Jump to content

Same sex marriage


  • Please log in to reply
168 replies to this topic

#1 Copacetic

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:47 AM

I had an infuriating conversation with my SIL yesterday about this topic and I'm just hoping that some EBers can help me understand her point of view.

Her view was that a marriage was something between a man and a woman, before god, who could then go on and make babies.  That therefore meant that same sex couples could not marry because the church would not recognise it, and they couldn't naturally make a baby.

I said, then in that case, according to her view of what marriage was, I wasn't properly married, because god never even entered into it for me. I was married in a park, with a celebrant. Follow on with some rubbish about that not being right, because she believes in god, and he is everywhere, therefor if she was at my wedding then so was he.

I then said that same sex couples had fertility options available to them much in the same way that man/woman couples do, so that takes away the problem of being unable to have children and she then decided that SS couples could have and agreement but they couldn't have a marriage because a marriage is unique. Cue me even more frustrated, saying that actually, a SS couple is far more unique than a traditional man/woman couple. She doesn't see the problem with just calling it a partnership, but that just seems so 2 dimensional to me. Like a business arrangement or something.

I know that most here will agree with SS marriage, but those that don't, please help me see her side of this? I just don't understand the problem.



#2 Sweet like a lemon

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:59 AM

QUOTE (Copacetic @ 02/01/2013, 07:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Her view was that a marriage was something between a man and a woman, before god, who could then go on and make babies.  That therefore meant that same sex couples could not marry because the church would not recognise it, and they couldn't naturally make a baby.


And yet so many hetrosexual couples do not marry in a Church, so many beliefs besides Christianity, so many married couples struggling to conceive and if she is into biblical type marriages then surely she does not object to her husband taking another wife or two and a few concubines...

Sorry, can't help.



#3 PrincessPeanut

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:05 AM

yeah ditto to the PP...i get very frustrated at views like that as i disagree...its ridiculously black and white

frankly, no one should dictate who you marry so why dictate the gender. what is key is its for love and the right reasons, not about being of the opposite bloody sex.

she is narrow-minded and probably the kind who believes you sin away but you say forgive me and pray and you a-ok.

#4 Jane Jetson

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:27 AM

One argument I have seen a lot is that some people, including a lot of Christians, see men and women as having a particular role in a marriage. This is generally that the man is the dominant party and "lovingly" makes all the decisions and guides his wife, while his wife does all the submitting and doing as she's told.

A SS marriage therefore can't work, because with two men in a relationship how can one automatically be the head of the family simply because he has testicles?

It's certainly not an argument I believe in - and if SS marriage was to actually undermine this kind of marriage as constantly claimed I am all for it - but it's one I've heard posed.

#5 SophieBear

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:29 AM

My sister believes the same thing. I disagree wholeheartedly especially considering that many married couples choose never to have children too and married couples may have fertility issues.

I think the religion aspect of this argument is a cop out. Marriage is not about religion anymore and many different religions can marry. This isn't a solely Christian tradition.

I can't elaborate on her views as they aren't mine but the 'God and Children' view is a shared one which in my view is a opinion for when there is no other valid argument.

#6 JillyJellyBean

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:36 AM

In my opinion marriage has very little to do with religion. (Or why would an atheist bother?) I woulodnt even bother arguing the point with someone who has already amde up there mind. I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions, but know that your not alone is being cross at this short sighted view point.

#7 Bart.

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:37 AM

QUOTE (Jane Jetson @ 02/01/2013, 08:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
One argument I have seen a lot is that some people, including a lot of Christians, see men and women as having a particular role in a marriage. This is generally that the man is the dominant party and "lovingly" makes all the decisions and guides his wife, while his wife does all the submitting and doing as she's told.

A SS marriage therefore can't work, because with two men in a relationship how can one automatically be the head of the family simply because he has testicles?

It's certainly not an argument I believe in - and if SS marriage was to actually undermine this kind of marriage as constantly claimed I am all for it - but it's one I've heard posed.

