Same Sex Marriage?

[punkin]

I reject arguments about falling populations (birth-rate) as an excuse to ban same-sex marriage. Gays and lesbians who marry will either start a family via artificial insemination, surrogacy or adoption since they cannot procreate as a couple.

No one is arguing that. The issue is that marriage itself is decreasing and is in trouble.

 

[punkin]

To clarify: I do not work for the Pew Research Center. I just referred to their conclusions.

It wasn't a swipe at you bicker. I was just referring to your post since I have absolutely no independent information on the topic.

 

[bicker]

Yup, np... just didn't want anyone thinking I worked there personally.

 

[Jennasis]

No one is arguing that. The issue is that marriage itself is decreasing and is in trouble.

Ah...think I misunderstood the previous page.

 

[CandyMandy]

The issue is that marriage itself is decreasing and is in trouble.

And which is why all this discussion on various versions of marriage -- as well intended as it is -- represents a classic case of worrrying about who gets to sit on which deck chair, while the entire ship is slowly going down. By the time the argument ends and you are finally in that seat you so desperately wanted, the seawater will be lapping at your feet.

 

[bicker]

But you still have to prove, first, that the ship is sinking, rather than learning to fly. And you cannot even begin to do that until you're willing to accept that both could be possible.

 

[punkin]

But you still have to prove, first, that the ship is sinking, rather than learning to fly. And you cannot even begin to do that until you're willing to accept that both could be possible.

I'm a little confused what your point is.

I am a big believer in marriage for many reasons and I am very upset about the possible ramifications for society should the institution become obsolete. It is very possible that other things could replace it and be much better for society overall, but I just do not see it. I guess I am a believer in gay marriage because, hey, here at least are people who actually want to get married and raise children in a loving home. I'm all for that.

 

[bicker]

I'm a little confused what your point is.

CandyMandy is implying doom and gloom ("entire ship is slowly going down") based on the statistics that she referred to. My reply points out that she is assuming that the statistics are pointing toward doom and gloom. All the statistics are actually pointing toward is a decrease in the number of people married. Whether that's good or bad isn't indicated by the statistics.

I am a big believer in marriage for many reasons and I am very upset about the possible ramifications for society should the institution become obsolete.

Which may be why you were confused. I'm also a big believer in marriage for many reasons, but unlike you I'm not going to jump to the conclusions that one must jump to in order to justify being upset about the possible ramifications. I don't "cringe in fear of change". I don't expect the future definition of what is "good" conform to our current definition. I'm going to rely on my understanding of human history and human nature to remember how often a trend, that seemed negative from the prevailing sentiments of the day, turned out generations later to be viewed as the beginning of some great advancement. I already mentioned a great example, earlier in one of these related threads.

It is very possible that other things could replace it and be much better for society overall, but I just do not see it.

And to be clear, I don't "see" it, either, necessarily, but what I know is that we often don't "see it" in advance. Hindsight is 20/20 perhaps, but foresight is practically 0/0.

 

[CandyMandy]

But you still have to prove, first, that the ship is sinking.

That box has already been checked. As shown earlier with hard data, the ship is at a minimum taking on a lot of water and beginning to seriously list. Fact: marriage (and birth) rates have been dropping significantly for decades, and the rate of decline is increasing. None of the demographers or academics who are experts on that are predicting some sort of miraculous flattening of the decline or major turnaround.

In fact, I just attended a Yankelovich trends presentation a few weeks ago where the presenter (a classic Manhattan urbanite) breezily generalized that the emerging value mindset of (her label) "the millenial urban knowledge worker class" (which I think is a fancy label for "Gen Y college grads who live/work in major metros") is (direct quote):

"Marriage and children not necessary."

 

[bicker]

That box has already been checked.

But the "box" checked is not labeled "Doom". You're choosing to present it that way, perhaps to bolster your personal preference for how you want things to go, or to support your contentions in some other way. But regardless, you're imposing meaning on the "box" that simply is not there of its own accord.

What if the "box" checked, back in 1828, was "Are you teaching your African slaves to read?" Back then, Captain Hugh Auld (the man who owned 10 year old Frederick Bailey, who would later become Frederick Douglass) would consider that number increasing to be horribly bad. How do we feel about that number increasing back then, now?

 

[punkin]

In fact, I just attended a Yankelovich trends presentation a few weeks ago where the presenter (a classic Manhattan urbanite) breezily generalized that the emerging value mindset of (her label) "the millenial urban knowledge worker class" (which I think is a fancy label for "Gen Y college grads who live/work in major metros") is (direct quote):

"Marriage and children not necessary."

That's interesting. According to the Pew data that bicker posted, it seems that marriage is only holding its own among college graduates:

A new ―marriage gap in the United States is increasingly aligned with a growing income gap. Marriage, while declining among all groups, remains the norm for adults with a college education and good income but is now markedly less prevalent among those on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder.

I guess we should also decouple marriage from children since the first is no longer a prerequisite for the second.

 

[roscoepc1]

Okay, how about a father and daughter or a mother and daughter for that matter? Should they be allowed to get married if they are attracted to each other and are in love? It's not their fault they are already related and they do really love each other, right? Does society frown on that type of relationship? Aren't their rights being denied then?

I don't believe an incestual relationship can EVER be between equal, consenting adults. In a familial setting there is ALWAYS one person with sway over the other...whether it be parent to child, older sibling to younger, or older cousin to younger. So one person has been affected by the authority of the other in their life....that's not equal consent.