\foster\adopt\have childen. (if that makes any sense)

[rainbowings15]

I definatly don't see a problem with it. It's religion weilding it's big fear stick yet again and I just hate that. I have gay friends whom I value very much. Beautiful people.
And another thing, I heard on the news today that the vat swill are saying it's homosexual priests who are molesting children, not your usual sexually repressed priest. How bloody dare they twist it like that. :mad:

[kanook]

Only the usual religious suspects seem to hold the opposition, presumably due to various statements in the bible and koran.

The big trouble is these "Usual religious suspects" are always the ones in Government.

I am sick and tired of a whole section of our community have less rights than others.

A guy that beats his woman and children, can be married and can have children.

A drug addict, can be married and have children.

A violent bloke that punches on outside nightclubs, can be married and have children.

A convicted rapist, can be married and have children.

And yet a whole group of people cant be married and have children and I have yet to hear why?

I have never heard a Government Minister explain why they cant, except for the usual one line statement that marriage has always legally been between a man and a woman. Well it use to be legal to send children down the mines to work, it use to be legal to beat your wife, it use to be legal to keep women out of bars, it use to be legal to refuse a loan to a woman unless her husband signed the loan documents, it use to be legal to hang people! All of this has changed and I want to know why the Gay marriage and parental rights havent?

[Loki]

I'd like to try a marriage of four; two husbands and two wives. Better for division of labour, better for providing for everyones needs when everyone is so busy. Can't see a down side personally.

Why are we stuck with this one size fits all model? No reason for it I can see.

[pedrico]

I'll think you'll find that gay people want to get married because it is a legal and ethical acknowledgement that they have become accepted - at least to an extent - into the cultural norms of the dominant culture.

[rainbowings15]

Well said Kanook and all of the above. I hate the old chessnut that marriege is for procreation. Well, if thats the main reason, those who don't want to have kids shouldn't be alllowed to marry. Of course thats rediculous. The god fearing ultra conservative want the sole rights to the breeding programme. It's an insult to human compassion and dignity. And as kenook said, times change and it should be now.

[c2009]

Indeed. The religious lobbies have FAR too much influence on things. It's insane that 70% of Australians support this, and yet our politicians obstinately ignore the issue.

[Ivan Tudor C McHock]

Hi all, Just thought I would ask the question to see what my fellow Atheists feel about it, the question of Gay Rights.

I am a heterosexual male, I have been married to my beautiful wife for Twenty One years, and we dated for 4 years before getting married, so thats a total of 25 years together, and we have a seventeen year old son who is a computer addict and swears we are being unfair for making him empty the dishwasher :D

Anyway, when I grew up in Brisbane, I had Gay friends, both male and female. These people were great friends and I found them to be kind, caring, considerate and wonderful friends!

My question is that are our laws that deny these people the right to marry and adopt children based on our leaders religious beliefs?

This is the only reason I can think of! You cant say that because someone is gay then they cant love. You cant say because someone is gay then they cant be married, I mean I love my wife and we got married because we love each other, so why cant gay Australians share the same basic rights that we heterosexual Australians have??

We have laws in this country that protect peoples rights to their religious beliefs, we make a law that protects peoples rights when it comes to pretend Gods but we wont make a law that gives the simple right of marriage to another human being?

What are you views?

For the record, I'm straight and married. I state this only to show that my views have nothing to do with self-interest.

As for the title question, what's wrong with it? - well, the answer is nothing. In my 43 years I have yet to hear an argument against it which makes sense. All of the "reasons" for homophobia are rooted in religious hysteria and loathing. And, of course, the reason religions have adopted this pose is simply because it is not good for business. The doctrine of "be fruitful and multiply" is all about getting more bums on seats and more money in the collection plate. Folks who don't barf out kids by the dozen do nothing to help Reverend Kiddiefucker avoid getting a real job.

Unfortunately the poison of fear and loathing of gay people has spread beyond the church and it probably starts in the schoolyard. If you're not out there hating you might be thought a woolly moof yourself. Better to be play it safe & hate with the religious morons, eh? Anyone who is not a church-going headnodder but IS a homophobe needs to take a fucking good look in the mirror.

The laws which deny gay people the right to marry and adopt children are an absolute disgrace and are indicative of the primitive tribe of apes that most of us still are.

[hooa]

"My question is that are our laws that deny these people the right to marry and adopt children based on our leaders religious beliefs?"

Not sure really ... Apparently the dynamics and priorities in a homosexual relationship are very different to heterosexual ... I think they are seen to lack long term stability which would be a requirement for adoption...

