NationStates Jolt Archive

OH yes i am an atheist Liberal! oh yeah all you people who say no well i just happen to think your an unfair pile of shit.

I just think its fair after all how can the usa call itself a free country and not allow people just like us not to get married

Meh, let them do what they want.

+1

PS you realise you have just potentially opened the floodgates right?

plus just cause a book says so isnt enough to stop a wonderfull thing such as marrage between two people who love eachother

Quit flogging me!

I hope you all realize that they are people just like us!

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!

why sir 1 im not gay only a liberal atheist 2. i think you are sick shitty bastard!

do you think its wrong not to beliave in god? or do you just hate all liberals?

Why do so many idiots put up a fight agianst whats very fair?

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!
Dear Sir/Madam,
You are an idiot. Try:
(A)Taking a gun and pulling the trigger while the barrel is in your mouth.
(B) Throwing your computer into the ocean.
(C) Disconnecting your internet.
(D) Sticking your tounge in the electrical outlet.

Have a nice day,
RFF

Gays are a blemmish on the perfect society that is Right-Winged, Homo's should be emilinated from the great power of Great Britian and the rest of the world. Or put them on an island and annhialte the enitre place or do studyies on how there brains are so disrupted and corrupt

So much For "exeptionism"

Read my above reply idiot.

oh yeah c navy YOUR AN ASS_HOLE YOU BASTARD!

I am a Nazi Sympathiser so the fuk wot, go die gay boyz

Oh a nazi that explians things!

Ahhh attack of the n00bs.

Gays are fine, i have a good friend whoose gay

I am a Nazi Sympathiser so the fuk wot, go die gay boyz Do you feel the same way about lesbians or is it just gay guys?

i think they just hate new ideas

i think they just hate new ideas

i think they just hate new ideas

i think they just hate new ideas

im glad that most people are saying yes!

after you've washed your filthy mouth out with soap and water (cos all you seem to do is verbally abuse ppl that dont agree with YOU), i suggest you should reread your verbal shat (cos you seem to have nothing better to do with your time), and then try (if your solitary brain cell allows) to come up with a better discussion than this one :!: its soooo dated.

OH yes i am an atheist Liberal! oh yeah all you people who say no well i just happen to think your an unfair pile of shit.

EXAMPLE 1 :!:

why sir 1 im not gay only a liberal atheist 2. i think you are sick shitty bastard!

EXAMPLE 2 :!:

I wrote about this at length here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=149779&highlight=).

Gays should not be allowed to marry because it is sick and not right. I think every gay faggot should be flogged and shot in public

Where is the option for Who Cares?

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!

F-U hard core up the butthole. Why shouldn't Gays and Lesbians have as many rights as straight people? In fact, gay sex is healthier the boy/girl sex, because it doesn't spread as many STDs'. Being Gay/lesbian is a normal healthy thing. You are a closed minded a-hole.

Quit flogging me!



I appreciate the call for mercy on my behalf. This has gotten to be a sore subject.

Gays should not be allowed to marry because it is sick and not right. I think every gay faggot should be flogged and shot in public

"Really, and what is your objective basis for these assertions?" -he asked him knowlingly

Yes, I know, I know...

You forgot an option in your poll, "NO!" because it's just plain wrong!

You forgot an option in your poll, "NO!" because it's just plain wrong.

I don't agree with being gay because to me it's immoral, but I do think they should get the same rights married couples get. So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them. Don't get me wrong, I love gays and lesbians just like everyone else. They are humans too, but I don't agree with what they do, it doesn't mean that I treat them any less equal. It's like not agreeing with something your friend does, but your still friends with them. You still love them.

I dislike it when people point their finger at me and call me wrong for saying "no" you want me to respect your opinion, so why can't you respect mine?

I don't agree with being gay because to me it's immoral, but I do think they should get the same rights married couples get. So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them. Don't get me wrong, I love gays and lesbians just like everyone else. They are humans too, but I don't agree with what they do, it doesn't mean that I treat them any less equal. It's like not agreeing with something your friend does, but your still friends with them. You still love them.

I dislike it when people point their finger at me and call me wrong for saying "no" you want me to respect your opinion, so why can't you respect mine?

I do not see why people say the homosexuality is immoral. It is not a choice, therefore not a question of morals. I do, however appreciate the sentiment you expressed. Could you please tell me why you think it is immoral though?

Gays should not be allowed to marry because it is sick and not right. I think every gay faggot should be flogged and shot in public

Gays are a blemmish on the perfect society that is Right-Winged, Homo's should be emilinated from the great power of Great Britian and the rest of the world. Or put them on an island and annhialte the enitre place or do studyies on how there brains are so disrupted and corrupt

Have you guys been hanging out with that SSDivisionViking mofo? You should get in touch with him so he can tell you how to make a tin foil hat to protect you from the mind control beams.

So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them.

I don't understand why I keep seeing this type of statement in debates like this. Why are people so paranoid that they think the government is going to force their churches to perform marriages? Or do they really just have that much of a misunderstanding of how the system works.

The government is not going to force your church to marry homosexuals, regardless of what laws get passed. As long as your church does not receive government funds to perform marriages (which they don't), the church can discriminate based on any criteria it wants to. If your church doesn't want to marry people who are 32 and were born on a Saturday, that is their perogative. Stop being freaking paranoid.

I don't agree with being gay because to me it's immoral, but I do think they should get the same rights married couples get. So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them. Don't get me wrong, I love gays and lesbians just like everyone else. They are humans too, but I don't agree with what they do, it doesn't mean that I treat them any less equal. It's like not agreeing with something your friend does, but your still friends with them. You still love them.

I dislike it when people point their finger at me and call me wrong for saying "no" you want me to respect your opinion, so why can't you respect mine?

I do not see why people say the homosexuality is immoral. It is not a choice, therefore not a question of morals. I do, however appreciate the sentiment you expressed. Could you please tell me why you think it is immoral though?

First of all, I don't believe it's just how they are born that it is a choice, but that's my opinion others think differently. That perhaps they believe it's not but I have known many gay men, or lesbians who have gone back to being straight and been married happily to the opposite sex.

But I believe it is immoral not just because the bible says so (although it is a just reason, for me at least, being a christian) the christian reason:
"A baby, therefore, is the intended result of the two becoming one. Homosexual sex can never result in a baby; it can never fully achieve the one flesh that human sexuality is intended by God to achieve. Therefore, homosexual acts are contrary to the natural moral law and are, therefore, objectively immoral " ~ Philip T. view the article I got it from here;
http://www.catholicmatch.com/pl/pages/community/articles/details.html?ra=1;id=202

but also because to me it goes against human nature. It's like, think of a sexual act which you think is wrong and would never do, between whoever, and then ask yourself why? You say because it's immoral, that you wouldn't do it, and you think it's wrong because it's so. To me it's just one of those things I feel is wrong. I'm not comparing it to drugs or anything, but I'm going to use drugs as an example. I just feel drugs are wrong, not because of the health reasons (which do factor into gay sex too - aids for example) but because I can feel it, it's one of those things to me I can try to justify in my mind over and over but I come up with the same conclusion.

As to people saying I am close minded and such, I am not. Change is good, although I don't believe in marriage perhaps this will diminish gay beatings, and killings which is an upside to it. Like I said before, let them marry in court or by ministers who want to marry them, but please don't force a church into doing so.

i'm going to make this very simple.

yes. gay people should have the right to marry.

1000 is a significant number. you know why? no no, don't guess, i'll tell you. its the number of times this thread has been made, and argued over.

give it up people.

So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them.

I don't understand why I keep seeing this type of statement in debates like this. Why are people so paranoid that they think the government is going to force their churches to perform marriages? Or do they really just have that much of a misunderstanding of how the system works.

The government is not going to force your church to marry homosexuals, regardless of what laws get passed. As long as your church does not receive government funds to perform marriages (which they don't), the church can discriminate based on any criteria it wants to. If your church doesn't want to marry people who are 32 and were born on a Saturday, that is their perogative. Stop being freaking paranoid.

