Gay people

[CrackRabbit]

corrected

Quoted for Fail!

 

[Moonbeam]

I am just bored with all of the gay threads. Yadda, yadda, yadda, Yoda.

You can talk about being gay again if you like.

I got bored with my bathroom so I went and pissed on my neighbor. But he understood and accepted right away when I told him I was bored. Being bored is a license to be, well you know what, eh?

 

[Moonbeam]

I dont understand why gay people are not allowed to marry in most states.

I don't get it

lol

Your purpose is to express how happy you are the world is full of bigots like you. It may be full of them and they may give you imaginary comfort, but you are doomed by a curse. You are a bigot, with a bigot's need to feel superior to somebody else, and all your life will be lived in fear that somebody somewhere will get the upper hand on you and you will become the object of bigotry. You are stuck with Karma and will have to watch our very carefully. You will not feel happy with who you are without feeling better than somebody else. You are cursed because the flip side of your bigotry is the feeling that you don't measure up. Poor poor little putzknocker would be a nobody without his bigot crutches.

Let it all go, Nick There is nothing wrong with you except you were made to feel there is.

 

[werepossum]

That is where you and I disagree, bonding between two (or even multiple ) people in general is beneficial to society even if they can't produce children.
Production of children can be done now without the actual need for a male/female relationship. Why limit marriage to that?

Heinlein had some strange views on government and society. It certainly made for good reading, but I'm not sure how well his ideas would work in practice.

I agree, although I think the bar should be not allowing what is considered to be beneficial for society, but rather banning what materially harms others. Boys dressing up like Goth girls or wearing their pants below their butt cheeks is certainly not beneficial to society; should we then ban this behavior merely because we see no benefit to society (and thus ourselves)? Maximize freedom by NOT interfering with individuals' behavior unless and until it materially harms others - or, like impaired driving, offers a clear and present danger of doing so.

If gays would push for civil unions with all the same benefits instead of changing the laws of what traditional marriage is most wouldn't care.

Then we would have two separate (but equal!) bodies of law that would inevitably begin to deviate. Supporters of "real marriage" would demand benefits that civil unions don't offer. A court would rule one way in a civil union case, then a different court would rule another way in a marriage case.

I'm really, really tired of hearing about gay issues. Treating gays legally just like straights (not only in the letter of the law but in its effect) would end this. Making civil unions for gays and marriage for "normal people" just continues the struggle for true equality versus protecting our traditional values.

Of course, one way civil unions could work would be for government to get out of the marriage business completely, civil unions for everyone and marriage as a separate, extralegal contract between you and your church. But as Bamacre so succinctly put it, "Government is in the everything business." For government to give up control of anything isn't likely. So the most likely way to solve this issue is to simply treat gay people like anyone else and let them marry whomever they wish. After a few years it won't even sting.

 

[nick1985]

Your purpose is to express how happy you are the world is full of bigots like you.

uh....what? Did you not read the OP?

 

[Narmer]

Welcome back.

 

[sao123]

That is where you and I disagree, bonding between two (or even multiple ) people in general is beneficial to society even if they can't produce children.
Production of children can be done now without the actual need for a male/female relationship. Why limit marriage to that?

Heinlein had some strange views on government and society. It certainly made for good reading, but I'm not sure how well his ideas would work in practice.

Really? What benefit?

ME-TO Personal benefits aside... (AKA, this is nothing more than a money grab - tax breaks, gay spouse health insurance, etc) how does society benefit from married gays?

 

[CrackRabbit]

Really? What benefit?

ME-TO Personal benefits aside... (AKA, this is nothing more than a money grab - tax breaks, gay spouse health insurance, etc) how does society benefit from married gays?

1. To make religious idiots like you show how bigoted and wrong they are.
2. Committed couples of any type are much more likely to have stable income and home environment.
3. Committed couples are less likely to spread STDs of any type.
4. Because they usually have stable incomes committed couples are more likely to make large purchases (houses, etc.) and stimulate the economy much better than single people.

I could probably think of more, but you are likely to dismiss them with bigoted nonsense anyways.

 

[pcgeek11]

Gay people can get married in every state, ... They just have to marry someone of the opposite gender.

 

[Brigandier]

For the same reason gays can't openly serve in the military. They are scary and will turn you gay.

 

[Moonbeam]

uh....what? Did you not read the OP?

Not sure, I'm getting some strong messages coming in through the fillings in my teeth. I might be hearing pictures and seeing sounds, the old synaesthesia kicking up again.

 

[ShawnD1]

I dont understand why gay people are not allowed to marry in most states.

