Gay Marriage Legalized in Iowa

[Capernicus]

Elaborate.

[[Spoiler]]

Elaborate.

Meaning they do it for the sake of it or they think they are in love, when they really need commitment.

[Memento Mori]

Meaning they do it for the sake of it or they think they are in love, when they really need commitment.

I guess the people who really do love each other and do want a sacred commitment and still want all the legal benefits of marriage... well... it's just a fad, right?

[Capernicus]

According to dictionary.com:

fad - (noun) a temporary fashion, notion, manner of conduct, etc., esp. one followed enthusiastically by a group.

Marriage is far from temporary, the evidence supports that the practice of marriage "pre-dates reliable recorded history".

Getting married is not a fad. Getting married young is not even a fad, for centuries people in many cultures got married a lot younger than they do in, say, America. A lot of these cultures continue this tradition of "getting married young".

[[Spoiler]]

According to dictionary.com:

fad - (noun) a temporary fashion, notion, manner of conduct, etc., esp. one followed enthusiastically by a group.

Marriage is far from temporary, the evidence supports that the practice of marriage "pre-dates reliable recorded history".

Getting married is not a fad. Getting married young is not even a fad, for centuries people in many cultures got married a lot younger than they do in, say, America. A lot of these cultures continue this tradition of "getting married young".

Sorry it looks like you guys have misunderstood the way I used that word, or maybe I didn't fully understand the usage of that word before I posted. The real intentions for my message is that some people nowadays don't take marriage seriously, they don't commit to their partner or love, etc. and all that good stuff. I was pretty much agreeing with what most of you were saying towards the end of this thread.

[Eris]

Marriage is a fad for many young adults.

Yah, it's gonna blow over any time now. Like the internet.

[-akichan-]

Yah, it's gonna blow over any time now. Like the internet.

Internet marriage you mean?

[SigmaSD]

Internet marriage you mean?

No, he means that young adults are going to lose interest in marriage just as many people will lose interest in the internet.

And I must say something else in the matter. If gay people want to get married in a church, then I believe it is the right of the church to forbid the marriage if they believe that it's wrong. But if they just want to get married then there shouldn't really be a problem. Anyone else agree?

[Mmmmmmmmmm]

And I must say something else in the matter. If gay people want to get married in a church, then I believe it is the right of the church to forbid the marriage if they believe that it's wrong. But if they just want to get married then there shouldn't really be a problem. Anyone else agree?

I've really opened my eyes due to this thread. And I agree; if the church doesn't want the homosexuals to get married because of the church's religion, then the couple shouldn't get married there.

[Capernicus]

No, he means that young adults are going to lose interest in marriage just as many people will lose interest in the internet.

And I must say something else in the matter. If gay people want to get married in a church, then I believe it is the right of the church to forbid the marriage if they believe that it's wrong. But if they just want to get married then there shouldn't really be a problem. Anyone else agree?

I would be very surprised if anyone disagreed. Religions have the right to refuse to marry couples just because said couple hasn't been a member of said church for x amount of years, so why should they be forced to marry couples that are opposed by their doctrine? It's arse backwards. However, there shouldn't be any uproar if said couple just grabs a judge and does it in the court house.

[Yugure's Goddess]

I KNEW IOWA WOULD LEGALIZE IT! PROOF YOU GUYS KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IOWA! HURRAH FOR MY PROGRESSIVE HOME STATE OF AWESOME. WAY TO GO!

*parades through the forums throwing confetti* GO IOWA! GO IOWA! BAH, I consider Iowa one of the more progressive states in the union, quite frankly. Just cause it's mostly farm land doesn't mean they're all a bunch-bible thumping, ignorant nobodies! It just means they have fertile soil. PERIOD!

Anyway, I'm happy to one-up Cali (sorry Capsters). Iowa effin' rocks! YEAH CORN! *singing* Everybody shuck now! XP

love
dani
dude

[Doctor One]

It's legalized in maine now too. And about damn time.

[Grim Scythe]

it took nine pages for those realizations, not sure whether to be impressed or dismayed.

[Scarred DNA]

Finally.

I honestly can't even believe that this is an issue in this day and age. We like to think we are so civilized and enlightened, and yet . . . two people can't even get married?

No, I take that back. In a society where even males and females don't yet stand on the same level, I guess it comes as no surprise how truly backward we really are. Nevermind that certain social institutions (namely CJ) have never been able to keep up with the winds of social change.

Marriage in its current form . . . isn't doing so great. Grasping for straws to keep it out of the hands of certain social groups is not going to save it, if it can even be saved. With the empowerment of women, the (slow) realization that lifetime love is not much more than a social construct, and higher education for all - I really don't see it lasting much longer anyway.

Hats off to the states moving toward the future, instead of stagnating in outdated religious belief and elitism.

[_-Anonymous-_]

At least this is a step in the right direction. People should be able to marry whomever they love. And no law should tell them they can't.

agreed...

[-akichan-]

At least this is a step in the right direction. People should be able to marry whomever they love. And no law should tell them they can't.

The thing is, is it legal to adopt children? I mean those who marries the same sex. Would that be against the law since children health is one of the biggest concerns in the country. I've been asking myself this question.

[Capernicus]

Would that be against the law since children health is one of the biggest concerns in the country. I've been asking myself this question.

Since you're having those thoughts, I assume you are of the opinion that a homosexual household is an unhealthy environment for a child. Is this correct?

[Ollie]

From all I've read and heard, the sexuality of the parents don't really affect the upbringing of the child negatively OR positively, just how good/bad the parents treat the child.

[-akichan-]

From all I've read and heard, the sexuality of the parents don't really affect the upbringing of the child negatively OR positively, just how good/bad the parents treat the child.

Oh ok, that makes sense. But do you think that the law would be standing anywhere when it comes to adoption?

[Capernicus]

Oh ok, that makes sense. But do you think that the law would be standing anywhere when it comes to adoption?

...no, this doesn't make sense.

[Scarred DNA]

Oh ok, that makes sense. But do you think that the law would be standing anywhere when it comes to adoption?

When you say law, do you mean those that make it illegal for two homosexual people to marry, or the laws that now allow two people to get married?

While I think laws allowing same-sex marriage will very likely lead to an increase in adoption among same-sex couples, there are also other institutions and agencies that will continue as they always have. Meaning, they will continue to make it difficult for same-sex couples to adopt, despite evidence that such arrangements can cultivate socially healthy children into productive members of society.

Which is not good, because then black-market adoptions will increase

[Cless Alvein]

Meaning, they will continue to make it difficult for same-sex couples to adopt, despite evidence that such arrangements can cultivate socially healthy children into productive members of society.

Unfortunately it's not that simple. While there's certainly no evidence to suggest that being homosexual makes you an unfit parent, there is overwhelming evidence that the majority of violent criminals, chemically-dependents, suicides, teen pregnancies, financially disadvantaged, etc. etc. all come from single-parent homes.*

How much of this is simply because one parent working alone lacks the resources to raise a child as effectively as two, and how much is due to lacking a balanced representation of a traditional male-female parental unit has not been conclusively studied.

* http://www.family-enterprising.org/bof_facts.php

[-akichan-]

When you say law, do you mean those that make it illegal for two homosexual people to marry, or the laws that now allow two people to get married?

Oh yes, I mean both xD

While I think laws allowing same-sex marriage will very likely lead to an increase in adoption among same-sex couples, there are also other institutions and agencies that will continue as they always have. Meaning, they will continue to make it difficult for same-sex couples to adopt, despite evidence that such arrangements can cultivate socially healthy children into productive members of society.

That's what I was thinking about. What I think is similar, both will-marry and married would still be difficult in adoption because of how this country treats children as treasures. Therefore, there will be someone who will get really furious of my opinion.

[Capernicus]

Unfortunately it's not that simple. While there's certainly no evidence to suggest that being homosexual makes you an unfit parent, there is overwhelming evidence that the majority of violent criminals, chemically-dependents, suicides, teen pregnancies, financially disadvantaged, etc. etc. all come from single-parent homes.*

* http://www.family-enterprising.org/bof_facts.php

This doesn't even make sense. Why are you quoting statistics for single parents? If gays are going to get married...then they won't be single parents. I'm confused, perhaps I missed your point.

[Scarred DNA]

Unfortunately it's not that simple. While there's certainly no evidence to suggest that being homosexual makes you an unfit parent, there is overwhelming evidence that the majority of violent criminals, chemically-dependents, suicides, teen pregnancies, financially disadvantaged, etc. etc. all come from single-parent homes.*

How much of this is simply because one parent working alone lacks the resources to raise a child as effectively as two, and how much is due to lacking a balanced representation of a traditional male-female parental unit has not been conclusively studied.

* http://www.family-enterprising.org/bof_facts.php

That's because a significant percentage of those single-parents live in poverty, and possess a low level of education. Low-SES families face social stressors on both the micro and macro level, and this results in difficulties in raising their children. Besides living in violent neighbourhoods, children in such families . . .

1. Have little physical space at home.
2. Attend schools that are overcrowded, underfunded, and sub-par.
3. Have fewer oppportunities for daily stimulation and appropriate play materials.

4. Have poor nutrition, which leads to lower IQ levels, which in turn lead to antisocial and aggressive behavior.

Harsh discipline strategies or none at all result in children who dysfunction not only in school but in the community as older adults.

Single-parents with adequate socio-economic resources tend to not suffer this same kind of stress that low-income parents face, so their children are less-likely to fall into the pitfalls you mentioned above.

Even in two-parent families with a low SES, children are still at a disadvantage and are still more likely to suffer from those same pitfalls because the relationship between the parents can still be strained by social stressors. Only in situations where parents are able to have a close, satisfying, and nurturing relationship with their children does the child benefit.

But this is all assuming that a homosexual parent is going to be a single parent, and there's no direct correlation between being homosexual and being a single-parent.

Bottom line - when homosexual individuals are put in the same social circumstances as heterosexual individuals, their behaviors are very, very similar with only a few minor differences. And the majority of these differences are positive differences, not negative differences.

Curiously enough, homosexual parents tend to be highly educated - Almost half have graduate degrees. High level of education = well-paying job = high SES = more resources with which to raise children.

Therefore, there will be someone who will get really furious of my opinion.[/color]

So what?

Yes, it will still be difficult even for married couples to adopt, if that's what you're saying. And when talking about children already in the system (wards of the state), they aren't treated like treasures. They're treated like commodities. Because agencies receive federal funding based on the number of children they have, these agencies tend to be picky and choosy about who they let adopt the children, or they avoid it altogether just so they can continue to receive those funds.

Many many children are never adopted because of the money they bring in.

* http://www.family-enterprising.org/bof_facts.php

Now that I read it, I'm not sure I have much "faith" in that website. Some of their statistics are almost 2 decades old, and I get the feeling they have an agenda in pushing the "traditional" family unit, given their religious stance. To me, that's really nothing more than a well-veiled attack on cohabitation, which is basically the arch nemesis of marriage.