Not to offend anybody, but I’m against gay marriage. Who knows what that can lead to? If gay marriage is permitted, there’s a case for incest, and if there’s a case for incest, there’s a case for bestiality.
Look at it this way: adultery used to be punishable by death, then by a prison sentence, then it wasn’t punished at all, and now, even encouraged. I heard on the radio an ad for people in relationships who “want something more.”
These are the declining morals of today’s society. Many historians believe that the Roman empire ended because of the declining morals of the emperors and the empire’s citizens. Today, that the States are the superpower, its morals are declining. Gay marriage is a sign of that.
I know that a person’s sexual orientation is out of his or her control, but marriage isn’t.
“If gay marriage is permitted, there’s a case for incest, and if there’s a case for incest, there’s a case for bestiality.”
Holy Fuck, that was stupid. Now I have to go wash my brain out with beer just to make sure the stupid doesn’t get stuck in there and I start thinking like a right-wing radio talk show host told me to.
Wow.
kligor gay marriage is about love between two people of the same sex and
they want to show it to each other, and that’s fine by me. however there’s no
correlation of being gay and incest and beastiality each are seperate issues.thus icest is family touching or
having sex with each other and i dont mean husband and wife. beastiality is having sex with animals. the roman empire was built on blood and death and it fell beacause people fought back thus
the end of the roman empire. get your shit right and be carefull not to use
propaganda…
Barton
Oh com’on Kligor…whats a little incest…beastiality and maybe poligomy amongst “nice…good” people? Who is society to say that any of that is right or wrong? Just a few years ago socities were stoning people caught in adultery! Get with the times bro! LOL!!
I agree with Vegita. This whole debate is a waste of time on the part of our Gov’t.
I don’t really understand the arguement against gay marriage. The only reason I see is a religious one.
Let’s keep this simple.
Reasons against gay marriage
• Marriage is between a man and a woman.
• It opens up a can of worms. If marriage is now undefined, then what about the following situations? Three or more people; brother and sister; 40 year old man and 13 year old boy (parents give consent); man and dog; man and himself.
If you want to make the argument FOR gay marriage, then please address each of these points. If you cannot, then gay marriage should not be allowed.
• Two college guys can now marry each other, and get all the benefits from it just to save some money.
• Not allowing gay marriage does not give gay people any less rights than straight people. There is absolutely no argument that they have any less rights than normal people do. A gay guy can marry a woman just like I can, and I can’t marry a guy just like a gay man cannot. There simply is no argument here. Don’t say that you should be able to marry who you love, cause I love Angelina Jolie but I can’t marry her (kidding). I also cannot marry a married woman despite me loving her.
• Saying that there is already a high divorce rate is not a reason for gay marriage. It is irrelevent. Besides, WHY on earth would you want to make it worse?
Arguments for gay marriage
• I can’t think of a single one.
Two words: Civil union.
Now please leave us alone about “gay marriage”. It is an oxymoron, there is no such thing. Why wouldn’t you take a civil union if it gave you the same benefits of marriage? Sounds like communist cultural deconstruction to me. Quit forcing shit on us and be happy with a civil union.
This is the way I (son of a pastor) see this issue. Let them get married at a justice of the peace, so that according to the government they are married. But they should not get married in a church.
I have gay friends, cool guys, they know I don’t approve of what they do, but I am not going to dislike somebody for that, thats like saying fat people shouldn’t be allowed to raise children because fat people generally raise fat kids… and I seem to remember reading in the Bible that the body is a temple, and we are supposed to treat it as such. So thusly it would be a sin to be fat and out of shape…
Thusly Fati people and Gay people are both sinning, and by me judging them, I am sinning too. What sin is greater?? That’s not up to us, just live and love everyone to the best of your abilities.
-Dave
Kilgor needs to think things out a touch before he writes, and his posts will be better articulated…
let me give it a shot, and please feel free to stomp this line of thinking into the ground… but, please be principled.
The idea of gay sex is based on two people who lust after each other, sexually pleasing each other, and neither is hurt. (If you are still of the notion that sex = love, please do not respond, because you need to venture out into the world we currently live in.)
So, if gay sex is morally good, then we can carry the same principles to other situations. Let’s say to what Kilgor mentioned, to bestiality. Two creatures engaging in sex, both consent (yes, an animal does enjoy this, and will come back for more), and both enjoying. If we apply the same principles as define gay sex as good, we can conceivably justify what Kilgor mentioned.
The only thing that made gay sex previously morally bad was the church, and the common accepted opinion that two fully grown hairy men should not lube up their erect penises to penetrate another man’s anal cavity. Now, it is accepted as a beautiful act of nature that just requires a touch more clean-up.
So, by accepting the same principles that make gay sex a-ok, we just have to get over the the silly notion that sex must be between two animals of the same species. I am not sure if this is naturally sound, because I am not a biologist. Does anyone know if any animals engage in sex outside of their own species? I do not.
If we were to say fifty years ago that gay sex would soon be accepted as morally good, you would have been locked up probably, so maybe we aren’t far from a little woman on donkey action at the dance clubs. who knows. personally i am not into that, but, the way our society is heading, we may need to find new lines of work for carnival people.
now, if you want to argue about gay marriage, let’s stop being stupid and arguing over whether it is morally good or not…our society is going to accept it as good soon enough. the issue should be on the tax and insurance implications, and whether my liberty($) (that those who don’t produce have given the governmnet the right to steal), is going to pay for your partner. that is the real issue that no one here has addressed. because once we say gay marriage is legal, then a whole host of benefits are granted to the couple… because they are a family… by our modern definition.
i have to run now…going clubbing…to the see the carnie people!
has this been dripping enough for all of you?