For instance, (this is what I’ve read) ... The average long term gay relationship is a lot shorter than in straight ....Frequency of sex in gay relationships is a higher priority in holding the relationship together than with straight couples ... I've heard gay guys say that if there no sex in their relationships then it’s over ... This is not really the case with straight couples who will often stay together for the sake of raising a family ... Gay relationships have higher rates of violence and promiscuity ... I haven’t got all the stats on these but Im sure they’re easy to find...

[atheist_angel]

"My question is that are our laws that deny these people the right to marry and adopt children based on our leaders religious beliefs?"

Not sure really ... Apparently the dynamics and priorities in a homosexual relationship are very different to heterosexual ... I think they are seen to lack long term stability which would be a requirement for adoption...

For instance, (this is what I’ve read) ... The average long term gay relationship is a lot shorter than in straight ....Frequency of sex in gay relationships is a higher priority in holding the relationship together than with straight couples ... I've heard gay guys say that if there no sex in their relationships then it’s over ... This is not really the case with straight couples who will often stay together for the sake of raising a family ... Gay relationships have higher rates of violence and promiscuity ... I haven’t got all the stats on these but Im sure they’re easy to find...

You making this claim about men or women!

btw, Are these religious people claiming these stats are true?

The source of the stats can explain the degree of bias.

The stats don't really matter though. Discrimination is discrimination.

[ugu80]

There are still very stable, long term gay relationships. I would imagine adoption would require an invasive investigation of the prospective adopters to vet and cull the inappropriate.

[kanook]

There are still very stable, long term gay relationships. I would imagine adoption would require an invasive investigation of the prospective adopters to vet and cull the inappropriate.

Exactly right, the same way straight couples have to be investigated before adoption.

[ugu80]

Exactly right, the same way straight couples have to be investigated before adoption.


I'd wager the vetting of a gay couple would be like the spanish inquisition compared to hetero couple.
(No one expects the spanish inquisition, Cardinal Fang.)

[Logic]

Just a heads up...

This Saturday is a global day of action against homophobia, and a national day of action for same-sex marriage. In the lead-up to the federal election, it’s crucial that we keep our marching boots on so we really get our message across loud and clear that we will not accept the Rudd government’s homophobic laws. Let’s make this an election issue! Come out and march simultaneously with thousands of others across the country!

Nationwide rally details:


Melbourne: May 15, 1pm, State Library
Sydney: May 15, 1pm, Sydney Town Hall
Brisbane: May 15, 1pm, Queens Park
Canberra: May 15, 1pm, Petrie Plaza, Civic
Adelaide: May 15, 1pm, Parliament House, North Terrace
Perth: May 15, 1pm, Wesley Church, Cnr Hay St/William St
Wollongong: May 15, 1pm, The Amphitheatre, Crown St Mall

Visit our website for more details. See you on Saturday!

Yours equally,

The Equal Love team
www.equallove.info (http://t.ymlp198.com/uaaamewaoaeuemaxauuj/click.php)

Is anyone going to the Brisbane one?

[gruber]

I hate how some religous nutters have said that its not healthy for a child to have gay parents and fight and fight and fight to make sure theres no law making helping gay partners. Strange how they dont act with the same fantacism with abusvie drug addicted parents (which there are a fair few near where i live) that have 15 kids to 16 different men:confused:.

[GodwinGrey]

mOMI-eeNs-E

[Logic please]

For instance, (this is what I’ve read) ... The average long term gay relationship is a lot shorter than in straight ....Frequency of sex in gay relationships is a higher priority in holding the relationship together than with straight couples ... I've heard gay guys say that if there no sex in their relationships then it’s over ... This is not really the case with straight couples who will often stay together for the sake of raising a family ... Gay relationships have higher rates of violence and promiscuity ... I haven’t got all the stats on these but Im sure they’re easy to find...

Sorry hooa, but without some reasonable evidence (preferably not contaminated by "confirmation bias"), I'd consider all these statements to be in the category of "outrageous generalisation"...

I have personally seen a number of heterosexual marriages, between people of comparable ages, and all quite young, break down after 2-3 years... based on this, I think it's incredibly presumptuous to assert without real evidence that "one" type of relationship is automatically more committed or monogamous than others...

I see no logical reason to deny committed gay couples full relationship recognition and legal benefits... especially now that legal marriage can be completely secular, and can be chosen to be child-free!

Surely the institution of marriage is devalued less by the sexual orientation of the participants, and more by early breakdown regardless of sexual orientation!

[Enginseer]

Marriage in the religious sense should stay preserved for the theists.
Yet legally same sex couples should be allowed to get married. This is why it's important to separate religion from government.