How to Explain Gay Rights to Dummies

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
This should be obvious to you. Non-romantic human relationships do not have the investment of a life long romantic relation[/quote]

Why not? My friendship with my friend Steve has lasted through his two divorces. And our friendship has been true and strong for longer than any of my romantic relationships. I have done more for Steve than his wives have ever done for him. In fact many friendships last longer than marriages.

Perhaps your statement might have been true when the institute of marriage was highly respected. When being divorced was socially bad. But I think if it still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.

182

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
This should be obvious to you. Non-romantic human relationships do not have the investment of a life long romantic relation[/quote]

Why not? My friendship with my friend Steve has lasted through his two divorces. And our friendship has been true and strong for longer than any of my romantic relationships. I have done more for Steve than his wives have ever done for him. In fact many friendships last longer than marriages.

Perhaps your statement might have been true when the institute of marriage was highly respected. When being divorced was socially bad. But I think if it still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.[/quote]

Well, you sound like you would make an excellent husband and that Steve would be lucky to have you.

Actually, I am semi serious here.

183

[quote]orion wrote:
A) Are there no other social arrangements that could provide the same benefits?
[/quote]

Perhaps. But the nuclear family is tried and tested. If you have significant evidence that another approach might work as well then perhaps we can socially elevate that arrangement as well.

[quote]orion wrote:
B) Are there not homosexual couples raising children right now doing exactly what you want married couples to do? Would their children not benefit from the legal framework marriage provides?
[/quote]

Perhaps. But do we want to encourage homosexual couples to raise children? I am of mixed opinions about it.

[quote]orion wrote:
C) Is it really your point that marriages are good because they serve the greater glory of Rome?[/quote]

I think more importantly marriages are recognised by the state because they serve society.

184

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
This should be obvious to you. Non-romantic human relationships do not have the investment of a life long romantic relation[/quote]

Why not? My friendship with my friend Steve has lasted through his two divorces. And our friendship has been true and strong for longer than any of my romantic relationships. I have done more for Steve than his wives have ever done for him. In fact many friendships last longer than marriages.

Perhaps your statement might have been true when the institute of marriage was highly respected. When being divorced was socially bad. But I think if it still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.[/quote]

Well, you sound like you would make an excellent husband and that Steve would be lucky to have you.

Actually, I am semi serious here.[/quote]

I have no interest in a romantic relationship with Steve. It is a sad world where people take close male friendships to indicate homosexuality. Oh you are really close to Dave huh? Hes supported you through rough times? Must want to stick your dick in him.

185

Society sure seems fragile these days.
You people make me laugh more and more every day, thank you.
Continue on.

186

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Sigh. Sometimes I wonder why I deal with these dipshits.

Listen, moron -read this carefully, kay sweetheart? Here, I’ll make it nice and big for ya:

MY POINT WAS NOT THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS MORALLY ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE ITS NATURAL.

Yes, (a) homosexuality is morally acceptable. And, yes, (b) homosexuality is natural. Now, read the sentence above again – just because I say that (a) and (b) are both true, does not mean that I am saying (a) is true because of (b) or that (b) is true because of (a). I’m simply saying that both are true.

So, pointing out something else that is natural, but morally unacceptable, does not address any point I made, at all.

Nice try, play again.[/quote]

Then what is your point? I think it was REASONABLE to make the assumption that I did based on the limited context.

[/quote]

No, it wasn’t. Just like it hasnt been reasonable any of the other fifty million times the exchange goes:

Idiot: Homosexuality is unnatural!
Thinking person: Well, homosexuality appears in many species in nature, so it doesn’t make sense to call it unnatural.
Idiot: Well some animals (insert morally unacceptable behavior here)! I guess we should encourage THAT too huh??!

Its always the same thing, and its always stupid.

Is ‘rape’ morally unacceptable in the animal kingdom?

[/quote]

In the human world, yes. Morals apply to humans.

