What are the ethical parameters of homosexuality?

[Flopper]

Allowing gay marriage is looking inevitable. Defending and tolerating homosexuality has become popular with the young, thanks to the powerful Gay groups ever pushing this issue. I have to commend the Pro Gay rights groups, they have USED this democracy of ours to it's fullest and most cynical extent. Gays tend to be wealthy, they have money and they plow that into their cause. Just like the Petroleum industry or the the NRA, Gay rights groups have clout for their special interests. That is how American "democracy" works. It's not always about fairness, necessity or reason. I stopped voting, and I don't care anymore because people like me don't fit in with this phony form of Democracy. In my opinion, allowing gay marriage in America will be a black mark on everything we have ever accomplished prior.

I don't believe gays are any wealthier than heterosexuals. In fact, there is good reason to believe the reverse is true. The reality is Gay men suffer significant job and wage discrimination, and lesbians do not earn more than straight females.

 

[MaryL]

Gays have a reputation of expendable wealth, and I posit that they are no different than any other special interest group here in the US. They can BUY lots of lawyers, PR firms and PACs. Judging by how much American opinion has changed in the last decade, color me skeptical of how ethical or moral, let alone "Constitutional" gay rights are. Gays have the same constitutional rights as heterosexuals, and always have. Homosexuals are concerned with what is in their crotch and their ideal of love is defined by folks that have the same preocupation with narcissism. That seems to be the definition of homosexual "LOVE". Heterosexual marriage transcends personal sexual quirks, and despite it's faults, is why we as a race exist.

 

[Flopper]

Gays have a reputation of expendable wealth, and I posit that they are no different than any other special interest group here in the US. They can BUY lots of lawyers, PR firms and PACs. Judging by how much American opinion has changed in the last decade, color me skeptical of how ethical or moral, let alone "Constitutional" gay rights are. Gays have the same constitutional rights as heterosexuals, and always have. Homosexuals are concerned with what is in their crotch and their ideal of love is defined by folks that have the same preocupation with narcissism. That seems to be the definition of homosexual "LOVE". Heterosexual marriage transcends personal sexual quirks, and despite it's faults, is why we as a race exist.

People's perceptions of gays and gay marriage has changed remarkable primarily because people have become more open minded and accepting of people that are different from themselves. Young people are beginning to see a gay kid not as a weirdo to be bullied but as just another kid who happens to be gay.

This is not just a change in America's attitude toward sexual orientation but a basic change in America's attitude toward intolerance. It's a long term change that started after WWII and will continue until people finally judge people based on their individual merits without regard to their sexual orientation, race, religion, or nationality.

 

[Aristotle]

I understand is that gay men will wear condoms only when engaged in anal sex. Which makes total sense. Of course one needs to consider cleanliness at that moment but not where one's mouth is concerned. Homosexuals sure love to kiss little babies....

I see your point, which a lot of a people view gay marriage but there are gays that abstain from sex

There are a lot of gays particular older women who simple enjoy the company of their own sex.

I have noticed that gays who marry seem to be much more committed to their relationship than heterosexuals. It's not an easy route. Unlike heterosexuals; they aren't marrying to have kids and they aren't marrying because of social pressure. In many ways gays that marry are ostracizing themselves. They don't quite fit in to the gay community and they don't fit in with married heterosexuals. Gay marriage is not an easy path to take and couples should certainly be very committed to the relationship before even considering it.

Your advice is also valuable to many heterosexual couples as well.

 

[yidnar]

I see the argument against the legalization of homosexual marriage from religious conservatives but I have to ask, just looking at homosexuality alone, is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

1st of all nobody in their right mind wants to hear about someones sex life !! 2nd how is someones sex life considered a civil right on par with the civil rights movement ??

 

[Flopper]

I see the argument against the legalization of homosexual marriage from religious conservatives but I have to ask, just looking at homosexuality alone, is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

1st of all nobody in their right mind wants to hear about someones sex life !! 2nd how is someones sex life considered a civil right on par with the civil rights movement ??

Marriage, homosexual or heterosexuality is not about sex. It's about commitment and legal rights and responsibility. Sex is certainly no longer a reason for marriage.

 

[yidnar]

I see the argument against the legalization of homosexual marriage from religious conservatives but I have to ask, just looking at homosexuality alone, is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

1st of all nobody in their right mind wants to hear about someones sex life !! 2nd how is someones sex life considered a civil right on par with the civil rights movement ??

Marriage, homosexual or heterosexuality is not about sex. It's about commitment and legal rights and responsibility. Sex is certainly no longer a reason for marriage.

then your heart has never shot out of your dick .

 

[blackcherry]

Gays have a reputation of expendable wealth, and I posit that they are no different than any other special interest group here in the US. They can BUY lots of lawyers, PR firms and PACs. Judging by how much American opinion has changed in the last decade, color me skeptical of how ethical or moral, let alone "Constitutional" gay rights are. Gays have the same constitutional rights as heterosexuals, and always have. Homosexuals are concerned with what is in their crotch and their ideal of love is defined by folks that have the same preocupation with narcissism. That seems to be the definition of homosexual "LOVE". Heterosexual marriage transcends personal sexual quirks, and despite it's faults, is why we as a race exist.

You can posit all day long , but it still doesn't alter the fact that your invented world view does not match the facts .
You are indulging in selective vision .

 

[editec]

is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

Not really.

Do you know why there isn't?

Because that argument would fail in the three possible ways one defines ethos

1. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.

Its legal

2. Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practicea

.

Homosexuals have always been with us

3. Based on logical reasoning; reasonable: a legitimate solution to the problem.

There is no logical reasoning that can show us that homosexuality is problem to be solved.

 

[High_Gravity]

Allowing gay marriage is looking inevitable. Defending and tolerating homosexuality has become popular with the young, thanks to the powerful Gay groups ever pushing this issue. I have to commend the Pro Gay rights groups, they have USED this democracy of ours to it's fullest and most cynical extent. Gays tend to be wealthy, they have money and they plow that into their cause. Just like the Petroleum industry or the the NRA, Gay rights groups have clout for their special interests. That is how American "democracy" works. It's not always about fairness, necessity or reason. I stopped voting, and I don't care anymore because people like me don't fit in with this phony form of Democracy. In my opinion, allowing gay marriage in America will be a black mark on everything we have ever accomplished prior.

I don't believe gays are any wealthier than heterosexuals. In fact, there is good reason to believe the reverse is true. The reality is Gay men suffer significant job and wage discrimination, and lesbians do not earn more than straight females.

Actually I think gays can have more money, they don't have to worry about accidentally getting someone pregnant and dishing out half their paycheck to child support and alimony.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I see the argument against the legalization of homosexual marriage from religious conservatives but I have to ask, just looking at homosexuality alone, is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

There is no such thing as ‘homosexual marriage,’ there is only marriage, as either defined by the state or by a given religious dogma.

Homosexuals merely seek access to that same secular marriage law opposite-sex couples have access to, as defined and codified by the state; nothing more, nothing less.

As private entities, of course, religious institutions cannot be compelled to accommodate same-sex couples, as 14th Amendment jurisprudence applies only to the public sector.

Otherwise, why would homosexuality be any more or less ‘unethical’ than heterosexuality?

Churches can and do marry in the name of the State. They all have pronounced the words "HUSBAND and WIFE" ----- clearly such a distinction doesn't exist among homosexual couples... This makes homosexuality different.

Incorrect, not in the eyes of the law.

If a same-sex couple were to be married by a member of the clergy, the secular component of that marriage would be just as valid, just the same, as an opposite-sex couple married by the same clergyman.

That a given religious entity might not recognize marriage equality is legally irrelevant, as the state will always acknowledge as valid a marriage ceremony performed by a duly authorized representative of the state, be he a justice of the peace or a minister, regardless the gender configuration of the couple.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I see the argument against the legalization of homosexual marriage from religious conservatives but I have to ask, just looking at homosexuality alone, is there a legitimate argument regarding homosexuality as being unethical?

That would depend on your ethics, wouldn't it? If your ethics prohibit you from having sex then any sexual behavior would be unethical. Another example, if you are married to a woman and your ethics prohibit you from having sex outside of marriage, once again homosexuality would be unethical.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's not about ethics...

... it's about morality...

... and health and public safety.

Ok waltky but what about public safety?

Ask a paramedic sometime.