Gay marriages now legal in the UK

[Cain]

Quoting exnihilo from 18:25, 7th Dec 2005
There's nothing directly attributed to Christ, but dear ol' Paul spits bile in all directions.

shouldn't that be "all directions?

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[José Jimenez]

Quoting from 13:03, 7th Dec 2005
No more of these "moral decline" arguments? Why not? Doesn't moral decline exist?

An increase in casual sex. Lax attitudes towards said sex. Rises in abortion. Ridiculous limits on points at which babies can be aborted. The increasing prevalence of pornography which encourages abuse of minors and exploitation of women. The shocking sexualisation of young girls. Decreased respect for human life. Increased acceptance of euthanasia. Rises in hate crimes, rape, murder, gun crimes, knife crimes, arson, physical violence, drunk and disorderly behaviour. Cities and countries pushing to legalise prostitution. Student-focused promotions/nights/events which positively encourage one-night stands. Cutthroat capitalistic practices. The growing divide between rich and poor. Mercenary business techniques. Increases in bullying at schools, in the workplace, and in the home. More internet scams, identity theft, drug and people trafficking, tax evasion, benefit cheats, sex scandals and consumerism than ever before.

Note I'm not addressing sex specifically here. All I want to address here is the implication that social morality isn't in decline. You can't say that the items mentioned above aren't based on morality on some level. So don't imply that this society isn't careering towards moral bankruptcy.

I don't think these are problems whose severity has increased in recent times. Society has turned it's attention to them, and now we are all shocked and disgusted at their prevelence.

Your concerns about abortion will be alayed somewhat by the knowledge that most physicians will not perform late term abortions unless the life of the mother is at serious risk, and both she and the child will die. Generally speaking most Ob/Gyn's will not perform late term abortions. It was disturbing to see Bush and his supports politicize the issue when they did.

I believe the Jewish position on homosexuality varies with the interpereation of halakha, or the body traditional jewish law, somewhat akin to sharia.

Leviticus (or Vayikra in Hebrew) 18:22 states

"V’et zachar lo tishkav mishk’vey eeshah toeyvah hee"

which in English translates as

"And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman, it is an abomination"

However, like most religions of antiquity, less emphasis was placed on thought than on action - note that there is no reference made to harboring homosexual thoughts being sinful, just the act of homosexual intercourse.

Each Jewish sect has a different interperetation of the implications of this passage with regard to halakha: the most traditional sects of Judaism, the so called Haredi, abhor homosexuality in thought or practice, while the more progressive sects, such as the Lubavitch, are sympathetic to homosexuals but disapprove the expression of their sexuality (similar to the position taken the Roman Catholic Church on this issue). The more liberal sects (such as the reform jews in the United States, and I believe the Liberal Jews in the UK) will sanctify gay marriage and will ordain gay rabbis as well.

[macgamer]

Quoting ezra from 00:58, 7th Dec 2005
Looks like it's just you and a handful of catholics that's standing between the tidal wave of sodomy which is threatening to cripple society. get the ducking stool out, mate, they're coming for you.

That is one of nicest complements I've ever received on the Sinner message board, thankyou. We all have a cross to bear at some point in our lives, so if it is just myself and a few others with a moral backbone, that decide to take it upon ourselves to stem the bleeding of society then I'll do it gladly.

[Humphrey]

Quoting from 00:39, 6th Dec 2005
This whole thing smacks of secular fundamentalism, which is really dangerous.
But just to throw my tuppence in:

In the lesbian community there is more infidelity than among straight women. One large study found that 42 percent of lesbians had more than ten sexual partners, of which a large percentage were strangers.
- Laura Dean et al., "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health: Findings and Concerns," Journal of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association 4, no. 3 (2000): 101-51.

In a study by a researcher into homosexual male health, 37 % of HIV+ gay males said they didn't practice safe sex. 33% of all gay men don't practice safe sex consistently, 10% said they never or almost never practice safer sex.
- http://www.gaytoz.com/bResearch.asp

Gay men are 33 times more likely to contract anal cancer. HIV+ gay men are 66 times more likely to get anal cancer than heterosexuals. - Bower M. HIV associated anal cancer and anal intraepithelial neoplasma. Oral presentation, AIDS-related cancer forum, Wolfson Institute for Biomedical Research, University College London, January 17th, 2004.