Okay, I was going to respond to the rest, till I read this. I’m done.

Maybe somebody will tell you about sex when you’re older.

187

That one’s going on my list of best hairsplitting in PWI.

Define “sex”?!

Can I get some gold bars over here, push??

188

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Maybe somebody will tell you about sex when you’re older.[/quote]

Funny man. I was thinking; does he mean sex between a man and a woman? does he mean anything that gets anyone’s rocks off? It is important to actually define such terms to have any meaningful discourse.

189

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Maybe somebody will tell you about sex when you’re older.[/quote]

Funny man. I was thinking; does he mean sex between a man and a woman? does he mean anything that gets anyone’s rocks off? It is important to actually define such terms to have any meaningful discourse.[/quote]

Funny? Does he mean funny like “haha” or funny like “interesting”?

Man? Does he mean man like one male, or man like the entire species of human?

I? Does he mean his body, his mind, his spirit, or some combination of the three?

Was? Does he mean this literally, as in the past tense, or is he still currently thinking it…

Thinking…does he mean…

190

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
This should be obvious to you. Non-romantic human relationships do not have the investment of a life long romantic relation[/quote]

Why not? My friendship with my friend Steve has lasted through his two divorces. And our friendship has been true and strong for longer than any of my romantic relationships. I have done more for Steve than his wives have ever done for him. In fact many friendships last longer than marriages.

Perhaps your statement might have been true when the institute of marriage was highly respected. When being divorced was socially bad. But I think if it still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.[/quote]

Well, you sound like you would make an excellent husband and that Steve would be lucky to have you.

Actually, I am semi serious here.[/quote]

I have no interest in a romantic relationship with Steve. It is a sad world where people take close male friendships to indicate homosexuality. Oh you are really close to Dave huh? Hes supported you through rough times? Must want to stick your dick in him.[/quote]

Its a sadder world where people say “But I think if [marriage] still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.” as though even talking about, or suggesting, that homosexuals should be allowed to marry somehow disrespects (or shows evidence of disrespect toward) the institution of marriage.

Thunderbolt can bitch all he wants about my ‘bad faith arguing’, the fact remains that its never long into the gay marriage debate that most of the anti-gay marriage crowd shows some clear anti-gay bias.

191

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Define “sex”?!

[/quote]

You are the one who used the term so you are the only one who can explain what use you are acsribing to the word. Just coitus? 3rd base? sodomy? masturbation? You need to describe what you are talking about to have any meaningful discourse as I said.

192

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Maybe somebody will tell you about sex when you’re older.[/quote]

Funny man. I was thinking; does he mean sex between a man and a woman? does he mean anything that gets anyone’s rocks off? It is important to actually define such terms to have any meaningful discourse.[/quote]

Funny? Does he mean funny like “haha” or funny like “interesting”?

Man? Does he mean man like one male, or man like the entire species of human?

I? Does he mean his body, his mind, his spirit, or some combination of the three?

Was? Does he mean this literally, as in the past tense, or is he still currently thinking it…

Thinking…does he mean…[/quote]

Yes very amusing. However you still haven’t described what you mean by “sex” - you see you used the term in this context:

‘sex is not unnatural’

So, surely to have any meaningful discourse one would need to know whether you mean coitus or sodomy etc? surely? surely I must be getting through at least?

193

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Define “sex”?!

[/quote]

You are the one who used the term so you are the only one who can explain what use you are acsribing to the word. Just coitus? 3rd base? sodomy? masturbation? You need to describe what you are talking about to have any meaningful discourse as I said.[/quote]

Groan.

Please. Dude. Stop.

194

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Define “sex”?!

[/quote]

You are the one who used the term so you are the only one who can explain what use you are acsribing to the word. Just coitus? 3rd base? sodomy? masturbation? You need to describe what you are talking about to have any meaningful discourse as I said.[/quote]

Groan.

