last time i checked, seperate but equal was unconstutional because it was inherently unequal!
good for them!
good for them!
I didn?t think so Pman. If you are going to level charges against someone back it up.
Accuse someone of hate speech and not respond to explain your charge.
Here's something I haven't seen yet.. Any thoughts?
The concept of "civil unions" is actually far more liberal and waffling than allowing gay marriage. While it seems extreme to those who have attached a moral basis to heterosexual marriage, legalizing gay marriage would only allow men / men or women / women to participate in the already existing institution of marriage. Civil unions are, on the other hand, a new, unexplored, and undefined terriroty. Why does this matter?
Those of you that are making arugments like "gay marriage will let anyone get married, marry brother, sister, dad, dog etc." really should be more worried about civil unions than gay marriages. A civil union, if given most of the rights of a marriage, would almost have to encompass a far greater variety of pairings than a definition of marriage that included gay couples would. Why? Because the concept of civil unions is borne out of the domestic partner ideaology. Now almost anyone can be your domestic partner if they live in your household and you both swear to it. Think of the mess that bringing this definition of a "couple" to the legalities involved in marriages would be.
The other thing to point out, is that with the exception of the 45 states who have recently added it, marriage was not defined as "between a man and a woman" except for when tinged with Christian or other morality. Our country explicitly forbids the enforcement of religous morality on it's populace. Why do you think those pilgrims came here in the first place?
Basically the reason the definition needs to be put in place is because there are so many people morally opposed to the idea of gay people being able to marry one another. Why this is boggles my mind, as legitimizing gay relationships would do amazing [good] things to the stability and health of this population.
The court system can't ultimately do an end run around the entire legislative branch of the government, so it remains to be seen what will happen with this. It is pretty much for sure that it won't be legal but in the most liberal of states (Mass, Oregon, Wisconsin, Vermont, etc..) but why not let the states make their own minds up about it? If you don't like the laws in your state, lobby to change them or move. That's the great thing about the US. Or at least it's supposed to be. Persecution of people because of their biological nature is not. Who are gay peope hurting? If you put aside religious morality, there is no ethical reason for gay people to be treated any differently than anyone else. I haven't seen one single argument that says anything to the contrary.
Besides, anyone wonder why this is such a major issue? Aren't there more important things to worry about, like why we are trillions of dollars in debt in the US? Or why we can spend a few billion on a war and not afford to provide people with even basic health care? Please let's not elect the president on whether or not he gives blessing to gay relationships. This is one of the most important people in the world, with an insane military at his command... Maybe we should be sure he's not a crackpot before we worry about his feelings on social policy. Just a thought.. Maybe some of the people who have enough money to pay for years of litigation to legitimize their relationship might spend their money helping some of the gay kids who don't have a home, or who have HIV at the age of 18.
The concept of "civil unions" is actually far more liberal and waffling than allowing gay marriage. While it seems extreme to those who have attached a moral basis to heterosexual marriage, legalizing gay marriage would only allow men / men or women / women to participate in the already existing institution of marriage. Civil unions are, on the other hand, a new, unexplored, and undefined terriroty. Why does this matter?
Those of you that are making arugments like "gay marriage will let anyone get married, marry brother, sister, dad, dog etc." really should be more worried about civil unions than gay marriages. A civil union, if given most of the rights of a marriage, would almost have to encompass a far greater variety of pairings than a definition of marriage that included gay couples would. Why? Because the concept of civil unions is borne out of the domestic partner ideaology. Now almost anyone can be your domestic partner if they live in your household and you both swear to it. Think of the mess that bringing this definition of a "couple" to the legalities involved in marriages would be.
The other thing to point out, is that with the exception of the 45 states who have recently added it, marriage was not defined as "between a man and a woman" except for when tinged with Christian or other morality. Our country explicitly forbids the enforcement of religous morality on it's populace. Why do you think those pilgrims came here in the first place?
Basically the reason the definition needs to be put in place is because there are so many people morally opposed to the idea of gay people being able to marry one another. Why this is boggles my mind, as legitimizing gay relationships would do amazing [good] things to the stability and health of this population.
The court system can't ultimately do an end run around the entire legislative branch of the government, so it remains to be seen what will happen with this. It is pretty much for sure that it won't be legal but in the most liberal of states (Mass, Oregon, Wisconsin, Vermont, etc..) but why not let the states make their own minds up about it? If you don't like the laws in your state, lobby to change them or move. That's the great thing about the US. Or at least it's supposed to be. Persecution of people because of their biological nature is not. Who are gay peope hurting? If you put aside religious morality, there is no ethical reason for gay people to be treated any differently than anyone else. I haven't seen one single argument that says anything to the contrary.
