This is probably how the arguments used to be about women’s suffrage. Truth is, Gay marriage, or union, or some other name for it has a good chance of taking place, and future folks will look back at our time, and wonder how the government could possibly exclude certain people from constitutional rights; kind of like how we look back on women not being able to vote, children having to work in factories to support their families income, and Speaking in public being forbidden by Women Union leaders.
When you chop it all down, the government is only giving the civil union of marriage to certain gender pairs. Ultimately, most of you know that this is pure discrimination, and your argument probably lies with morals and religion. But straight up constitutionally, the laws are discriminating.
NAMBLA is irrelevant, since homosexuals who would be eligible for marriage, union, would be consenting adults. The tricky part will be how NOT to clog up the courts with people who just want benefits. What defines homosexual love? What defines Heterosexual love? The only difference to me is to change the word woman, to man.
I think that the topic of reproduction ability has its place in the gay marriage debate. Why do men and women get benefits & breaks? what if they don’t have children. couldnt a man and women get married just to reap the bennies just like most people think 2 men would?
I think an excellent idea would be to retract governmental benefits of marriage until children are born… meaning no tax breaks for gays until they adopt a child… and no tax breaks for heteros unless they give birth or adopt.
Suddenly no one has advantages that the other does not concerning marriage.
ZEB, nice editing job on my post. Thanks for both misrepresenting and misunderstanding me.
I at least can think and speak for myself. I don’t pretend to reprsent anyone. If someone agrees with me, that is fine. I don’t represent the radical left, mainly because I am not a leftist. I am libertarian, hence my belief that gay people deserve the same rights as anyone else, including the right to marry the adult, human partner of their choice.
I want to know how you know what the gay experience is. Are you one of those former homosexuals you are always talking about? You have asserted repeatedly that it is a choice. How do you know? Gay people have explained that being gay is not a decision but people like you insist that it is. Why will you not just accept that they would know better than you how they came to be gay? And what damn difference does it make anyway?
I really think there is no point in responding much further to you. You have no scruples. I never urged pushing polygamy. I said I don’t have a problem with it as long as everyone is an adult and has given consent. Then you reach a little further and ask if I condone brother/sister incest. It’s like if you ask just the right question, I’ll somehow agree with you. It’s really just absurd now.
You frequently invoke the power of the majority in this discussion, saying that we shouldn’t alter the meaning of some institution for such a tiny group of people. You seem to think that the majority is the granter of rights and liberties to minority groups. Otherwise, I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. The founding documents do not specify who can marry who, therefore, if we were to treat gay citizens in the same way as everyone else, they should be able to marry each other.
By your own posts, you seem to have no regard for fairness and justice for gay people. You seem more interested in pushing your religious agenda.
I am pretty much through with this discussion, as I have other things to do.
ZEB, nice editing job on my post. Thanks for both misrepresenting and misunderstanding me.[/quote]
This is fairly typical of you. I misrepresented nothing.
You are indeed a leftist and a racical one at that! You have used all the terminology of the far left. You are also in favor of Polygamy. Oh you are a lefty alright!
I never claimed that I know what “the gay experience” is. I have read of many who have left the gay life and actually married and have children and are quite happy. I wonder how many have to do this before someone is brave enough (on the national level) to step up and say something on the order that this gay thing might just be a Psychological problem. (Again we don’t know for sure…yet).
I am not saying it’s a decision. I am not saying that they are born that way. I am saying that we don’t have enough information yet to decide for sure either way. However, someone could he raised a certain way as a child. It then is not a concious choice but a pattern of behavior, not unlike other behaviors which we somehow learn in childhood.
The left needs to open their collective minds to all possibilities!
I know I must be bad because I don’t agree with you. Another deception from the left.
You don’t have a problem with Polygamy. I understand fully your point. I simply disagree…
No, your ideas on how society should behave are absurd. You said Polygamy was fine with you. The next logical question is: do you think that adult brothers and sister should marry? You stated all consenting adults and groups of adults should be able to do what they want. So…what do you think of adult incest?
The point is simple; Where do we draw the line on attempting to please tiny groups of minorities who want to change our social structure. You have no limit, I do.
