If it were irrefutably proven that being homosexual was something that was determined before birth (via genetics or during the prenatal enviroment) (Example: being black, asian, white, having FAS, born addicted to drugs, etc), that they had no control over said situation or had the ability to change it, and that being homosexual presented no danger to adopted children, would you still "hate" them?
Does anyone here hate homosexuals? Further, why does their being gay due to genetics make them any different than if they're gay due to other factors? Should we treat them differently? I don't believe so, though I've seen polls putting the number at greater than 50% that support homosexual marrige only because they believe it's genetic. What's the difference how they got there? They're as they are, period, and their treatment should have no dependence on the cause.
Because it seems to me that some people in the thread believe it's a conscious choice that they make and one that they can easily reverse. Others are against it because they think it will fvck up the children they adopt.
I guess everybody went through the whole bible isn't a good arguement against gay marriage thing already. So I won't bring it up
Are we talking behavior modification treatment here, or treatment by stoning? Seems to me the proper treatment is to allow them to marry whom they love. That and not children is the essence of marriage.
Every state should pass a law that gays should have to get married. How come they get all the breaks? Why don't they have to deal with divorce, custody, splitting the assets, monogomy, etc. like the rest of us. Who does apply the law of the womb in a dike divorce? What judge has the wisdom?
I think that love is the essence of marriage on a personal level, but do you really want the government in the business of regulating love by making it the essence of legal marriage?
Love may be the essance of marriage, but statistics lean toward it not being the essance of seperation. Divorce laws are all based on the law of the womb. Guys have been getting crapped on in divorce courts for generations and I can't wait to see how divorce courts will handle cases where there are either too many wombs or none. If marriage laws are going to change, the libes had best think about reworking divorce laws as well. They apparantly haven't thought that far ahead. They never do!
ArmchairAthlete
Diamond Member
- Dec 3, 2002
- 3,763
- 0
- 0
It never ceases to amaze me how much the right lavishes in their own bigotry and discriminating thought process.
This gay marriage ban sounds like a good idea ..... hear me out
1) The physical vessels in which we run around in are made for male / female union. You ever tried to plug a male plug into another male??? current doesn't flow.
2) I believe that under the law gay couples should be able to have the same rights benefits as heterosexual couples. But marriage is defined as a union of a male and female. You cannot force the church to accept the life styles of others.
3) Finally I and anyone else do not need to accept the life styles of others. This constant in your face homosexual propeganda is crazy. I dont know of any straight pride parades ... and if there was one .. do you not think homosexuals would be outragged??? Is it any different when the roles are reversed.
4) peoples sexual orientation is theirs alone ... no one regardless of sexual orientation should push their beliefs on others.
1) The physical vessels in which we run around in are made for male / female union. You ever tried to plug a male plug into another male??? current doesn't flow.
2) I believe that under the law gay couples should be able to have the same rights benefits as heterosexual couples. But marriage is defined as a union of a male and female. You cannot force the church to accept the life styles of others.
3) Finally I and anyone else do not need to accept the life styles of others. This constant in your face homosexual propeganda is crazy. I dont know of any straight pride parades ... and if there was one .. do you not think homosexuals would be outragged??? Is it any different when the roles are reversed.
4) peoples sexual orientation is theirs alone ... no one regardless of sexual orientation should push their beliefs on others.
So you poke fun at my post but offer no counter points or arguments ???? and that is an example of brillant thinking ???
And since my point of view is so wrong... is their a way to qualify yours as the right one, so I can send you your medal ??? Or is it better kept that people should not force their views on other such is point number 3 which you dismiss?
And since my point of view is so wrong... is their a way to qualify yours as the right one, so I can send you your medal ??? Or is it better kept that people should not force their views on other such is point number 3 which you dismiss?
Your stupididity is astounding, his response was WAY to kind.
There is no need to make any counter arguments, anyone with an IQ over 10 would realize that you never even managed to make a single valid point.
I love how you are saying that the "church shouldn't be forced to". Since when is the church in charge of the government?
THINK before you post and you might get replies other than people laughing at your blatant stupidity.
Well Captain asshat ... the topic of this thread has to do with same sex marriage.. where do u think the notion of marriage originated from. Again we have someone who offers no counter points or arguments what so ever .. instead results to personal attacks ...
so which one of us has the lower IQ ???
And yet again someone else trying to force his view on others, no arguments to back it up, just the typical school yard bully because I sad so mentality .... so what makes your views the correct ones ???
so which one of us has the lower IQ ???
And yet again someone else trying to force his view on others, no arguments to back it up, just the typical school yard bully because I sad so mentality .... so what makes your views the correct ones ???
Ah, so you are saying that the state should follow the bible?
I just didn't think even you were that stupid.
Read your bible again and notice the words "for life" which would make divorce illegal, the biblical definition isn't used AS IT IS, get it captain noclue?
You want me to refute your post? I might make you cry if i do.
1. Ehhhhh, i really don't know what to reply to some kind of extreme stupidity such as that, you are equating humans to electrical plugs? LMAO, your analogy is so fvcked up i must assume that your meth stash got emptied before you made that up.
2. The church can marry anyone they like to, but the LEGAL definition has NOTHING to do with the church.
3. Lots of different groups are the same, most notably are christian churces and groups who get money for just being christian. Remove ALL of it and you would scream as much.
4. They DON'T want to make you gay, you can relax and forget about that, what they want is same rights, not for EVERYONE to believe or act like they do, it's not like they are CHRISTIANS or some other group who actually DO act like that.
Is that better?