Besides, anyone wonder why this is such a major issue? Aren't there more important things to worry about, like why we are trillions of dollars in debt in the US? Or why we can spend a few billion on a war and not afford to provide people with even basic health care? Please let's not elect the president on whether or not he gives blessing to gay relationships. This is one of the most important people in the world, with an insane military at his command... Maybe we should be sure he's not a crackpot before we worry about his feelings on social policy. Just a thought.. Maybe some of the people who have enough money to pay for years of litigation to legitimize their relationship might spend their money helping some of the gay kids who don't have a home, or who have HIV at the age of 18.
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
Anyone ever seen that T-shirt switching out the words for "silly rabbit Trix are for kids? Sorry that just popped into my head.
Anyhow States already are writing Laws that just because Adam and Steve got married in Mass does not mean they are married in Ohio etc.
Does it bother anyone that the judiciary wants to legislate? And even worse their common sense is questionable at best.
Yes it is my opinion and if you think I do not have a right to air it but same sex marriage is ok refer back to the common sense portion of the post.
Anyhow States already are writing Laws that just because Adam and Steve got married in Mass does not mean they are married in Ohio etc.
Does it bother anyone that the judiciary wants to legislate? And even worse their common sense is questionable at best.
Yes it is my opinion and if you think I do not have a right to air it but same sex marriage is ok refer back to the common sense portion of the post.
I could throw God into the mix and then this forum would really blow up. But I wont.. there may be children reading...
But I wont.. there may be children reading...Referring to the common sense portion of your post, the reason the court ruled as it did was because the logic of it's decision was compelled by common sense. You have confused common sense with bigotry. Were you not a bigot, you would be able to practice common sense. That is what common sense refers to, the ability to think unhindered by a thousand pounds of mental cabbage like that you carry. Every collection of bigots, as long as they live in some dark part of the universe like the fundamentalist brain banged religious American outback, think that their bigotry is common sense and they are completely blind to their ignorance by lack of exposure. That is why you bigots, when you step into a thread like this are shocked to discover, for the first times in your life, really, that you are a collection of backward pricks.Originally posted by: EXman
Anyone ever seen that T-shirt switching out the words for "silly rabbit Trix are for kids? Sorry that just popped into my head.
Anyhow States already are writing Laws that just because Adam and Steve got married in Mass does not mean they are married in Ohio etc.
Does it bother anyone that the judiciary wants to legislate? And even worse their common sense is questionable at best.
Yes it is my opinion and if you think I do not have a right to air it but same sex marriage is ok refer back to the common sense portion of the post.
But don't worry. If you could go back in time just a relatively short distance, your present day thinking on most matters would earn you the title of Liberal Assholes. You are only backward relatively speaking and in your own time. You are actually among the most advanced and liberal and enlightened human beings who have ever lived. Unfortunately, that isn't saying very much. but progress is progress.
Watching the Massachusetts Legislature debate the proposed constitutional amendment right now, here in Boston on the local PBS station. (Man, I never knew the constitutional process could be soooo BORING!!)
Hey, even thought it makes me uncomfortable to watch two gay guys kissing in public, (thought for some reason I find it cool when they hold hands in public, man that takes balls) I think that two people if they love each other badly enough, why not let them get married? I was very wishy washy on allowing gay folk to be legally married some time ago, but then I heard the Massachusetts SJC ruling last year that 'separate' is inherently unequal' and they are right. To me this is more of a question of civil rights and equality in this state/country, not some hyperbole argument about 'preserving the institution of marriage.' By the way, if more than 50% of straight couples get divorced, whom are we to deny that pleasure to gay couples.
So if you want to marry your significant other and go through all downsides that 'straight' married couples go through, then more power to ya!.
Hey, even thought it makes me uncomfortable to watch two gay guys kissing in public, (thought for some reason I find it cool when they hold hands in public, man that takes balls) I think that two people if they love each other badly enough, why not let them get married? I was very wishy washy on allowing gay folk to be legally married some time ago, but then I heard the Massachusetts SJC ruling last year that 'separate' is inherently unequal' and they are right. To me this is more of a question of civil rights and equality in this state/country, not some hyperbole argument about 'preserving the institution of marriage.' By the way, if more than 50% of straight couples get divorced, whom are we to deny that pleasure to gay couples.
So if you want to marry your significant other and go through all downsides that 'straight' married couples go through, then more power to ya!.
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
Moonbeam call me a bigot all you want (is this hitting home?) you missed the part where I said it was my OPINION.
Just because I do not agree with you you call me a bigot? Who cares that is your OPINION and I respect your right to it. Who has common sense now?
Move along and try to tell some n00b they don't have a right to their own opinion. An opinion that is in the majority as well.
btw at least I can control my language when some personally attacks me directly (most of the time.) It is the internet bud people are gonna have different views I thought you'd figure that out by now.
Just because I do not agree with you you call me a bigot? Who cares that is your OPINION and I respect your right to it. Who has common sense now?