Homosexuals have much higher rates of depression, childhood abuse (both sexual and violent), domestic violence, alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety, and dependency on psychiatric care than heterosexuals.
- M. J. Bailey, "Homosexuality and Mental Illness," Archives of General Psychiatry 56 (1999): 883-4.

A Canadian study showed that life expectancy at for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, it is estimated that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday.
- Hogg, R.S. et al.: Modelling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men. International Journal of Epidemiology, 1997; 26:657-61

Homosexual relationships last an average of 1.5 years, and homosexual males have an average of 8 cases of infidelity per year.
- British Medical Journal 298: 1137-1142

In an online survey among nearly 8,000 homosexuals, 71% of same-sex relationships lasted less than eight years. 9% of all same-sex relationships lasted longer than 16 years. Violence in homosexual partnerships is 2-3 times more common than in heterosexual relationships
- 2003-2004 Gay & Lesbian Consumer Online Census

Children raised in same-sex parents are more likely to become sexually promiscuous and are more likely to become homosexual themselves. - Riggs, S.C.: Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents. In: Pediatrics 2002; 109: 1193-4.

You wanted statistics (and these are from non-religious, not even right-wing sources), but no doubt I will now be told "they're just statistics".

That seems like a compelling argument, untill you visit a neo-nazi chat room and see that the muppets on there use similar techniques to argue that black people shouldnt be allowed to have children. They simply cobble a load of supposedly daming statistics together (ethnic crime figures and incidents of domestic violence) and finish with a res ipsa loquitur conclusion. Gay bashing and racism are essentially different strands of the same mindset of bigotry.

[hr]

http://www.livejournal.com/users/humphrey_clarke/

[Senethro]

macgamer, consider what jesus was martyred for.

Now ask yourself if you want to be martyred for opposing bumsex.

[Bonnie]

Dude, just stop. Don't give Catholics a bad name.
We're not all inherently evil.
Some of us actually read the catechism and have respect for our fellow human beings.

Myself, I figure "Meh, I don't care who's gay or straight, as long as they buy me a pint."


[hr]

I love cheese.

[José Jimenez]

exnihlio

I would like to meet you in person at some point. If you would like to do so please send me an e-mail on an17

Regards
José

[exnihilo]

Oh dear! Have I offended you? Will I need to wear some sort of armour?

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[macgamer]

What people want to do in the privacy of their own homes is really up to them. They have free will to choose how they live their lives. However when sanctity of marriage is at stake and right of children to a stable family, then there is a problem. This is all that I have been bothed about, not some sort mindless homophobic tirade. It's a pity that some people cannot see the difference between defending the sanctity of marriage and promotion of the family and bigotry.

[exnihilo]

In what conceivable way does this infringe on the "sanctity of marriage", what even isthe "sanctity of marriage".

Seriously, I'm keen to know...

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[Bitterandtwisted]

And how does two guys having bumsex make your marriage less valuable?

[hr]

Grant me the strength to change what I can, the inability to accept what I can't and the incapacity to tell the difference.

[Humphrey]

Quoting macgamer from 16:22, 8th Dec 2005
It's a pity that some people cannot see the difference between defending the sanctity of marriage and promotion of the family and bigotry.

In this case I’m afraid there isn't a difference because you base your defence of the 'sanctity of marriage' on derogatory stereotypes of homosexuals.

[hr]

http://www.livejournal.com/users/humphrey_clarke/

[macgamer]

Quoting exnihilo from 16:39, 8th Dec 2005
In what conceivable way does this infringe on the "sanctity of marriage", what even isthe "sanctity of marriage".

Seriously, I'm keen to know...

Quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church Ref:1605
Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: 'It is not good that the man should be alone.' Gen 1:28; 1:31 The woman, 'flesh of his flesh,' his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "help mate" Gen2:18-25; she thus represents God from whom comes our help. "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." Gen 2:24 The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh." Mt 19:6

Does that clear somethings up for you?

