NationStates Jolt Archive

Calling all U.N. Delegates!!! Endorse the proposal to repeal gay marriage, the reasoning is in the proposal, and is as follows :

Repeal "Gay Rights"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #12
Proposed by: -The Jedi-

Description: UN Resolution #12: Gay Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays, it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time. Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom". In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women, seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

rrr... as debateable as this could be..

Why dont you just enter a new proposal, and see how people react?

Calling all U.N. Delegates!!! Endorse the proposal to repeal gay marriage, the reasoning is in the proposal, and is as follows :

Repeal "Gay Rights"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #12
Proposed by: -The Jedi-

Description: UN Resolution #12: Gay Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays, it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time. Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom". In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women, seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

wrong forum

Shouldn't this be in the UN thread?

By the way, just because some uber-right morals were set at the dawn of time, doesn't mean they are moral in the present day. There is a reason we don't follow the Code of Hammurabi.

Thread moved, unnecessary exclamation marks removed.

Calling all U.N. Delegates!!! Endorse the proposal to repeal gay marriage, the reasoning is in the proposal, and is as follows :

Repeal "Gay Rights"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #12
Proposed by: -The Jedi-

Description: UN Resolution #12: Gay Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays, it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time. Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom". In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women, seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

How should I could the ways?

First - blue?

Second - Resolution #7 (Sexual Freedom) only protects the rights of people in their own rooms. So it would not protect the right of two men to walk down the street hand in hand. (Or two women for that matter). "Gay Rights" however would protect that, which at least gives it a purpose.

Third - having kids is NOT the only reason people get married. Because by that definition a couple who can't have kids should not be permitted to marry either. Are you willing to stop infertile couples marrying? If not then you can't repeal this resolution on that basis. If you are then you are in violation of any number of proposals dictating equal rights to everyone.

Fourth - blue? Seriously?

Fifth - "Homosexuals are in the minority". That is your arguement for not letting them have rights? What if blacks are not in the minority? Can you stop them having rights? What about women? Or men? If the nation is made up of 49.9% men and 51.1 % women, would that give you the right to take all rights away from men because they are in the minority?

Sixth - Oh yeah, if you hadn't worked this out already, I oppose this repeal.

Seventh - I can't get over the blue. Sorry :}

Color removed. It annoyed me.

Calling all U.N. Delegates!!! Endorse the proposal to repeal gay marriage, the reasoning is in the proposal, and is as follows :

Repeal "Gay Rights"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #12
Proposed by: -The Jedi-

Description: UN Resolution #12: Gay Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

I have not, at the point of typing right here, actually read it. But I will bet there will be at least one mention of it being "wrong," "icky," or "against the Bible." Should be fun to see how the resident Roman Catholic utterly tears this repeal apart.

Argument: Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays, it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time.

Obvious lack of knowledge of even the basics of human history.

Okay, let's guide you along the path to wisdom. First, take that Bible you were reading and lock it in a safe. You are not ready to read it yet. Now, pick up a book on the Greeks and their culture. Notice how they allowed homosexuality? Now, pick up a book on Egyptians. Notice how they did not entirely oppose it? Now, pick up a book on the Romans. Notice how they were not only for it, but encouraged it in their military? Good. Now put the books down.

Little secret: Morals are not universal and they change as time passes.

Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom".

That protects what they do in the bedroom. Gay Rights protects everything else.

In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women, seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

1) Not all straight couples have kids or can have kids.
2) You don't need to have sex to have children these days.
3) The institution of marriage was not established for that purpose. It was later changed to be for that purpose.
4) Procreation doesn't require marriage.
5) The instution of marriage was originally corrupted from its original form to be the idiotic form you're advocating. People have since corrupted it further and changed it away from that. You are advocating a corrupted form of marriage, so your arguement is moot.

In the utterly vain hope that anyone will bother, I've included links to the last dozen major debates on this topic, encompassing thousands, literally thousands of posts and arguments.