[quote]By your own posts, you seem to have no regard for fairness and justice for gay people. You seem more interested in pushing your religious agenda.
I am pretty much through with this discussion, as I have other things to do.
WMD[/quote]
Sorry to see you are bailing out so soon. Then again, your posts lasted longer than your logic did!
[quote]demonthrall wrote:
This is probably how the arguments used to be about women’s suffrage. Truth is, Gay marriage, or union, or some other name for it has a good chance of taking place, and future folks will look back at our time, and wonder how the government could possibly exclude certain people from constitutional rights; kind of like how we look back on women not being able to vote, children having to work in factories to support their families income, and Speaking in public being forbidden by Women Union leaders.
[/quote]
Oh, I guess I missed the part in the constitution that makes marriage a constitutional right? Do you have your own “special” constitution nobody knows about?
Sure, and maybe someday we will look back on NAMBLA and say why didn’t we let those upstanding gentlemen marry the boy of their choice? If the boy is consenting and so is the man, then what is the issue?
You see demonthrall, keeping religion out of it, we as a society have determined what a consenting adult is and what is not. That is an artificial determination that is not based on biology or any other objective measure. It is purely a moral judgment that society has determined. Just like not letting homosexuals marry; a moral judgment that society has determined.
You are just comfortable in breaking down the previously established moral judgment of gay marriage, but not the NAMBLA thing. But, the fact is that the two are exactly the same. Both are a moral judgment by society. So it is logical to say that with the pushing back of one moral boundary, other moral boundaries can go just as easily.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Demeaning arguments is not something that is hard to do. [/quote]
I agree especially when the arguments presented are so very weak!
You have that wrong! I do care a great deal. I sincerely want to read a good argument in favor of gay marriage. You have not supplied one. Now you attempt to demean me for pointing out the weakness of the arguments given.
I disagree. A sign of intellectual weakness is this very post of yours. Instead of actually debating the points you have chosen to take the low road and attack the person. Why is it whenever the facts fail the left they resort to attacking the oppostion personally. That seems like a sign of intellectual weakness to me.
Actually, I have put forth many reasons why gay marriage is a very bad idea (not that I had to since no serious argument has been presented to the contrary). If you followed along you would have seen my posts which discuss this. That I began the discussion speaking about the Bible bothers you as I think you are biased against people of faith.
The liberal rules read like this: It’s never okay to be biased against any group, regardless of whatever ideas they want to put forth. However, it’s perfectly okay and well accepted to show your prejudice against anyone might believe in God.
Not that I want to get into character flaws (we all have so many). But, that would be one more strike against your character!
This is always my favorite part!
I want the readers of this post to understand that once again, if you do not embrace the homosexual agenda you are “ignorant.” Now I wonder why that is? Did you notice that no one from the other side decided to change their minds? Are they closed minded as well?
Maybe you better stick to posting hate threads about President Bush. You seem to be more in your element in doing that. You really do have nothing to add over here. And I’m sorry to have to say that.
I know you hate religion and all who believe, you have made that perfectly clear. However, this argument is bigger than “religion,” much bigger. It strikes at the foundation of our values. And if you think for a second that the “pro gay marriage” people are going to “win” think again! Curently they are zero for 14 in state votes.
By the way make sure you check to see how people are voting in Texas today. There is a referendum banning “same sex marriage.”
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
[/quote]
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
Oh, I guess I missed the part in the constitution that makes marriage a constitutional right? Do you have your own “special” constitution nobody knows about?
[/quote]
Of course not. Be amicable.
Because current law says there is a legal age of consent. That does not apply to gay marriage.
Agreed. Society determines wrong things sometimes. I wont go into examples, you know.
Inderstand how you could see this, I do. But the way I see it, they are different, since age of consent is not the issue. The issue is discrimination by sex. That’s already a law that you’re not supposed to do.
That’s a fallacy known as slippery slope. It’s never necesarily true.
My main thought on this is to once again chop it down and say that my interpretation of the bill of rights, especially the first amendment, does not discriminate between sexes. In America it should be no ones right to withhold privileges and benefits from certain sexes, or pairs of.
Why do you think two law abiding adult women should not be able to get the same benefits as a man and a women?