Move along and try to tell some n00b they don't have a right to their own opinion. An opinion that is in the majority as well.
btw at least I can control my language when some personally attacks me directly (most of the time.) It is the internet bud people are gonna have different views I thought you'd figure that out by now.
Watching the Massachusetts Legislature debate the proposed constitutional amendment right now, here in Boston on ch 44
Looks like their typical session, just more grandstanding & BSing
Looks like their typical session, just more grandstanding & BSing
I thought you realized that my view is that you don't have an opinion, you have a bias. I gave you all the data that's required to realize that. Opinions are nothing if you can't support your view. It's just bigotry, like I said. You want to pretend you have a valid opinion. I'm telling you you don't. You have a bigoted opinion. You can't find a single rational for your opinion except it's how you feel. It's not like it isn't unsupportable balderdash, you know. You're entitled to your dumb opinion but don't expect that if you lay it out before others somebody isn't going to come along and call your bigotry what it is. That's my opinion and I'm right. You must live in the fantastical world where all thoughts are of equal value. They aren't. The word bigotry exists because there are bigots.
Updates on gay marriage debate: By a vote of 100-98, lMA awmakers meeting in constitutional convention to consider a ban on same-sex marriage have defeated the Finneran proposal, which defined marriage as the union of a man and woman, but left the establishment of civil unions up to the Legislature. A two-thirds majority was required.
Lawmakers are now considering the bipartisan Senate amendment that also bans gay marriage, but sets up civil unions.
Lawmakers are now considering the bipartisan Senate amendment that also bans gay marriage, but sets up civil unions.
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
nuff said about that :beer:
stop having a fit and settle down. Pretty funny though made me LoL in RL
Lastly I have a right to believe what ever I want. This is America bub don't dictate to your Queer Eye for the Internet BS. You Call it bigotry then the Majority of the nation is bigots? Please.
nuff said about that :beer:
What are you 5 years old?
Lastly I have a right to believe what ever I want. This is America bub don't dictate to your Queer Eye for the Internet BS. You Call it bigotry then the Majority of the nation is bigots? Please.
Nuff said my ass-------------->Originally posted by: EXman
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
nuff said about that :beer:
What are you 5 years old?stop having a fit settle down. Pretty funny though
Lastly I have a right to believe what ever I want. This is America bub don't dictate to your Queer Eye for the Internet BS. You Call it bigotry then the Majority of the nation is bigots? Please.
Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
- big·ot·ed /-g&-t&d/ adjective
- big·ot·ed·ly adverb
You hold a bigoted opinion which is purely emotional in nature and is unsupported by even a single shred of evidence. The source of your opinion is your own prejudice. That's why, although you are opinionated, you are also bigoted. All you have to do to understand what a bigot you are is to ask yourself why you have the opinion you do. You will quickly see that you don't know, that a lot of words come out that mean nothing, a lot of transparent and unexamined assumptions.
Lets have a closer look at your latest inane remarks:
"
What are you 5 years old?
" You are a bigot and come on line here and post your bigotry. You have no intellectual development at all and yet you call me five. You have an emotional reaction to gays that you translate into action, a stand against the human rights of others. I should not have a fit? Why. Look at history and the millions of lives lost and the masses of human suffering and misery bigots like you have wrought. It's not funny at all, but you don't want to take responsibility for your hate, and the cognitive dissonance makes you giggle.
"Lastly I have a right to believe what ever I want."
You have the right to believe the world is flat or that humans didn't evolve. You have a right to any and every stupid opinion you want. But you can't and don't support any of those with a shred of proof. The nut house if full of people like you. You have the right to think like a moron.
"This is America bub don't dictate to your Queer Eye for the Internet BS."
Hehe, this is so pathetic it hardly rates an response, but that's making assertions like you do. So lets see: "This is America", as if you knew what that means since you hold bigoted opinions against the Constitution, "bub" a cute turn of phrase designed to condescend, "don't dictate to your Queer Eye for the Internet BS"....well aside form the obvious fact that you are a very unaccomplished or non native English speaker, you only succeed in showing us the homophobia at the heart of your bigotry. You don't bother me with that sort of hate speech.
You Call it bigotry then the Majority of the nation is bigots?
That's right, I do. But it remains to be seen if it's true. Humanity can be very surprising. Bigots like you a few years back targeted blacks in the same way and were also a majority. Humanity is trying to grow up. You just happen to be at the back of the class. History will lump your kind with the fools who burned witches.
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
Sticks and stones bub you're such a whiner
Or just calling me names in general. I have not called you a name. I?ll get to emotions in a moment.
What do you want as fact or reasoning?
Homer calling sex between two men wrong and could lead to the downfall of civilization after practicing homosexuality himself for years and then seeing the light.
