gay marriage = sexist, one of the worst arguments yet

yes, i heard this. Basically, the argument is that gay marriage would lessen the status of women because it would basically state that marriage no longer needs a woman and implies they aren't neccesary in the family structure. lesbian marriage wouldn't negatively affect men as much since men already have a higher social status for the most part and don't have to worry about being brought to a lower level.

funny how pretty much all feminist groups are in favor of gay marriage...it seems that this argument is basically arguing that women belong in the home as housekeepers in a way or that every woman needs a man.

relative to census figures. And conservatives wonder why they seldom get their way (after years and years of liberal headbanging).

The gay marriage opposition is merely an exercise in conservative male penis envy. I implore any freeper lurker to prove otherwise. Why would two gay people marrying effect your marriage or the institution of marriage? Because you ain't strong enough to keep it together? Cause your spouse might want some of that? Cause you are a dumbass? I give you three correct answers. Now, you fuck it up.

And your lame excuse in the other (read vanity) thread you started just to give us your miracle answer to gay marriage is one of the biggest piles of crap I have ever seen. And further, you just took a dump in mine and every single other queers face, who happens to wonder these boards looking for a little sign that the times are indeed changing, and American attitude is moving into the 21st century.

Genuine conservatives value social institutions that are benificial to society. They believe that marriage is such an institution. Furthermore, they believe that the original function of marriage for a man and a woman to dedicate themselves to concieving and raising children. They further assert that the original purpose of marriage law--that is, the state's recognition and sanctioning of a marriage--was to encourage this process. They see healthy society as built on a foundation of this marriage and family system, and they see gay marriage as a threat to this social arrangement--but why?

Well gee! That is something we never knew about. NOT!

Saving the sacntity of marriage so that people can concieve and raise children is all fine and dandy, so long as the law is enforced to not allow people who are sterile and cannot concieve in the first place cannot marry. Futher, people that don't intend to have children in a marriage shouldn't be allowed to marry as well. This argument is pure discrimination and unfortunately government approved discrimination.

Now, every argument FOR gay marriage naturally hinges on the idea that certain homosexual couples love each other

Excuse me! "Certain" homosexual couples love each other. WTF! Well gee some heterosexuals certainly don't love one another, but they are still allowed to marry. The recent Spears marriage only proves this.

Stop calling it marriage. Ask for "civil unions," or whatever, but please don't call it marriage.

Anything less than marriage is infact discrimination. As a queer who has seen the worst of discrimination the United States has to offer, I can tell you, I am sick to death of being forced to sit on the back of the bus while life passes me by.

I am sick to death of not being able to make a home with the love of my life in her country (The United States of America. The so called land of the free) because her country will not allow her to sponsor me for immigration.

Life is too short to spend it at the back of the bus. One misses so much.

How dare you ask that us queers continue to sit at the back fo the bus and continue to do so, without so much as a whimper.

Stop making the argument that people oppose gay marriage out of bigotry. This may be true in some cases, or for all I know most cases, but it is an unfair claim to place on those who do not oppose gay marriage for that reason.

ROFLMAO! What a lame excuse. Tell me if it isn't about bigotry then what is it about?

Bobby, I really believe you need to take a look at what your wrote. I also believe you need to put yourself into a queer persons shoes for a while, just so you can see how bloody rediculous your argument actually is.

Do not preach to me that what you said is the conservative argument, because you know what? You wouldn't have thought us here at DU so stupid as to not understand what the conservative argument is all about, if you didn't have the same or similar belief that the conservatives do.

If you want to know how it feels to be forced to live 8,000 miles from my partner, because the only way I could be with my partner at this time is to live in her country, I would gladly tell you. I will tell you how it felt Christmas morning to wake up and have it feel like just another day, because the love of my life isn't with me. Even though, Christmas had been one of my favorite times of year all my life. I will gladly tell you how it felt at midnight on New Years Eve and not my partner with me, to give her a kiss to bring in the New Year.

If you want to know how it feels to be told you can't marry the person you love more than life itself because you are indeed a sinner and are going to hell, I will gladly tell you that as well.

<sarcasm>
Thank you for the first anti gay fight for 2004. I truly appreciate it so close in the New Year. </sarcasm>

but only to the extent that the state defines what sex can get married to what other sex.

Interviewing a guy on NPR this morning and he actually said gay marriage would be harmful because it would create homes where children either had no mother or had no father (depending on the sex of the couple in question obviously).

As soon as the guy opened his mouth, my first thought was . . . ummm I don't know about you, but where I come from, they're going to have the kid whether they're married or not. The second thought was. . . since when does being heterosexual mean you'll have both parents in the home?

Frickin people need to be hit with a reality stick.

the same sex couples I know usually (from what I have noted) seem to have a stereotypical "masculine" and "feminine" person. So if this is what the right winger was talking about...

I have ever heard.

It implies only men are homosexual.

So who said it?

does one have to specifiy which one is the husband and which one is the wife?