Again keeping it pacific makes for intelligent, fun conversation. I enjoy learning others points of views, and incorporating them into my own version of how things are. Everyones got their own “window” that they look at life through… and to share them is the most valuable thing.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
[/quote]
It’s wrong to say we don’t/shouldn’t legislate morality. We do it all the type. But there are things that everybody basically agrees are morally wrong-like rape, pillaging, and murder. And we don’t need religion to tell us that anymore (not criticizing religion, but basically all agnostics and atheists would agree with those value judgments). And there are things on which there is no concensus as to their morality. Like abortion and gay marriage. And these issues are much harder to legislate (or discuss at all).
This NAMBLA analagoy people are making does not hold. We do not condone things that are crimes and have victims. Pedophilia is such a crime whether heterosexual or homosexual. Two autonomous adults choosing to engage in conduct that some find wrong and reprehensible is not the same thing. In respect to the two people getting involved, no one is getting hurt.
I have never heard a sound argument against gay marriage except for religious beliefs - which the supreme court has shown time and time again that the constitution will not favor.
Yes, this country was founded on forms of christianity, which can be interpreted to frown on homosexuality, but the last thing this country will turn is more religious… Equal rights for all in my eyes is being held back by this issue.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
Lorisco wrote:
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
[/quote]
Fuck this. Don’t you dare get on a rant about how people who are gay are immoral just because they are gay. I will put any single one of my gay friends up against you in a Moral-a-Thon any day of the week, and you will be soundly “hom-owned” by them with ease. And even though I have never met you, I am quite confident of this. You know why?
Ever take care of an kid with cancer? Ever wipe a sweet old lady’s butt for her without making her feel embarrassed about it? Ever sat up all night with a confused old man, and talked with him so he wouldn’t be so scared to go to surgery tomorrow?
Just a sampling of some of the kinds of things my friends here do EVERY SINGLE DAY. A step backward for western civilization? Fuck that, and fuck you, sir. The reason we got it so good in this country has nothing to do with assholes like you spouting off about what is or is not right, it has to do with service and sacrifice – that men and women before you gave of themselves. These people came from all walks of life… white, black, male, female, etc., etc… and guess what? Some of them were gay. But God forbid you should look at a gay person and see someone you should be thankful for. God forbid you should shake the hand of a gay person who might have done something for you and say “I’m glad I could rely on you.”
You want to know what the REAL decline of western civilzation would be? That is when we all get together and decide that we have gone far enough, and that there is no more reason us to reach out to our fellow human brethren. That is when we give up on relations with other countries, give up on maintaining a sense of justice for those in this world who cannot defend themselves… when we give up on each other.
But you are lucky, Nabisco, because whether you realize it or not, this decline you are so afraid of will never happen as long as people like my “immoral” friends at the hospital here are around.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
Lorisco wrote:
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
Fuck this. Don’t you dare get on a rant about how people who are gay are immoral just because they are gay. I will put any single one of my gay friends up against you in a Moral-a-Thon any day of the week, and you will be soundly “hom-owned” by them with ease. And even though I have never met you, I am quite confident of this. You know why?
Ever take care of an kid with cancer? Ever wipe a sweet old lady’s butt for her without making her feel embarrassed about it? Ever sat up all night with a confused old man, and talked with him so he wouldn’t be so scared to go to surgery tomorrow?
Just a sampling of some of the kinds of things my friends here do EVERY SINGLE DAY. A step backward for western civilization? Fuck that, and fuck you, sir. The reason we got it so good in this country has nothing to do with assholes like you spouting off about what is or is not right, it has to do with service and sacrifice – that men and women before you gave of themselves. These people came from all walks of life… white, black, male, female, etc., etc… and guess what? Some of them were gay. But God forbid you should look at a gay person and see someone you should be thankful for. God forbid you should shake the hand of a gay person who might have done something for you and say “I’m glad I could rely on you.”
You want to know what the REAL decline of western civilzation would be? That is when we all get together and decide that we have gone far enough, and that there is no more reason us to reach out to our fellow human brethren. That is when we give up on relations with other countries, give up on maintaining a sense of justice for those in this world who cannot defend themselves… when we give up on each other.
