Obama endorses same-sex marriage (Page 13)

There have been plenty of studies that show for a very long time, it is evenly split 50/50 for men and women that cheat in a marrigae. It has also been shown about 50/50 of relationships that are manogamous and those that cheat. I do not see how you could make the case that homosexuality is anydifferent that the general population....

... and as far as "rare"... I have never cheated on any girl I was ever in a relationship, EVER. Just my choice. I have better things to do that play games with people.... but don't say it's "rare".

From everything I've read it is more accepted in the gay community to be non-monogamous.

Where did you get your data about heterosexual couples?

I'll add that I'm not making any judgments but the argument that gays being married will be all butterflies and rainbows isn't valid. The gay community seems to have a different view of marriage than the heterosexual community. In our current society that lifestyle hasn't reached the level of mainstream. So, mainstream America when given the option of voting yes or no for SSM will vote no. There usually isn't bigotry, hatred or religious intolerance behind it. If you had to define it would be more ignorance or apathy. .

Only of the Church and not by law. The same as many other things in the US that use to be how it was but it did change. I know really at this point it's just both sides stating what they believe but I do believe in time this too will change and within my lifetime.

Where have you been... He inherited the problem. It was Bush's fault. It is Congress' fault. It those backwards peoples fault clinging to their guns and religion... and it most certainly isn't HIS fault or lack of leadership.

I think that's part of the issue. Why is SSM more of a hot button now than divorce and remarriage was a few generations ago? It was debated and lamented and railed against, but never legislated. 

And it is attitudes like this that make people continue to think that me loving my partner is somehow different then a man loving a woman.  sigh.

My data come most recently from national (U.S.) polls conducted by Gallup and Time-CNN which were cited in dozens of leading contemporary publications such as Psychology Today, Time Magazine, and the New York Times.

I think we could debate the definition of marriage as a whole in any context in any religion, and this is besides what the real talking point is.  This isn't about civil rights, this is about power in politics.  Let's look at what has just happened.  John Boehner Speaker of the House just appointed Robert P. George to a federal post known as the International Religious Freedom Commission.  

Goerge is one of the founders of NOM, an organization who has just had certain documents unsealed in the state of MA that you can read their agenda.  It is NOT a pretty one, and now this commission which is to be a bipartisan and independent is federally funded and it's staff members are government employees.  

National Organization on MarriageLawsuit  - this is pretty damning if you ask me about their agenda. 

Would you say that 30% of married/committed heterosexual couples participate in some type of open relationship?

There is cheating in all types of relationships. It's called cheating because one side is doing it behind the others back. Those relationship usually end.  In these relationships both parties agree to have other sexual partners outside of the relationship. Swingers share partners.

 The sites I listed are mostly articles with information about studies not "hook up" sites. I hope that clears up the difference.

Sorry. Right. What was I thinking.
Clearly he's a leader. 

I'll get back in line now.  

Our recognition, understanding, and application of it have had to develop. I'm willing to grant that it is there as a divine gift from our creator, which to me has squat to do with religion.

Divorce and remarriage and adultery were all the subject of many legislative acts over the years.  Most of those acts were intended to stop or discourage the activity. Just google it.  I has become more socially acceptable these days so it is not nearly the hot button issue it used to be  Lucky us!

To be fair, you need to leave married couples of out the equation because we have no statistics on same sex married couples. I wonder why that is....

So at what point does moral relativity become moral decline?  What amount of moral decline is accpeptable?  At what point does it damage the fabric of society?

I'm still not getting what point you're trying to make with any of that.

Because you believe gay people, and by all of your own citations a minority of gay people MAY view marriage differently than you believe straight people view it (and there's absolutely no way to get a consensus on how even a bare majority of straight people view marriage) ... see where I'm getting mixed up?

There isn't a consensus in either group, gay or straight (and those lines are anthropologically blurry), regarding how marriage "should" be.

Even if there were, how should that affect legislation regarding whether one of those groups should be able to marry or not?

Recognition of that transcendent reality is a good place for common ground.

In the latest stages of man's development, conscious regard for law and custom, the fear of gods, the explicit recognition of duty and conscience, and the direct pursuit of ideals-all the reflective considerations that we may lump together under the word "conscientiousness"-play their ever increasing part and complicate the psychological situation of morality.

But even in modern civilized man the underlying animal forces count for far more in my opinion.  And without them the later self-conscious forces would not have come into play at all. There is class of people who are dominated throughout their activities by consciously present ideals or obedience to religious injunctions. But the average man still acts mainly under the pressure of the more primitive forces which we have enumerated.

Isn't it great that we live in a country that instantiates in both its legal and social fabric the freedom to express ourselves in an open forum?

Unlike some countries that use religion as a means to instantiate laws that stifle personal freedom.

Great point Brad.

Excellent questions. In a nutshell; I believe it is a continuum and we as a species travel back and forth towards either end of it, but I think (hope, pray, wish) that even with the back and forth swings of the pendulum we are moving closer towards some critical mass that brings about global enlightenment for the human race.

As long as there have been "rulers" there have been many many ways used to stifle dissent.

Or we are all gong to die this December. 

Well, yeah, Or that.