The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Gay 'marriage'. How long until people can marry animals?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Sufistic
I am against gay marriage.

But the title of the thread is highly offensive; I mean, seriously, you're equating homosexuals to animals? They're still humans, have some respect.

Posted from TSR Mobile


I'm curious now - why are you against it?
Original post by Andrewlittle1996
Well I think that we should preserve traditional marriages as it is a sacred institution and its always been one way so why not keep it this way? (Sorry, don't mean to offend, just my opinion! :-). )


Posted from TSR Mobile


It hasn't always been the same way. Marriage was used in the Bible to force slaves into marriage, to kidnap women and marriages of multiple partners was allowed.

So, it has completely changed.
Original post by Andrewlittle1996
I believe in only straight marriages. Fr a woman and a man. Civil partnerships are fine, but definitely not two people of the same sex! :-/


Posted from TSR Mobile


Do you need a dictionary?
Reply 43
Avatar for viriol
viriol
12
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
They do. It would only be a problem if, for example, a woman wanted two husbands but the first husband didn't want to share her.


Such issues would have to be decided at the time of the marriage.

Divorces could get interesting though :P
Reply 44
Avatar for Howard
Howard
5
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
A blanket age is the only reasonable way one could apply the law. It's the only realistic way since otherwise it would become fully subjective and result in an awful lot of people being taken advantage of. And hey, the law is bumbling and clumsy enough without it being more inconvenient to use.

I know. However, that doesn't make low ages of consent alright.


The question is though, what is the right age of consent? 16 in the UK, or 14 in Bulgaria, or 18 in some other place. It's subjective by it's very nature, let alone the complete chaos that would reign if it were measured on an individual basis.

My only point is that someone mentioned that this extension of marriage wouldn't apply to pedophilia because children can't consent. And yet, if a 21 year old man were to be "dating" a 14 year old girl then that would in the eyes of the law be pedophilia and yet the girl in question might be very well capable and mature enough to consent.
Original post by viriol
Such issues would have to be decided at the time of the marriage.

Divorces could get interesting though :P


They would. Only people who were okay with it could do it.

Divorce would be a nightmare. Can you imagine trying to split property with five wives? :biggrin:
The day I see a horse demanding marriage equality so that they can marry a human is the day I will take the concept seriously. Even then it would only be fair to apply it to horses rather than animals in general.
Original post by Howard
The question is though, what is the right age of consent? 16 in the UK, or 14 in Bulgaria, or 18 in some other place. It's subjective by it's very nature, let alone the complete chaos that would reign if it were measured on an individual basis.

My only point is that someone mentioned that this extension of marriage wouldn't apply to pedophilia because children can't consent. And yet, if a 21 year old man were to be "dating" a 14 year old girl then that would in the eyes of the law be pedophilia and yet the girl in question might be very well capable and mature enough to consent.


I personally feel the sixteen is perfectly fine, but the culture you are raised in plays a major role. It's already subjective, which is why it shouoldn't ever be changed to an individual standard - can you imagine how much time that would take up? :eek:

It was me that mentioned it - and, I don't care particularly if that hypothetical girl is mature enough, because others are not. You have to protect those in society who need protecting, sometimes at the expense of those who don't. And really, for the sake of a bit of sex, it's not worth the hassle. Any 21 year old who dleiberately dates a fourteen year old knows that they're breaking the law, and should therefore not do it.

And the seven year rule should always apply. :biggrin: 21 divided by two equals 10.5, plus 7 makes 17.5.
Reply 48
Avatar for Nickp91
Nickp91
Must be troll. Just must be. I mean the obvious is surely the fact that animals arnt even the same race......
Reply 49
Avatar for viriol
viriol
12
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
They would. Only people who were okay with it could do it.

Divorce would be a nightmare. Can you imagine trying to split property with five wives? :biggrin:


I was thinking more about if two in a "couple" of, say, six, no longer wanted to be married, the other four having to choose... Maybe some could choose to be married to each on different days (sort of like with "splitting" children)?

On a slightly relevant note, I know of a real-life case of a man who lived with two different women on alterrnate days of the week and had the Sunday to himself :P
Original post by Adileh
People are very naive.

