Legalise Gay Marriage!

Hi readers! Just want to share some of the awesome gems on the internet, cleverly arguing why gay marriage should be legalised. Enjoy and spread these photos around! All of these photos and more can be accessed at http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/gaymarriage/ig/Gay-Marriage-Signs/.

What Will Happen if Gay Marriage Is Legalized?What Jesus Said About Gay PeopleImagine How Stupid You're Going to Look

Gay People Can Quote the Bible Too 

 

Comments

  1. ProProgress

    Great finds! I agree completely. Australia is currently operating under a backward and discriminatory system, denying homosexual couples the right to marry. This is one of the most pressing civil rights issues in modern Australia, and changes need to be made! Not legalising gay marriage is hypocritical, because we’re not sticking to the idea of equality that we enforce on other countries.

    1. GundagaiSteve

      Hm, I don’t know about this. Marriage isn’t a right: it’s a privilege. So the state doesn’t have to grant gay couples this privilege as marriage is not a civil rights issue. This is because the case for gay marriage isn’t as important as things like free speech and freedom of religion, which the UN Declaration of Human Rights gives us. Besides, gay couples have civil unions to compensate for marriages, right?

      1. ProProgress

        Marriage isn’t technically a human right, but it’s still unethical for us to only allow civil unions for gay couples. Just as the US Supreme Court found in 1967 in regards to segregation between black and white citizens, nothing can ever be ‘separate but equal’. A system that is separate is inherently unequal. Plus, there’s financial, social and legal rights granted with marriage that you don’t get in a civil union, so the government’s really discriminating against gay couples! There are hospitals that only let married couples see their lover in hospital or get medical information about them. This means that gay couples can’t see each other in hospital unless they’re married. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in the Loving v.s. Virginia case of 1967 that marriage is “one of the basic civil rights of man.”1

        1. GundagaiSteve

          You can’t compare the black civil rights struggle in America to gay marriage because the discrimination against African Americans was socially constructed, and they faced physical threat and fewer opportunities to better their lives. There is no such discrimination in modern day Australia against homosexuals. Heterosexuality is naturally and morally constructed, so that isn’t the same as gender or racial equality. By legalising gay marriage, you’re actually violating the moral boundaries that God has set.

          1. ProProgress

            But Australia’s secular for a reason: Christians can’t make all our laws! Everyone believes in different gods or no god, so we can’t all decide on one religion to base our laws on.

  2. GundagaiSteve

    But Australia’s a democracy, with almost two-thirds of us being Christians (2), so shouldn’t we follow what the majority believe in? Us Christians reckon that it’s Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!

  3. ProProgress

    Over half of the Christians support same sex marriage though! (3) So obviously there’s room for interpretation in religion. Since not all religious people can agree on the same interpretation, the Bible should not be used as our source of law. And anyway, if only a small percentage of marriages are solemnised by the Catholic Church, why should they get to decide for 100% of the population? And imagine if everything that was listed as a sin in the Bible was turned into law in Australia. It’d be illegal to be wrathful, greedy, slothful, proud, lustful, envious and gluttonous, and to gossip and have pre-marital sex, and instead slavery and stoning people for crimes would all be legal! The Bible says that if two men have sex, “they must both be put to death” (4) , which is obviously something that we won’t tolerate today. If these things are now called out-dated, how can you use the Bible to back up your view?

    1. GundagaiSteve

      Obviously, Christianity has adapted to society because we don’t follow all those rules anymore. And anyway, it’s not just religious people who don’t like gay marriage. Every sane person realises that gay marriage will lead to a slippery slope. Before we know it, polygamy, incest, bestiality, paedophilia and marrying inanimate objects would all be legal. If two men can claim that they love each other, then soon enough, a man can that he loves his dog etc. We need to preserve marriage in its traditional sense; otherwise it’ll be corrupted by anyone who thinks they can change marriage to suit their own needs.

