Washington lawmakers pass gay-marriage bill

Shanghai Alice said:
I really don't see anything wrong with first cousins being allowed to marry, actually. Not my preference, but European royalty intermarried, so why not the common people?
Click to expand...

So incest is okay because royalty did it, all right then. I guess making sure wealth and power is kept close out of greed forms a better "family unit" than two people who genuinely love each other.


Shanghai Alice said:
As for my feelings on gay marriage:

Cool story, bro. I disagree with you, and I do not think that homosexuals form the basic family unit, but do whatever you want. Just don't bother me with your views, and I won't bother you with mine.
Click to expand...

It's ironic you mentioned this last sentence because simply by throwing your views out there, you're knowingly going to bother people.
 
Keiran777 said:
So incest is okay because royalty did it, all right then.
Click to expand...
They aren't saying that, they're saying that if the royalty can, then why wouldn't others be allowed to?

Also I don't know how I feel about it actually, but Shanghai Alice is entitled to an opinion. Whether others are gonna be bothered by it isn't relevant and it's also nothing to do with the person who stated their opinion. If someone is gonna be offended/bothered by it or not, that's more their problem.

And if gay marriage is allowed, I don't see why intermarriage wouldn't be.
 
Keiran777 said:
It's ironic you mentioned this last sentence because simply by throwing your views out there, you're knowingly going to bother people.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm completely for gay marriage and I'm not bothered by his opinion.

As far as incest, when first cousins have children they have ~4-6% chance of the children having a mutation due to their genes. The main problems with it actually is when people act like royalty and have cousins marrying everywhere; if there are multiple bloodlines marrying cousins all the time than because the cousins share more DNA they're more likely to have a mutation (Source). But in the real world that's not how it generally works, so I don't think that's enough of a risk to ban cousin marriage.

For comparison, a woman over 45 has a 1 in 30 chance of having a child with Down Syndrome (source). Should she be barred from having a child as well? How far will we go to bar people from having children at the risk they'll be unwell? Incest is banned not because of birth defects but because it grosses us out, that's all. Because if it was because of birth defects a lot more childbearing practice would be banned.
 
Toujours said:
Incest is banned not because of birth defects but because it grosses us out, that's all. Because if it was because of birth defects a lot more childbearing practice would be banned.
Click to expand...
Very true. It's a silly argument that genetics is the reason for denying marriage to cousins, but then it's also very telling for why some people are against same-sex marriage: the idea that marriage is for producing children. It should be pointed out that there is no requirement that any couple have children or anything if they want to be married. Obviously even heterosexual couples often can't or choose not to have children. Now even if back in the day children were the specific or unspoken reason that just doesn't hold up in today's world of free choice and personal happiness.
 
On that point, I think it's also worth mentioning that to be married is not a requirement of child-bearing. The whole 'marriage is for reproduction' argument just falls apart at the seams if you so much as look at it sideways.
 
Just a little update.

It's been signed by the governor of Washington so now it's law and will take effect starting June 7. This makes a total of 7 states (and the District of Columbia) that allow same-sex marriages. Only 43 more states to go.
 
For a comparison, that's the same amount of European countries that have had it legalized for years, not counting the several other ones that offer equivalent contracts (not called "marriage") but with the same rights.
 
Unless I completely misread it, she's just saying that Washington has joined the group of 7 states to allow same-sex marriage and so she hopes all the other ones will proceed to do the same, but just as a hopeful wish.

I'm sure all of them will sooner than later, but it's all speculation for now.
 
Well, the State of Washington can't force anybody to follow their legislation but their own citizens XD It will be up to the lawmakers of the other states to decide whether they create a similar law or not. Nobody will force anybody, but if other states want to do it, I don't know why they wouldn't be able to.

Also, if you are alright with the bill, then I don't know what's wrong with other states copying it as well.
 
Yes, I was just expressing my hopes for every state to eventually allow marriage (and marriage rights) between contenting adults.

Technically, even if every state wanted to enact laws protecting same-sex marriage there is still DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) which prohibits recognition of same-sex marriages at a national level.

And it's possible that someone could force other states to accept same-sex marriage. One possible way would be if the Supreme Court ruled anti-gay marriage laws unconstitutional, although with the current justices I don't see that happening any time soon. I do see it eventually coming down to a dozen or more states enacting their own laws and/or state courts overturning anti-gay marriage laws like what was done in Iowa, and eventually some kind of national level law being passed making it legal everywhere.
 
Washington is now the 7th state in the union to permit gay marriages. Governor Chris Gregoire signed the debatable bill into law on Monday. The signing was in the middle of much jubilation from proponents of the bill. However, a solid opposition plans to have it repealed. You may also read: https://www.newsytype.com/14714-same-sex-marriage-wa/

I have nothing against homosexuals but I strongly believe that marriage must be between men and women. It's okay if you do not agree with what I stand. We all have our own opinions and our own beliefs and this is what I have. ;)
 
I'm always happy to hear when a new state allows gay marriage. :D
It's one step closer.

At the same time, I know that my own state will likely be one of the last ones to do such, and it pisses me off.

And at the above poster, I am gonna have to disagree with you. xD; I believe that marriage should be between two people who love each other, regardless of gender. But I know certainly not everyone feels the same, so whateverrr.
 
eyah said:
Washington is now the 7th state in the union to permit gay marriages. Governor Chris Gregoire signed the debatable bill into law on Monday. The signing was in the middle of much jubilation from proponents of the bill. However, a solid opposition plans to have it repealed. You may also read: https://www.newsytype.com/14714-same-sex-marriage-wa/

I have nothing against homosexuals but I strongly believe that marriage must be between men and women. It's okay if you do not agree with what I stand. We all have our own opinions and our own beliefs and this is what I have. ;)
Click to expand...

We all have our own beliefs and opinions like you say. Therefore, I don't think that any one group can coerce their views into someone else's lives. When gay people get married it doesn't directly affect heterosexual couples (they are not forced to marry people of the same sex :/). The position and actions of proponents of gay marriage, therefore, does not harm heterosexual couples.

When opponents of gay marriage combat gay people's rights to marry they directly affect that couples lives. Therefore, any actions derived from the beliefs of opponents of gay marriage are forcing others to adhere to them, so we have a problem because you are actively coercing your beliefs into my life. I have nothing against heterosexuals, but only if they are not trying to take away my rights, because I believe a man and woman should be able to marry, you should allot the same courtesy to me. I would be just as hateful if I actively fought against heterosexual marriage!
 
eyah said:
Washington is now the 7th state in the union to permit gay marriages. Governor Chris Gregoire signed the debatable bill into law on Monday. The signing was in the middle of much jubilation from proponents of the bill. However, a solid opposition plans to have it repealed. You may also read: https://www.newsytype.com/14714-same-sex-marriage-wa/

I have nothing against homosexuals but I strongly believe that marriage must be between men and women. It's okay if you do not agree with what I stand. We all have our own opinions and our own beliefs and this is what I have. ;)
Click to expand...

Please show me a legal/common law precedent to justify not legalizing Gay marriage, aside from Judeo-Christian religeous tradition.

You won't find one.
 
Tachikaze said:
Please show me a legal/common law precedent to justify not legalizing Gay marriage, aside from Judeo-Christian religeous tradition.

You won't find one.
Click to expand...

If we had rep you'd get a +1. Just sayin'.

If anyone goes, "well once they can marry the same sex then they might start to marry animals or inanimate objects" in response I will stab you with a fork. Repeatedly.

I hate that stupid excuse.

I see no reason for all the states to legalize gay marriage. Maybe it will give the country, I don't know, something new to have in common.

Just as people have a right to religion they should have a right to marry whomever they damn well please.
 
I feel Gov. or Religion has NO say in love, And don't say "Well marriage is a sacred bond" pr "sacred pact in front of God" because Religion doesn't have a patent on lifetime of partnership. thats what marriage is, A partnership between two people. No one has the right to deny people of that.

Fun fact: Half of marriages end in divorce =D
 
CrypticTerror said:
I feel Gov. or Religion has NO say in love, And don't say "Well marriage is a sacred bond" pr "sacred pact in front of God" because Religion doesn't have a patent on lifetime of partnership. thats what marriage is, A partnership between two people. No one has the right to deny people of that.

Fun fact: Half of marriages end in divorce =D
Click to expand...

And I agree, the astronomically high divorce rate in the US kind of throws out the whole "sanctity of marriage" argument in my opinion. So straight people can divorce & hate each other, and that doesn't violate said sanctity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top