This is BS for the majority of Christians and I'm sad you've lumped all billion+ believers into one package.  Some families may run like this, but certainly not all.

I am a Christian and I have no problem with SS marriage. ohmy.gif  I know, fall down in a swoon.

I think where your friend is coming from is that the institution of marriage, as a term and an entity, should be between a man and a woman.  For those who are same-sex, perhaps there should be another form of unity?  I had a gay friend tell me once that this is what he believed.  I'm not saying I agree with his stance, but nonetheless, it may be an explanation?

(edited for grammar)

Edited by Bartholomew, 02 January 2013 - 07:40 AM.


#8 Lucrezia Borgia

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:38 AM

For the life of me I can't see why gay couples can't get married in a civil ceremony by a marriage celebrant (same as what my DH and I did)..... I guess it's up to the church to decide whether or not they will allow their priests or ministers to marry same sex couples, I imagine there are same sex couples who are religious and who would wish to be married in church..I think they have a battle on their hands but beyond that I have no further comment as I am not religious.....but as far as civil ceremonies go, god (or any other deity) simply should not come in to it.

#9 Jane Jetson

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:54 AM

QUOTE (Bartholomew @ 02/01/2013, 08:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is BS for the majority of Christians and I'm sad you've lumped all billion+ believers into one package.  Some families may run like this, but certainly not all.

I am a Christian and I have no problem with SS marriage. ohmy.gif  I know, fall down in a swoon.


So am I. If you actually read my post, you'll see that I've written

QUOTE
some people, including a lot of Christians


How you've managed to interpret this as "all billion+ believers" (including myself) I have no idea.

#10 KT1978

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:54 AM

It doesn't offend me, the reason I'm not married is that I see it as a religious ceremony with legal recognition. The word marriage is religious to me.

I'm not against gay marriage either but can see why some people think the distinction should be made between the religious and the legal. Call it r something that has no religious connotations for hetero and ss couples and leave religion to do whatever they believe in.

I don't think either side needs to agree to believed in the same thins for this to happen so I guess that's why those views aren't overly offensive to me.



#11 Ingrid the Swan

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:56 AM

I think the whole issue is an emotional rather than a logical one,  and that people resort to whatever arguments they can to justify their emotional position. They come to a position based on emotion and come up with reasons to argue against others with the different emotional position later. That could be why a lot of the positive arguments - on both sides - can sound a little weak objectively.

Also the reason why you can't expect many people to change their mind on the issue even after you point out their clear logical failures.

It is infuriating when people invoke a God I don't believe in to justify treating my relationship as lesser-than - and worse when people who support gay marriage are blamed by extremists as "incurring God's wrath" and thus inciting natural disasters and massacres. But ultimately enough people believe in gay marriage that it's only a matter of "when", so best to try rise above it.

Although if you do want to blow her mind, point out that you know of someone - being me - who had her very Catholic PIL and GMIL front and centre at her non-legally-recognised wedding in Australia as well as a Christian friend bear witness to her legally recognised wedding overseas - so that means God must have been at both of my weddings).

#12 Ymarferol angel

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:03 AM

I've walked both sides of this; I used to be against same sex marriage but now think that it's something a society should be free to do.

At the end of the day, the opposition to gay marriage is a natural law argument; in this view, same sex attraction is unnatural.  To give it the legitimacy of marriage would be to equate it with opposite sex attraction, which is "natural."  I think the weakness here is in the take on what is "natural," but there is a long history of thinking this way with much underpinning and it is hard to pull apart.  

Just as recently as Christmas day, for example, my mother was comparing same sex attraction to a birth deformity and lamenting that society would do all it could to fix one but not the other.  She couldn't get her head around the idea that it wasn't a sort of psychological defect.

#13 epl0822

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:08 AM

I'm not really sure what your purpose is in posting this. You already disagree with your SIL so no matter what anybody says, you're not going to see any sense in it.