Gay Marriage Misinformation (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=377323)
Repeal gay rights resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=376866)
Circumstantial gay marriages (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=374763)
A "reasonable" appeal of Resolution #12: Gay Rights Resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=374772)
Repeal Resolution 12 "Repeal Gay Rights" (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=370368)
Ban on Gay Marriages (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=369506)
Repeal Gay Rights Proposal (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=362264)
The Official Topic of Definition of Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=375415)
Homosexual Rights (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=295041)
NOTICE: GAY MARRIAGE ALREADY LEGAL AND PROTECTED BY UN. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=312419)
Sanctity of Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=309683)
Same-Sex Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=310896)

I'll bet the sum of one million FriBs against the possiblilty that anyone on either side can come up with a genuinely new idea on this topic, or manage to convince anyone on the opposite side of the issue that "they've been wrong all along and are changing their vote!"



Can we stop making new topics on this, please? It's been done. Done to death. Enough, already.

I'll bet the sum of one million FriBs against the possiblilty that anyone on either side can come up with a genuinely new idea on this topic, or manage to convince anyone on the opposite side of the issue that "they've been wrong all along and are changing their vote!"



Can we stop making new topics on this, please? It's been done. Done to death. Enough, already.


The government of Telidia completely and utterly concur and in fact we will even match the bet. Also, thank you very much for taking the time to locate the previous debates.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

In the utterly vain hope that anyone will bother, I've included links to the last dozen major debates on this topic, encompassing thousands, literally thousands of posts and arguments.

Gay Marriage Misinformation (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=377323)
Repeal gay rights resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=376866)
Circumstantial gay marriages (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=374763)
A "reasonable" appeal of Resolution #12: Gay Rights Resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=374772)
Repeal Resolution 12 "Repeal Gay Rights" (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=370368)
Ban on Gay Marriages (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=369506)
Repeal Gay Rights Proposal (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=362264)
The Official Topic of Definition of Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=375415)
Homosexual Rights (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=295041)
NOTICE: GAY MARRIAGE ALREADY LEGAL AND PROTECTED BY UN. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=312419)
Sanctity of Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=309683)
Same-Sex Marriage (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=310896)

I'll bet the sum of one million FriBs against the possiblilty that anyone on either side can come up with a genuinely new idea on this topic, or manage to convince anyone on the opposite side of the issue that "they've been wrong all along and are changing their vote!"



Can we stop making new topics on this, please? It's been done. Done to death. Enough, already.

But... but... the resolution was all pretty and blue!!! (sorry)

You are incorrect on so many level's its not even close to being funny. I never knew Jedi were so intolerant.

OK, where to start...

Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays, it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority

??? In Adam Island people who perfer only men sexually are the minority, [most of us have sexuality that is so divese and gradient that these pigeonholing terms are meaningless] but what does that have to do with anything? Minority, majority, so what?



and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time.

??? It would be awfully hard to have a moral law against homosexuality in place at the dawn of time since sexuality itself didn't even exist then. And as far as our historians can tell, the civilizations that have lived on Adam Island have never universally condemned homosexuality, so I don't know where this "worldwide" business is coming from. And also, what does a moral law have to do with what UN laws are like?

Wow, there are so many things wrong with that sentence fragment it takes a whole paragraph to summarize the major points.



Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom".

Being "gay" (I'm assuming this is slang in your country for homosexual) is not a concious choice, at least for the species of creatures in my Republic. And Sexual Freedom protects, well, Sexual Freedom, not marriage.



In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage

How does this "corrupt the institution of marriage?" Please offer concrete examples. Joe and Bob getting married does nothing to Tom and Sally getting married. Marriage is a social contract between two people to define their relationship.



which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women,

Um, no it wasn't. Men and women can procreate just fine without a marriage contract, believe it or not. The family evolved as a way to raise children in a consistent unit. A family is not exclusively a mother, father and genetic offspring. It can be a mother, father and someone else's genetic offspring; a grandfather and grandmother living alone; Bob Saget living with two other men in San Francisco raising three girls who always have their hair done perfectly no matter what time of day; or even an abbott of monks.