But you are lucky, Nabisco, because whether you realize it or not, this decline you are so afraid of will never happen as long as people like my “immoral” friends at the hospital here are around.
[quote]demonthrall wrote:
I have never heard a sound argument against gay marriage except for religious beliefs - which the supreme court has shown time and time again that the constitution will not favor.
Yes, this country was founded on forms of christianity, which can be interpreted to frown on homosexuality, but the last thing this country will turn is more religious… Equal rights for all in my eyes is being held back by this issue.[/quote]
Good post. I’ve been away for almost a week, and during my absence, the naysayer(s) have been saying that us liberal haters need to put up a reason for why we should allow and/or support gay marriage. After all, the proof is on us to show that we should change things, right?
Okay.
Gay marriage will create a more stable home environment for children. This is really a major point in this day and age to get married in the first place. It’s about the kids, stupid! While I have lesbian friends who are raising kids and are a stable couple and have been for over a decade, maybe this is not the fact for some other gay couples. Maybe it would help to have a contractual obligation? Oh… but wait! Lesbians and gays can’t have kids, right? Wrong. You can thank modern technology, adoptions, and prior relationships for that. Kids are not the exclusive province of heterosexuals, therefore cons, if your whole point against gay marriage has anything to do with family and children, then you will realize that marriage shouldn’t be the sole province of heterosexuals either.
Publicly recognizing the validity of gay relationships will strengthen the ties of the gay community to the rest of us as a whole, thus making our society stronger. An extremely easy way to open your arms and accept someone who is different from you is to show them a measure of equality. We heteros could even make it a point to say “Hey, uh… sorry this took so long, guys and gals. We are kinda stupid about things sometimes.”
As has been stated earlier by other posters, legal status and things like hospital visitations, joint bank accounts, tax filing, etc., in other words, the kinds of legal conveniences that married couples may take for granted but become roadblocks for gay couples… those roadblocks could be lifted if we accept gay marriage.
Shall I continue? I would post more, but it’s getting busy around here. See y’all later.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
Lorisco wrote:
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
Fuck this. Don’t you dare get on a rant about how people who are gay are immoral just because they are gay. I will put any single one of my gay friends up against you in a Moral-a-Thon any day of the week, and you will be soundly “hom-owned” by them with ease. And even though I have never met you, I am quite confident of this. You know why?
Ever take care of an kid with cancer? Ever wipe a sweet old lady’s butt for her without making her feel embarrassed about it? Ever sat up all night with a confused old man, and talked with him so he wouldn’t be so scared to go to surgery tomorrow?
Just a sampling of some of the kinds of things my friends here do EVERY SINGLE DAY. A step backward for western civilization? Fuck that, and fuck you, sir. The reason we got it so good in this country has nothing to do with assholes like you spouting off about what is or is not right, it has to do with service and sacrifice – that men and women before you gave of themselves. These people came from all walks of life… white, black, male, female, etc., etc… and guess what? Some of them were gay. But God forbid you should look at a gay person and see someone you should be thankful for. God forbid you should shake the hand of a gay person who might have done something for you and say “I’m glad I could rely on you.”
You want to know what the REAL decline of western civilzation would be? That is when we all get together and decide that we have gone far enough, and that there is no more reason us to reach out to our fellow human brethren. That is when we give up on relations with other countries, give up on maintaining a sense of justice for those in this world who cannot defend themselves… when we give up on each other.
But you are lucky, Nabisco, because whether you realize it or not, this decline you are so afraid of will never happen as long as people like my “immoral” friends at the hospital here are around.
Shame on you.[/quote]
This was a very good post. If anyone judges someone else, not by their actions or deeds as a person everyday of their life…but by who they are attracted to, the person judging has no morals worth praising. I seriously doubt that even the most staunch “Christian Republican” on this board would stand by the belief that someone being gay makes them a bad person. I also doubt that all of the acts of one’s life will be ignored to keep them out of heaven (for those who believe in God) simply because they happen to be homosexual. Why would God place this act above any other sin on the planet? Like lying is OK, but God forbid you happen to be gay? I haven’t read every post in this thread because the simple fact that it is 5 million pages long looks pretty damn stupid to me, but you have an entire life. I hope no one is so blind to ignore the goodness in people as they play God deciding who is worthy of recognition for certain rights in this country. After all, homo’s are just like pedophiles and rapists, right?