We're not being paranoid, it is a fact. They want to put a law in that says in no place are you allowed to speak out against being homosexual. This includes Church, because it is viewed as "discrimitory" even if it is your view. Therefore if we were to read the lines in our bible that call homosexuality immoral, the church could be sued or punished.

So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them.

I don't understand why I keep seeing this type of statement in debates like this. Why are people so paranoid that they think the government is going to force their churches to perform marriages? Or do they really just have that much of a misunderstanding of how the system works.

The government is not going to force your church to marry homosexuals, regardless of what laws get passed. As long as your church does not receive government funds to perform marriages (which they don't), the church can discriminate based on any criteria it wants to. If your church doesn't want to marry people who are 32 and were born on a Saturday, that is their perogative. Stop being freaking paranoid.

We're not being paranoid, it is a fact. They want to put a law in that says in no place are you allowed to speak out against being homosexual. This includes Church, because it is viewed as "discrimitory" even if it is your view. Therefore if we were to read the lines in our bible that call homosexuality immoral, the church could be sued or punished.

When right is wrong and wrong is right, thats an early sign of the end times. This law scares the crap outta me. I'll say what I choose to say. Also, gays have the right to marry, just not other boys. I don't feel I'm being discriminated against because I cant marry boys. Why should they?

well no in a sense/ I think government should get entirely out of marriage its a private/religious matter thus gays could "marry" by making a deal with each other and staying together and of course churches that wished to marry them could or those that didn't could refuse etc.

government spends 30 billion on divorce a year and more on the whole idiotic process all I need is to live with and make a commitment for life with one I love and I myself it would be a woman and done throught a church but thats me.

It's like, think of a sexual act which you think is wrong and would never do, between whoever, and then ask yourself why? You say because it's immoral, that you wouldn't do it, and you think it's wrong because it's so.

couple thoughts
1) you cant tell who is happily married. they may well be or they may not, you cant tell from the outside.

2) when it comes to sex, my criteria is "am i interested in doing that" and "does it involve pain". immorality doesnt come into it. or maybe im just not interested in immoral activities"

3) in the US the govt cant force churches to do anything. for example, the catholic church is free to deny marriage to divorced people even though its legal for them to marry.

If we legalize gay marriage the next thing that will happen is people will be trying to legalize getting married to animals and being gay is horribly wrong

We're not being paranoid, it is a fact. They want to put a law in that says in no place are you allowed to speak out against being homosexual. This includes Church, because it is viewed as "discrimitory" even if it is your view. Therefore if we were to read the lines in our bible that call homosexuality immoral, the church could be sued or punished.

Source????

The only law out there says that you can't say "Go out and kill all the gay people." This leads to violence against others. You can, however, say, "All gay people are going to hell." I'll disagree with it, but you can say it all you want.

If we legalize gay marriage the next thing that will happen is people will be trying to legalize getting married to animals and being gay is horribly wrong

::Realizes she can now ignore everything Enodscopia says, because such person obviously doesn't have any clue whatsoever what they are talking about::

It's like, think of a sexual act which you think is wrong and would never do, between whoever, and then ask yourself why? You say because it's immoral, that you wouldn't do it, and you think it's wrong because it's so.

couple thoughts
1) you cant tell who is happily married. they may well be or they may not, you cant tell from the outside.

2) when it comes to sex, my criteria is "am i interested in doing that" and "does it involve pain". immorality doesnt come into it. or maybe im just not interested in immoral activities"

3) in the US the govt cant force churches to do anything. for example, the catholic church is free to deny marriage to divorced people even though its legal for them to marry.


read the above law they're proposing in CANADA (not the USA) and as for #1 then how do you know they aren't happily married? They obviously wouldn't have changed, dated for awhile and got married unless they were sure

If we legalize gay marriage the next thing that will happen is people will be trying to legalize getting married to animals and being gay is horribly wrong

Why? Does it make you cry little boy?

What's next. 46 year-old perverts marrying little children? You will unleash a pandora's box. :twisted:

What's next. 46 year-old perverts marrying little children? You will unleash a pandora's box. :twisted:

Again, why?

DP

What's next. 46 year-old perverts marrying little children? You will unleash a pandora's box. :twisted:

You belong in a circus.

"Watch as he compares apples to oranges, wonder as he completely ignores the concept of consent!"

gays dont bother me so long as i dont get stalked or hit on by one other than that there people with feelings that are different and then real people that should die are nazi sypathists

First of all, marrige with animals and children can't heppen because of one little word: consent.

At least in California, if you arn't 18, you are still technically in the custody of someone else. Therefore, you can't get married, because you don't even own yourself.

As for animals, it's impossible to say weither or not they consent, despite what your pet psychics tell you :p



I honestly don't give a damn if you're against homosexuality. You can be a racist, sexist jerk and I still couldn't care less. But there's a difference between saying "being gay is wrong" and saying "they can't have such and such rights."


Just as an added note, the Bible also says against marrying other races, but that's legal. And, correct me if I'm wrong because I, unlike many here, don't know EVERYTHING in the entire world, but Wormwood didn't come crashing into the Earth.

Hey, where's the "OMG STFU and get on with your lives, the lot of you" option?

I voted for "Why do we keep talking about this" , "theres nothing more you can get from this, everyone's already chosen sides or has apathy leaking out their ears", and "Do whatever the hell you wan't don't tell me about it."

oh yeah c navy YOUR AN ASS_HOLE YOU BASTARD!

EXAMPLE 3 :!:

You do realise the creator of this thread spelt the word "should" wrong in the title and the poll?

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!

F-U hard core up the butthole. Why shouldn't Gays and Lesbians have as many rights as straight people? In fact, gay sex is healthier the boy/girl sex, because it doesn't spread as many STDs'. Being Gay/lesbian is a normal healthy thing. You are a closed minded a-hole.


WHY don't gays spread as many STD's????? are they immune? i think not!

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!

F-U hard core up the butthole. Why shouldn't Gays and Lesbians have as many rights as straight people? In fact, gay sex is healthier the boy/girl sex, because it doesn't spread as many STDs'. Being Gay/lesbian is a normal healthy thing. You are a closed minded a-hole.


WHY don't gays spread as many STD's????? are they immune? i think not!

I think statistically they're less likely to contract STDs is what the author was saying.

If we legalize gay marriage the next thing that will happen is people will be trying to legalize getting married to animals and being gay is horribly wrong

I think you're the only person who wants to marry an animal.

Gay people should be shot because they are not part of the grand scheme of things. They should be eliminated from the planet, espesically you!

F-U hard core up the butthole. Why shouldn't Gays and Lesbians have as many rights as straight people? In fact, gay sex is healthier the boy/girl sex, because it doesn't spread as many STDs'. Being Gay/lesbian is a normal healthy thing. You are a closed minded a-hole.


WHY don't gays spread as many STD's????? are they immune? i think not!

I think statistically they're less likely to contract STDs is what the author was saying.

ty for that little gem Insane Troll. Maybe you could then tell me why, when challenged, ppl on here have to resort to a full on verbal onslaught which includes foul language and name calling?

maybe La gente dei cuori really does want to 'fcuk' The Colonial Navy 'hard core up the butthole' proving his/her/its sexuality and mentality?

either way, all i can say is....... it must hurt up trap2 :!:

the coloneal navy your stupid your saying fuck gays when if you were really in the navy you would have your shit pushed in and like it, so gays i really dont care if they get married it aint coming out of my taxs.

Gays should defnitly have marriage rigths to bring them in line with the rest of us! Why should they have less rigths than us just because of their sexual prefrences? why have ltos lots of facist rigt wing nazi scum saying 'I don't like gays becuase their not like me' that is wrong, gays and lesbians deserve the same quality of life as you or me.

GLBT persons should have just the same rights of marriage as heterosexual couples. Why? It's only fair. Because doing otherwise is discrimination, which I THOUGHT was not permitted by our constitution.

I don't care much for gay marriages. But I have nothing against it, and I think that the law should uphold their rights, not just the whims of overzealous religious persons.

First off, yes, I'm gay. I'm a woman who loves another woman. Now that we have that out of the way...