People form opinions based on values they hold dear. I don't think it's necessarily a religious thing - if you go to a lot of Asian countries you will find that many people, regardless of religion, are totally against gay marriages. I have also read arguments from members of gay rights groups and/or people who themselves are homosexual, who are against same sex marriages for whatever reason (I read about one gay person - can't remember who it was sorry - who said they actually do believe in their hearts that kids need a mother and father; another gay academic said legalising same sex marriages will lull people into a false sense of security about progress in gay rights and that legalising SS marriage was not the ultimate conclusion to their efforts to eliminate hate crimes and so on).

Or if somebody says "I don't think gay marriage should be legal because it is wrong in the eyes of God," they have a set of religious based values that you don't agree with. It all boils down to, they value this and you value something else. It frustrates me when people claim to be open minded but don't accept that other people are entitled to subscribe to their religious values because it contradicts the values they hold dear.

In short, you and your SIL are never going to come to am amicable middle point agreement. She believes in something and you believe something else. She has already given you her reasoning and you've rejected it. Just leave it at that.

#14 Ianthe

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:26 AM

It does go back to Genesis and the woman being made for man and that being part of God's perfect plan. So I understand that from that perspective. But I don't agree with the stance that Australia's marriage act can't be changed.

And we live in an imperfect world. As Christians we are reminded of that continually. And I see marriage in terms of legalities as a modern construct. So to me it is completely irrelevant to me that marriage is re defined legally. And I think it is abhorrent in a modern society that any couple who are committed to each other cannot marry if they choose too.

I worry for my church. I worry for their relevance in the future. I think it is important to uphold Scripture but so much of the stances the church takes is so irrelevant to most Australians. And while I believe God can work within anyone, I think some churches are making it hard for people to listen to the gospel and for people to be in fellowship with Christians.

#15 Mozzie1

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:38 AM

My Dad holds this view, and he is a staunch athiest. I just don't get it.  shrug.gif

His argument is that children should have a mother and a father, and that although we can't stop gay people from having children, we shouldn't make it socially acceptable. There is so much wrong with this that it makes my blood boil, but it's a different argument to some of the others I have seen at least.

#16 Canberra Chick

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:41 AM

Basically a small group of people take marriage to only apply to a wedding with a religious aspect, which therefore has to be heterosexual given the churches' stance re: homosexuality. The rest of us see the word 'marriage' and assume it refers to a formal (can be secular or religious) ceremony in which two people who love each other formally declare this in the presence of witnesses.

It's the same word, but it means two different things. Given that legally recognised marriages do not require any religious component, I think the second definition has to be the correct one and therefore it can be taken to include homosexual couples too. In fact the marriage act as it was allowed for this within its scope, which is why that old bugger Howard got it changed.

#17 Fenrir

Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:23 AM

Some people will never see SS marriage as something that should be allowed. Your SIL is one of them.

One thing that does bug me though - SS couple does not = infertility.

#18 Musk Sticks

Posted 02 January 2013 - 09:38 AM

.

Edited by Musk Sticks, 05 March 2013 - 06:49 PM.


#19 Feral*Spikey*

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:02 AM

One of the most interesting things to do, is to ask a person why they hold that belief.

For example, asking about why it must be a man and a woman. The answers, are either "because I said so", or they run the biology/history argument. If they run the "because I said so", you have an opportunity to explore why they are so creeped out about marriage or gay people - despite their claims of being non-homophobic. Then you can follow up with exploring why a person might want to get married - and then point out that each person has different reasons, and none are invalid.

If they run the biology argument, you can always point out that a person's fertility and biology has never been dependent on marriage (women get periods before they get married, indicating their fertility), and in this secular country, plenty of single parents exist. Marriage is not a requirement for reproduction. Similarly, infertile couples and couples who are intentionally childless, would not 'qualify' for marriage, because they're biologically unable or unwilling to have children. This raises the question of whether divorce ought to be compulsory.

