How come gay rights have been supported from more women then men? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 09:32:23 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  How come gay rights have been supported from more women then men? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How come gay rights have been supported from more women then men?  (Read 1391 times)
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
« on: March 11, 2012, 02:38:52 PM »

Because women view marriage as a safety net and the be all and end all of the purpose of their life. 
This is somewhat true because most women view their main function in life is to have children and raise children and this career lasts for at least 20 years. 
Most men view marriage as a prison, and as the government dictates marriage is a prison for men to maintain financial and social support for his wife and his biological children. 
Most single women will NOT have biological children out of wedlock, or before marriage if it was up to them.  Because single women know that the only way to ensure that a man sticks around to pay for and care for a biological child is with the full legal enforcement of the government. 
That is why the marriage contract is seen as so essential to the lives of women. 

But the idea that the marriage safety net should apply to gay people is illogical for a few reasons.  First, there are significant financial government benefits that have been given to unemployed stay at home moms, that would be given to gay couples - this could create scarcity and increased demand for these limited government resources.  This would in effect mean that unemployed mother would be competing with gay men/women for limited government benefits. 

In addition, if gay men/women want to create a legal contract sharing property, they can ALREADY do this as private citizens.  I think the gay marriage debate is less about legality, and more about a social statement by liberals to win political influence away from christian conservatives, and to increase gay acceptance in society, instead of the actual legal merits of marriage. 

Marriage is not a necessity or a right serviced by the government if 2 private citizens can just create a legal contract sharing property. 
Marriage was and is created by government as a method to protect single women from men who impregnate them and leave them alone to raise the child afterwards. 
There is no need or necessity for the government to intervene in the private legal affairs of gay couples who do not want to be legally enforced to share property.
Logged
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2012, 07:39:55 PM »

I think a significant part of it, along with other things mentioned in this thread, is that it's just a lot more likely that women are going to have gay (male) friends than straight men are. When you regularly interact with a minority group, you're more likely to feel sympathetic towards their plight and support increased rights for that group.

Its also interesting that most women won't support polygamy, perhaps because they fear that their husband will just leave them for a second wife, and also the emotional jealousy that would ensue.
But most men would likely support or be indifferent towards polygamy if it were done by consenting adults and not tied to religious cults. 

Men think they can be strong and independent and free from government doctrine and laws regarding marriage or anything else.  For men, less rules, laws, and regulation is a good thing.  So men don't view marriage as a very important structure or even a necessity in life, especially if a man is have intimate relations with a woman without a government certificate. 

But women are concerned about feeling safe and secure, and need the government to take care of them and protect them in their sexual life.  Women want a marriage certificate to protect them from the creepy vagrants that want to rape them or give them fatherless bastard children. 

If you want to tie Polygamy and Gay Marriage together as reasons for changing marital laws, then you will get more male support.
Logged
milhouse24
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,331
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2012, 09:52:14 PM »

Because women view marriage as a safety net and the be all and end all of the purpose of their life. 

Good job starting your comment by putting your most terrible, mysogenistic thought first. And then top notch following it up with the idea that most guys think "marriage is a prison."

You're a real catch. If this is what you think marriage is, then damn right it's time for someone to redefine it!

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

You literally have no idea how the government and tax structure works, do you? Real government benefits don't kick in until you start getting kids involved. An unemployed non-mother gets very little in terms of governmental benefits as compared to an unemployed mother, gay or otherwise.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is me. Just throwing up my hands in futility: \o/

This is me walking away from you, dismayed:  -_-

This is me, praying that you are indeed a dying breed, and that one day all people will have equal rights despite your bigoted nonsense:   O>

Two of the benefits that I've mentioned are Health Care insurance and Green Card fraud. 

With health care, why can only married people share health insurance.  Why can't a single adult man share health insurance with a family member like a sister, brother, mother, or father.  At least you are sharing health insurance with someone who is blood-related and not someone out to fraudulently get health benefits.  Why can't a single mother marry her brother to get free health insurance?  Shouldn't single mother deserve free health insurance too?  At least with family members, the govt knows that you are likely to stick around and live with that person. 

As for green card fraud, someone posted a story about a Lesbian who married a mexican male to commit green card fraud against the Government.  This is the definition of a fraudulent marriage for government benefits.  Perhaps you don't agree with the Federal Immigration policies and think every non-citizen should automatically qualify for permanent residency. 

But there are many cases of marriage fraud for green cards amongst straight couples.  Do you think that gay marriage will increase, or decrease, the number of fraudulent gay couples for green card benefits.  You may condone immigration fraud.  I'm sure many women or lesbians will help out another woman and create a fraudulent green card marriage to help a female friend establish citizenship.  I'm also sure many men will fraudulently marry another man or perhaps pretend to be a gay boy toy to obtain a green card. 

Needless to say, if you think America has an immigration problem, the passing of federal gay marriage, will also increase immigration via green card marriage.  There is too much immigration demand to think that people will use any means necessary to acquire a green card. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.