Don't mess with the status quo on this! Do you have any idea what's going to happen if you pass a law allowing us to marry? My hunny will start nagging on me every day. "So? Nu? When are we going to get hitched? When are you going to make me an honest woman?"

"Darlin', nothing will make you an honest woman as long as you keep dealing from the bottom of the deck."

Look, if you make it legal to marry, you're going to ruin my relationship! Leave us alone! You're going to mess up everything!

(Yes, this is a farcical message. Except the part about being gay.)

Wow..I havent seen a dumber thread than this in quite some time.

By the way, the next time somebody asks ...

According the the World Health Organization, as of December 2002, the largest number of male cases of HIV/AIDS are a result of homosexual contact. The second greatest "exposure category" is defined as "not identified" so who knows. The third greatest risk factor for men is IV drug user.

So, yes. AIDS is still bad news for gay men, who are definitely not immune to it. In fact, for the United States, being a male homosexual is still the greatest risk factor OVERALL.

However, let's move on to the women's categories. And the winner is . . .

As of December, 2002, the greatest risk factor for HIV/AIDS among US women is having HETEROSEXUAL INTERCOURSE!!!!

Yes siree bub. The second greatest risk factor is being an IV drug user. Lesbian sex is so low on this risk chart that it isn't even mentioned. (Okay, I know you're not stupid. Think about it for a second and you'll figure out why.) It's even lower than the risk from having haemophilia.

Of the current living cases of HIV/AIDS cases among US adult women, 54,203 are from using IV drugs, and 54,782 are from heterosexual contact, according to the WHO.

And who are these men that are giving HIV/AIDS to heterosexual women? Bisexual men, adulterous men, and men who use IV drugs.

So, men play and women pay the price. So, what else is new?

The point is that those who claim that HIV/AIDS is God's punishment for being gay and lesbian are overlooking the fact that God evidently has no problem with lesbians. An argument could be made that God is punishing women for having sex with promiscuous partners and drug addicts.

I am not making any of these arguments. It is my belief that everyone should have the right to love whom they will for their own reasons. That's all I have to say on that subject. But you should really re-consider the HIV/AIDS issue of Gay Rights before it comes back to bite you.

Should gays be allowed to marry?

Too late. It's already legal in Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Canada (I think) and a few days ago the first gay couple in France got married (though illegally). :)

yesh. yes they should

Should gays be allowed to marry?

Too late. It's already legal in Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Canada (I think) and a few days ago the first gay couple in France got married (though illegally). :)


Its only legal in 4 countries.


USA
Canada
Netherlands
Belgium

Why not? >_>

Oh, I thought it was legal in Denmark as well. Or another one of those Scandinavian countries. Guess I was wrong :)

It's only legal in certain states in the USA, right?

Oh, I thought it was legal in Denmark as well. Or another one of those Scandinavian countries. Guess I was wrong :)

It's only legal in certain states in the USA, right?


I could be wrong about Denmark, I am not sure. But it is legal in the USA in some states, it may have been made legal natiowide via a court decision, but I can't promise you that.

OH yes i am an atheist Liberal! oh yeah all you people who say no well i just happen to think your an unfair pile of shit.


i bet you're from myg0t right?

Well, that's good news. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to marry.

First of all: I don't think it's legal in any of the scandinavian countries. Maybe in Denmark, though. I tried to find some information about it, but the danish law is.. yeah, you know - in danish :)

Second: I don't think that the message about men marrying children is in any way silly. Consider it for a moment - it's a sexuality. Pedophilia and homosexuality is both just that - a sexuality! And yes - today it is illegal to marry anybody under the age of 18, but it is illegal to marry someone of the same sex aswell. What assures us that children won't be able to marry in the future? Maybe you see homosexuality as something "normal". I can just say that it isn't. Proof: Approximately 6% of the inhabitants of the world are homosexual. Biologically - it's not the way it should be. A man and a woman have sex to produce a child, originally. Not for their own pleasure or anything else.

What's "normal" is what most people are. The world "in general", or something like that. And I'm sorry, but just because 6 percent of the world is gay, it's not the norm.


Then I would like to add that it just makes me sick that so many people posts silly messages like: "this is old news", "no! (with no argumentation)" and such. This is a forum, if you think the thread is redicoulus - just leave. You don't have to write something meaningless. It's just annoying. Let the ones that wants to discuss write, and leave it there.

Is this forum intended to be posting what we really think or in character for our nation?

Speaking as an individual, I find the views of particularly "The Colonial Navy" utterly repugnant and immoral and I look forward to the time when we can live in a world freed from such bigotry and intollerance. A shame, in a way, that I'm a liberal; if I weren't, I'd recommend sterilisation as I don't think that people such as this should be able to breed as they are a danger to the moral fabric of society.

Rotanimeret, you talk a load of bollocks. Who gave you the right to decide what is "normal" or not? Are you a god? If not, I feel very sorry for you; your god must look at you in despare, I should think.

I note with interest your link between paedophilia and sexuality. First off, paedophila is not rreally a sexulaity (as in gay, straight etc) but an attraction towards particularly young people. I'd like to see your proof for this controversial statement (you must have sources of information, reassearch papers presumably). As you yourself point out, the number of gay people in the world is far fewer than the number of straight people and therefore (assuming that the rate of paedophilia is the same in both gay and straight communities; you need to provide proof if this is not the case) then there will be far more straight paedophiles. Of course, child abuse is NEVER right whether its perpetrated by gay or straight people.

I do not know what you mean when you say "I do not think that the message about men marrying children is silly". What message? If you mean that you think that the law should ban men from marrying children I agree; it should and in my country it does! But by implication you do not think the same about women marrying children which I find odd. Again, this has nothing to do with sexuality as you assert. You also say that "...it is illegal to marry anyone under the age of 18,..." but this is not the case in my part of the world.

You then go on to assert that the only role of sexual reproduction is for the purpose of pro-creation. Of course, thats a perfectly valid opinion but I do feel very sorry for you as I think that sex (provided its consensual) is a wonderful and enjoyable thing.

Finally, I reluctantly have to agree with you that if you consider the word "normal" to mean "conforming to standard" [The Consise Oxford Dictionary] then no, it isn't "normal" to be gay. But who wants to conform to the standard? If you take a more moral view, however, I do not find anything not "normal" about gay people; we laugh, we cry, we fight, we go shopping etc. just like you straight people; wow: a revelation huh?

In summary I cannot understand why you would want to take such an illiberal and illinformed view about gay marriage. I don't seek to ban straight marriage so why on Earth would you want to prevent me from doing the same?

Right then; I'm going somewhere to cool off now...

But what if they then get attacked for being gay? Would the goverment protect thier rights then?

Just for the record - I primarily use words in the meaning of our dictionarys, because if I don't, it often leads to misunderstandings. I didn't mean to say what's normal and not according to me - but accordning to the word's meaning, it isn't normal at all to be a homosexual. (This does not mean that I have something agaist homosexuals, or any other sorts of sexualitys. In fact, my best friend is gay)

Off and away. We're talking about the situation in USA, it would be a lot harder to talk about the world in general - so many laws are different in other countries. Such as yours - which, if I may ask? I don't know any country where it's legal to marry under the age of 18. Do you have a lower limit, or non at all? In my country the legal age is 18, but under some circumstanses you can marry before that. Homosexual marriage is illegal in my country aswell.

The subject paedophilia: Yes, this is a sexuality. Attraction to children. (I'm not saying that neither paedophilia nor homosexuality is wrong). Well - paedophilia can mean that a person (in my country, you have to be at least 16 and the child must be at least six years younger than you, to be classed as a paedophil) falls in love with a child and wanting to have a relationship with it. It's not always only about sex, like a fetish. Nor is homosexuality. You may say it's a way of life. I think I'm confusing myself and you now. Well. The norm (and the way it "should" be - the way nature made us) is heterosexuality. All other kinds of sexuality is not the norm, therefore it's not normal. But that doesn't mean it's wrong in any way. We have a lot of sexualitys, not just hetero-, homo-, trans- and bisexuality.