  4. ProProgress

    The slippery slope argument you just made has no logical basis! If you don’t believe me, you can look at all the other places that have already legalised gay marriage. The Netherlands was the first country to do so, in 2001 (5) . In the 12 years that have passed, the fabric of society hasn’t fallen apart. People aren’t marrying animals, or their siblings, or minors. Marriage requires two consenting adults to sign legal documents, and obviously a child, inanimate object or animal can’t sign documents, so the fear of paedophilia, bestiality and objectum-sexuality legally can’t happen. And who says marriage isn’t adaptable? We’ve made plenty of changes to marriage and changed its traditional definition, like legalising mixed-race marriages and divorce and recognising that women aren’t their husband’s property. In fact, marriage should always be prepared to adapt to social norms. We’ve already made changes to this institution without adverse effects, so the institution can definitely handle some more alterations.

    1. GundagaiSteve

      But it’s dangerous to change the institution of marriage. It’s important to maintain marriage because its sanctity must be preserved, so it can be used as a stable institution in society to give people a sense of security. If such a solid institution is tampered with, people can get confused by this integral part of society being tampered with. Also, the purpose of marriage is to procreate, which gay couples can’t do, so how can they even be married under natural law?

      1. ProProgress

        What sanctity of marriage? In a society where around half of marriages end in divorce, we can’t pretend that all heterosexual marriages are the epitome of happiness and stability. Britney Spears can make a farce out of marriage by being married for just 55 hours (6) so how can we say that gay couples are spoiling marriage when straight people are making a mess of it anyway? Also, marriage is about far more than just procreation. It’s about two individuals expressing their commitment and love to each other. If you claimed that marriage was only to procreate, that would immediately class infertile and elderly couples as not being ‘true’ married couples, plus, many couples choose not to have kids, but that doesn’t mean they don’t deserve to be married. Before you make sweeping claims like that, you have to understand what else you’re really implying in that comment!

        1. GundagaiSteve

          Even if gay couples get together and don’t have biological children, they’re still allowed to adopt kids or have them through a surrogate mother. If gay marriage is legalised, adoption will be a lot easier for these couples and more and more children will end up in a situation where they don’t have a mum or dad. Without a mother or a father, kids will be confused and possibly seek harmful role models in the media. Children deserve two role models so they don’t get corrupted by drunken celebrities in the media or peer pressure.

          1. ProProgress

            Kids don’t NEED a mum and dad to grow into awesome people. If you claim that they do, aren’t you pretty much saying that single parents can’t raise their kids right? If a child has two mothers, they can still find positive male role models in the form of neighbours, extended family, teachers or figures in the community such as police officers, politicians or charity workers. After all, it takes a village to raise a child, and this metaphorical village is a good source of role models and nurturing for every child. I think we can all agree that if we were a starving orphan in Malawi or Burma, we’d be more than happy to be adopted by responsible, loving parents in the Western world, regardless of their gender. There are 18 million kids (7) living in orphanages around the world, and even more kids living on the streets. There aren’t enough adoptive parents in the West, but if we legalise gay marriage, it’ll allow a huge chunk of society to become adoptive parents, as many adoption agencies will only give children to married couples. It’s a win-win situation for everyone!

  5. GundagaiSteve

    Gay couples would inevitably raise gay children though, which is dangerous to human population if there aren’t enough heterosexuals to keep our species thriving. It’s been proven by the American Sociological Review that children with homosexual parents are more likely to be homosexual themselves, which prevents human reproduction. 25% of young adults raised by lesbian mums had been in a homoerotic relationship, compared to 0% of young adults raised by straight mums (8). Also, children of gay parents would be bullied at school because of the unusual circumstances they have at home. This’ll lead to heaps of emotional problems for these kids, because of their parents’ lifestyles. Surely nobody wants this for the children of our society.