Or that AIDS is on the rise again in only one demographic group... homosexuals after 10 years of decline. Some even where it as a badge of honor or commitment toward their partner. Now that is LOVE
I support financially a group that brings people back from homosexuality, yes it can and does happen. Would you ever here about that in the liberal media? Never that is very dangerous secret. I bet the thought pisses some people off
Right here in my city 60 minutes did a report a few days ago, on a gay couple that have Quadruplets and they wanted more because only one of them is the birth father. My gay neighbor who knows them socially <shudder> told me that the Nanny is a drag queen! Do the math these are going to be some funked up kids. Now it gets even better they are splitting up a year after having the kids. Will the kids have 4 gay Dads and a Drag queen now as role models? Are you getting the point yet? No matter how you slice it these kids will adversely effected.
Oh another reason I am bitter about homosexual special rights is that our local government is out of money but the Mayor panders to homosexuals to have healthcare paid for their flavor of the month "Partner" (in a union or just a lover) even though the city counsel voted that down handily. They recommended later that we need better pay for police and firefighters. Our police force hires anyone now even convicted drug dealers as long as it is more than a year. Why cause the pay is so terrible that experiences officers leave to get higher paying jobs every month. And if you have a car accident after April the police will not respond unless there is an injury or it blocks traffic because the car will not move under its own power. Insurance rates are going to go up!!! They suggest you map out the accident yourself be in charge of getting witnesses. This has already happened to me it is a PITA. All of this cause the Police department cannot keep anyone here because one person, our mayor, is hell bent on being the PC police.
So these special rights for homosexuals are more important than basic police protection for the general public is not as important to our mayor to pander to special interest for special rights. A lawsuit is in the works and her public opinion is as low as Howard Deans.
Or the fact that my roommate I had while working at a major theme park was harassed, discriminated against and finally sexually assaulted by homosexuals because they said he "looked gay" and that he should stop reporting the harassment to the park management. At 19-20 how would you like that for your first sexual experience?
And let's think about homosexual acts just for a second it is in it self all about emotions isn't it? The last Fact was emotional as well. The emotions by a man for a man and a woman for woman this is about emotional feelings and not reasoning so using emotions to form an opinion is fair play. I know gay people and some are repulsed at the thought of having sex with the other sex. I am repulsed at the thought of two men. Is that wrong? No more than they are repulsed by having sex with a woman.
What else you want? You know I really do not care what else you need cause you are not going to change my mind or the minds of the majority of Americans remember we are all bigots in your mind. :beer:
Assumptions lets talk assumptions. Why because I don't feel like articulating my reasons to some whiner on the internet? Should I assume that you are homosexual from your fervent and emotional responses? Yes your responses have been the emotional ones remember this gem
Or just calling me names in general. I have not called you a name. I?ll get to emotions in a moment.By that you are a bigot towards me I suppose. You have that right! And by the same accord I have a right to be one as well if I wanted to.
What do you want as fact or reasoning?
Homer calling sex between two men wrong and could lead to the downfall of civilization after practicing homosexuality himself for years and then seeing the light.
Or that AIDS is on the rise again in only one demographic group... homosexuals after 10 years of decline. Some even where it as a badge of honor or commitment toward their partner. Now that is LOVE
I support financially a group that brings people back from homosexuality, yes it can and does happen. Would you ever here about that in the liberal media? Never that is very dangerous secret. I bet the thought pisses some people off
Right here in my city 60 minutes did a report a few days ago, on a gay couple that have Quadruplets and they wanted more because only one of them is the birth father. My gay neighbor who knows them socially <shudder> told me that the Nanny is a drag queen! Do the math these are going to be some funked up kids. Now it gets even better they are splitting up a year after having the kids. Will the kids have 4 gay Dads and a Drag queen now as role models? Are you getting the point yet? No matter how you slice it these kids will adversely effected.
Oh another reason I am bitter about homosexual special rights is that our local government is out of money but the Mayor panders to homosexuals to have healthcare paid for their flavor of the month "Partner" (in a union or just a lover) even though the city counsel voted that down handily. They recommended later that we need better pay for police and firefighters. Our police force hires anyone now even convicted drug dealers as long as it is more than a year. Why cause the pay is so terrible that experiences officers leave to get higher paying jobs every month. And if you have a car accident after April the police will not respond unless there is an injury or it blocks traffic because the car will not move under its own power. Insurance rates are going to go up!!! They suggest you map out the accident yourself be in charge of getting witnesses. This has already happened to me it is a PITA. All of this cause the Police department cannot keep anyone here because one person, our mayor, is hell bent on being the PC police.
So these special rights for homosexuals are more important than basic police protection for the general public is not as important to our mayor to pander to special interest for special rights. A lawsuit is in the works and her public opinion is as low as Howard Deans.
Or the fact that my roommate I had while working at a major theme park was harassed, discriminated against and finally sexually assaulted by homosexuals because they said he "looked gay" and that he should stop reporting the harassment to the park management. At 19-20 how would you like that for your first sexual experience?