Although, before beastiality is legalised i suspect incestual marriage Will be Legalised. It's the next 'logical' step.


Aww, has the poor baby been owned? You never even tried to respond to my point.

Mind you, I personally don't agree with incest, but with sterile siblings or another situation where there is no chance of offspring being born, there isn't an actual reason to be against it, apart from one's emotions getting in the way of logic.
Reply 51
Avatar for Boucly
Boucly
Original post by Jack93o
incest on the other hand....

I have always wondered about that. It "feels" wrong. However, I was never explicitly told so and I cannot give it a reason either.

I would very much like to be told why it is wrong, and why does it "feel" wrong without knowing why.

Also,

•

Man Marries Pillow

•

Tokyo man marries video game character



Marriages have changed indeed.
Original post by viriol
I was thinking more about if two in a "couple" of, say, six, no longer wanted to be married, the other four having to choose... Maybe some could choose to be married to each on different days (sort of like with "splitting" children)?

On a slightly relevant note, I know of a real-life case of a man who lived with two different women on alterrnate days of the week and had the Sunday to himself :P


That's quite a problem there. And what if some of them didn't want to be in the marriage if one of them was going to leave? So many problems :biggrin:

And kids. Custody of children would be instantly more complicated.

That... Doesn't sound like a bad idea. I've always thought it's a good idea in a relationship to have like, a place or a time to yourself. Somewhere where no one judges you for the **** you watch on TV and the questionable things you look at on the internet. :cool:
Animal cannot get married fool, they cannot give their consent.
In my opinion, everyone has the right to get married. It doesn't matter if you are a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. As long as you are happy it shouldn't matter!
Enough said.
Reply 54
Avatar for ameritus
ameritus
9
Original post by Jack93o
yeah like others have said, animals can't consent so it'll never take off as an issue for edgy teens to campaign for

incest on the other hand....

i give it 20 years max before that gets legalized, there is literally no logical reason why it can't be in this age where contraception is so readily available, you're a bigot if you disagree


Well incest isn't something you'd want to encourage either :K:
Original post by Boucly
I have always wondered about that. It "feels" wrong. However, I was never explicitly told so and I cannot give it a reason either.

I would very much like to be told why it is wrong, and why does it "feel" wrong without knowing why.

Also,

•

Man Marries Pillow

•

Tokyo man marries video game character



Marriages have changed indeed.


I was just thinking about this as well. As long as there is no chance of offspring (because that's the rational reason), then, really... There is no other reason to be against incest. Even though most of us would not approve of the idea.
Original post by ameritus
Well incest isn't something you'd want to encourage either :K:


I get what he's saying. Why not? I mean, as long as there are no children being born, then... There's no other reason apart from the knee-jerk reaction of OH GOD THAT'S AWFUL STOP IT, which most of us get.
Reply 57
Avatar for viriol
viriol
12
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
That's quite a problem there. And what if some of them didn't want to be in the marriage if one of them was going to leave? So many problems :biggrin:


That person could just divorce everyone.


And kids. Custody of children would be instantly more complicated.


So many birthday presents! :birthday:


That... Doesn't sound like a bad idea. I've always thought it's a good idea in a relationship to have like, a place or a time to yourself. Somewhere where no one judges you for the **** you watch on TV and the questionable things you look at on the internet. :cool:


You do know such things can be politely arranged with your partner, right?
Reply 58
Avatar for ameritus
ameritus
9
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
I get what he's saying. Why not? I mean, as long as there are no children being born, then... There's no other reason apart from the knee-jerk reaction of OH GOD THAT'S AWFUL STOP IT, which most of us get.


I get it too, but it's not something the state should sanction. I mean, chances are there's nobody in existence who is attracted exclusively to members of his/her own family and nobody else, unlike the case with gays/lesbians where they're exclusively attracted to members of the same sex.
Why do homophobes care which humans, other humans want to have sex with, unless they want to have sex with that person themselves? It's none of you're business and comparing it to bestiality and saying stuff like that is ridiculous.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you