    1. ProProgress

      Gay couples wouldn’t just raise gay kids because obviously, straight parents don’t always raise straight kids! You’re practically claiming that every gay or bisexual person alive today had homosexual parents that made them the way they are, but obviously they must’ve had heterosexual biological parents in order to be born. Also, I think it’s pretty obvious that the Earth is struggling to support the amount of people alive today, and we definitely don’t need to have more. It’s true that children of gay couples will most likely face some problems at school, but that doesn’t mean we run away from the problem. The first African American students to start attending white schools in America faced huge challenges, perhaps even more than the children of gay couples would face today because 1960’s America was still heavily segregated in parts, whereas our society today is quite accepting of homosexuality. Society overcame that hurdle, and in terms of discrimination faced by the children of gay couples, we’ve just got to soldier on. Homosexuality is stigmatised largely because gay marriage is not legal: teens in the community will see that the government thinks of gay marriage as abnormal and illegitimate, and this increases low self-esteem and a lack of acceptance. Even though changing the laws doesn’t always change public perception, it’s still vital for governments to show solidarity with minorities. Legalising gay marriage will foster acceptance, as it gives this part of society empowering social and cultural capital, promoting social mobility and acceptance.

      1. GundagaiSteve

        No one is saying that being gay is wrong. It’s just that the institution of marriage should not be granted to gay couples. Gay teens are still free to be who they want to be. If you’re worried about discrimination, you should think about all the religious people that would be discriminated against if gay marriage becomes legal. Churches may be forced to let gay people be married in their churches, which breaches Christian beliefs. Also, religious people will suffer financially. Our tax dollars will go towards funding gay marriages, and we shouldn’t be forced to pay for something we don’t believe in!

        1. ProProgress

          Laws can easily be put in place to guarantee that churches don’t have to wed couples if they feel it clashes with their beliefs, to allow for religious freedom, as we are a liberal democracy after all. Legalising gay marriage won’t oppress any individual either, like you’re making it out to be. Gay couples will always exist, so denying them the right to marry doesn’t get rid of them. Legalising gay marriage won’t impact you, but not legalising it will impact someone else. Also, atheists’ tax dollars go towards funding private religious schools (when the whole concept of a private school is that it’s privately funded, not funded by tax dollars!). We all end up paying for things we don’t like, but that’s just how the tax system works in a democracy. Also, if you care so much about money, gay marriage is good for the economy! The flood of gay couples getting married will pump millions into the economy. New York City received a $259 million boost in the economy in the first year of legalising gay marriage. If homosexual couples spend as much as heterosexual couples on weddings, Australia can expect almost $1 billion of revenue (9) if we legalise gay marriage.

          1. GundagaiSteve

            You’ve mentioned a specific American city, New York City, and claimed that financially, legalising gay marriage has been beneficial for the area. But, in reality, it’s actually a threat to the overall strength of a nation if different states within one country start having different laws to what is federally recognised. If some states and territories start passing laws in favour of gay marriage when the federal government is not in favour of it, it makes the government look weak and leads to greater confusion.

  6. ProProgress

    States and territories are autonomous enough to pass their own legislation regarding this issue: that’s how federation works. If the majority of the population in one state are in favour of gay marriage, the federal government should not be able to veto the decision of the majority. This is already happening in America, where certain states are in favour of gay marriage and certain states aren’t. It certainly hasn’t led to the fall of the US government or any diminishment in their credibility. It actually lets the majority in each state to do as they please, since people don’t always have the same views in different parts of one country.

    1. GundagaiSteve

      Apart from making the government look weak, legalising gay marriage can actually hurt gay couples. This is because they’ll be forced to integrate into heterosexual communities, and will lose their own vibrant culture! M.V Lee Badgett, PhD summarises that “marriage means adopting heterosexual forms of family and giving up distinctively gay family forms and perhaps even gay and lesbian culture.” (10) By not legalising gay marriage, gay culture is being protected and nurtured, you see.

      1. ProProgress

        ?!!? Are you seriously promoting social segregation here?! I don’t think gay couples would want to hang out with you anyway, so you don’t have to worry about this ‘forced integration’. You know what, if Jesus can have two dads, so can I!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *