The Furry Forums

Furry Chat => Rants and Advice => Topic started by: Self-sain on March 14, 2011, 08:56:01 PM

Title: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Self-sain on March 14, 2011, 08:56:01 PM
I was doing some research for a project when I came across this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/12/us/12marriage.html?ref=politics

    “I submit there is a cancer growing on the political process here,” said Emmett C. Burns, a delegate from Baltimore. Same-sex marriage violates natural law, he said, adding, “It does not create a family but a naturally sterile union.”

This statement baffles me, gays can not get married, becuase they can’t make babies? Well seeing how I thought their were so many other ways of having a child other then with your “legal” spouse, either:

(A) Those methods I heard of are complete lies… like the cake..

(B) Those methods create something that does not equal a child… a super gay mutant baby perhaps?

(c) The politician is bias… you deiced >_>

That being said, any heterosexual “married” couple who does not have a child, nor plans on having one, should lose there legal rights (marriage wise) because it is also a “naturally sterile union”. Politics…

    “I’ve heard that somehow, I am less than natural, I am less than human, I am less than,” said Luke H. Clippinger, Democrat of Baltimore. “I am here today to claim to this house that I am not less than”

That is rather motivating

Note, no of what was said above is against heterosexual people, uniformed religion, or government. Also these views are my own, and do not represent the views of the furry forums, just saying :P (felt like being all legally correct and stuff)
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: White Wolf Guardian on March 14, 2011, 09:01:52 PM
Well what Emmett C. Burns said on the part "...a naturally sterile union." is true, but the rest is his opinion. A gay couple can't have kids unless either adoption or some other option comes into play.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: WhiteTiger89 on March 14, 2011, 09:08:37 PM
There are a number of things in this modern world that aren't "natural". Like chemotherapy treatment for cancer. Does that mean we should ban it?

Frankly, I don't see how this is NOT a civil rights issue. People are being denied a right afforded to everyone else based on an arbitrary fact about who they are. Also, about the whole "naturally sterile union" thing, does that mean couples who are infertile shouldn't be allowed to get married.

If churches don't want to marry gay couples, then that's fine. But FFS, let them get legally married in a courthouse!

All this really boils down to for me is this: They're not hurting anyone, so why stop them?
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: The_GMan on March 14, 2011, 09:16:02 PM
Come to Portugal, same sex marriage is legal here \o/
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: WhiteTiger89 on March 14, 2011, 09:21:42 PM
And I take it Portuguese society hasn't collapsed as a result?
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: The_GMan on March 14, 2011, 10:55:15 PM
And I take it Portuguese society hasn't collapsed as a result?
Nop, to be honest I'm actually very surprised.

But legalizing same sex marriage is probably the only good thing our prime minister has done.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: TheLazyFur on March 17, 2011, 01:05:21 PM
"naturally sterile union?" Wouldnt that mean that straight couples would have to have kids to get married, wouldnt it?
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Seko on March 17, 2011, 04:08:20 PM
As whitetiger89 said, there are many things in this world that are considered "not natural". The aformentioned delegate is obviously biased and has no way to justify what he is saying. If he feels so strongly about things "not being natural" he wouldn't drive a car, he would live in the woods or something, reject all healthcare, not eat 90% of food and many other things.

If a sterile heterosexual family can be intertwined in marriage even though procreation is not going to occurr, then by the same guidelines why can't a homosexual couple marry?

Also homosexual couples can have children, not specifically with their significant other but through a surrogate or other means. Is this not procreation? the creation of a life?




Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Aoren Deringer on March 17, 2011, 09:34:44 PM
Thats rediculous >.>

Personally I believe it is the fault of many religious presences traditionally controlling the governmental system. Hypocratically.

Life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness. I don't mean to bash religious groups, but its not right no matter who you are.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Kaprika on March 17, 2011, 11:17:58 PM
ya know....if you go apply for a job...ANYWHERE in the US..read the fine print and do you know what it says??

it says "in no way shall your application be turned down or affected by race, gender or ORIENTATION
in the workplace...they can not judge, treat you differently by position or pay because your gay/bi/lesbian...you have constitutional rights.

now...where does that go with marriage? why do all these "rights" dissapear suddenly, and become fogoten, and we are no longer equal to all the straight people.
sure they say "hey, dont get all fussy...you can still have civil unions"
but you know what...when racism was all the rage...and they had white bathrooms and black bathrooms.is THAT ok?
is THAT "enough".."acceptable"
no...its not, just cause they give us something similar to what they have and separate it from everyone else...doesnt make it the same.
we want marriage too, dont give us something else dress it up kinda the same and say its just as good NO.
we want the whole package deal that you straight people get!
*fist pumps*
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Aoren Deringer on March 17, 2011, 11:20:17 PM
Not to hate but that kinda sounded like you think all straight people are like that. Just sayin'.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Self-sain on March 17, 2011, 11:28:13 PM
No it dosent, just like with the "racism" thing, not everyone wanted segregation but they never spoke up. Same principles same thing. Just possibly slightly better. Anyways none of this should be taken as an anti strihht thing. Someone needs ro make the babies, obviously gays can't :P
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Aoren Deringer on March 17, 2011, 11:29:59 PM
Actually modern genetics are able to breed two female humans. I believe they've already done it in london, just too lazy to look up the article. And I GTG. byes.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Kaprika on March 17, 2011, 11:30:16 PM
Not to hate but that kinda sounded like you think all straight people are like that. Just sayin'.

oh goodness no, i have no dislike for straight people whatsoever, hope it didnt sound like it.
OwO

just me gettin all amped up, when i said "you straights" i refer to the gay haters
ur no hater, so its all good
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Self-sain on March 17, 2011, 11:34:20 PM
As far as I am informed, they were able to make male and female babies from two father "mice", but a seragant donner is still needed. Not trying to be a jerk or anything, but human gentics are far more complicated then mice, and we have only just brushed up on that.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Kaprika on March 17, 2011, 11:47:00 PM
it is in fact possible for two same genders to have a child. its just a simple surgery where a artificial womb is placed inside one of the men, and there is a surgery that they can take two male genetic samples and make the baby and place it inside..and it will grow normaly as any real female born child is...and a C section to birth it.

its just men arent BORN with the ability to breed, but they certainly CAN..women too
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Self-sain on March 18, 2011, 12:08:10 AM
There is no such thing as an artifical womb, we don't know when to release every hormone, and all that stuff that all women are born knowing how to do. Plus males don't have the space within there body to make fetus.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: WingedZephyr on March 18, 2011, 12:31:50 AM
Please stay on topic.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Kaprika on March 18, 2011, 01:10:52 AM
There is no such thing as an artifical womb, we don't know when to release every hormone, and all that stuff that all women are born knowing how to do. Plus males don't have the space within there body to make fetus.

actualy there is, its surgicaly implanted. ive watched a show about it like...a year ago on one of those discovery health channels


and yes, this is off topic. sorry.
just want to say that last thing and ill be right back where i should
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: TheLazyFur on March 18, 2011, 01:18:12 AM
Im a pro-gay rights christian. But i dont know why it would have to be a quote "naturally sterile union" to be excluded from marraige. Im straight, does that mean I cant get married before I have children? No. Gays, Bis etc. shouldnt be excluded from it either, in my views.  :/
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: x on March 18, 2011, 11:03:42 PM
Okay I am going to be hated forever for my opinion but whatever.

I agree, two people who love each other should be allowed to get married, no matter if it's a lesbian, gay or straight couple. They deserve this right like anyone else.

BUT it is not appropriate to count biology and creation of fetuses as a legal right. Having babies isn't about law. It's about having children, and in my opinion gay couples need to adopt if they want a child and lesbian couples need a donor or else need to adopt too.

This insane, disgusting notion of making males pregnant, giving males wombs needs to stop. It violates every natural law on Earth. A male and a female need to take part in the birth of a child. Sperm fertilizes the egg. Egg goes inside a woman. THE END. And yes, you should care about natural law because it is what makes this world go around, like it or not. If natural law continues to be violated with things like this and abortion, our world is going to die.

Yes, let homosexuals get married and raise children. It's about love and I'm fine with it, but I'm not fine with males being pregnant and this other insane stuff brought up.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: Self-sain on March 19, 2011, 12:11:02 AM
Well seeing how it isn't possible yea...

The one I brought up use the DNA from the two males, that's it, the woman's egg is used as a shell for the other males DNA. Its all natural and all that good stuff.

With abortions, I would recommended taking that off, that isn't allowed to be voiced.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: WingedZephyr on March 19, 2011, 12:13:48 AM
I already asked you guys to stay on topic once.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: x on March 19, 2011, 01:24:59 AM
of course abortion is not allowed to be voiced.

and I am sorry Zeph, but this is a topic about how someone said homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to marry because they can't have children. though my post has a lot of opinion sprinkled through it, it is completley on topic.
Title: Re: No babies no marriage?
Post by: WingedZephyr on March 19, 2011, 01:39:17 AM
The beginning of your post was on-topic, yet the end of your post brought it back to the off-topic discussion I already asked everyone to stop. Which also led to other people getting back on that track again.

There's nothing wrong with stating an opinion, but do remember to be respectful of the fact that other forum members may not share the same opinion as you.

If you ever have a problem with anything I say, feel free to talk to Tweak about it, but I don't appreciate just being ignored. Nor do I like having to ask something more than once.




Locking this thread because it needs to be done.