Same Sex Unions/marriages a History of.

Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Dove Snuggler
Joined in 2007
March 2, 2008, 16:53

Hi William

I think we’ve got a little hung up on the word ‘basic’. I don’t think Michelle was equating it with whether I have food today.

I’ll quote Maslow because he has an interesting perspective that has been argued over for years just like our favourite topics. In his Hierarchy of Needs, he said that people are concerned about Physiological needs (e.g. food, sleep, sex); Safety needs (e.g. employment, shelter, health); Belonging needs (e.g. friendship, family, sexual intimacy); Esteem needs (e.g. confidence, achievement, respect); and Self-Actualisation needs (e.g. morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice).

He said that as some of the more basic needs are met, people tend to reach for the higher level needs of belonging, esteem and self-actualisation.

Now my point: one of these might include marriage which for me or someone else might be (or become) a basic human need. If so, why isn’t it our right to marry?

You enjoy the right to study, work, travel on public transport, fall in love with someone of either gender, be acquitted of a crime you committed because nobody can prove you guilty, have a child even if you are an incompetent parent, kill whales if you are Japanese or Norweigan. But you cannot marry someone of the same sex.

There are many further issues about this that have been discussed but I’ve vowed to keep my posts brief from here on and I’ve already breached that. So with all the other issues in mind but not necessarily proven, whose business is it if two people of the same sex marry, except their own?

Yet because we have a continuing homophobic society, we still outlaw same-sex marriage and securities marriage can bring, such as the potential loss of shelter and possessions for someone in a same-sex committed relationship when their partner dies. That is not justice, so to some of us it is a breach of human rights.

Just a few rushed thoughts.


Shantih Shantih Shantih
Joined in 2008
March 2, 2008, 17:59

Hmm…it seems that Michele deleted the post I replied to (or something went wrong on the site). Either way, I won’t say anymore about that unless she posts again.

I will reply to you, though, Kit, as it seems we more or less described the same thing. The necessities I mentioned and the lower parts of the Hierarchy of Needs you mentioned seem to correlate somewhat. The difference, again, is that I place little or no importance on the higher parts of the HoN, whereas you believe them to be necessities in their own right.

However, I don’t agree with your assertion that these ‘higher needs’ become basic human rights when the lower ones are achieved. I think that BHRs are much more universal than that – they are not subjective, not subject to circumstance or opinion. I can claim that access to the internet is my right if that’s what I’m used to, but that doesn’t mean it is. Granted, the issue of marriage is a little more serious than that, but the principle is the same:

something is not a basic human right because you claim it is, it is a basic human right only if it cannot bearably be lived without.

Please note that I am not saying it shouldn’t be the right of same-sex couples to get married, I’m not saying that at all. What I am saying is that is isn’t a basic right, and one should not argue that it is.

Also note that I make quite a distinction between basic human rights, human rights, and mere rights. The latter always refers to legal rights within a given country, ‘human rights’ refers to privileges that should be available to all humans, and the former (which is what I have been referencing most throughout my posts) are necessities (which are also included among the ‘human rights’).

Regarding the rest…[shrugs]…as I’ve already said, I don’t care about the legalisation of same-sex marriage – it is only the dignity of those others who suffer human rights abuses such as preventable starvation and disease, torture, suppression of free speech, (etc.) that I seek to defend. Certainly, it is more preferable for homosexuals to be allowed to marry than some of the things people can get away with, but (at the risk of sounding callous) that is not my concern.

Joined in 2008
March 2, 2008, 20:42

Hi William

I did delete the message obviously not before you saw it … sorry about the confusion. I changed my mind on the post as I was particularly upset with what you wrote and when I wrote it I was too emotional so what I wrote would not have made a real lot of sense.

On the issue of human rights I a have good grasp on the topic … I work in the field of disaster management coordinating disaster welfare relief and the operation of emergency shelters and settlement camps. I can tell you that people at emergency shelters are not concerned about getting fed, having water, shelter, beds, clothes, but are more interested in finding loved ones that are missing either prior to or upon entering the shelter.

I do a lot of work with Asian delegates training emergency service personnel in disaster welfare … I can tell you that marriage is very important to them and they see it as a fundamental right. They value it much great than many things we take for granted. Why is that? Marriage brings them security … firstly from a personal level but also from having children which is their future. If you asked them to choose over marriage and the basics mentioned they choose marriage. This is because they have learnt to fight for the other but the loss of marriage means a loss of so much more.

This knowledge doesn’t come from books, the Internet or from pulpit at church but comes for years of working with people in need and with those that provide these valuable welfare services.

Now what offended me was the allegation or summation that I would have something to personally gain out the legalisation of same sex marriages. There is something you need to know about me I am a transsexual woman. I have been legally married both before man and God for almost seven years. I know how valuable marriage is personally. Unless you have been married or are in a long-term commitment relationship it is a very difficult to provide comments on the subject. My wife means the world to me as I do to her. The only thing legalisation of same sex marriages would mean is that I could add my true gender of female to my birth certificate. But it is not that important to me because it still will have a birth gender on there as male … it is only an addendum. All of my important documents are in my correct gender so it does not matter. I gain nothing out of a change in legalisation other than to see the rights that heterosexual couples take for granted being given to same sex couples.

I would love to hear from long term couples on this site and they can tell what it would mean to them to get married. It is not a piece of paper or a ceremony it is about the commitment of love to another. Unless you have experienced what that is and how fundamental that need is it is very difficult to understand. I hope you do get to experience that for yourself one day.

When I studied psychology at university the issue of love was taught in first year psych and in that they talked about experiments where children were given the basics of life and were deprived of love. These children failed to thrive and some died. This wasn’t a cruel experiment but was observations made of children in orphanages. When those children were give close love and were held even for a short period of time they recovered and began to thrive.

The need for love and to be loved is a fundamental right and marriage is very much at its heart.

Shantih Shantih Shantih
Joined in 2008
March 2, 2008, 21:35

Hmm…well, you got me there, Michele. I feel really bad now…

I apologise for my earlier comments, I didn’t by any means intend to offend you. Things don’t effect me emotionally the way they do others, and as a result I can be somewhat insensitive and undiscerning sometimes. What’s more, when I get fired up about something I tend to lose my head a bit, and that certainly didn’t help.

I also didn’t mean to imply that you in particular were being self-serving – it was, in fact, a bad choice of words, if I could do the post over, I wouldn’t even include that adjective in my description (another effect of my hot-headedness).

Otherwise, I wish only to say that I also didn’t intend for love and relationships to be included in my spiel about marriage. I was referring to marriage more as a legal process than as a loving, long-term commitment to another person, which I had hoped to convey when I said:

“Marriage is something that you can live without (whether you can live without a relationship with someone else is arguable, but that’s not the issue)…”

obviously I did not do this well.

Once again, very sorry for the offence I caused,

– William

Joined in 2008
March 2, 2008, 21:42

Thank you William … much appreciated.

Dove Snuggler
Joined in 2007
March 2, 2008, 22:52

I could forgive you William but I am quite incensed that you minimise homophobia and the gay and lesbian struggle as you did in your post at 4.59 pm today.

You say: “I don’t care about the legalisation of same-sex marriage – it is only the dignity of those others who suffer human rights abuses such as preventable starvation and disease, torture, suppression of free speech, (etc.) that I seek to defend.”

Please be sure to remain a closeted gay, William, and don’t become a closeted Nazi.

One of my work colleagues was released from hospital on Friday after a savage bashing in Sydney the week before. I know of several men with HIV/AIDS who have taken their own lives rather than face them any more. I know of the intimate struggle with life many GLBTIQ people face because of the pious attitudes and homophobic actions that trivialise our place in the world and threaten our very existence.

I comment on the fact that you not only don’t care about same-sex marriage, you obviously consider that the human rights abuses of gay people don’t qualify on your own list of human rights issues. (I have been very careful to reconsider your words but I can’t come to any other conclusion).

Shame on you!

Starvation in Africa is a tragedy but so has been the deaths in custody of indigenous Australians. So has been the infringement of human rights among many gay Australians. For example, when one of my employers (a Christian organisation) discovered that I was gay in the late 1990’s, they issued a memo to all the managers in the organisation, blacklisting and humiliating me. I stood at lookouts wishing I could jump. I drove my car into the path of a semi-trailer. I knew nobody who could help me shoulder that burden. One tormented 31 year-old gay man I knew stole his ex-boyfriend’s car and drove it off the gap, killing himself. Do you think this is less an infringement of human rights than somebody dying of starvation? God forbid either of these to happen but they do.

The Human Rights Commissioner, Graeme Innes (a sight-challenged man himself), rode in the Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras last night in Sydney, indicating his belief that gay rights are a significant human rights issue, and pledging his support.

I fear that if you came out of the closet, you might also find this to be true for you. I would hope it would not be the case. But perhaps you will one day understand. (I seek not to be patronising but forgiving).


Joined in 2007
March 2, 2008, 23:59

Oh my goodness… this is so interesting… the arguement for and against is so addictive! Giggles. 😆

My partner of 13 years walked by and asked me what it was… told him it was F2B and gave him a quick rundown of the issues… he’s response was… wait for this. 😯

“Render unto God what is his and render unto Geasar what is his”. Union with another person under God means that the two have become one… if the government makes it legal or illegal does not change what God states. One could apply that scripture to anything and hmmmmm interesting. 🙂

Hmmmm he said something more… giggles but I was far too gone into my own thinking. 😆

My partner is bi-sexual. He doesn’t believe in marriage between two men. I do for legal reasons. I personally see that, really under God I am married to my partner. I am the love of his life as he is the love of my life. Everything I have is his and vice versa. We share a house, with 5 mad cats and a guidedog, we argue like a married couple and yet we have our passionate moments. Oh dear! So yeah I want the Australian government to fix it so that we have the same equality as a married couple. For instance… my superannuation my brother is listed… and yet for my partner I have to re-enter his name in every three years… Im not married to my brother, I dont plan to do that… I dont live with him, I dont have any emotional connection with him on a sexual level and yet the man in my life can’t get my superannuation… shame on them. There’s more there are 58 inequality laws still outstanding and I think its about time to fix it. Its not to make my life easy… it just gives me the assurance that should I die tomorrow that my partner is going to be in good hands and looked after so that he can fall inlove with someone else and partner up with them… I don’t want him to be lonely for the rest of his life.

I know that God was always on about social justice… and what has been argued here should reflect that God can not influeance what the world wants to do and how they go about it. God will empower situation to happen to swing in our favour because we asked for it. Seeking justice is and has always been a part of what God is like… so gay couple wants to marry and have the same legal stuff as married couples do… what’s the hangups? Hmmm 🙄

Hugs to all and good night. Off to bed. One of my cat is growling and wants me to go to bed! Smile.

Hugs to all

Joined in 2007
March 3, 2008, 09:34

Well… thats the interesting thing about gay-mrarriage or lack there of isn’t it? Everyone has a different opinion that is apparently based in scripture and everyone believes they know how God thinks on the issue. I pray in thankfullness that same-sex marraige hasn’t been instituted… are my prayers any less worthy?

Joined in 2006
March 3, 2008, 10:45

All prayer is heard by God and the fact that certain prayers havent been answered yet or are taking there time or dont get answered just shows that HE is in control and only HE will bring it about if and when HE sees fit plus our own will comes into it too, he never crosses that.

God does stick up for injustices, he has mercy on the downtrodden, he hears the plight of those who suffer and He moves where people are willing to co-operate with Him. Sadly not many are willing and hence the state of the world as it is.

I really cant see what the injustice would be in allowing us to marry and be accepted into society as a whole.

Joined in 2006
March 3, 2008, 12:04

I do think that reading over some posts, that yes the mistake we all make at some stage is the fact that we cant get across in words what we really want to say effectively and sometimes what we do say we say in the heat of the moment and so it causes hurt or very crossed wires.

Truly we could all speak off the tops of our heads regarding some things without any personal knowledge or personal experience on what we are giving an opinion about, here is where we should tread a little carefully. Lets try and not be too blase in our opinions. Yes its good to share them but not at the expence of offence or if one is genuinely interested to know the whys of something, then it should be stated and a forgiving asked if it comes across a little hard or such.

But in saying this, it is good to see that we try and clarify any wrongs, it keeps things peaceful and on a conversational unoffended level.

Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7
WP Forum Server by ForumPress | LucidCrew
Version: 99.9; Page loaded in: 0.103 seconds.