Explain to me why you think paedophilia isn't a sexuality, and homosexuality is?

paedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children.

its way different for an adult to find a 15 year old sexually attractive, esp since many are indistinquishible from adults, and finding a 5 year old sexually attractive.

i dont know about psychological definitions. im pretty sure that finding children overwhelmingly attractive is abnormal but no matter where it fits into the psychological spectrum its wrong because its wrong for the child. you cant have adults having sex with children.

if adults want to have sex with other adults of whatever gender, as long as everyone is capable of consent, and gives that consent, and no one is maimed, its none of our business. if you dont like it, dont do it. people do wicked kinky things that we never know about because they are private actions of consenting adults. just dont think about it and it will be fine.

In Ghostalen's Reply:

"First of all, I don't believe it's just how they are born that it is a choice, but that's my opinion others think differently. That perhaps they believe it's not but I have known many gay men, or lesbians who have gone back to being straight and been married happily to the opposite sex."

In that case, did they merely believe they were gay, or did they have an inner conflict (religion/moral based or otherwise) which made them deny what could be their true nature?


But I believe it is immoral not just because the bible says so (although it is a just reason, for me at least, being a christian) the christian reason:
"A baby, therefore, is the intended result of the two becoming one. Homosexual sex can never result in a baby; it can never fully achieve the one flesh that human sexuality is intended by God to achieve. Therefore, homosexual acts are contrary to the natural moral law and are, therefore, objectively immoral " ~ Philip T. view the article I got it from here;
http://www.catholicmatch.com/pl/pages/community/articles/details.html?ra=1;id=202

Then don't you gay-marry. Have a lovely straight marriage, with your beautiful wife, have lovely children, live happily ever after, and more power to you. But don't get in the way of others, because you are living YOUR life, not OTHER PEOPLES'. Is anyone forcing you to become gay? No. And yet you'd, because of the decree of a book which may - or may not - be correct, and may - or may not - try and force your views upon others.
I'm not gay either. But I don't care if they marry, as long as they leave ME alone.


but also because to me it goes against human nature. It's like, think of a sexual act which you think is wrong and would never do, between whoever, and then ask yourself why? You say because it's immoral, that you wouldn't do it, and you think it's wrong because it's so.

In some cases, morals have nothing to do with it.
I don't know what it was that made me *a-hem* ri-i-ise to the occasion, as it were, when I first knew I was attracted to women (but a boy of 4 was when I had my first inkling that I liked the ladies, but it could have been even sooner), but I'm pretty sure that it WASN'T morals, nor was it any government legislation!
Don't get me wrong. There are some things which I [u]WOULD[/i] say are morally wrong - paedophilia, for example. But that's because one of the people involved isn't in a position to be able to decide for themselves, nor are they mature, as one should be for this.
Gays, however - assuming it's between two consenting partners - don't bother me in the slightest.



To me it's just one of those things I feel is wrong. I'm not comparing it to drugs or anything, but I'm going to use drugs as an example. I just feel drugs are wrong, not because of the health reasons (which do factor into gay sex too - aids for example) but because I can feel it, it's one of those things to me I can try to justify in my mind over and over but I come up with the same conclusion.

Ahh...but 'tis not only GAY sex for which AIDS is a factor. Straight people are just as likely to acquire AIDS. In fact, your biggest worry when it comes to that is not "is the person gay?", rather "is the person a SLUT?", or "Does the person share needles whilst doing drugs?".


As to people saying I am close minded and such, I am not. Change is good, although I don't believe in marriage perhaps this will diminish gay beatings, and killings which is an upside to it. Like I said before, let them marry in court or by ministers who want to marry them, but please don't force a church into doing so.

If there are as many people who possess the mindset "faggots should die" out there as there are who've written so in this forum, then I doubt that gay beatings will diminish.
I've no qualms with individual churches refusing that, but hey - the gay folks probably wouldn't want to go there in the first place, judging by the sorts of folks who treat them as such.
I saw that French mayor marrying that gay couple, and the head of Justice saying that he was wrong for doing so. All jokes about "Gay Paris" aside, I say good for him. I think that the United States should take a similar mentality.

In some countries and cultures, ten-year-olds marry old men. And it's legal. I still see no explaination to you paedophilia isn't a sexuality.

And I can add that children can feel sexually attracted to adults aswell. Therefore - shouldn't it be legal if the child wants it? "but it's so hard to know if they want to - and most of them don't". Hello? Paradox! But often said.

Should straight people be allowed to marry :?:

In some countries and cultures, ten-year-olds marry old men. And it's legal. I still see no explaination to you paedophilia isn't a sexuality.

And I can add that children can feel sexually attracted to adults aswell. Therefore - shouldn't it be legal if the child wants it? "but it's so hard to know if they want to - and most of them don't". Hello? Paradox! But often said.
no it shouldnt be legal
if we are talking about prepubescent children
they are not capable of consent
they are not physically ready for sexual contact
its psychologically damaging to them

There are many different types of love, if two gay people wish to commit to each other why stop them? What does it matter in the grand scheme of things?

I believe gay people are born as they are, they don't CHOOSE a lifetime of harassment by bible thumpers and ostracism by friends/family who are against it. When a gay couple marries it doesn't hurt anyone else, people should mind their own business and stay out of other people's bedrooms. (Except of course in cases of rape/molestation etc...)

As a straight female, I have known many gay people and most of them were the sweetest, funniest, wittiest people I have known :) Go gay marriage woohoo! As long as no one else is hurt then let people do as they wish.

The vast majority of pedophiles identify as heterosexual men. Not gay men. Again, this argument will come back to bite you when the facts are analyzed. Stop argueing from your bigotry.

It made me sick the day that some states let gays marry it was a sad day in America history. I think even being gay should be illegal and all gays be sent to jail for life.

I find it funny that the arguement of gay marriage automatically focuses on gay sex. Marriage is not about sex, but love. My parents are married, and I try not to think of them having sex. Many of your parents are married, and hopefully you don't think of them having sex. Point is why do people think gay marriage is about gay sex. As for the whole animal and children thing, that is a slippery slope, and gay marriage does not automatically lead to it. Thats my two cents.

I agree very much with Neo, gay people have as many rights as hetrosexuals and should not be discriminated because they some how seem different from some of us.

I don't feel that this threatens me or anyone else in this nation or in this world. It's basically that those who oppose this are afraid that it will legitimize the sex lives of men and women who don't do the same way they do.

It's funny, that so many straight men are freaked out when they find out another man in the room is gay. You can practically see the straight guy get his back against the wall, because in his balding, fat, halitosis-ridden mind, that man is going to find him attractive enough to do him up the ass at a moment's notice. That's the average homophobe, deluding himself that he's irresistible to both sexes, and any moment now, they will want him to tear his clothes off.

Why he'd be concerned about two people he doesn't know wanting to commit to each other is really beyond me. Not unless he's afraid they'll move in next door and gentrify the neighborhood out of his price range.

I just don't get it. What is it about homosexuality that is *so* bad that some people need to make such a huge fuss out of it?
I never see (serious) posts in the line of "people with red hair should die!" or "God hates people who are 5'8"."
Where's the outcry against left-handed people marrying?Left-handedness is abnormal! Ban it!

"gay people have as many rights as hetrosexuals and should not be discriminated because they some how seem different from some of us."

"if two gay people wish to commit to each other why stop them?"

Yet again: and the difference between the gay marriage and the paedophilian marriage is what?
Remember: this is a comparision - I'm not dragging any lines between homosexuality and paedohilism. So stop commenting that.

Well. If a child wants to marry an adult, and the adult wants to marry that child: why not? If two people wish to commit to each other, why stop them? Or is this just for homosexuals? And is it allowed if it's a boy and a man?

"should not be discriminated because they some how seem different from some of us". Well, same thing. Many seem different. Homosexuals, paedophiles, rapists, murderers - psychos. Aswell, I like to have sex with both men and women - shouldn't I therefore have the right to marry both, in the same time?

"gay people have as many rights as hetrosexuals and should not be discriminated because they some how seem different from some of us."

"if two gay people wish to commit to each other why stop them?"