Please. Dude. Stop. [/quote]

Stop what? How can we argue about whether “sex” is “unnatural” if you’re talking about sodomy and I’m talking about coitus? Surely, if you were to explain just what you mean by “sex” then a meaningful discourse could ensue? Otherwise I might mistakenly agree with you that sex is a natural thing because I think you are talking about coitus - when in fact you are talking about sticking a carrot up my arse. Can you see now what I mean?

195

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
This should be obvious to you. Non-romantic human relationships do not have the investment of a life long romantic relation[/quote]

Why not? My friendship with my friend Steve has lasted through his two divorces. And our friendship has been true and strong for longer than any of my romantic relationships. I have done more for Steve than his wives have ever done for him. In fact many friendships last longer than marriages.

Perhaps your statement might have been true when the institute of marriage was highly respected. When being divorced was socially bad. But I think if it still was highly respected we wouldn’t even be having a gay marriage debate.[/quote]

Well, you sound like you would make an excellent husband and that Steve would be lucky to have you.

Actually, I am semi serious here.[/quote]

I have no interest in a romantic relationship with Steve. It is a sad world where people take close male friendships to indicate homosexuality. Oh you are really close to Dave huh? Hes supported you through rough times? Must want to stick your dick in him.[/quote]

Well, how you would arrange your marriage is of course totally up to you.

You would neither be the first asexual couple nor the first that seeks sexual fulfillment outside of it.

In fact, the very fact that sex would not play that big a role would make it very traditional.

196

Sex (verb) The act of sticking a carrot up SexMachine’s ass.

There. You have your definition.

197

[quote]phaethon wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
A) Are there no other social arrangements that could provide the same benefits?
[/quote]

Perhaps. But the nuclear family is tried and tested. If you have significant evidence that another approach might work as well then perhaps we can socially elevate that arrangement as well.

[quote]orion wrote:
B) Are there not homosexual couples raising children right now doing exactly what you want married couples to do? Would their children not benefit from the legal framework marriage provides?
[/quote]

Perhaps. But do we want to encourage homosexual couples to raise children? I am of mixed opinions about it.

[quote]orion wrote:
C) Is it really your point that marriages are good because they serve the greater glory of Rome?[/quote]

I think more importantly marriages are recognised by the state because they serve society.[/quote]

Wait, I need to prove to you that it is beneficial to third parties before I can enter into a contract?

Interesting notion, are you willing to apply that principle across the board?

Also, “benefiting society” are weasel words for “makes society more like you want it to be”.

I get that some people really, really want marriages to be strictly hetero, but that does not make “I want it because I want it” terribly convincing when it comes to denying other peoples rights.

198

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Define “sex”?!

[/quote]

You are the one who used the term so you are the only one who can explain what use you are acsribing to the word. Just coitus? 3rd base? sodomy? masturbation? You need to describe what you are talking about to have any meaningful discourse as I said.[/quote]

Groan.

Please. Dude. Stop. [/quote]

Stop what? How can we argue about whether “sex” is “unnatural” if you’re talking about sodomy and I’m talking about coitus? Surely, if you were to explain just what you mean by “sex” then a meaningful discourse could ensue? Otherwise I might mistakenly agree with you that sex is a natural thing because I think you are talking about coitus - when in fact you are talking about sticking a carrot up my arse. Can you see now what I mean?[/quote]

Is the carrot gay or straight?

You brought it up, we desperately need to know.

199

[quote]iVoodoo wrote:
Society sure seems fragile these days.
You people make me laugh more and more every day, thank you.
Continue on.[/quote]

Well if you define society as “me being on top and everyone living up to my standards” that is actually a rather fragile situation.

Always.

Which is why people benefiting from the status quo almost always have a conservative bend.

200

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Sex (verb) The act of sticking a carrot up SexMachine’s ass.

There. You have your definition.[/quote]

What means “ass”?

What is a “carrot”?

Does it stand pars pro toto for any root vegetable?

What I just put it there and he just happens to sit down on it?

Can I really only have “sex” if it is with him?