I am not for gay marraiges. What I am going to say though. GAY PEOPLE STOP COMPLAINING!!! Your worst that blacks(not trying to be rasist here).
Ever here the Asain community complain (rarely), Heck, we didn’t even complian a few years ago when major Guliani ban firework at chinese new year in NYC. We invented the Damn FIREWORKS!
Get this one I saw on the news that some girl is sueing the school because she can’t were a shirt that say’s BARBIE is a Lesbian give me a brake.
Hope I didn’t offend anyone. It wasn’t the point.
The point is that if you stop complianing and started doing things for yourselves then maybe your life will be better.
Legally, I don`t give a shit about sexual orientation. I am in favor of laws that are based on (and favor) the responsibility of the individual.
And, anyway, if the law does not please pink-power activists, they`ll eventually find a way to blackmail a couple of politicians and impose it upon us anyway. That I am sure of! Trust history.
“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”
And that goes DOUBLE on this here website forum!
Starting from the premise most peoples opinions are <i>emotion</i> rather than <i>intellect</i>, what youre saying is that intellectual debate is useless.
Consequently, since intellectual arguments cannot change ones mind, only somebody who speaks <i>emotionalese</i> can and will do the job. Bring in some charismatic speaker, leader or politician who does a nice sales job on you, using <i>emotion</i>, and hell be ultimately responsible of your view change, whereas arguments coming from the head never will.
Since emotion is the biggest free-for-all and the olympics of the double-standard at the N-th power, you would be forced to conclude that debates and forums are primarily emotional venting outlets and, if your lucky, maybe someone else will pick up, think about, and use whatever intellectual stuff thats in there. And thats assuming that you care about the speaker at all and take time to fully consider his arguments in globality and where he`s coming from.
Finally, can you will emotion? I guess not, emotions are reactive.
Learn from salesmen and great public leaders. Theres a reason why they havent changed their tactics. 1- It works. 2- Nothing else does.
Furthermore, even intellectuals get all emotional when things heat up. Everybody is biased. Especially when you back them into a corner, get competitive and/or drunk. Intellectual stuff is the first casualty in these situations… it`s back to good-old-instintual-animal behavior. Ha!
Now let us all peacefully resume venting. ;0)
Here’s the definition of marriage off of Webster’s Dictionary (www.m-w.com):
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage
Eh, you can’t argue with that Webster guy!
When Bush says he wants to “protect the sanctity of marriage,” That’s violating the first amendment. If you remember, the first amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Blah Blah Blah!”
Personally, I think that the reason why the Bush Administration wants to ban gay marriages is so gay people don’t get the tax benefits like straight couples do.
i absolutely cannot believe this is happening again!
P.Dog…your really distressed aren’t you??..that people don’t swallow gay marriage hook, line and sinker.
It doesn’t matter how enlightened…“cool”…“in”…“tolerant”…“non-judgemental”…“up to date” it seems to embrace gay marriage…aint no time soon gonna be seen a baby born of two dudes or two chicks solely. This is just a medical fact. “Gay” marriage or not…
They should be able to have some kind of union. They should NOT be able to get Married. A marriage is between Husband and Wife under God.
P-DOG: I hope you get used to it. In Quebec, it is already in force. Theres demand for this stuff. The media even mentionned that people coming from the US came here because of this addition`.
Can’t we all see that from a metaphysical standpoint, there CAN BE NO UNION between like “things”. Think about all the examples we have around us that lend themselves to make the point. Two like ends of an extension cord… NO UNION. Try to screw two lightbulbs together… NO UNION. To create a UNION, two opposite beings, two opposites period, are needed to create a UNION. Metaphysically, in every logical extension, there must be two OPPOSITES two “join” together. And as a side note, my two favorite clients are boyfriend/boyfriend, My fiance’ and I go to dinner at each others’ homes quite often. I am NOT a homophope. My son calls them Uncle John and Uncle Matt (just so you know where I’m coming from).
Gay Marriage will certainly lead to Gay Sex!
Get ready to pick someone! The Gay Liberals are going to force everyone in America to Gay Marry!
Just kidding.
I would like to know how can it be considered okay to allow gay couples to adopt children, but not allow them to say they are “married”?
Lumpy,
I went over those reasons in my post. Please read it.
Compare that to having a child raised by government vs. parents.
I think most of us would agree that we should let gay people adopt. I don’t think they should be given priority, in fact, if given the choice between a good straight couple and a good gay couple, they kid should be given to the straight couple.
But if given the choice between a gay couple and living in foster homes for the rest of their childhood, the gay couple is the better choice.
Musclerob: actually, the only reason I allow gay people to adopt is because a child being brought up by, gay parents is better then being brought up by no parents at all. That we are please special intreast in allowing gay people to adopt.
Personally, though I really don’t think that gay people should be allowed to adopt a baby.
But, I do feel they can adopt teens. By, then they are think for themselves. I don’t think a parent has a right to force the child into a gay lifestyle by adopting them.