[exnihilo]

Ah, so the entire world has to live according to the Catholic catechism. There's tolerant for you.

Marriage, as has been pointed out ad nauseam is not the sole preserve of Christianity and certainly is not the sole preserve of the Catholic Church. Even now, a marriage in a church is meaningless except that it carries with it the legal contract recognised by the state. By allowing persons other than Catholics to marry or to join in union or whatever term you care to use you devalue by not one iota the value of marriage within the Catholic Church. What you do, however, is to extend the same legal rights, such as those of inheritance, kinship, visiting rights, financial co-dependence and so on and so forth.

Your argument is invalid. Unless you believe that all non-Catholics should be denied those rights too. As I'm sure you don't, your argument is purely that homosexuals should not. That makes it a bigoted argument. That makes you a bigot. Not, and this part is important, a defender of morality, truth and justice as you seem to think.

Also, as an aside, those passages of Genesis are actually not all that revealing, not unless they're taken in the context of the cultural mores of the time and indeed in the context of the body of Mosaic Law - from which, I think you'll find, they are drawn.

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[José Jimenez]

Haha nope. I just want to meet the man behind the posts, thats all. I can understand that the tone of my request might be unclear in the context of this thread, but rest assured I do not want to fight you.

Anyway, if you'd like to meet sometime let me know. I find this medium somewhat impersonal.

Quoting exnihilo from 16:08, 8th Dec 2005
Oh dear! Have I offended you? Will I need to wear some sort of armour?

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[Yeats]

While macgamers views may anger some, you must respect him/her. They clearly take their faith very seriously and are willing to argue it against strong opposition. While you may disagree with them they clearly practice what the believe in their faith, if only the world contained more people so serious about their beliefs it would be a much better place.

[hr]

Some day we shall be glad to remember such things

[exnihilo]

I take my faith very seriously too. That's why I bothered to read the Torah and understand Mosaic Law. In my faith we're encouraged to think for ourselves, not to blindly follow an old man in Rome. My faith does not encourage or support bigotry, hatred or intolerance. When the same can be said of yours, my respect for it will rise.

The last thing the world needs is more people serious in the belief that other people are inferior to them for reasons of their personal lives, their faith, their race or whatever other meaningless marker is chosen to distinguish them. What the world really needs is more people who are willing to live and let live and, even speaking as a Jew, more people willing to live according to the real message of Christ and not some corrupted received version or a distorted one of their own devising.

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[Yeats]

Quoting exnihilo from 17:38, 8th Dec 2005
I take my faith very seriously too.

No doubt you do, though if macgamer wasn't defending the teachings of his church he'd be accused of double standards by not being willing to actually stand by his beliefs.

Just as you have as a moral duty to defend why you think what he is saying is wrong, he has a moral duty to stop what he regards as a decline into immorality.

I also respect that he has not descended into bad language or personal attacks on homosexuals at all despite the severe provocation that some on this board have given him.

(Apologies if macgamer is not a he)

[hr]

Some day we shall be glad to remember such things

[exnihilo]

You don't need to swear and hurl names about to be a bigot.

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

[The Dude]

Quoting from 13:03, 7th Dec 2005
No more of these "moral decline" arguments? Why not? Doesn't moral decline exist?

An increase in casual sex. Lax attitudes towards said sex. Rises in abortion. Ridiculous limits on points at which babies can be aborted. The increasing prevalence of pornography which encourages abuse of minors and exploitation of women. The shocking sexualisation of young girls. Decreased respect for human life. Increased acceptance of euthanasia. Rises in hate crimes, rape, murder, gun crimes, knife crimes, arson, physical violence, drunk and disorderly behaviour. Cities and countries pushing to legalise prostitution. Student-focused promotions/nights/events which positively encourage one-night stands. Cutthroat capitalistic practices. The growing divide between rich and poor. Mercenary business techniques. Increases in bullying at schools, in the workplace, and in the home. More internet scams, identity theft, drug and people trafficking, tax evasion, benefit cheats, sex scandals and consumerism than ever before.