Yet again: and the difference between the gay marriage and the paedophilian marriage is what?
Remember: this is a comparision - I'm not dragging any lines between homosexuality and paedohilism. So stop commenting that.

Well. If a child wants to marry an adult, and the adult wants to marry that child: why not? If two people wish to commit to each other, why stop them? Or is this just for homosexuals? And is it allowed if it's a boy and a man?

"should not be discriminated because they some how seem different from some of us". Well, same thing. Many seem different. Homosexuals, paedophiles, rapists, murderers - psychos. Aswell, I like to have sex with both men and women - shouldn't I therefore have the right to marry both, in the same time?

Maybe people aren't responding because this is an old, tired argument.

Marrying Children/Animals: Neither can give legal consent to be married, so there's no point to be made here.

Rape/murder/other demons people dream will be unleashed by change: These things harm other, non-consenting parties. Homosexual relationships do not.

In order to make a comparison you must compare two things with more in common than that you consider them all deviant.

Why he'd be concerned about two people he doesn't know wanting to commit to each other is really beyond me. Not unless he's afraid they'll move in next door and gentrify the neighborhood out of his price range.
:lol:
most intellegent theory yet

Even if you think it's old or not, there's no good answers. Homosexuality is a sexuality, aswell as paedophilism and such. There's nothing that proof anything else. You are especially attracted to some people because of something the are, in a sexual way. A sexuality. Oh my god. "It's oooold". Well, we don't have to be new. I really think that we should encourage people to be homosexuals, and not try to live after the biological norm. It's like encouraging blind people not to have their eyes fixed if the can.

It's like encouraging blind people not to have their eyes fixed if the can.

Difference between homosexuality and blindness off course being that blindness is a disabeling affliction.
Nice try though.

Well i have to be quite honest. While my opinions differ greatly Ghostalen has to be the most mature person on here in the way he conducted his arguments. Things would be so much easier if congress was full of him/her.

Yes, gay people should be aloud to be married too. If they werent that would be like telling straight people that they couldnt get married because they are straight and thats just nasty... Thats the problem with people now adays they dont look at the problem from the other side.

Yes, gay people should be aloud to be married too. If they werent that would be like telling straight people that they couldnt get married because they are straight and thats just nasty... Thats the problem with people now adays they dont look at the problem from the other side.

Cool, so let's have a little test then.
Why do you think some people don't want to allow gays to be married?

Yes, gay people should be aloud to be married too. If they werent that would be like telling straight people that they couldnt get married because they are straight and thats just nasty... Thats the problem with people now adays they dont look at the problem from the other side.

Cool, so let's have a little test then.
Why do you think some people don't want to allow gays to be married?

Because they probably think that they are nasty people, just because they have a different sexual preference. And also probably because they dont like them. Its the same thing we went through in the 60's with the blacks. Why didnt people like them? Because they wanted to be equal, just the same as the gays want to be now...Its the same thing.

Yes, gay people should be aloud to be married too. If they werent that would be like telling straight people that they couldnt get married because they are straight and thats just nasty... Thats the problem with people now adays they dont look at the problem from the other side.

Cool, so let's have a little test then.
Why do you think some people don't want to allow gays to be married?

Because they probably think that they are nasty people, just because they have a different sexual preference. And also probably because they dont like them. Its the same thing we went through in the 60's with the blacks. Why didnt people like them? Because they wanted to be equal, just the same as the gays want to be now...Its the same thing.

No no no, thats far too short-sighted. Demonizing your 'opponents' in this manner is not a proper way to handle a debate.
You berate them for 'not looking at the problem for the other side', and then write them off as a bunch of immature brats. How's this for the pot calling the kettle black?

Yes, gay people should be aloud to be married too. If they werent that would be like telling straight people that they couldnt get married because they are straight and thats just nasty... Thats the problem with people now adays they dont look at the problem from the other side.

Cool, so let's have a little test then.
Why do you think some people don't want to allow gays to be married?

Because they probably think that they are nasty people, just because they have a different sexual preference. And also probably because they dont like them. Its the same thing we went through in the 60's with the blacks. Why didnt people like them? Because they wanted to be equal, just the same as the gays want to be now...Its the same thing.

No no no, thats far too short-sighted. Demonizing your 'opponents' in this manner is not a proper way to handle a debate.
You berate them for 'not looking at the problem for the other side', and then write them off as a bunch of immature brats. How's this for the pot calling the kettle black?

Yes, you have to look at both sides to get the full effect. You have to put yourself in the other person position before you single them out. Lets say you were in love with hmm..lets just use the hot girl/guy (opposite of what ever sex you are) down the street. Ok, now you love her and you want to be with her, but you cant get married. Nobody wants to see you two in public kissing, or even stand the thought of you two being together. So you cant get married. You would be angry and want to get married too.

This post is directed at the people who think Being gay is wrong because of what the bible says.
*warning, long read*

first read this.

http://blogs.salon.com/0001772/2003/02/18.html

then this.

http://blogs.salon.com/0001772/thebibleandhomosexuality.html

comments?

comment:

its worth reading. the man knows his stuff and makes extremely important points that all chrisitans should take to heart.

They both came up as page cannot be displayed. :cry:

In fact, gay sex is healthier the boy/girl sex, because it doesn't spread as many STDs'. Being Gay/lesbian is a normal healthy thing.

While I agree that being gay/lesbian/bi is completely healthy from a mental perspective, you are wrong about gay sex being more healthier than straight sex, especially with regards to gay men.

There is a reason why AIDS was originally referred to as GRID (Gay Related Immunodeficiency Disease). It is because it was primarily spread by gay men. The reason for this is that when having anal sex, small sores often open in the anus and on the penis due to the friction, allowing the blood and semen of both partners to mix. If one of the parties is infected, they're both pretty much screwed. While this also occurs during vaginal sex, it is not as common, as women produce a natural lubricant.

Having said that, anyone who gets busy with an unknown partner without protection is a moron anyways.

Dr. Paulywood

Also, gays have the right to marry, just not other boys. I don't feel I'm being discriminated against because I cant marry boys. Why should they?

You're a dumbass. The whole point of marriage is to allow people who love each other to make a legal committment to share resources. If you don't/can't love a member of the opposite sex, this right is denied to you.

They both came up as page cannot be displayed. :cry:
try it again, i have a crappy connection and it came right up for me

First off, yes, I'm gay. I'm a woman who loves another woman. Now that we have that out of the way...

Don't mess with the status quo on this! Do you have any idea what's going to happen if you pass a law allowing us to marry? My hunny will start nagging on me every day. "So? Nu? When are we going to get hitched? When are you going to make me an honest woman?"


Kronberg,
I think that you should have the right to be as miserable as everyone else!
Hell, as an ordained minister, I'd perform the ceremony myself!

--Rev. Paulywood, Universal Life Church

Should straight people be allowed to marry :?:

This brings up a REALLY good point. Marriage is not about love, at least it wasn't originally. It was originally set up as a mechanism of social control.

I believe that society has progressed to a point where such social controls are not necessary anymore, save for an 80- 90% portion of a population who seriously believes that their imaginary friend will throw lightning bolts at them if they hump people without being married to them.

The reason for this is that when having anal sex, small sores often open in the anus and on the penis due to the friction, allowing the blood and semen of both partners to mix.
You make it sound so romantic!

For those who think gay marriage is wrong because the bible says so, Homosexuality was only directly referred to once by Leviticus (and he only talked about man/man). On That subject, here is an interesting letter (I hope all you folks who think being gay is wrong cause the bible says so doesn't eat pork!):
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

----------------------------------------------------------


For those of you who think being gay is a choice, because you know people who were gay and are now 'happily straight': Being straight or gay is not black and white.

While some people will be 100% full gay or straight, many of us fall somewhere else in the sexual preference curve (just pick up any recent Pyschology textbook on gender it will tell you the same).

Animals are gay too. Have you heard about the gay penguin couple who adopted a baby penguin in Central Park in New York City? Do you think these Penguins woke up one day and thought with their little bird brains "Gee, I think I want to be gay". . come on . .
-------------------------

For those who thing it is just plain wrong? What is your opinion of people who are born with both sexual organs, or none at all? Can they marry?

If marriage is about procreation, can infertial (sp) couples marry?

Homesexuals have grown up in the same society as the rest of us. They watched the same TV shows, saw the same movies about 'happiliy ever after', getting married, having kids, growing old with your partner. They want the same things as a straight couple would want out of marriage. But of course, they are told, "nope, sorry, you aren't allowed to participate in this important part of society because you are gay. "

I know that if I were gay and wanted to get married, being told I couldn't would break my heart.

The reason for this is that when having anal sex, small sores often open in the anus and on the penis due to the friction, allowing the blood and semen of both partners to mix. If one of the parties is infected, they're both pretty much screwed.

Or maybe it was because of the social stigma attached to homosexuality that caused a lack in specific sexual education, contraceptives and a feeling of fatalism in homosexuals?

I think that homosexuality is wrong because it is an illness. It's something gone wrong and nobocy can deny that. If humans were created to be gay, there would be only one gender.

I think that homosexuality is wrong because it is an illness. It's something gone wrong and nobocy can deny that. If humans were created to be gay, there would be only one gender.

um, many people can deny that. especially since research has repeatedly confirmed that homosexual behavior is a positive adaptation in many species, including our nearest genetic relatives (the chimps). if humans were designed to be ASEXUAL we would all be one gender, but we are actually designed to be bisexual so there are two. we cannot have sexual reproduction with only one gender, please review basic biology.

seriously, morons, crack a book. you're an utter embarassment to the human race if you let yourself remain this stupid.

I think that homosexuality is wrong because it is an illness. It's something gone wrong and nobocy can deny that. If humans were created to be gay, there would be only one gender.

I think that the major fault of you argument is that no one can prove that we were created at all, much less for any specific purpose. Without this proof, your argument is based on a false, or at least unprovable, premise.

I personally think that anyone who believes that they were created for a "purpose" has a bit of a self-esteem problem. I find it far more comforting to think that my only purpose in life is the purpose that I freely choose for myself.

The reason for this is that when having anal sex, small sores often open in the anus and on the penis due to the friction, allowing the blood and semen of both partners to mix.
You make it sound so romantic!

What can I say, I'm a poet at heart!

--P.

I think that homosexuality is wrong because it is an illness. It's something gone wrong and nobocy can deny that. If humans were created to be gay, there would be only one gender.

I think that the major fault of you argument is that no one can prove that we were created at all, much less for any specific purpose. Without this proof, your argument is based on a false, or at least unprovable, premise.

I personally think that anyone who believes that they were created for a "purpose" has a bit of a self-esteem problem. I find it far more comforting to think that my only purpose in life is the purpose that I freely choose for myself.

The reason for this is that when having anal sex, small sores often open in the anus and on the penis due to the friction, allowing the blood and semen of both partners to mix.
You make it sound so romantic!

What can I say, I'm a poet at heart!

--P.

If humans were created to be gay, there would be only one gender.

If humans were created to use the internet, they'd have network cables comming out of their ass.
Guess you'd better log off.

Gays make me uncomfortable in my sexuality, so no, they should not marry.

I can't tell you how funny that actually is.

See, I'm straight. And I know it. I can't see guys in that way. So I have no problem saying things like "Oh man, he's pretty hot." 'Cause said guy IS. Sure, I'm not attracted to him, but I know that he looks good :p

Funny thing is, I've been called gay before. Which I think is absolutly hilarious.

Well, now adays, people are to messed up. Everybody has this stupid idea that we can decide what and who we are - and whatever we decides to be, it's alright. We're no more than an animal. We have our instinct. You know that feeling which you can't explain? Maybe you just know that someone's watching you, or that something's going to happen? That's nothing surreal, nothing supernatural - it's only our instinct. The reason why so many humans deny this is that it makes us no more than any other animal. Oh my God! We're not some special creation with some kind of genius intellect.

Homosexuals is in every biological way not natural. You can put your penis in another mans ass or eat another girls pussy for all I care - but it's still not the way it's supposed to be. It's so hard for you to see that it's just a sexual corruption - like, as I said, paedophilia or whatever you please. It's to politically oncorrect to think and speak that it isn't normal. You have to love everybody - the whole world! Because there aren't any differences between homosexuality and heterosexuality, men and women, black and white.

I'm so sick of people saying "homosexuality isn't natural..." How much of what humans do IS natural? Wearing clothes, using the Internet, driving cars?

If being gay isn't natural, then why was I born that way?

it's really pretty simple - if two people love each other, why shouldn't they be married? perhaps you homophobic people think you are carrying out god's will by making gays suffer, but let me tell you - you are not. if god wanted gay people not to exist, why did he create them? and why did he offer them no choice in the matter? i am a straight guy, do i see gay or lesbian people going on marches, chanting obscenities, pushing for laws to stop ME getting married? maybe we shouldn't stop gay and lesbian people getting married. maybe the various disgusting nazi sympathisers on this forum, and those equally bad american-republican-homophobes are a more deserving target.

1) Why don't most people realize that the gays want to be married with a civil contract (for the rights a married couple has) and not be married in a church? See: marriages are LEGAL, CIVIL contracts which, in most cases, a church recognizes as holy matrimony. Its kind of like an add-on, or something else on the side. Did you see any gay couples getting married at a church? No. Did you see the gay couples getting married at the court house? Yes.

2) I'm tired of the homphobes as well. Most, if not all, of my friends are homphobic. Its really annoying because they always get paranoid if I say something that sounds even remotely gay! (I'm not gay, by the way). It's really frustrating have to be close-minded or else becoming a pariah.

oh, also - are gay people not functioning members of society too? do they not pay their taxes, go to work, manufacture the goods we enjoy day by day? if they put in their hard work as members of society, who are you to stop them doing the same things that productive straight members of society are allowed to do? Would you tamper with their lives just for being who they are? Do you really find them that alien and strange? I have a gay friend at college, and I relate to him, talk to him, enjoy trips out, dope smoking sessions, revision and the PS2, the EXACT SAME way as with my straight friends. so i'm sorry - if you object to gays on these grounds, then they are not the problem - you are.

Homosexuals is in every biological way not natural. You can put your penis in another mans ass or eat another girls pussy for all I care - but it's still not the way it's supposed to be. It's so hard for you to see that it's just a sexual corruption - like, as I said, paedophilia or whatever you please. It's to politically oncorrect to think and speak that it isn't normal. You have to love everybody - the whole world! Because there aren't any differences between homosexuality and heterosexuality, men and women, black and white.

but rotan, there is nothing that gay people do that heterosexual people dont do too.

nothing

i dare say there is nothing that gay people do that your own parents havent tried in their time. the only difference is that in a gay couple both people are of the same gender. the acts are the same.

dont be so naive, if its OK for straight people to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own homes, its OK for gay people to do it too.

as previously poionted out I think alot of the issues people have surround the word marriage and it's usual religious conections.
I can see why some one who is very religious may object to marriage but can see no defence of an objection to a civil union giving all the rights, responsibilities etc of marriage.
A bit of an play on words but if it keeps people happy is it too much to do?

I'm glad to have a group of friends that are very open, one of my best friends is Bi, I'm an active part of the school's GSA, and I just want to say that, if God created Man, then didn't he also create homosexuality? If God created everything, then he must have created all these "mental diseases" that people talk about. Therefore, they must be there for a reason.

(This isn't my only justification, I'm just using GOD as an arguement.)

I'm glad to have a group of friends that are very open, one of my best friends is Bi, I'm an active part of the school's GSA, and I just want to say that, if God created Man, then didn't he also create homosexuality? If God created everything, then he must have created all these "mental diseases" that people talk about. Therefore, they must be there for a reason.

(This isn't my only justification, I'm just using GOD as an arguement.)
I would stay away from the whole God created homosexuality so it must be ok argument. It's been shot down too many times.
Stay away from religion and just say 'it's ok with me, doesn't affect me so why should it bother me?'.
I am happy for people to disagree with any aspect of my lifestyle as long as they keep it to themselves. I eat meat, wouldnever think of making a vegi do it and would hope they would never try and stop me.
If someone is gay, it does not affect me so why should it bother me? Even if I were religious, the Bible tells Christians to condem the action not the person, so I should still then be able to be ok with some one who is gay.

Love the sinner, hate the sin, eh? I agree with Kirtondom.

I have nothing against Homosexuals, do as they like.
But I am against their marriage. Not the act of it, it's just the name of it.

I believe the word 'marriage' should be a thing for only a man and a woman to have.

For homosexuals, they should have some sort of 'legal entity', but not under the word 'marriage'. (which is the same thing).

I'm not saying this because I discriminate against them.
I dunno why, it just doesn't feel right, thats what I think. :roll:

Why is it that hard to understand... It is not about being homophobic, hating gays or telling that your friend who "is gay and a nice person" isn't, it's only a right belonging to men and women willing to mary, nothing else. Oh, gay poeople can love each other, but why ask for rights that they do not diserve... I mean, if three, four, even ten people want to mary together, even if they love eache other, should we allow them? "Of course not, it's the union between only two people". Alright. The union between a man and a woman, period. Hmm I can feel the flames coming :roll:

:arrow: Marriage \Mar"riage\, n. [OE. mariage, F. mariage. See Marry,
v. t.]
1. The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal
union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife;
wedlock; matrimony.

Definitions change.

Everybody has this stupid idea that we can decide what and who we are - and whatever we decides to be, it's alright.

Yes, that is a stupid idea indeed. It would truly be a horrible world if people were allowed to have some semblance of free will.

We are the ONLY entities who can decide what we are, as our existence only has the meaning that we give it. It's not only "alright" for us to decide who we are, it is necessary. Sucks to be a sentient being, doesn't it?

--P.

Definitions change.

But like what I said, could it be between 10 people? What if we begin to change definitions like that, just to please people? Could we redefine the world to be "The legal union between 10 people loving each other"?
I know that's not really plausible, but still, it is an example of how we could mess things up... :shock:

Definitions change.

But like what I said, could it be between 10 people? What if we begin to change definitions like that, just to please people? Could we redefine the world to be "The legal union between 10 people loving each other"?
I know that's not really plausible, but still, it is an example of how we could mess things up... :shock:

How would that mess things up?

Definitions change.

But like what I said, could it be between 10 people? What if we begin to change definitions like that, just to please people? Could we redefine the world to be "The legal union between 10 people loving each other"?
I know that's not really plausible, but still, it is an example of how we could mess things up... :shock:

And what is wrong with 10 people marrying if they love each other? I'd be for that if only because it would create so much paper work the state might get out of the business of marriage altogether.

Hey. We could just call gay marriages something else then.
Like a marmot.
Or something.

...
Yeah, just an idea.

Definitions change.

But like what I said, could it be between 10 people? What if we begin to change definitions like that, just to please people? Could we redefine the world to be "The legal union between 10 people loving each other"?
I know that's not really plausible, but still, it is an example of how we could mess things up... :shock:

How would that mess things up?

Changing definitions freely is dangerous, don't you think? Of course definitions change, some words had a completely different meaning some decades ago. But the marriage definition has been quite steady for centuries, and allowing to change it may result in a following of revendications and pressures from minorities regarding definitions that seem to give an advantage lawfully to some but are actually quite reasonable and are criticized for the wrong reasons, ie "they have the right to prove their love!"...
Why should a gay couple have the right to marry and a community of 10 happy guys who love each other shouldn't?
They could do the same, whine about people being discriminatory and not letting them having the right to love each other legally...
I'm just trying to raise some issues here, because everyone on this board seems to think that because one doesn't want gay to marry he must be some king of right wing closed-minded wacko...

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Why is it that hard to understand... It is not about being homophobic, hating gays or telling that your friend who "is gay and a nice person" isn't, it's only a right belonging to men and women willing to mary, nothing else. Oh, gay poeople can love each other, but why ask for rights that they do not diserve... I mean, if three, four, even ten people want to mary together, even if they love eache other, should we allow them? "Of course not, it's the union between only two people". Alright. The union between a man and a woman, period. Hmm I can feel the flames coming :roll:

:arrow: Marriage \Mar"riage\, n. [OE. mariage, F. mariage. See Marry,
v. t.]
1. The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal
union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife;
wedlock; matrimony.

I've posted this before, but what the heck;

http://workingforchange.speedera.net/www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/wfc/TMW03-03-04.gif

And while we're at it;

http://workingforchange.speedera.net/www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/wfc/TMW11-19-03.gif

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

Take it back a step.

If we deny child molesters the right to marry small children, what's next?

That form of argument is ridiculous.

Child molesters cannot marry, because children cannot give consent

Same with zoophiliacs

No offense, but your logic is crap

Ok, the cartoon is funny, but kind of ridiculous too
The segregationist past of the United States is not to take for an example, is it?
I live in Québec, and as far as I know, marriage here and in the rest of Canada, hence even in Europe has always been between a man and a woman, whatever the ethnicity or social status
There is no homosexual menace as shown in the cartoon... I just don't feel comfortable with the fact that it's now "cool" to be gay... I mean, thy didn't only make pressions for us to accept it (that was ok) but they glamourized it to such an extreme, and now they want to redefine marriage...

But oh well I know, I'm stupid and blablabla... It's fun to share ideas, not throwing insults because we don't agree on some controversial issue...
I haven't been flamed yet but that seems quite frequent that people resort on insults instead of expressing their point of view in a respectul way... anyways, my two cents.

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

You talk like there was an anti-marriage crusade... Gay people never had the right to marry, and deny their request to get it won't cause us to refuse people of different races to marry, as you seem to think that would happen...

Hey. We could just call gay marriages something else then.
Like a marmot.
Or something.

...
Yeah, just an idea.

Haha that reminds me of Kung Pow
"Killing is wrong... and bad. There should be a new stronger word for killing... Like badrong, or bedong! Yes! Killing is bedong! From this moment, I will stand for the opposite of killing, gnodab!"
lol :lol:

LOL I love that movie...

ALright, from now on gay's can't have marrige. What they CAN have, however, is garrige. All in favor?

im not jumping for joy that they got to get married(and im from mass) but if they get married do you pay more taxes?no
If they get married do they get better parking then you? No
If they Get married do they get a big fat government grant? No


what does it matter to you you dont get harmed from it.

im not jumping for joy that they got to get married(and im from mass) but if they get married do you pay more taxes?no
If they get married do they get better parking then you? No
If they Get married do they get a big fat government grant? No


what does it matter to you you dont get harmed from it.

Do you agree with every concept/idea/project that doesn't affect your income?

ill agree with it as long as it doesnt make any one elses life decline(unless nessecary)

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

Take it back a step.

If we deny child molesters the right to marry small children, what's next?

That form of argument is ridiculous.

Exactly! So why do people keep using it?

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

Take it back a step.

If we deny child molesters the right to marry small children, what's next?

That form of argument is ridiculous.

Exactly! So why do people keep using it?

Because they're retarded?

I'm just tired of that damn "slippery slope" argument.

It may lead to other people asking for marriages for some bizzare things, but that doesn't mean we should deny gay people the right to marry.

Let's turn that around shall we?
Let's assume we deny gays the right to marry, what's next? Refusing people of different races to marry? People of different religions? People of different social casts?
Will we ban free-willed marriages, and enforce them to all be pre-arranged at birth?

God I hope not.

Take it back a step.

If we deny child molesters the right to marry small children, what's next?

That form of argument is ridiculous.

Exactly! So why do people keep using it?

Because they're retarded?

Duuuuhhhhhuhhhhhh...uuuhyeah!

So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them.

I don't understand why I keep seeing this type of statement in debates like this. Why are people so paranoid that they think the government is going to force their churches to perform marriages? Or do they really just have that much of a misunderstanding of how the system works.

The government is not going to force your church to marry homosexuals, regardless of what laws get passed. As long as your church does not receive government funds to perform marriages (which they don't), the church can discriminate based on any criteria it wants to. If your church doesn't want to marry people who are 32 and were born on a Saturday, that is their perogative. Stop being freaking paranoid.

We're not being paranoid, it is a fact. They want to put a law in that says in no place are you allowed to speak out against being homosexual. This includes Church, because it is viewed as "discrimitory" even if it is your view. Therefore if we were to read the lines in our bible that call homosexuality immoral, the church could be sued or punished.

When right is wrong and wrong is right, thats an early sign of the end times. This law scares the crap outta me. I'll say what I choose to say. Also, gays have the right to marry, just not other boys. I don't feel I'm being discriminated against because I cant marry boys. Why should they?

you don't feel discriminated against because you don't want to do it. by your logic, i could argue that women shouldn't have the right to vote, becuase it wouldn't change my life at all. try to think of somebody other than yourself for once in your life.

and as far as laws forcing churches to marry homosexuals: it will never happen. the government has no place in religion. if, by some incredibly strange miscarriage of justice, such a law were passed it would be struck down by the courts at the first challenge.

Well, now adays, people are to messed up. Everybody has this stupid idea that we can decide what and who we are - and whatever we decides to be, it's alright. We're no more than an animal. We have our instinct. You know that feeling which you can't explain? Maybe you just know that someone's watching you, or that something's going to happen? That's nothing surreal, nothing supernatural - it's only our instinct. The reason why so many humans deny this is that it makes us no more than any other animal. Oh my God! We're not some special creation with some kind of genius intellect.

Homosexuals is in every biological way not natural. You can put your penis in another mans ass or eat another girls pussy for all I care - but it's still not the way it's supposed to be. It's so hard for you to see that it's just a sexual corruption - like, as I said, paedophilia or whatever you please. It's to politically oncorrect to think and speak that it isn't normal. You have to love everybody - the whole world! Because there aren't any differences between homosexuality and heterosexuality, men and women, black and white.

"unnatural" implies "does not occur in nature." i believe there are somewhere near 500 species that would beg to differ with that classification.

What this discussion comes down to is not the current definition of marriage, I think, but rather the philosophy behind it. Definitions change as philosophies change. So quoting a dictionary isn't the best way to go, here. If you think same-sex marriage is wrong on the basis of the definition of marriage, please provide your insights into the philsophy behind said definition. Otherwise, the discussion doesn't really go anywhere.

71% in favor, that 4% less than in Holland.
Must be the windmills.

Actually, I think the state should get out of the business of marriage. The government should allow civil unions for all with the rights, priveledges(sp?) and legal restrictions to dissolution that now apply to marriage licenses.

If you want to get married go to your church. Then the churches can put whatever restrictions they want on marriages within their flocks. I see the Morons going back to polygamy REAL quick!

Yes, children can give their consent. On what basis do you mean they can't?

And what's this idea about homosexuality not being a pervertion? What else would it be?

And to that argument about God creating humans. Well, if you're a christian, you belive this. But you also know that God gave man free will, and that it wasn't God, but humans, who created homosexuality.

But the marriage definition has been quite steady for centuries


http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=16523

Makes you think, doesn't it? :roll:

Sorry, just realized Hakartopia re-posted it on the previous page.

But you also know that God gave man free will, and that it wasn't God, but humans, who created homosexuality.

Really? And how exactly did we force animals to be homosexual then?

We invented the language; the word and the meaning of "homosexuality". Animals aren't living with the same gender, raising children and having that kind of a relationship.

We invented the language; the word and the meaning of "homosexuality". Animals aren't living with the same gender, raising children and having that kind of a relationship.

in fact, they are! lot's of species have been seen making a 'mistake' when tryin to reproduce themselves.

Yes, children can give their consent. On what basis do you mean they can't?

And what's this idea about homosexuality not being a pervertion? What else would it be?

And to that argument about God creating humans. Well, if you're a christian, you belive this. But you also know that God gave man free will, and that it wasn't God, but humans, who created homosexuality.

Children are not old enough to legally give their consent to do anything else; that's why they need a "guardian"

Therefore, they cannot get married. Use your brain.

What else could homosexuality be? That's a dumb question. It COULD very easily be a sexual orientation. But hey, that's looking at the facts, and who wants to do that.

And lastly, we have discussed this OVER, and OVER, and OVER again. it's like some people are sadobestialnecrophiliacs or somthing. BEING GAY ISN'T A CHOICE. People don't just wake up and say "You know what? I think I'm gonna be gay from now on!"

If we legalize gay marriage the next thing that will happen is people will be trying to legalize getting married to animals and being gay is horribly wrong

Slippery Slope fallacy.

::yawn::

We invented the language; the word and the meaning of "homosexuality". Animals aren't living with the same gender, raising children and having that kind of a relationship.

Wrong. (http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-06-10/591.asp)

There are also numerous instances of other species such as dolphins engaging in homosexual activities with other dolphins and even attempting mating with humans.

OMFG DOLPHINS N PENGUINS R TEH GAYZZ WE SHULD KILL TEHM

And what's this idea about homosexuality not being a pervertion? What else would it be?

If you cannot think of anything else, I'll just be giving a silent prayer for your sanity now.

They both came up as page cannot be displayed. :cry:
try it again, i have a crappy connection and it came right up for me

good pun there Ashmoria - intended or not intended :lol:

Love the sinner, hate the sin, eh? I agree with Kirtondom.

I have nothing against Homosexuals, do as they like.
But I am against their marriage. Not the act of it, it's just the name of it.

I believe the word 'marriage' should be a thing for only a man and a woman to have.

For homosexuals, they should have some sort of 'legal entity', but not under the word 'marriage'. (which is the same thing).

I'm not saying this because I discriminate against them.
I dunno why, it just doesn't feel right, thats what I think. :roll:


Oh, so you're advocating that we have a separate, but equal, systems?

Hmm. I do seem to recall hearing about something like that. Oh yes. That's right. Black and white children in segregated schools. Hmm. Separate? Yes. Equal? No.

Why is it that hard to understand... It is not about being homophobic, hating gays or telling that your friend who "is gay and a nice person" isn't, it's only a right belonging to men and women willing to mary, nothing else. Oh, gay poeople can love each other, but why ask for rights that they do not diserve... I mean, if three, four, even ten people want to mary together, even if they love eache other, should we allow them? "Of course not, it's the union between only two people". Alright. The union between a man and a woman, period. Hmm I can feel the flames coming :roll:

:arrow: Marriage \Mar"riage\, n. [OE. mariage, F. mariage. See Marry,
v. t.]
1. The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal
union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife;
wedlock; matrimony.

Appeal to Tradition fallacy.

Also, I don't see how polygamy is wrong.

After all, different cultures have different ideas about what a marriage is, and anthropologically speaking, our idea of marriage in this culture is relatively new. So being ethnocentric is not a good idea. The status quo does not stand up on its own as an argument.

I don't agree with being gay because to me it's immoral, but I do think they should get the same rights married couples get. So, let them be married in court, but we shouldn't force churches to marry them. Don't get me wrong, I love gays and lesbians just like everyone else. They are humans too, but I don't agree with what they do, it doesn't mean that I treat them any less equal. It's like not agreeing with something your friend does, but your still friends with them. You still love them.

I dislike it when people point their finger at me and call me wrong for saying "no" you want me to respect your opinion, so why can't you respect mine?

let's hear it for free market capitalism:!:

churches can refuse to marry, it's their right, government has no such right.

But can they be married in something other then a church?

That's the problem.

Gays should not be married. It is not just some book that says that, it is The Bible that says that. Lets think about this here. This is the Bible....the word of god. I think that should mean something to some of us. :?

And I'm sure it does in a very religious sense.

But the USA isn't a religious nation. Give proof why they can't be married in a place other then a church.

Gays should not be married. It is not just some book that says that it is The Bible that says that. Lets think about this here.

Are you saying we haven;t been thinking so far? That's rather rude isn't it?

This is the Bible....the word of god. I think that should mean something to some of us. :?

Word of God? Says who?

You all can take what insightful discussion this contains elsewhere; since this thread was started with the intent of flaming, it's getting shut down.