A marriage contract, in all its various forms, serves as a way to manage the various legalities that may come up between people that love and wish to care for each other. The particulars are up to them. I'm not going to define someone's relationship for them. That's their job, and they should have the right to do so.



seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

Do I seriously have to write this again? First of all, thanks to advances in technology that scientists from Adam Island would be glad to teach you, two people of the same sex can easily procreate. Secondly, procreation never has been and hopefully never will be the defining aspect of marriage. To reduce such an important and sacred thing as marriage to nothing more than a base sex contract is disgusting.

With your reasoning, impotent persons, old people, the disabled, etc., would not be allowed to marry.

Can we stop making new topics on this, please? It's been done. Done to death. Enough, already.

Don't you know? Beating dead horses is the official sport of NS.

Don't you know? Beating dead horses is the official sport of NS.

I would have thought beating a dead horse was easy. It's not going to move so what chance does it have of winning a race?

In the Nation of South Arctica, we do not have "legal marriage". Marriage is a term we use exclusively to describe an emotional and spiritual bond between people, and it is not the place of the State to define it. We do, however, have a form a civil union which we call "merging" and this serves the purpose of what many nations recognize as marriage; a joining of two people into a single family unit, enabling them to enjoy certain legal benefits including tax breaks and power of attorney, as well as joint custody of any children the couple may have either by birth or adoption.

In our country, all citizens are equal under the law, regardless of gender. Since it is legal for a male citizen to "merge" with a female, it must therefore follow that it is legal for a female citizen to "merge" with a female. What is legal for a man must also be legal for a woman, and vice-versa. (Our legislature has recently carried this concept to the point that it was ruled that our state-sponsored healthcare system, the National Insurance Plan for People in Lower Economic Sectors, must provide men with an annual gynecological examination - to date, however, only three men have taken advantage of this, and one was later revealed to be "just kidding".)

The concept of gender equality is a passion with our people, and we will fight any resolution that threatens it, including the banning of "gay marriage".


Sincerely,

Eugene Q. Hugo
Official State Philosopher
On behalf of the First Citizen of South Arctica

I would have thought beating a dead horse was easy. It's not going to move so what chance does it have of winning a race?
... :rolleyes:

I would have thought beating a dead horse was easy. It's not going to move so what chance does it have of winning a race?

Oh no, it's not. It's all about technique. How you beat the dead horse is what earns the points. The better and more unique the technique, the higher a score you get. I once won a bronze in that sport, only to have it taken away when they discovered the horse was only unconcious when I started beating it.

And here we have the reason the Jedi lost.... :p

Calling all U.N. Delegates!!! Endorse the proposal to repeal gay marriage, the reasoning is in the proposal, and is as follows :

U.N. Delegate responding....


Repeal "Gay Rights"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution

Category: Repeal
Resolution: #12
Proposed by: -The Jedi-

Description: UN Resolution #12: Gay Rights (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.


Wow, another "Gay Rights" repeal... like there isn't enough of their idiot mumbo-jumbo floating around...


Argument: Although it has been argued by some that the minority is against gays,

The minority is against them, after all, the minority voted against this resolution, while the majority approved it.... You see, the term "minority" and "majority" are relative terms...


it should be realized that homosexuals are the minority

Yes, that is true... however, the "minority" of gays and the "minority" against gays, are two seperate minorities... They are relative terms in relation to groups of people... You do of course realize, that you do not have to be gay to support gays having rights? Then again, you probably do not.


and are also going against moral laws that have been in place worldwide since the dawn of time.

That is a lie, Gays have had equal rights with the rest of society since the birth of the Constitutional Republic of Tekania. (OOC: and even if you are foolishly talking about REAL life, the Romans, Macedonians, Sumerians and Babylonians all accepted homosexual behavior).


Another reason for this would be the fact that this resolution in itself is pointless, if people wanted to be gay they would be protected by UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #7 "Sexual Freedom".

Ah, but #7 didn't specifically grant them the equivicable right to marry, which had been denied them by certain anal-retentive nations.


In conclusion, this resolution is pointless in helping homosexuals, and only goes on to further corrupt the institution of Marriage

I see in no way how this can "corrupt" a private institution that is only as functional and valid as the private individuals involved in this institution.


which was made in the first place to help procreation between a man and a women,

Actually marriage was "made" to describe the inter-weaving of two ropes, as an old french nautical term, and later used as an illusion to human unions.


seeing as how two people of the same sex cannot procreate, it is pointless to allow them to be married.

So is it pointless for one or two people, of which one is sterile to get married? seeing as how they can't procreate? Didn't consider that aspect of your logic did you?

In conclusion: Does it really fucking matter? Whether there are two guys who want to commit in porking each other for the rest of their lives, two women who want to commit to munching on each other for the rest of their lives.... does any of it have any bearing what-so-ever in the relationship between me and my wife? Or in any way effect how I look upon my wife? The answer is, of course, no.... It does not matter.... That being said... The Republic will play no part in abolishing any consensual private union between two or more adults of intelligent species.

I just love the fact that no one seems to notice that now in order to eliminate laws requiring nations to legalize gay marriage they have to repeal two resolutions, "Gay Rights" and "Definition of Marriage."

two people of the same sex can't create a child, it defies natural law. this is also an issue that a nation should decide upon.

two people of the same sex can't create a child, it defies natural law. this is also an issue that a nation should decide upon.

Depends on the species. I know of a lovely species of insectoids that would like to demonstrate how wrong you are.

Actually, two people are not needed to have sex to create a child anymore. Ever heard of "in vitro fertilization?" Hell, what color you want your child's eyes?

two people of the same sex can't create a child, it defies natural law. this is also an issue that a nation should decide upon.

Create a child? Who wants to do that, we're not Dr Frankenstein here.

Create a child? Who wants to do that, we're not Dr Frankenstein here.

I didn't know I was related to the Frankensteins...

Sure, he's the Wizard on 4th Street, always mumbling about his homoculi.

two people of the same sex can't create a child, it defies natural law. this is also an issue that a nation should decide upon.

What does "creating a child" have to do with marriage? I can "create" a child with or without marriage....

What does "creating a child" have to do with marriage? I can "create" a child with or without marriage....

Thats it, rob him of all his illusions. Next you'll be telling him that TV isn't real.

Thats it, rob him of all his illusions. Next you'll be telling him that TV isn't real.

Yes, I've got a 5' long reality buster with the name "Louisville" on the side of it I use for people like this...

* T.R Kom walks in holding a lit molotov ...

" Oh, I see here that ... it ... has been dealt with ... "

* ... and forgetting what he was about to do, explodes in flame as a consequence. Bollocks ...

In fact, without even getting married, or indee,d even having sex, a guy can go out to some clinic, jizz into a dixie-cup, and nine months later, some girl he has never met can pop out a child he sired.... Ain't technology grand... (Of course... this form is not as fun..... but.... )

I seriously do not understand what is so wrong with gay marriage. First of all, why would you want to take away a persons right to be equal with others and have the same benefits of a heterosexual couple. Homosexuality isn't wrong, it's a truth that we have to deal with. By calling it immoral or wrong, are we really getting anywhere? It isn't their choice to be that way, why would somebody want to lead a life of humiluation and discrimination? People kill themselves because they later find out that they are gay. Then there is the bible issue. People say that homosexuality is wrong because of the Bible. Yes it does, but it also says you can't eat mixed grains or wear bright colored clothing. Even if it is in the Bible, should it be brought into this whole debate, NO. Religion is great for personal benefit, but not for government. Religious beliefs should not be imposed on non believers. I find nothing wrong with Gay Marriage and I hope that the Definition of Marriage ammendment stays the same.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/Stupid%20Crap/deadhorse.gif

- "Oy."
UN Gnome of Stating the Obvious

UN Gnome of Stating the ObviousWell, even if there is a lot of shit sloshing about the floor at times, at least the U.N. can claim to be a work place with equality, ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/Stupid%20Crap/deadhorse.gif

- "Oy."
UN Gnome of Stating the Obvious

Consider that stolen.

two people of the same sex can't create a child, it defies natural law. this is also an issue that a nation should decide upon.

So my dear boy you only have sex for procreation?! what a sullen and boorish life you must lead. Or are you a hypocrite and piddle everything you come across?! Stop being a fool, take their tax money and get on with your life that happens to not be affected by gays marrying.

Some of the people who debate this should read up on ancient Greek armies. It was considered a blessing to be homosexual, because then you could be sent into military training with your lover and fight by their side. Homosexuality is a good thing to some people, and the age old "it's their choice" arguement has no value in a debate like this. you should really read what you write, some of the proposals are so bogus!

Yep, they are, but then you're not dealing with the educated, you're dealing mostly with the bigots who see one point of view, believe it is "THE ONE RIGHT WAY" and then make complete arses out of themselves on here trying to defend their points with rote answers they don't understand.

Yep, they are, but then you're not dealing with the educated, you're dealing mostly with the bigots who see one point of view, believe it is "THE ONE RIGHT WAY" and then make complete arses out of themselves on here trying to defend their points with rote answers they don't understand.

And those of us who do understand them are fighting against them.

I'm surprised we haven't had people on here using Bible quotes more often. I mean, how familiar are they with the Bible, anyway? Most of the ones who mention the Bible being against it sound like they are repeating what they were told and not actually looking it up.

And those of us who do understand them are fighting against them.

I'm surprised we haven't had people on here using Bible quotes more often. I mean, how familiar are they with the Bible, anyway? Most of the ones who mention the Bible being against it sound like they are repeating what they were told and not actually looking it up.

*hands you a cigar*

*hands you a cigar*

:smokes the cigar:

Good flavor, nice texture... Good thing my lungs are immune to tar. Where'd you get these? I'll try to import a few boxes for myself.

I agree with this, not to mention that it is far beyond UN jurisdiction.

I agree with this, not to mention that it is far beyond UN jurisdiction.

Well that made sense not.

I ment the repeal, sorry I replied with out reading this far.

The Parawyn goverment does no recognize a difference in sexualities, with the exception of those known to directly harm citizens (peadophilia, ect). To the same extend there is a very limited difference in how males and females are treated by law and this includes the domain of marriage. Legislation for or against gay marriage does not affect us, as we do not have sufficient means to detect when it is taking place, nor do formally recognize that it can or ever has. In order for such law to affect us there most be guidlines that force discrimation between the sexes to some degree, and until that happens we are not legally obligated to implement any rulings related to gender.

Well, too bad. Go cry me a river and drown in it. DO NOT MAKE ME ASSIMILATE YOU INTO OUR GREAT RELIGION.

*brain melted*

Giordano,
UN representative,
The Black New World

Neo Valua does not see why barbarian nations, like The Theocracy of -The Jedi-, are allowed to exist. Your will to oppress the homosexual based on ancient morals is insane. Homosexuality outdates Christianity itself, fool! It probably outdates humanity and it's foolish 'moral codes'.

OOC: And it would have really been great if I was logged into Neo Valua while posting this. XD

The Parawyn goverment does no recognize a difference in sexualities, with the exception of those known to directly harm citizens (peadophilia, ect). To the same extend there is a very limited difference in how males and females are treated by law and this includes the domain of marriage. Legislation for or against gay marriage does not affect us, as we do not have sufficient means to detect when it is taking place, nor do formally recognize that it can or ever has. In order for such law to affect us there most be guidlines that force discrimation between the sexes to some degree, and until that happens we are not legally obligated to implement any rulings related to gender.

Gee, you in the UN?

Liar.

If there is a "slight difference", there is a "difference". Nice try, but the UN Gnomes remove the "slight difference".

Points for creative ineptitude though.

The Federation of Aligned Planets, as UN Delegate for Sol, will not vote to endorse the repealing of the Resolution in question.

If there is a "slight difference", there is a "difference". Nice try, but the UN Gnomes remove the "slight difference".

We're sneaky that way.

-"Yes sir, very very sneaky."
UN Gnome #9328p184