Note I'm not addressing sex specifically here. All I want to address here is the implication that social morality isn't in decline. You can't say that the items mentioned above aren't based on morality on some level. So don't imply that this society isn't careering towards moral bankruptcy.

I think that one needs to address each of your points on their individual merit before rebutting the argument of a decline in social morality (and whether it exists).

1. "An increase in casual sex. Lax attitudes towards said sex. "
I like sex in a casual manner. I have never physically harmed anyone by it. I have never caused irrevocable emotional damage by it. By not caring about the supposed "moral implications" I have not caused harm to my self or other people. It is certainly true that people can become emotional about it but they can become emotional about anything and ant the end of the day doesn't it suck to be unfeeling? That may be just me.

2. "Rises in abortion. Ridiculous limits on points at which babies can be aborted."
This is a terrible simplification of an incredibly complex issue. It is certainly a point of opinion and not concrete fact that this is causing moral decay.

3. " The increasing prevalence of pornography which encourages abuse of minors and exploitation of women. The shocking sexualization of young girls."
By law people appearing in pornographic films or posing in picture must be consenting adults. If one were to say that they pornographers get away with using minors anyway that is an issue of enforcement and not the morals of a society. And like I said before they are consenting adults not exploited children. Also there are quite a few men in pornographic films. Are they being exploited? How exactly would that directly lead to the abuse of children? Before you go after pornography you would probably first have to go after parents who spank their children. On the issue of sexualized young girls such is the style of the time. Would you rather a girl wears what she feels to be comfortable that she likes to wear or would her.

4. "Decreased respect for human life. Increased acceptance of euthanasia."
If you are talking about general war, killing, and capitol punishment I would agree with you there. Not that it shows moral decay but that those are all bad things. On the issue of euthanasia that is another complex subject which has just been relegated a sentence. If somebody is in so much pain that they do not want to live anymore and there is no medical way to dull it why is it a bad thing?

5. "Rises in hate crimes, rape, murder, gun crimes, knife crimes, arson, physical violence, drunk and disorderly behavior."
If you think hate crimes are bad now you should have been in the souther US in the 40's and 50's or in Nazi Germany. As for other things I would agree that they are all bad. Are you sure that they are on the rise though? It would be interesting to see figures on that. At any rate I think there is once again there is a difference between social acceptance and enforcement measures.

6. "Cities and countries pushing to legalize prostitution."
Why not? once you legalize something you can control it. That way health standards can be enforced and everyone is better off in the end. Certainly the idea of being forced into prostitution is bad whether it be by force of personal circumstance. But that is more an issue of enforcement and economics. If somebody finds it to be a lucrative profession who are they hurting? Don't say the family of some guy who uses them because it is he who is hurting his family, not the prostitute.

7. " Student-focused promotions/nights/events which positively encourage one-night stands."
Once again why not? I have had one night stands before where my self and the woman in question both come out of the experience satisfied with the outcome. It is true that they can go wrong as well on an emotional level but how is that the fault of the promotion?

8. " Cutthroat capitalistic practices. The growing divide between rich and poor. Mercenary business techniques."
I will agree with you there. There are some business practices that need to be stopped which do not benefit society as a whole. Those along with other factors have led to a growing divide between the rich and the poor. that said things aren't nearly as bad as they were a century ago.

9. " Increases in bullying at schools, in the workplace, and in the home. More internet scams, identity theft, drug and people trafficking, tax evasion, benefit cheats, sex scandals and consumerism than ever before."
These are all enforcement issues and not social ones. That said sex scandals are a lot over nothing. There is no reason why anyone else should get worked up about somebody's private life beyond mild amusement. It is certainly no reason to get angry at somebody else unless you are one of the parties involved. I suppose though that you could put blame on people who expose and exploit such things.

All in all I agree with some of your points but the vast majority seem to be motivated by a Judeo-Christian mindset. I would argue that most of the things you describe are bad according to your morals but not to other peoples morels. Also a lot of the things you describe have either been going on for a while or are in the decline. If wee are all going to hell in a hand basket so are countless generation before us (and probably in much larger numbers). Also what does all of that have to do with same sex couples getting legal recoognition of their relationship like a straight couple would?