On Politics – 1 – Gay Rights
If you have any suggestions about the format please leave a comment. I would also welcome suggestions on what the next topic should be.
References
My Blog – http://andrewberkshire.blogspot.com/
Homosexuality by evolution – http://www.amazon.com/Selfish-Gene-Anniversary-Introduction/dp/0199291152/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214890457&sr=8-1
Gay Animals – http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html
Charlotte J. Patterson PhD – http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html
“Gay Parents and Child Custody: A Struggle Under the Legal System” by Douglas H. McIntyre [Published in Mediation Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 2, Winter 1994] – http://0-pao.chadwyck.com.mercury.concordia.ca/articles/displayItem.do?QueryType=articles&ResultsID=11A427575D4524F8D&filterSequence=0&ItemNumber=1&journalID=w553
American presidential candidates stances on same-sex marriage – http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.samesexmarriage.html
Azrienoch’s video – http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=LbWs98f0g7M
Duration : 0:6:12
Tags: Adoption, andrewrberkshire, discrimination, gay, homoexuality, lesbian, marriages, on, politics, research, rights, same-sex
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
So you have a …
So you have a problem with children being told that homosexuality isn’t evil.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Straight people …
Straight people don’t care if gays marry each other. That is no skin off their nose. The rub comes when you consider prepubescent children and their civil right NOT to have to concern themselves with this crap until after puberty.
Gays feel like if they wait until after puberty to get acceptance from straight kids, they lose. They are the butt of jokes and teasing and harassment by the straight kids if they don’t get into the classrooms early to indoctrinate kids that gay is normal.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
It is quite the …
It is quite the hypocrisy isn’t it… I guess most societies believe the tax structure for couples increases the incentive to form family groupings maybe? It would be nice to see single people gain the same rights, there isn’t much of a public push for it right now though.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I have no trouble …
I have no trouble with people coupling or even forming group arrangements. Have a ceremony be it in a church or forest or whatever.Just don’t expect government/employer imposed financial advantages that are denied single people. I see it as another tax break for the rich. I would be open to considering keeping the word “marriage” if it gives someone a warm fuzzy feeling. Keep in mind at one time gay rights was completely unthinkable (I’m 46). Single peoples rights may also happen in my lifetime.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
That is an …
That is an extremely intriguing point. But marriage is more than a legal contract to most people, so I don’t think your ideas would fly.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Like many other …
Like many other gays I’m against same sex marriage.
This is because I am against ALL legal marriages.
Marriage gives financial privileges to coupled people in the way of tax breaks, workers benefits etc. This is in spite of their double income advantage. Why can I give a survivor pension to a spouse and not a friend? This marginalizes single people. Pair up if you wish but don’t expect single people to pay for it.
I think gays should move for a new system rather than jump on the bigot train.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Thanks ossian! And …
Thanks ossian! And thanks for subscribing!
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
This is a very …
This is a very informative and sensitively researched video. It’s good to see that these issues are finally being addressed openly and honestly. I noticed a couple of comments using the ‘natural’ argument; is this STILL being used? If only all people actually took the time to research subjects which they have an opinion on, like you. Cheers
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Great Video and its …
Great Video and its good to have you back.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
The video is more …
The video is more of a personal perspective than a concrete factual data.
But there is some truth to that.
It is more of a genetic trait than a product of the environment.
But still, it doesn’t sit all that well with me.
But interesting nontheless.
Ciao
See ya’ later
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
No problem …
No problem regelemihai, please watch that whole video on the Foratv website, it’s extremely interesting and informative.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
The penis and …
The penis and vagina are complimentary, definitely, however when engaging in anal sex, men have the ability to reach through the stimulation of the prostate gland, and women feel entirely new sensations in the vaginal walls from anal sex and can also reach . So nerve stimulation works both ways.
There is no real data to suggest children are harmed in any way by having gay parents. I hope this video helps: watch?v=GGfKxFEXoVo
You can’t encourage gayness, it’s there or isn’t.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Regelemihai, thanks …
Regelemihai, thanks for giving an opposing opinion that isn’t steeped in prejudice. Homosexuality is a naturally occuring phenomena in animals that have become overpopulated in specific areas. The cases of animals engaging in homosexual behaviour is far from isolated, in fact most primates will engage in homosexual acts when in heat, if only for the pleasure.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Anyways…
Thanks …
Anyways…
Thanks for the vid Andrew.
Insightful as usual
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
[cont.]
There are …
[cont.]
There are various genetic abnormalities in anture,that doesn’t make them “natural”.
The fact that the Penis and vagina have complemetary shapes and reciprocal nerve stimulation says something
And no matter how we might want to twist it or spin it around,a child can be phycologically harmed by living in a house with two parents of the same sex.
It promotes this type of behaviour, and while I think Gays should not be marginalized in any way,I don’t think it should be encouraged either
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Ok, here’s my take: …
Ok, here’s my take:
Homosexuality should NOT be marginalized under the banner of of religious immorality. And I’m saying this as a Christian.
We need to look out for each other, regardless of sexual orientation.
We’re not living in the 13th century anymore.
Having said that, I do have to disagree with the other ertion.
Homosexuality is still conisdered to be unatural,and the fact that some animals engage in it,doesn’t say anything. Thise are isolated cases.perversions of nature.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Sometimes I wish I …
Sometimes I wish I could punch people through the internet. But the internet won’t be anarchy for long, net neutrality is something that won’t be around in the next 5 years if people don’t start paying attention when they cast their votes.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Yeah, I think I …
Yeah, I think I will. I like the idea of anarchy, because I often resent authority, but I view it as an unattainable utopia that always takes us back to the state of nature and inevitable tribalism. I think the closes thing we have to civil anarchy today would have to be the internet.
But the only reason the internet stays civil is because God doesn’t answer the Netizen’s prayer: “Dear Lord, please grant me the ability to punch people through TCP/IP.”
Another idea I like is “amorality”.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I like libertarian …
I like libertarian in some things but not in others. I’m going to be doing a back and forth with Cozmikzen soon on anarchy so you might enjoy that.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I understand what …
I understand what you are saying, but I tend to hold pretty strong to principles minimal government and self sufficiency. If their is a way to get government out of the picture and get equal or better results, then I’m for it. I’m Libertarian after all.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
You can have a long …
You can have a long term relationship without a marriage. A marriage is the contractual agreement between two individuals recognizing their rights as next of kin. Marriage carries the connotation of tradition because of time and origins. But today you have people living common law all their lives with most of the same criterion filled. Marriage just adds rights that are recognized by governing bodies and bureaucracy.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Without government, …
Without government, marriage would be an empty and meaningless contract?
That’s rubbish. A marriage is more then just an agreement or contract. It is an emotion based long-term relationship. And like any relationship, it is only as good the commitment, honesty and integrity all parties bring to the table. I would say that government has very little to do with these qualities.
What you describe sounds more like a civil union, not a marriage.
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Thanks a lot dude!
Thanks a lot dude!
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
I loved it!
Great …
I loved it!
Great job man! =]
December 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Well technically, …
Well technically, FlowCell, we didn’t evolve to want to have sex for non-productive reasons. Women in our species are extremely varied in times for ovulation, so it makes sense that the male always tries. Having sex without a want for reproduction has only been present since we became sapient.
The main difference between anal/oral sex would have been septic a long time ago, but not anymore. People are much more sanitary nowadays. And yes many gay people don’t engage in anal sex.