A new high for taken things out of context
Spin master flex .. I bow to you
"ah, so you are saying that the state should follow the bible" re-read my posts. They say nothing of the sort. But it seems you feel inclined to twist peoples words to your advantage.
is their a reason you are so mad and feel you need to belittle people to prove a point ?
And by the way I am aetheist .... So point four is moot.
Spin master flex .. I bow to you
"ah, so you are saying that the state should follow the bible" re-read my posts. They say nothing of the sort. But it seems you feel inclined to twist peoples words to your advantage.
is their a reason you are so mad and feel you need to belittle people to prove a point ?
And by the way I am aetheist .... So point four is moot.
I QUOTED YOUR ENTIRE POST YOU NUTJOB, HOW THE FVCK IS THAT TAKING IT OUT OF CONTEXT????????
You said it was the biblical definition and i proved you wrong, now either you stick to your guns and want the government to follow the definition or you STFU and realize that you are wrong.
I am NOT an atheist but i know how to spell it anyway.
*sigh* with every post you make you show just how big a fool you are, you should stop it before you hurt yourself.
The reason i am so mad is that your points are not worthy of discussion because they are stupid and way WAY out there, i have had more intelligent discussions with a crackhead who spoke a language no one else speaks.
READ the thread, understand what you are talking about, educate yourself before you spout your complete ignorance that has already been rehashed x500 but with a bit more intelligence than a hamster.
DO you understand what i am saying? Your points are so worthless that a kindergarten kid would feel offended for you trying to debate with him with such utter ignorance.
Its just an online fourm ....
And yet again more insults
No need to get so mad
perhaps some anger management courses would be wise
you still have yet to answer why your points are the correct ones ??
Or is just your overwhelming superiority complex?
proving points wrong ... maybe to yourself you have ... but thats it
and if my points are not worthy of discussion .. first why are you replying .. and second why is it you decide what is worthy of discussion? lastly if my points have been rehashed x500 what makes everyone with them wrong and you right ?
And yet again more insults
No need to get so mad
perhaps some anger management courses would be wise
you still have yet to answer why your points are the correct ones ??
Or is just your overwhelming superiority complex?
proving points wrong ... maybe to yourself you have ... but thats it
and if my points are not worthy of discussion .. first why are you replying .. and second why is it you decide what is worthy of discussion? lastly if my points have been rehashed x500 what makes everyone with them wrong and you right ?
This is 'tarded. Klixxer is the only one of you 2 that makes an argumnet and your comeback is.
I DONT BELIEVE YOU.
good one
Klixxer: 1 Bonkrowave: -1
I subtracted a point because you used the church to argue your point then said you are an atheist.
I DONT BELIEVE YOU.
good one
Klixxer: 1 Bonkrowave: -1
I subtracted a point because you used the church to argue your point then said you are an atheist.
I actually, honestly thought you were joking the first time i read them, i thought you were being sarcastic, but after reading your reply to Moonbeam i understood that you were actually serious.
I have nothing against christians, atheist, muslims, gays, people of any race or preference but what i DO hate are people who won't accept that in a society you have a variety of people, all different and that the rules of the society are there to prevent discrimination, not enforce it.
I just hate blatant stupid bigots, that is why i replied to your posts.
You contradict yourself in one single post amazing...
You say you dont discreminate against anyone
then say u hate blatant stupid biggots .. are the not entitled to rights ???
common bud dont take everything so seriously.
Again you twist my words ... if you read the first post the point I make is that same sex couples should have the same rights as everyone else. But you choose to ignore much of what I have said.
Anyway good luck with that temper.... must make you a hit with the ladies
Have a nice life
oh and the other chap who threw his two cents from the peanut gallery. Their is no need for personal attacks, or comebacks ... and what is this I dont beleive you ?? try to make sence ... ummmmmmmmmmmmmm-K The point was marriage originated from the church .... the church says marriage is between a man and wome .... I have no problem with same sex people being united or forming a union... but marriage is by definition between a man and women.
You say you dont discreminate against anyone
then say u hate blatant stupid biggots .. are the not entitled to rights ???
common bud dont take everything so seriously.
Again you twist my words ... if you read the first post the point I make is that same sex couples should have the same rights as everyone else. But you choose to ignore much of what I have said.
Anyway good luck with that temper.... must make you a hit with the ladies
Have a nice life
oh and the other chap who threw his two cents from the peanut gallery. Their is no need for personal attacks, or comebacks ... and what is this I dont beleive you ?? try to make sence ... ummmmmmmmmmmmmm-K The point was marriage originated from the church .... the church says marriage is between a man and wome .... I have no problem with same sex people being united or forming a union... but marriage is by definition between a man and women.
Oh fvcking HELL, i hate bigots with all my heart but i don't want them to be discriminated against!
Until you get the difference between personal emotions and approved discrimination you will never get anything.
Marriage IS by definition between a man and a woman but it also IS by definition FOR LIFE. (which would be hell, i mean, i can't imagine what being forced to live with my ex wife would be like), either you are ok with the government enforcing religious ideas or you are not.
That means that the legal definition has changed more than once, but i have already said that about 10 times in this thread, you just fail to understand what you read.
Take your bigotry and shove it kiddo.
Its perfectly clear these are your personal emotions .... dont kid yourself
Anyway you made my day ... seeing someone consumed with rage only makes me feel better about myself. I leave the office happy...
Its a safe bet you will continue to steam for some time
Anyway you made my day ... seeing someone consumed with rage only makes me feel better about myself. I leave the office happy...
Its a safe bet you will continue to steam for some time
I don't steam, it's not that i get physically angry, but i really DO hate bigots like you.
Actually, hate is the wrong word, i pity you.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter