Forums | MacLife

CG5Addict wrote:

Some1 wrote:

The moral fiber of America is crumbling, before you know it... half of all married heterosexual couples will be divorced.

I gay couple is not exempt from this. Hetero or homosexual are prone to the same problems. As times go by two people gay or straight may come to a point where they divorce. You can't tell me a gay couple even if not married won't leave their partner. This can go both ways, half of all heterosexual and homosexual can be divorced.

Their are no stats on gay couples that are married as of yet because these laws of legalizing gay marriage are new.

Some1's point is that divorce is a far greater threat to marriage than gay relationships ever could be.

CG5Addict wrote:

Some1 wrote:

The moral fiber of America is crumbling, before you know it... half of all married heterosexual couples will be divorced.

I gay couple is not exempt from this. Hetero or homosexual are prone to the same problems. As times go by two people gay or straight may come to a point where they divorce. You can't tell me a gay couple even if not married won't leave their partner. This can go both ways, half of all heterosexual and homosexual can be divorced.

Their are no stats on gay couples that are married as of yet because these laws of legalizing gay marriage are new.

As said above:

I wasn't inferring that gay couple's aren't presented with the same problems. I was however pointing out that institution of marriage is doing a fine job of destroying itself, and that gay marriage wouldn't have any affect on same-sex.

If married couples (opposite sex) are blaming gays for their marriage collapsing then they're doing something wrong.

Last edited by Some1 (2009-05-09 12:25 pm)

Some1 wrote:

CG5Addict wrote:

Some1 wrote:

The moral fiber of America is crumbling, before you know it... half of all married heterosexual couples will be divorced.

I gay couple is not exempt from this. Hetero or homosexual are prone to the same problems. As times go by two people gay or straight may come to a point where they divorce. You can't tell me a gay couple even if not married won't leave their partner. This can go both ways, half of all heterosexual and homosexual can be divorced.

Their are no stats on gay couples that are married as of yet because these laws of legalizing gay marriage are new.

As said above:

I wasn't inferring that gay couple's aren't presented with the same problems. I was however pointing out that institution of marriage is doing a fine job of destroying itself, and that gay marriage wouldn't have any affect on same-sex.

If married couples (opposite sex) are blaming gays for their marriage collapsing then they're doing something wrong.

Sorry was typing and posting when I saw your last post.

Your right, gay marriage wouldn't have any affect on same-sex. As much as I may disagree with same sex marriage, it should not be blamed for the collapsing of marriage itself. Each form of relationship has it's own problems, opposite or same sex.

Marriage itself is clearly what's destroying this country. It should be done away with.

CG5Addict wrote:

Your right, infidelity, finances, and criminal misconduct are what ruins relationships. But as written he doesn't make a distension as to what the cause is except for saying "the moral fiber of America is crumbling", not what the cause is as stated by Some1. Of coarse I may be bad at reading between the lines.

For me the moral fiber crumbling has more to do with how we treat each other than things like our sex lives. In  that light our moral fiber is in pretty bad shape. We (humanity in general) torture and condone doing so. We practice discrimination based on sexuality, race, religion, and gender. We will try to screw over even our friends and family to get the slightest bit more money. We can't even have a conversation without insulting someone. We damage property and the planet. Who we choose to have a consensual relationship with isn't even on the radar compared to that stuff.

Last edited by ScifiterX (2009-05-09 1:17 pm)

Satire often makes a decent lead in for that sort of point but it rarely is sufficient meat.

CG5Addict wrote:

Sorry, but reading the post as typed does not convey that to me. He may have meant that, but that is not what is written in the post.

Uh....he quite clearly was not implying that homosexual relationships never end and they never divorce.

robco wrote:

Morality is not static, but rather dynamic. Slavery wasn't immoral two hundred years ago. Racism wasn't immoral in the US a hundred years ago.

Wow.

So, how many states does this bring us to that have accepted it?

All I know for sure of is Massachusetts, and now Maine. Personally, I'm proud that MA was the first to go through with it 100%. Unfortunately, my hometown is very conservative, and one of my best friends is Mormon, so I can't talk about it too much around them.

It's about time states started embracing this and move forward instead of backasswards. Speaking of, how many states have gone ahead and "protected" marriage?

radarman wrote:

Conceptions of morality change, sure. What is actually right and wrong, however; do not. Slavery was just as wrong 200 years ago as it was 2000 years ago. The acceptance of slavery is all that has changed. Likewise for racism, and many other issues.

But if you lived 200 years ago, would you think that? You might think that slavery was perfectly normal and moral - it is condoned in the good book after all. Likewise, the common view was that non-whites were inferior to whites in many ways. Women were of course not considered to be as intelligent as men and certainly shouldn't have been allowed to vote.

We all like to think that if we'd lived back in the day, we'd have been strong abolitionists, fighting for equal rights for women and such - but that's not necessarily true. My point is that these things were appalling and are appalling to us now looking back. But these things weren't perceived as being wrong then. Jesus didn't advocate freeing slaves or treating women as equals. If we lived in earlier times, would we think such things were wrong because they're innately wrong? The concept of personal freedom and liberty is relatively new.

Religious folks back then had plenty of justification for slavery, segregation and reasons why women are inferior to men rooted in "holy" scripture. Even in modern times, young girls being forced to marry much older men is justified by scripture, as is treating them as second-class citizens.

Tallgeese wrote:

Wow.

I should have said considered immoral back then. It was perfectly acceptable back in the day. It wasn't right by our modern-day standards. But again, these were things supported by religious institutions then as well. The church didn't exactly frown on it.

Some1 wrote:

Robco, the bits on homosexuality, well male homosexuality in particular, date back to ~500BC.

Here's the thing, I don't believe that just because something was considered (in)acceptable in previous generations makes that morally correct for the time. I believe that it is still immoral, and it just showcases how humanity is progressing in terms of knowledge and tolerance.

It depends on the culture you're looking at. It was accepted in certain circumstances by the ancient Greeks, Japanese and other cultures. Actually in many places homosexuality was at least tolerated even in the 20th century. It wasn't always considered the bane of humankind.

I'm sure future generations will be taken aback by treatment of homosexuals - including discrimination such as not allowing same-sex couples to be married - like we are with slavery, racism and sexism. But would future generations also feel the same way about polygamy? What will be the moral quandaries a century from now? If you'd told someone back in 1909 that same-sex marriage would even be publicly debated, I would guess that they'd be surprised the issue of sexual orientation was being publicly discussed, much less that recognizing same-sex relationships under the law was even being considered.

Take your pick.

The point is, even though something was considered acceptable during the time, it doesn't make it right. Usually because something wrong is considered acceptable due to lack of knowledge at the time.