One Step Backward: No Marriage For Australian Gays

[mdwh]

Actually I got it from the 200 US scensus... "Nationwide, 594,391 same-sex partner households represented 1% of all coupled households, according to the 2000 Census. Of these, 301,026 were male partners and 293,365 were female partners."

I imagine the claim he wanted data for was the bit he put in bold - "very few of them have any interest in marriage at all".

 

[Stegyre]

I imagine the claim he wanted data for was the bit he put in bold - "very few of them have any interest in marriage at all".

You may be right, and he may not have hard data.

On the other hand, if 5% of the population is homosexual (a figure I've seen bandied about a bit; we can probably dig up some support for it, if necessary) and only 1% of households consist of homosexual couples, it's probably not an unreasonable inference that a substantial portion of the remainder aren't too interested in marriage.

Maybe we should check the next census and see if there are any interesting changes in states recognizing such marriages or civil unions.

 

[mdwh]

You may be right, and he may not have hard data.

On the other hand, if 5% of the population is homosexual (a figure I've seen bandied about a bit; we can probably dig up some support for it, if necessary) and only 1% of households consist of homosexual couples, it's probably not an unreasonable inference that a substantial portion of the remainder aren't too interested in marriage.

Maybe we should check the next census and see if there are any interesting changes in states recognizing such marriages or civil unions.

Okay, but some possible reasons:
- Don't forget bisexuality, which may be included in the 5-10% figures we sometimes hear (when I've heard the 5% figure, it's usually been something like "have you ever had sex with a member of the same sex", and not "are you exclusively homosexual").
- Homosexual people from older generations may have ended up getting married to an opposite sex partner out of social stigma, or at the least, would have found it much harder to find another homosexual partner - it would be interesting to see how the statistics of households vary with age.

 

[Stegyre]

Okay, but some possible reasons:
- Don't forget bisexuality, which may be included in the 5-10% figures we sometimes hear (when I've heard the 5% figure, it's usually been something like "have you ever had sex with a member of the same sex", and not "are you exclusively homosexual").

Hm, you're implying that the actual percentage of homosexuals is less (perhaps significantly less) than 5%? A smaller percentage would certainly weaken the inference I proposed. On the other hand, if you're saying it is a larger percentage, the inference is stronger.

- Homosexual people from older generations may have ended up getting married to an opposite sex partner out of social stigma, or at the least, would have found it much harder to find another homosexual partner - it would be interesting to see how the statistics of households vary with age.

Maybe. Yet most same-sex households of which I am personally aware have tended to consist of older homosexuals. I'll grant that's just anecdotal.

 

[blackheart]

Dont hate me for simply pointing out the flaws in your assumptions.

Anyway, if God created the earth, regardless of which religion he was talking about, I would say God predates marriage wouldnt you?

"a bond between a man and a woman in the eyes of GOD."
I think it's a reasonable assumption that this is a reference to the Judeo-Christian God, considering that no other religion has such a god and that Christians refer to marriage as a "sacred institution". So where is my flaw for assuming that the Christian god was meant?

And that is all assuming that a certain group of people can somehow interpret the words of a God while the rest of us are unable to. That's IF God created the Earth.

 

[The Yankee]

"Please, I get so tired of people calling others bigots because they dont agree with them. Save the bigotry label for those who genuinely deserve it, not for people who have an opinion based upon their religious principles. To me, its like saying I am a bigot because I think sinful behavior is bad."

Honestly people, it's not bigotry. When jesus tells you to hate someone and keep them from doing things that he disagrees with, it's a lot different then, for example hating brown people out of ignorance. It's really really different, because they have buttsex.

"Anyway, if God created the earth, regardless of which religion he was talking about, I would say God predates marriage wouldnt you"

LOL he got you there. Shoowee that was clever.

Moderator Action: Please enjoy a complimentary five day ban for your combination of trolling, flaming, and promoting hate policy.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[classical_hero]

You may be right, and he may not have hard data.

On the other hand, if 5% of the population is homosexual (a figure I've seen bandied about a bit; we can probably dig up some support for it, if necessary) and only 1% of households consist of homosexual couples, it's probably not an unreasonable inference that a substantial portion of the remainder aren't too interested in marriage.

Maybe we should check the next census and see if there are any interesting changes in states recognizing such marriages or civil unions.

The problem is that most "statistics" regarding homosexuality are so misused that the true number is very hard to get to. But in most socities the percentage of the population would be at the very most 2 or 3%, which does beg the question, why are they getting special rights for?

 

[.Shane.]

The problem is that most "statistics" regarding homosexuality are so misused that the true number is very hard to get to. But in most socities the percentage of the population would be at the very most 2 or 3%, which does beg the question, why are they getting special rights for?

Who cares if they're 1% or 30%?

/sigh

Its not "special rights". Its the same rights that straight people already have.

We need to ban divorce and bring back the stoning of adulterers. WTH is wrong w/ people today?

 

[GenMarshall]

which does beg the question, why are they getting special rights for?

Mainly from what I have heard is that they are being discriminated against due because of their sexuality. There are parts of the world where homosexuals are persecuted and put to death and other parts of the world where homosexuals are treated like second class citizens being fired from their jobs, evicted from their apartments/homes as well as being denied a job and a shelter.

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

The problem is that most "statistics" regarding homosexuality are so misused that the true number is very hard to get to. But in most socities the percentage of the population would be at the very most 2 or 3%, which does beg the question, why are they getting special rights for?

It also begs the question, why aren't they getting equal rights?

 

[blargh]

It also begs the question, why aren't they getting equal rights?

It also begs the question what the hell are these special rights and where are they?

 

[GenMarshall]

It also begs the question what the hell are these special rights and where are they?

Mostly its just same-gender marriages that pops into mind when I hear special rights

 

[blargh]

Mostly its just same-gender marriages that pops into mind when I hear special rights

Well one of the points brought up here was that very few countries allow these so it really isn't all that special. Besides, you are more than welcome in any of those nations to get hitched to your same sex best buddy just as gays and lesbians can enter into mixed gender marriages (in any country on the planet).

So who's got the special rights?

 

[GenMarshall]

So who's got the special rights?

I would say no one has the special rights. Unless one can define what special rights are.

 

[blargh]

I would say no one has the special rights. Unless one can define what special rights are.

Quite right though it's usually those that have them percieving those that don't as getting special treatment. I always thought Christians had far too much leeway when it came to voicing their opinion on this matter, among other things. At times, I've wondered if there was a limit to the ad hominem verbal abuse but things have changed in that regard, in Canada at least to enshrine GLBT's with the same protection enjoyed by relgious individuals for example (Bill C-250 -- hate crimes bill) and guess who were the first to cry 'special rights'.

Whatever rights we have as individuals emanate from societal morals and those change over time. I could go on at length why the current and historical morality fails gays and lesbians miserably. Few know that better than some of 'us' and what this marriage thing, which I personally have little interest in for now at least, is part in parcel to evening the field, and maybe one day will erase the divide.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

One country is thinking rationaly. Honestly Marrige is between a man and a women nothing else!! No new sick pervy deas should ruin something as holy as marrige

 

[Sidhe]

I would say no one has the special rights. Unless one can define what special rights are.

I think special rights is a right to live together in a stable relationship and reap the benfit of tax breaks for it, unless you give those rights to everyone, then they are special rights for one group. And a discrimination against another.