And let's think about homosexual acts just for a second it is in it self all about emotions isn't it? The last Fact was emotional as well. The emotions by a man for a man and a woman for woman this is about emotional feelings and not reasoning so using emotions to form an opinion is fair play. I know gay people and some are repulsed at the thought of having sex with the other sex. I am repulsed at the thought of two men. Is that wrong? No more than they are repulsed by having sex with a woman.
What else you want? You know I really do not care what else you need cause you are not going to change my mind or the minds of the majority of Americans remember we are all bigots in your mind.
:beer:
EXman
Lifer
- Jul 12, 2001
- 20,079
- 15
- 81
That is the last straw. I have a Black sister-in-law I love her so I guess you continue to be wrong and continue to attack me cause I do not like Homosexual marriage?
OK I GET IT! Oh this is great I see it now your living in San Fransisco I guess you are not Biased at all.
Bottom line here folks is if you do not agree with Moonbeam you are a bigot. And you will not end a discussion with him on a civil note You have some deep seeded issues bub.
Just a couple things sir, although I don't really think you are going to be all that open to suggestions:
No one knew a darn thing about homosexuality in Homer's time.. They did a lot of interesting things that were attributed to "seeing the light" as it were.. many of them involved mass slaughter and torture. I don't so much think we want to use that as an example.
This is a sadly narrow-minded comment. What about the millions of nations in Africa where AIDS has been on the rise for years? There isn't but the littlest bit of public homosexuality there. HIV is not, and never has been a gay disease. Now there are statistics about inclining rates of HIV infection among young gay men, I believe 18-25 or something like that. Is this supposed to prove some point other than that our society is sad for letting it happen? Have you ever spent any time talking to a gay person that you didn't already have negative feelings towards? It isn't so easy to have committed relationships when everyone around you expects you, as one of those gay people, to be a sl*t. As far as the people with AIDS comment goes, there are people who find their AIDS status to be a ground for a common bond. Go pick on cancer patients and see how far that gets you. If you think people with HIV just "did it to themselves," then well, I guess that's a whole other can of ignorance.
It is, in fact, not a secret at all. It's called reparative therapy and it's a bunch of crap. Faith-based groups like Exodus, or pseudo-scientific ones like NARTH have pretty much zero for rates of long term success. Sure, you can scare anyone into thinking that they have to be straight to be saved, or in the latter case you can use aversion therapy to cause them pain when they think of someone of the same sex, but it doesn't last long, and isn't effective at anything other than causing depression. Groups like these you mention take people with all kinds of serious problems and give them false belief that they are fundamentally flawed and in need of fixing when in fact they probably just need someone to treat them with respect, and maybe have an ounce of real compassion for them. Not some half-baked pious compassion, but the kind that doesn't have a hidden agenda. Reagardless, the American Psychological Association debunked the idea that homosexuality was a disorder that needed treatment years ago. The only organizations that exist that still do this kind of thing (through some pretty heinous methods I might add) are filled with fringe psychiatrists who forgot that Freud was a fuzzy scientist at best, or by religious fundamentalists. Why are you so concerned with "helping" gay people become straight? If you really want to help gay people, contribute some money to your local LGBT community center, if there is one, where they do social work and therapy, and things that actually do help people.
Break up of couples always adversely affects children, regardless of the gender of their parents or their nanny. I suppose you would prefer them to be born to a nice crack-addicted person who ends up trying to leave them with a friend so he / she can get high. Being gay does not, in any logical sense, equate to anything other than it's definition. The kids won't be any more messed up than other kids who's parents get divorced or separate. The only reason they might end up "funked up" is because of people like you who make them feel like outcasts.
Good for your city for using the political system to voice their opinion. If the mayor isn't doing what the population wants her to do, then get rid of her. This has nothing to do with gay rights, it has to do with you having a suspect political officer.
I wouldn't care to be harrassed by anyone, regardless of their gender. Who cares how old I am? Are you assuming that any guy would love being harrassed by a woman or by women? It's unfortunate that he felt harrassed, and if he was sexually assualted it's horrible. Bad people exist in every demographic group and in every gender. This statement says nothing about gay people as a group.
There is nothing at all wrong with you being repulsed by the thought of sex with two men. What is wrong is that you condemn and generalize about people that differ from you. I don't think you know the slightest thing about what it is like to be a gay person, nor do I really respect your opinions on the matter, because you can't get past your ideas that being gay is somehow sick and perverted. You are projecting your feelings about the sex act onto the entire population of gay people, and using these feelings to justify opinions that affect public policy. Just because I feel revulsion about something doesn't give me license to condemn an entire group because of my personal feelings.
It is too bad, IMHO that your mindset is this rigid. Maybe the arguments have not been all that strong, but why do you feel the need to strike out against gay people? Why is it worth your time? <rant> When is negative, narrow minded thought, that is unmindful of the suffering of other people, ever worth anyone's time? </rant>
No one knew a darn thing about homosexuality in Homer's time.. They did a lot of interesting things that were attributed to "seeing the light" as it were.. many of them involved mass slaughter and torture. I don't so much think we want to use that as an example.