As for the history/legal/religious argument, well the new chick (I'm guessing she's not Australian as she has no clues about how marriage operates here) pretty much sums up the bogus arguments.

Marriage is a LEGAL, not a religious construct. It always has been, because it is about the transfer of property from one family to another. It has never had anything to do with 'allowing people to live together in a socially acceptable way'. In the UK, prior to the Victorian era, plenty of people lived together in 'matrimony', who had not undergone a religious ceremony. They belonged to the rich, not the dirt poor peasants, or the serfs.

In the UK (post conqueror, pre-modern history) most marriages were not conducted in a church - only those of significantly wealthy landowners were. Why you ask? Because they were giving their property rights over the woman (and the attached inheritance rights) to the spouse. That's right, women = property,  this was a property transaction. Nothing religious about it at all. The Church, such as it was, was literate and was able to keep those records. Of course, the fact that they also wanted to profit from this connection shouldn't be dismissed either - look at all the folk who've been convinced marriage is a religious thing as an example of PR work. Oh, and marriage pre-dates the Torah, little Bobita. wink.gif

The property thing was highlighted in other societies where same sex marriages were recognised. Nothing to do with religion, everything to do with property arrangements.

Now, none of the history or legal aspects prevent the marriage or religious recognition of a marriage being between a man and a woman.

What it does point out, is there is no reason, historically or religiously, to prevent the secular and legal marriage of a same sex couple. The religious homophobe types can continue to ignore the rest of the secular world, and we can blithely ignore them.

Oh yeah, and the slippery slope argument - well marriage itself is the source of the angst. It's those marriages between men and women that are making the gayz all "me too". If we want to stop that, then we should simply ban the reason they want equal rights in the first place, and annul each and every marriage in this country. I lived with DH for several years prior to getting married, so I'm comfy with living together as an unmarried couple. wink.gif

#20 NotRocketScience

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:05 AM

OP I would quit. She sounds very closed minded to me. People like your SIL will never see your point of view, unfortunate as that is.

#21 76 others

Posted 02 January 2013 - 10:59 AM

Yes, people are entitled to another opinion. BUT, the "against SS" opinion affects other's lives and the "for SS" opinions have no ill affect on the oppositions lives whatsoever.

So how about you guys go on living your lives and butt out of things that have no ill affect on you and let people live their lives how they see fit.

#22 Lucrezia Borgia

Posted 02 January 2013 - 11:02 AM

QUOTE (Gloriosa @ 02/01/2013, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yes, people are entitled to another opinion. BUT, the "against SS" opinion affects other's lives and the "for SS" opinions have no ill affect on the oppositions lives whatsoever.

So how about you guys go on living your lives and butt out of things that have no ill affect on you and let people live their lives how they see fit.

Agree 100%.

And the "but allowing ss marriage would devalue my marriage which I hold sacred etc etc" is a false argument IMO....you know what your relationship is worth, and nothing anyone else does, or doesn't do, can change that.

#23 76 others

Posted 02 January 2013 - 11:06 AM

QUOTE (Lucretia Borgia @ 02/01/2013, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Agree 100%.

And the "but allowing ss marriage would devalue my marriage which I hold sacred etc etc" is a false argument IMO....you know what your relationship is worth, and nothing anyone else does, or doesn't do, can change that.


Oh phew. That was really hard to word. Glad it made sense.

QUOTE
They will lose, eventually. And I will laugh at them. Also maybe point.


LOL Love it.




#24 Froyo

Posted 02 January 2013 - 11:06 AM

It makes no sense. How can marriage be defined/ controlled by a religion it pre-dates?

#25 Tesseract

Posted 02 January 2013 - 11:20 AM

Look I think basically your SIL reacting from an emotional standpoint and then retrospectively fitting an argument. But that's kind of how we all argue - supporting SS marriage fits within my lefty-equal-rights mindset, so I support it - the arguments I use are just dressing really. I just *feel* that it is right, just as others feel that it is wrong.

So in that sense sometimes there is really no point in arguing with someone.

However I did manage to bring a family member of mine around on this issue. I argued every point (the same way you have been) for months and months. I broke down every one of their arguments with reason and logic. Eventually it came out that really they just didn't like the idea of teh butt s*x and that's why they didn't support SS marriage. I was flabbaghasted. Honestly that had never entered my head that this would be their problem. Once they voiced it themselves they realised themselves that what other people do in their bedrooms is none of their business and everyone (including straight people) has different preferences in the bedroom. When they realised their own reasoning they changed their mind themselves, and now are full guts supporters of SS marriage.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 

Exclusive Black Friday Sale!

Get over 40% off selected products, including prams, baby carriers, cloth nappies, sleeping bags and much more! 24 hours only, on May 6 - register now for your special code.

Kelly Clarkson shares first photos of son

Kelly Clarkson has shown off the first photos of her son, Remington Alexander Blackstock.

5 childbirth myths that need to be busted

Birth is an unpredictable, mysterious process that intrigues us all, and there is a lot of misinformation out there.

Mum of three fatally shot by toddler while driving

A US mother has been shot by her toddler while driving on a highway in Wisconsin.

All you need is one minute to work out

The seven-minute-work out is old news. Research shows the effectiveness of going hell-for-leather for just one minute.

Pregnant women needed to join diabetes study

Pregnant woman in country Australia will help Adelaide researchers figure out why cases of type 1 diabetes have doubled over the past two decades.

Just announced: the Mountain Buggy Unirider

It's the perfect solution to combat those toddler meltdowns when they no longer want to be in a pram but can't walk long distances.

Authorities euthanise dog that fatally bit a newborn baby

A pit bull mix that fatally bit a 3-day-old infant last week has been euthanised, authorities said.

The push for Medicare to fund lactation consultants

While meeting with a lactation consultant can make an enormous difference to a new mother, it's not a service that is available through the public health system.

Why it's perfectly natural to dislike other people's children

Members of a popular forum are fiercely debating whether it is acceptable to dislike a friend's child.

Woman gives birth on plane, names baby after airline

A pregnant woman who unexpectedly gave birth on a flight has named her new baby after the airline, Jetstar.

Heartwarming photos show the joy of adoption after foster care

Children living in foster care can feel like their future is less than clear. But that uncertainty disappears the day they are adopted by their "forever family" 

'Oh my god, it's a baby!' Mum shocked to give birth

When the cramps started to kick in, Klara Dollan just assumed a painful period was starting.

Mum's Facebook plea: 'Help me find my daughter's father'

Kerryn has a unusual present planned for daughter Imi's 13th birthday celebrations - she hopes to be able to be able to give the soon-to-be the teenager her first ever photo of her dad.

Is it possible for your house to be too clean?

Our houses are cleaner than ever before. But how clean is too clean? Could a sterile home be putting your family's health at risk?

Millions of Monkeys: puzzles that grow with your toddler

Here's a puzzle that grows with them; the Puzzle Grow Pack by Millions of Monkeys.

Baby names from Britpop

If you grew up in the 90s you might want to look to the genre of Britpop music for baby name inspiration.

What to eat and drink when you have gastro

When you catch a bug that causes acute infectious gastroenteritis (gastro), your stomach and intestinal tract become inflamed, causing diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramping and pain. The last thing you probably feel like doing is eating.

'To this day, I owe her my life'

Would I have survived if I hadn't crossed that street?

Why baby Sonny needs you to vaccinate your children

Caitlin is a firm believer in the importance of immunisation to protect children from harmful and deadly diseases.

Five-year-old's photo captures beauty of motherhood

There is no make-up or special outfits and hairdos, but the five-year-old boy who took this picture captured the essence of motherhood as well as any professional photographer.

Babies know whether you are naughty or nice

Studies have shown that infants in the first months of life try to avoid dealing with social wrongdoers - for example, sharing less with them and helping them less - and they expect others to, too.

 
Advertisement
 

Top 5 Articles

Advertisement
 
 
 

What's hot on EB

The babies who are one in 70 million

Bethani Webb was excited to find out she was pregnant, but the first time mum did not realise she was carrying four babies not one.

Exclusive Black Friday Sale!

Get over 40% off selected products, including prams, baby carriers, cloth nappies, sleeping bags and much more! 24 hours only, on May 6 - register now for your special code.

Cafe offers breastfeeding mums a free cup of tea

A Sydney cafe is offering breastfeeding mums free cups of tea in a bid to show support for the right of women to nurse their babies wherever they choose.

To snip or not to snip? When the decision is not clear cut

Jamie Oliver, who considered a vasectomy, is to be a father again. A fellow dad reflects on his own decision 11 years ago

Doctors stunned by rare twins born almost six weeks apart

To everyone's surprise, Kristen Miller "kept doing better each day", keeping her second baby safe.

Baby book ideas for modern parents

Before my son was born I was given a lovely baby book full of blank pages waiting to be filled with weights and heights and first words.

The adorable smile of a baby seeing his mum clearly for the first time

There is no doubt seeing their child smile for the first time is an unforgettable moment for parents everywhere.

Mum tells how toddler 'nearly hung himself' in cot mishap

When Alison Johnson put her 18-month-old Caleb down for a nap, she had no reason to believe her son was in any danger.

Babies are still switched at birth? Yes, it can happen

All my panic and tears aside, my biggest question looking back is about the kind of security measures used in the maternity ward.

Doctors slammed for taking selfie with newborn

Everyone who visits a mum in hospital in the days following childbirth wants to get a photo with the new baby.

ergoPouch Twosie Sleepsuit for winter breastfeeding

Finally, there's a way to keep warm while breastfeeding through winter.

Health check: How long does sex 'normally' last?

What to do with this information? My advice would be to try not to think about it during the throes of passion.

When breastfeeding sucks: fixing common problems

From niplash to tight boobs, biting to milk supply issues, Pinky McKay looks at common breastfeeding issues and how to solve them.

10 things I've learnt in my first six months with twins

Six months on we're all still alive, and the more we get to know each other the easier the days become.

Mum's loving kiss leaves baby fighting for life

Kirsty Carrington thought nothing of giving her newborn son a kiss, little did she know it would leave the baby fighting for life.

When doing chores is your new 'me time'

After children, 'me time' looks a little different.

Get going: 14 travel strollers for families on the move

A stroller can make or break travelling with a baby or toddler. Here are 15 great single travel stroller options.

10 ways toddlers are terrific

It always pays to remind yourself of how terrific toddlers can be - they're little like this for such a short time

 

ENTER NOW

Do your kids love bananas?

This is the comp for you! We have $800 worth of Myer gift cards and boxes of Australian Bananas to be won. Entry is simple: just post a pic of your little one enjoying a banana in the comments of the FB post to enter.

 
Advertisement
 
 
Essential Baby and Essential Kids is the place to find parenting information and parenting support relating to conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids, maternity, family budgeting, family travel, nutrition and wellbeing, family entertainment, kids entertainment, tips for the family home, child-friendly recipes and parenting. Try our pregnancy due date calculator to determine your due date, or our ovulation calculator to predict ovulation and your fertile period. Our pregnancy week by week guide shows your baby's stages of development. Access our very active mum's discussion groups in the Essential Baby forums or the Essential Kids forums to talk to mums about conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids and parenting lifestyle. Essential Baby also offers a baby names database of more than 22,000 baby names, popular baby names, boys' names, girls' names and baby names advice in our baby names forum. Essential Kids features a range of free printable worksheets for kids from preschool years through to primary school years. For the latest baby clothes, maternity clothes, maternity accessories, toddler products, kids toys and kids clothing, breastfeeding and other parenting resources, check out Essential Baby and Essential Kids.