RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,500
Posts: 5,511,184
Members: 25,135
Currently online: 467
Newest member: nonbelligerency

TrekToday headlines

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 13 2013, 03:04 PM   #346
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

BillJ wrote: View Post
" why the fuck do I really care if two grown people enter into a contract with each other"?
Marriage should be a contract between a person and another person (Or persons!). Unfortunately, marriage is a contract between two people and the government.

I have no problem with the concept of marriage as a contract between two people that they themselves honour to eachother in their own privacy. Including the government is absurd though, and is a mutual arrangement between both parties to give both the couple and the government more power.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:06 PM   #347
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

DalekJim wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
" why the fuck do I really care if two grown people enter into a contract with each other"?
Marriage should be a contract between a person and another person (Or persons!). Unfortunately, marriage is a contract between two people and the government.
Pretty much all contracts are between two or more parties and the government. Been that way for as long as I can remember.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:07 PM   #348
Nagisa Furukawa
Commander
 
Nagisa Furukawa's Avatar
 
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

BillJ wrote: View Post
But then I thought " why the fuck do I really care if two grown people enter into a contract with each other"? Which is all marriage is, a contract.
For the same reason this entire issue is being discussed. It's the fact that, to put it as bluntly as I can, the government treats people differently who sign that contract. If that wasn't the case, gay marriage wouldn't be an issue at all because there'd be nothing to lose or gain from just going into a Unitarian Church, having a ceremony with friends and now say "We're husband/husband or wife/wife." But the very fact that it IS a legal institution, that signing that contract allows the government to treat you differently in any number of ways (many of which discussed above), is precisely what makes this such a thorny subject. If the government just wouldn't say who's allowed to get hospital visitation rights and the like, there wouldn't be a problem.
__________________
I am the one who guided you this far.
Nagisa Furukawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:09 PM   #349
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

BillJ wrote: View Post
Pretty much all contracts are between two or more parties and the government. Been that way for as long as I can remember.
I think the government should only be involved in the most bare of necessities. Having them involved in every aspect of our lives, including our choice of sexual partner, is unnecessary. The more contracts that are made, the more power the government gains over our daily lives. I think it's a bad idea for everybody.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:14 PM   #350
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

DalekJim wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Pretty much all contracts are between two or more parties and the government. Been that way for as long as I can remember.
I think the government should only be involved in the most bare of necessities. Having them involved in every aspect of our lives, including our choice of sexual partner, is unnecessary. The more contracts that are made, the more power the government gains over our daily lives. I think it's a bad idea for everybody.
I don't know about you, but the government has never been involved in my choice of sexual partners.

The government needs to be in contracts to make sure not only the terms of the contract are honored but also the laws of the land.

I'm simply not interested in an anything goes Libertarian wonderland.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:14 PM   #351
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
DalekJim wrote: View Post
I believe that gays have the same basic rights as every other human being.
Nonsense. Maybe you don't think marriage should involve government benefits, but it does, it always will, and it's not just about the government rewarding "good behavior." So no, gays don't have the same basic rights as everyone else, and I'm not even bringing up issues not purely involving marriage such as hospital visitation, adoption, etc.

According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are 1,138 statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor in determining benefits, rights, and privileges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_..._United_States
It's very convenient to decide that government shouldn't have a role in marriage only at the moment that another group wants equal access to it and the benefits it brings.

not all arguments that say that there's a reason that heterosexual marriage should be privileged by the government are incoherent, hypocritical, or based on prejudice. You could say that the whole REASON that marriage involves government benefits was because government wanted to encourage stable relationships that lead to procreation. And the "not all heterosexual marriages lead to procreation, so that's b.s." no more invalidates the CONCEPT of why governments do it than the "some people use spoons to hang from their nose as a trick" means that spoons aren't meant to be eating utensils.