Or that AIDS is on the rise again in only one demographic group... homosexuals after 10 years of decline. Some even where it as a badge of honor or commitment toward their partner. Now that is LOVE
This is a sadly narrow-minded comment. What about the millions of nations in Africa where AIDS has been on the rise for years? There isn't but the littlest bit of public homosexuality there. HIV is not, and never has been a gay disease. Now there are statistics about inclining rates of HIV infection among young gay men, I believe 18-25 or something like that. Is this supposed to prove some point other than that our society is sad for letting it happen? Have you ever spent any time talking to a gay person that you didn't already have negative feelings towards? It isn't so easy to have committed relationships when everyone around you expects you, as one of those gay people, to be a sl*t. As far as the people with AIDS comment goes, there are people who find their AIDS status to be a ground for a common bond. Go pick on cancer patients and see how far that gets you. If you think people with HIV just "did it to themselves," then well, I guess that's a whole other can of ignorance.
I support financially a group that brings people back from homosexuality, yes it can and does happen. Would you ever here about that in the liberal media? Never that is very dangerous secret. I bet the thought pisses some people off
It is, in fact, not a secret at all. It's called reparative therapy and it's a bunch of crap. Faith-based groups like Exodus, or pseudo-scientific ones like NARTH have pretty much zero for rates of long term success. Sure, you can scare anyone into thinking that they have to be straight to be saved, or in the latter case you can use aversion therapy to cause them pain when they think of someone of the same sex, but it doesn't last long, and isn't effective at anything other than causing depression. Groups like these you mention take people with all kinds of serious problems and give them false belief that they are fundamentally flawed and in need of fixing when in fact they probably just need someone to treat them with respect, and maybe have an ounce of real compassion for them. Not some half-baked pious compassion, but the kind that doesn't have a hidden agenda. Reagardless, the American Psychological Association debunked the idea that homosexuality was a disorder that needed treatment years ago. The only organizations that exist that still do this kind of thing (through some pretty heinous methods I might add) are filled with fringe psychiatrists who forgot that Freud was a fuzzy scientist at best, or by religious fundamentalists. Why are you so concerned with "helping" gay people become straight? If you really want to help gay people, contribute some money to your local LGBT community center, if there is one, where they do social work and therapy, and things that actually do help people.
Break up of couples always adversely affects children, regardless of the gender of their parents or their nanny. I suppose you would prefer them to be born to a nice crack-addicted person who ends up trying to leave them with a friend so he / she can get high. Being gay does not, in any logical sense, equate to anything other than it's definition. The kids won't be any more messed up than other kids who's parents get divorced or separate. The only reason they might end up "funked up" is because of people like you who make them feel like outcasts.
Good for your city for using the political system to voice their opinion. If the mayor isn't doing what the population wants her to do, then get rid of her. This has nothing to do with gay rights, it has to do with you having a suspect political officer.
I wouldn't care to be harrassed by anyone, regardless of their gender. Who cares how old I am? Are you assuming that any guy would love being harrassed by a woman or by women? It's unfortunate that he felt harrassed, and if he was sexually assualted it's horrible. Bad people exist in every demographic group and in every gender. This statement says nothing about gay people as a group.
There is nothing at all wrong with you being repulsed by the thought of sex with two men. What is wrong is that you condemn and generalize about people that differ from you. I don't think you know the slightest thing about what it is like to be a gay person, nor do I really respect your opinions on the matter, because you can't get past your ideas that being gay is somehow sick and perverted. You are projecting your feelings about the sex act onto the entire population of gay people, and using these feelings to justify opinions that affect public policy. Just because I feel revulsion about something doesn't give me license to condemn an entire group because of my personal feelings.
What else you want? You know I really do not care what else you need cause you are not going to change my mind or the minds of the majority of Americans remember we are all bigots in your mind.
It is too bad, IMHO that your mindset is this rigid. Maybe the arguments have not been all that strong, but why do you feel the need to strike out against gay people? Why is it worth your time? <rant> When is negative, narrow minded thought, that is unmindful of the suffering of other people, ever worth anyone's time? </rant>
Originally posted by: EXman
Sticks and stones bub you're such a whinerAssumptions lets talk assumptions. Why because I don't feel like articulating my reasons to some whiner on the internet? Should I assume that you are homosexual from your fervent and emotional responses? Yes your responses have been the emotional ones remember this gem
By that you are a bigot towards me I suppose. You have that right! And by the same accord I have a right to be one as well if I wanted to.
What do you want as fact or reasoning?
Homer calling sex between two men wrong and could lead to the downfall of civilization after practicing homosexuality himself for years and then seeing the light.
Or that AIDS is on the rise again in only one demographic group... homosexuals after 10 years of decline. Some even where it as a badge of honor or commitment toward their partner. Now that is LOVE
I support financially a group that brings people back from homosexuality, yes it can and does happen. Would you ever here about that in the liberal media? Never that is very dangerous secret. I bet the thought pisses some people off
Right here in my city 60 minutes did a report a few days ago, on a gay couple that have Quadruplets and they wanted more because only one of them is the birth father. My gay neighbor who knows them socially <shudder> told me that the Nanny is a drag queen! Do the math these are going to be some funked up kids. Now it gets even better they are splitting up a year after having the kids. Will the kids have 4 gay Dads and a Drag queen now as role models? Are you getting the point yet? No matter how you slice it these kids will adversely effected.
Oh another reason I am bitter about homosexual special rights is that our local government is out of money but the Mayor panders to homosexuals to have healthcare paid for their flavor of the month "Partner" (in a union or just a lover) even though the city counsel voted that down handily. They recommended later that we need better pay for police and firefighters. Our police force hires anyone now even convicted drug dealers as long as it is more than a year. Why cause the pay is so terrible that experiences officers leave to get higher paying jobs every month. And if you have a car accident after April the police will not respond unless there is an injury or it blocks traffic because the car will not move under its own power. Insurance rates are going to go up!!! They suggest you map out the accident yourself be in charge of getting witnesses. This has already happened to me it is a PITA. All of this cause the Police department cannot keep anyone here because one person, our mayor, is hell bent on being the PC police.
So these special rights for homosexuals are more important than basic police protection for the general public is not as important to our mayor to pander to special interest for special rights. A lawsuit is in the works and her public opinion is as low as Howard Deans.
Or the fact that my roommate I had while working at a major theme park was harassed, discriminated against and finally sexually assaulted by homosexuals because they said he "looked gay" and that he should stop reporting the harassment to the park management. At 19-20 how would you like that for your first sexual experience?
And let's think about homosexual acts just for a second it is in it self all about emotions isn't it? The last Fact was emotional as well. The emotions by a man for a man and a woman for woman this is about emotional feelings and not reasoning so using emotions to form an opinion is fair play. I know gay people and some are repulsed at the thought of having sex with the other sex. I am repulsed at the thought of two men. Is that wrong? No more than they are repulsed by having sex with a woman.
What else you want? You know I really do not care what else you need cause you are not going to change my mind or the minds of the majority of Americans remember we are all bigots in your mind.
My goodness sakes alive. You are a bigot first class. I'm so glad you finally trotted out all the threadbare excuses you use for logic so we can see how absurd, truly is your thinking. Lets have a look:
"
By that you are a bigot towards me I suppose. You have that right! And by the same accord I have a right to be one as well if I wanted to."
You can rightfully call yourself a bigot but there's nothing bigoted about my attitude toward you. I'm not voting to limit your rights or taking a position that you should be silenced in any way. You are free to be a bigot in my book. I simply accurately described who you are. Nothing bigoted about that. You simply fit the definition.
"What do you want as fact or reasoning?"
(I want reason why Gay people who love each other shouldn't marry just like any other two people who meet legal requirements can do.)
"Homer calling sex between two men wrong and could lead to the downfall of civilization after practicing homosexuality himself for years and then seeing the light."
Who cares or even knows if Homer was even really gay. This is just more bigoted thinking put to back up your bigotry. It's anecdotal nonsense.
Or that AIDS is on the rise again in only one demographic group... homosexuals after 10 years of decline. Some even where it as a badge of honor or commitment toward their partner. Now that is LOVE
The existence of sexually transmitted disease has nothing to do with whether or not straight people can marry. STDs can be eliminated by banning sex. Your argument here is just hysteria and fear, and yes, more inane bigotry. Faithful loving marriages are the way to avoid STDs.
"I support financially a group that brings people back from homosexuality, yes it can and does happen. Would you ever here about that in the liberal media? Never that is very dangerous secret. I bet the thought pisses some people off
" It's pure religious bull sh!t propagated as science just like Creationism. Show me hard scientific evidence that sexual orientation is malleable. In fact you can do better than that for me. Go out and have sex with a man. If you can do it than I'll know I'm wrong or really more like you're actually gay. But never mind, just prove this to yourself and me. Fall in love with a guy. But please, not me. I won't be able to get it on with you in a million years and I'm not even bigoted toward gays. The only people who can have sex with both sexes are bisexuals, not straights or gays.
"Right here in my city 60 minutes did a report a few days ago, on a gay couple that have Quadruplets and they wanted more because only one of them is the birth father. My gay neighbor who knows them socially <shudder> told me that the Nanny is a drag queen! Do the math these are going to be some funked up kids. Now it gets even better they are splitting up a year after having the kids. Will the kids have 4 gay Dads and a Drag queen now as role models? Are you getting the point yet? No matter how you slice it these kids will adversely effected."
Jesus, more anecdotal BS from you. The number of kids that get screwed up by homosexual parents is dwarfed by the number screwed up by straights. Your thinking is on the level that we need to lock up all people in jail because some will commit a crime. Pathetic. This kind of thinking appeals to you because it plays right into your bigotry. You are an emotionally irrational case.
"Oh another reason I am bitter about homosexual special rights is that our local government is out of money but the Mayor panders to homosexuals to have healthcare paid for their flavor of the month "Partner" (in a union or just a lover) even though the city counsel voted that down handily. They recommended later that we need better pay for police and firefighters. Our police force hires anyone now even convicted drug dealers as long as it is more than a year. Why cause the pay is so terrible that experiences officers leave to get higher paying jobs every month. And if you have a car accident after April the police will not respond unless there is an injury or it blocks traffic because the car will not move under its own power. Insurance rates are going to go up!!! They suggest you map out the accident yourself be in charge of getting witnesses. This has already happened to me it is a PITA. All of this cause the Police department cannot keep anyone here because one person, our mayor, is hell bent on being the PC police. So these special rights for homosexuals are more important than basic police protection for the general public is not as important to our mayor to pander to special interest for special rights. A lawsuit is in the works and her public opinion is as low as Howard Deans."
Later you accuse me of having issues. Boy, you sure got it in for gays. I guess you're a bigot. If this is a real problem and not some sort of dementia of your addled brain, the answer is political. The problem is the Mayer, not gays. Straits are the ones with special rights. They are allowed to marry. If you're really against special rights, as you falsely claim, vote for gay marriage.
So these special rights for homosexuals are more important than basic police protection for the general public is not as important to our mayor to pander to special interest for special rights. A lawsuit is in the works and her public opinion is as low as Howard Deans.
"Or the fact that my roommate I had while working at a major theme park was harassed, discriminated against and finally sexually assaulted by homosexuals because they said he "looked gay" and that he should stop reporting the harassment to the park management. At 19-20 how would you like that for your first sexual experience?"
The subject is gay marriage, not a litany on how you became a bigot.
And let's think about homosexual acts just for a second it is in it self all about emotions isn't it? The last Fact was emotional as well. The emotions by a man for a man and a woman for woman this is about emotional feelings and not reasoning so using emotions to form an opinion is fair play. I know gay people and some are repulsed at the thought of having sex with the other sex. I am repulsed at the thought of two men. Is that wrong? No more than they are repulsed by having sex with a woman.
Please, you are very emotional and immature in your reasoning. No wonder you became so easily a bigot. There is a great deal of difference between emotion and having an opinion based on emotion. Feelings are not rational, but opinions need to be, except those of a bigot. See, that is the whole point. Your attitude toward gays is irrational as I have amply demonstrated to you. You are basically cuckoo. And the feeling you feel is hate not love. You also seem to be so cut off from yourself that you don't even realize there's a big difference between love and hate. Hate you learn by being hated, but Love comes from God. It's our soul.
What else you want? You know I really do not care what else you need cause you are not going to change my mind or the minds of the majority of Americans remember we are all bigots in your mind.
:beer:
Everybody has a right to be a bigot. I invite you to grow up. A while ago you were a bigot and didn't know. Now you do. Now there is a possibility to change. And whether you care or not doesn't mean a thing. I care, and that's what matters to me.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,862
- 84
- 91
just remember, as late as 1952 we had antimiscegenation laws in most the states. banning interacial marraige, and i'm sure most americans were for it. legislators with their righteous intolerance.
republicans, always fighting the fight for intollerance. masking fear, hatred, intollerance with religion.
its the land of the free, your free to be a bigot, just not to legislate bigotry. republicans need to stop worrying about the fanatics in the middle east and take a look at themselves.
heres some of our sorry history with just asians. http://www.epwijnants-lectures.com/ct_asian_americans.html
republicans, always fighting the fight for intollerance.
masking fear, hatred, intollerance with religion. its the land of the free, your free to be a bigot, just not to legislate bigotry. republicans need to stop worrying about the fanatics in the middle east and take a look at themselves.
heres some of our sorry history with just asians. http://www.epwijnants-lectures.com/ct_asian_americans.html
This argument is invalid. Pets cannot consent. If they could, they'd be sentient. If they were sentient, they'd be entitled to the same rights and responsibilities any human is.
To put it another way, say there were an extraterrestrial species in contact with us, with all our intelligence, similar physiology, and such. Are you willing to say an Earth man can marry an extraterrestrial woman, but two Earth men cannot? Don't deny your descrimintation, and don't hide behind the claim that it's eroding our society. 'Society' is not a static concept, otherwise we'd still be living in caves. People said the same thing about inter-racial relationships, about pornography, and about free speech.
Let society grow.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Discussion (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 8000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram