Log in

No account? Create an account
. ..: .: ..::.: ..:.:.....: ...::: ...::.

April 2011
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

gwen [userpic]
Gay Marriage Saves Lives!

Recently, I've seen a number of references to Iowa Family Policy Center saying that gay marriage is “more dangerous for individuals who engage in it than is smoking,” because of a recent CDC publication of statistics showing homosexual men having higher rates of AIDS and Syphillis. IFPC maintains, "Because of these figures, if the state allows gay men to get married they are 'sanctioning self destructive behavior.'"

OK, so, in the style of Saturday Night Live's "REALLY?" skit:

REALLY? Are you REALLY saying that marriage is EVER sanctioning self destructive behavior? Is that REALLY upholding your family values? REALLY?

REALLY? So, do you REALLY think that unmarried men are encouraged to not spread their obviously gotten-out-of-wedlock-sex STDs by remaining unmarried? REALLY?

REALLY? So if they marry a woman, it's OK to spread that disease to her? REALLY????

The complete and utter fail of this line of argument should be apparent to just about anyone. Seriously, if you take the stance that marriage is all about commitment and partnership, as it's traditionally viewed, you'd think that marriage is a SOLUTION to the increased rates of STDs. Sure, you can argue that there are men who don't believe in monogamy in marriage (shock: there are women who believe that too), but if you're advocating traditional values, then you should assume that your marriage ideal is that of traditional commitment.

So, showing how bad your argument is, a proof:

Assumption: Traditional Marriage is a committed partnership between One Man and One Woman.
Assumption: Homosexual men have higher instances of these STDs.
Assumption: Women, as a whole, have lower instances of these STDs.
Assumption: Men marrying men increases the risk of STDs to the general populace, which is a "secondhand danger".

Thus: Men should not marry other men.
Thus: Men should marry only women.
Thus: Homosexual men, who have higher instances of STDs, should marry women, who have lower instances of STDs.
Thus: Women become more infected with these STDs, as a result of marrying infected men.
Thus: The general populace becomes more infected as a result of requiring "Traditional Marriage".
Thus: The general populace has more "secondhand danger" when "Traditional Marriage" is required.

So, in fact, this argument actually leads to the opposite of your claim. Perhaps we should use this on the pro-gay marriage side of the fence! Gay marriage saves lives!!!!


The problem is that you're talking to a group of people who, for whatever twisted reason they've managed to come up with, don't believe that homosexuals are actually interested in or even capable of committed relationships. It's hard to say exactly why they think that gay couples want to get married then with that line of thinking, but that's how it is (ultimately, that's probably also the greatest cause of the "destroying marriage" argument as well -- if you think that marriage is an institution about commitment, and you don't think that gays are capable of committing, then it's not hard to take the leap that clearly the institution is being "destroyed"). And that's the problem -- you're trying to have a logic battle with people who are functionally illogical. You can't win, because they don't think like normal, sane people do.

I can't help but think of Monty Python logic.

So if a woman weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood, and therefore...

A witch!

The ability to have a committed relationship is orthogonal to the "gay marriage spreads STDs" argument, though.

Except that it's the basis of your argument:

Seriously, if you take the stance that marriage is all about commitment and partnership, as it's traditionally viewed, you'd think that marriage is a SOLUTION to the increased rates of STDs.

I'm saying that you're trying to argue logic with them using a base which they, for whatever twisted reason they might have, don't think applies.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

What I really mean is: the traditional marriage folks assume that marriage is a committed ideal. If homosexual men get married, then they should assume it's about commitment, right?

However, if they assume the homosexual men aren't going to be committed, even in marriage, then that's a different issue than the spread of STDs. Non-committed sorts of people are going to be non-committed whether they're in marriage or not -- being married isn't going to make their STDs spread any more.

Further, if the traditional marriage folks will accept that marriage doesn't have to be about commitment, then they've lost one of their fundamental precepts about marriage.

So I reject this line of reasoning in the context of this argument as a moot tangent; not quite "orthogonal", more like not relevent here.

Yes, I know it's what they REALLY feel, but that isn't what I'm addressing in my rant. I'm just making fun of a really really badly thought out argument.

Homophobia is rooted in misogyny. Manage the symptoms and treat the disease.

~ me

Sadly, this is very true. The real root of the "destroys traditional values" argument, to me, is that gay marriage defies the belief that every marriage needs a woman -- in the kitchen and birthing babies.

I may post another rant on feminism in TV advertising later. There are a few commercials out there that really piss me off because they also assume this about women.

But again, this is orthogonal to their "gay marriage spreads STDs" claim. Honestly, I just wanted to make total fun of this horribly thought out argument. It's clearly someone grasping at straws.

Btw, did you get a Save the Date?

I did, however I am hoping to return around Thanksgiving. I do hope that some day I am as fortunate as you. I am always with you both...

like an annoying smell

If I follow their logic, having a gay marriage makes you have lots of unprotected sex with other gay men and get stds. They have an interesting view of marriage. Oh wait, judging by the behavior of some of their tv preachers, that's actually about accurate :)

And again, QED. Because this contradicts the assumptions of what "traditional marriage" is purported to mean. :)

So by this logic, since women have the lowest rate of STDs, women should only marry other women. Support lesbian marriage!