I don't get it

lol

Some states don't yet have cable TV or internet. People get bored out of their minds so they harass gay people to kill time. You ever see those protests on TV? Try estimating how many people marching in an anti-gay protest have cable TV, satellite TV, or internet. If you guessed 0, you would be correct.

I like gay people because they rarely have 8 welfare babies

 

[gingermeggs]

HOmasectuallitee' is much like the jooish religion-
Anal
Introverted
Decisive
Secular

I like the Idea, but it isn't my cup of tea!

 

[gingermeggs]

Not sure, I'm getting some strong messages coming in through the fillings in my teeth. I might be hearing pictures and seeing sounds, the old synaesthesia kicking up again.

mercury amalgam filings can fuck ure brain dude!
This leads to self-hating!

 

[gingermeggs]

1. To make religious idiots like you show how bigoted and wrong they are.
2. Committed couples of any type are much more likely to have stable income and home environment.
3. Committed couples are less likely to spread STDs of any type.
4. Because they usually have stable incomes committed couples are more likely to make large purchases (houses, etc.) and stimulate the economy much better than single people.

I could probably think of more, but you are likely to dismiss them with bigoted nonsense anyways.

Have you been committed yet?

 

[gingermeggs]

i still don't understand, with the way law works for same sex de'facto relationships, why homosexuals want to be married- apart from rattling the straights cage @ya!
what's next after that?

 

[Moonbeam]

i still don't understand, with the way law works for same sex de'facto relationships, why homosexuals want to be married- apart from rattling the straights cage @ya!
what's next after that?

So does that mean you don't understand why straight people would want to marry?

 

[Zebo]

Mainly religion is to blame. In most religions marriage is a man woman deal and a large portion of societies are religious. As societies lose religion it's more acceptable like in secular west Europe and some parts of USA and israel.

Second is anthropological & societal custom, customs are slow to change. I mean this silly hand shaking is still with us long after necessity.

Third is financial related to 1 and 2. People do not want same sex benefits tax, employment, heath or otherwise let alone support it financially through socialistic insurance and taxes.

Forth is progation of species argument.

Fifth is wanting to control and prohibit what you don't understand or have value in.

 

[zsdersw]

I think the purpose for marriage is only secondarily as an expression of love. The purpose for the institution is to be a mechanism for having and raising children. Homosexual relationships don't meet this test, but male/female poly-marriage does.

For the purpose of expressing love, marriage is a poor choice.. for heterosexual relationships or any other.

Let us not assume, though, that the real reason why government (at any level) has a role in marriage is solely the raising of children. After all, females who are infertile or otherwise unfit to have/raise children can have their marriage recognized by the state and federal government.

No, the true reason for government involvement in and recognition of marriages is the beneficial nature of committed relationships. It's very much a "promote the general welfare" thing for government to incentivize and recognize committed relationships of all types for, if nothing else, the suspension of selfishness they represent. The decision to share your life with someone in such a deep way is an expression of your willingness to cooperate and to sacrifice for a greater good, whether that be the raising of children or a turning away from the avarice and sexual hedonism of the single life (particularly among my fellow homosexuals).

Society benefits from committed romantic relationships, and in more ways than just procreation.. and that is the best reason for government being involved with recognizing marriages, and also the best reason for it to recognize committed homosexual couples.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Have you been committed yet?

Ahh another religious idiot.

Psst, your bigotry is showing.

 

[gingermeggs]

Ahh another religious idiot.

Psst, your bigotry is showing.

Adam and Steve?

 

[techs]

Why does government have to be in the marriage business?

Exactly. If gays want to marry, why should anyone care.

In fact, Vermont was the first(or one of the first) to allow civil unions. Not because Vermont is liberal, but because Vermont is libertarian when it comes to individual rights. Old time "Yankees" cast votes for civil unions saying the government should stay out of personal decisions and out of peoples bedrooms. It was pretty bizarre to see grizzled old time Vermonters, some who still had outhouses, standing up for individual liberties for gays.

 

[manimal]

If gay people cant marry and get their marriage benefits than nobody should. End the marriage bailout and handouts....Why should a man with 3 exwifes have everyone of those ex wives qualify for his benefits but a commited same sex couple that stays together for 50 years pay into a system that never gives them anything back.

Rights should be equal for everyone. The anti gay rhetoric veiled as comedy in this thread is disgusting and only shows how purvasive this type of thought is. That douchebag hoping gay kids would kill themselves is the tip of the iceberg.

 

[hal2kilo]

hahahah what a goofball!! Bringing polygamy into the picture. Not even closely related to the topic.

rofl......

Well, it's better than Nemessis1 equating gayness to murder.