I don't really have a dog in the fight. I'm not gay, I support gay rights and I think society's verdict on gay marriage is in, I just don't think that ALL arguments against gay marriage are a result of bigotry.


(although to be clear, a lot are. OSC's certainly seems to be.)
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:40 PM   #352
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm simply not interested in an anything goes Libertarian wonderland.
It really isn't all that far away from Orson Scott Card's attitude, if you believe the removal of government involvement with marriages would lead to such a radical destabilisation of society. I'm not calling for no laws, I'm calling for only the most necessary of laws, and for certain apron strings to be cut for the good of the many.

sonak wrote:
You could say that the whole REASON that marriage involves government benefits was because government wanted to encourage stable relationships that lead to procreation.
It is the whole reason, and applying the same benefits to homosexuals only shines a light on how preposterous it all is.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 03:41 PM   #353
Guy Gardener
Fleet Admiral
 
Guy Gardener's Avatar
 
Location: In the lap of squalor I assure you.
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

Too many marriages means too many tax benefits, which means they lower the tax benefits for everyone, or continue squashing the old minorities or find new minorities unprepared for being stepped on... Meanwhile not enough marriages means less children, and more importantly: less emotionally-stable-and-productive-children-who-grow-up-to-pay-a-lot-of-taxes.

Thousands of years ago, bible times, without marriage, men would just wander off and women would be murdered by their family for being shame generating whoresluts and the species would have been died out if not for the invention of marriage. The invention of refrigeration should have suspended halal and kosher concerns... Leaving the desert should have done that too. Mummery had to be cloistered for the savages so they didn't use their children for firewood and continue eating actual food no matter how rancid it got.

Homosexuality is way more exciting, life without children is awesome, and considering how few humans there were 3000 years ago, if Homosexuality was allowed to go unchecked... The species would have died out. Although how many heterosexuals and bisexuals would have been exterminated when god raised Gomorrah?

And despite all that, gay people still have a biological clock and a foolish drive to be parents.
__________________
"Glitter is the herpes of arts and craft."

Troy Yingst. My Life as Liz
Guy Gardener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:10 PM   #354
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

DalekJim wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm simply not interested in an anything goes Libertarian wonderland.
It really isn't all that far away from Orson Scott Card's attitude, if you believe the removal of government involvement with marriages would lead to such a radical destabilisation of society. I'm not calling for no laws, I'm calling for only the most necessary of laws, and for certain apron strings to be cut for the good of the many.
Attitude about what? Marriage? Gays? Gay Marriage? Because I read some pretty out there attitudes from Card about the third one. And some down right crazy ones about the second. Somehow I doubt Mr Cards attitudes would change if government was out of the marriage business.

If marriage is a contract, especially a legal, then there has to be oversight. That part of the governments job in my opinion.
__________________
Nerys Myk

Last edited by Santa Kang; July 13 2013 at 04:37 PM.
Santa Kang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:25 PM   #355
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Rhovanion
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

hyzmarca wrote:
No straight person thinks like that.
Well, at least part of it - the "far, far easier for women to get along with other women" and "women know how women think and feel far better than men do" stuff - is actually quite pervasive in the straight community, often rising to the level of outright sexism.
__________________
Whatever happens on earth, that up there, that's the endgame.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:34 PM   #356
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

Set Harth wrote: View Post
hyzmarca wrote:
No straight person thinks like that.
Well, at least part of it - the "far, far easier for women to get along with other women" and "women know how women think and feel far better than men do" stuff - is actually quite pervasive in the straight community, often rising to the level of outright sexism.
I've been married for twenty years and have a nineteen year old daughter and I still don't understand women.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:42 PM   #357
The Festivus Awakens
Airing Grievouses
 
The Festivus Awakens's Avatar
 
Location: Locutus of Bored
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

sonak wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
DalekJim wrote: View Post
I believe that gays have the same basic rights as every other human being.
Nonsense. Maybe you don't think marriage should involve government benefits, but it does, it always will, and it's not just about the government rewarding "good behavior." So no, gays don't have the same basic rights as everyone else, and I'm not even bringing up issues not purely involving marriage such as hospital visitation, adoption, etc.

According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are 1,138 statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor in determining benefits, rights, and privileges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_..._United_States
It's very convenient to decide that government shouldn't have a role in marriage only at the moment that another group wants equal access to it and the benefits it brings.
not all arguments that say that there's a reason that heterosexual marriage should be privileged by the government are incoherent, hypocritical, or based on prejudice. You could say that the whole REASON that marriage involves government benefits was because government wanted to encourage stable relationships that lead to procreation. And the "not all heterosexual marriages lead to procreation, so that's b.s." no more invalidates the CONCEPT of why governments do it than the "some people use spoons to hang from their nose as a trick" means that spoons aren't meant to be eating utensils.

I don't really have a dog in the fight. I'm not gay, I support gay rights and I think society's verdict on gay marriage is in, I just don't think that ALL arguments against gay marriage are a result of bigotry.

(although to be clear, a lot are. OSC's certainly seems to be.)
That's fascinating. It has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote, but fascinating nonetheless.
__________________
'First Contact' is the tale of a man who just wants to cash in on his creation so he can get wasted on an island full of naked women, but his fans keep insisting that he's a saintly visionary who has profoundly altered the world. AKA - 'I Don't Want to be a Statue: The Gene Roddenberry Story.'
The Festivus Awakens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:46 PM   #358
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

Guy Gardener wrote: View Post
Too many marriages means too many tax benefits...
Which can easily be adjusted.

Regardless of whether you agree with current marriage laws or not, the simple thing is this: everyone needs to be treated equally under the law.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:48 PM   #359
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Sindatur wrote: View Post
My belief is the exact opposite. Marriage should be a legal Institution, that everyone is treated the same with
I think the definition of marriage means this never going to be the case. Marriage is about two people signing a contract to gain more rights than people who aint signed it. It is never going to be an institution about equality.
Huh? Did you misunderstand and think I was saying married and unmarried people should be treated the same in Marriage? No, we're speaking of Marriage, only married people, but, ALL married people should be treated the same and all should be able to be married. Even Gay couples, without children are advantageous to Society, because they acquire things, meaning someone made sales and taxes are collected on those bigger purchases that become easier to purchase when you settle down with a single person

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Sindatur wrote: View Post
People have lost their homes when their partner died, because their union wasn't seen as legitimate. People have been denied seeing their partner in the hospital dying because only "Family" was allowed to see them, and a Gay union isn't accepted as family, people have been denied the right to determine care for their Gay "Spouse". That's what I care about on the marriage end
This happens to absolutely everybody that isn't married though. I don't see how a select few signing up for a government scheme makes it fairer, I firmly believe the opposite. It just causes unbalance. I think if the concept of legal marriage bonuses didn't exist, the gay community would have been a lot happier. It is only seeing straights enjoy them that has built up the resentment, so imagine how people like me, who don't agree with the legal definition of marriage, feel.
Of course it happens to those who aren't married/legally bound. How can you possibly prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, incontestable by their blood family, that you deserve to keep the house, over some relative that wants to take it, or that you have the right to authorize the life saving operation or to be at the top of the short list to be with them when they die in a hospital if you don't have the marriage. Blood trumps many, many other signed documents, especially when Anti-gay Bigots stand in your way.

If you've committed yourself to someone for life, your insane if that's not the person you want to have those rights
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
Sindatur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 13 2013, 04:50 PM   #360
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

BillJ wrote: View Post
Regardless of whether you agree with current marriage laws or not, the simple thing is this: everyone needs to be treated equally under the law.
I think the best way to treat everybody equally is to not have such an elitist law in the first place, rather than elevate monogamist homosexuals to a higher position of benefits, and equate them with a heterosexual family dynamic.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.