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
Lorisco wrote:
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
Fuck this. Don’t you dare get on a rant about how people who are gay are immoral just because they are gay. I will put any single one of my gay friends up against you in a Moral-a-Thon any day of the week, and you will be soundly “hom-owned” by them with ease. And even though I have never met you, I am quite confident of this. You know why?
Ever take care of an kid with cancer? Ever wipe a sweet old lady’s butt for her without making her feel embarrassed about it? Ever sat up all night with a confused old man, and talked with him so he wouldn’t be so scared to go to surgery tomorrow?
Just a sampling of some of the kinds of things my friends here do EVERY SINGLE DAY. A step backward for western civilization? Fuck that, and fuck you, sir. The reason we got it so good in this country has nothing to do with assholes like you spouting off about what is or is not right, it has to do with service and sacrifice – that men and women before you gave of themselves. These people came from all walks of life… white, black, male, female, etc., etc… and guess what? Some of them were gay. But God forbid you should look at a gay person and see someone you should be thankful for. God forbid you should shake the hand of a gay person who might have done something for you and say “I’m glad I could rely on you.”
You want to know what the REAL decline of western civilzation would be? That is when we all get together and decide that we have gone far enough, and that there is no more reason us to reach out to our fellow human brethren. That is when we give up on relations with other countries, give up on maintaining a sense of justice for those in this world who cannot defend themselves… when we give up on each other.
But you are lucky, Nabisco, because whether you realize it or not, this decline you are so afraid of will never happen as long as people like my “immoral” friends at the hospital here are around.
I was finished with this thread, but lothario has finally raised some legitimate points which need to be discussed. I also think that he has raised the level of the debate, at least on the “pro gay marriage” side. This is something was needed almost from the first post.
Up to this point sarcasm, name calling, Christian bashing and generally poor behavior has filled the posts of the pro gay marriage people.
I thank you lothario for stepping up to the plate one more time for a cause which I know that you strongly believe in!
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Gay marriage will create a more stable home environment for children.[/quote]
The problem with that one is that first of all we don’t know why gay people are gay. You can scream from the roof tops that they are “born that way” but there is no proof. Hence, how do you know that you are not creating more homosexuals simply by placing them in such an environment.
And I think it was you who stated that no one would want to become a homosexual if they had a choice. Are you condemning an entire generation with this one premature move?
I certainly don’t know yet as all the facts are not in. However, I am willing to wait for all the facts before rushing off and declaring not only gay marriage, but gay adoption as a good thing (while I know gay adoption occurs currently in some instances).
Before anyone attempts to claim that a child will not copy a parents behavior, they better think again! NOt enough gay relationships with children have been around long enough to see the ultimate consequences of their action. This takes decades and long term studies.
Wow, where do I begin with this one?
Some ties do not need to be strengthened, especially when we don’t know why they are there to begin with.
I want to strengthen the ties of the Polygamist community to the rest of the country. When I’m done championing that cause I want to strengthen the incest community to the rest of the country. Yea…I want to make sure that every tiny percentage of minority groups who choose (or who claim they are born that way) to be different are indeed strengthened to the rest of the country.
Do you think the country wants that?
Some of you don’t like the fact that I continue to point out that the number of gays who want to marry are less than 1%. However, I think that is a very important point. And I want to know that once the gates are opened to include this tiny percentage where do we then stop?
I am not talking about NAMBLA now (while there is a good argument as some gay groups are championing that specific organization). I am talking about Polygamists and those who are interested in sanctioning incest (for adults of course).
I don’t think the country should be embracing either anymore than they should be embracing homosexual marriage. I think gay people have proved one very important thing. If you scream loud enough and have enough money behind you, you become important somehow…
Who will be the next group to stand up and become “important?”
I agree with you at least in part. However, the answer is not to change marriage laws. the answer is to change the laws that surround some of those things.
If two heterosexual men live together and have no other family that they are close to they should indeed have hospital visitation rights. One should be able to “desigante” the other as his, or her “significant other.” The fact that they are NOT having sex should not disallow this type of benefit. The same goes for other sorts of benefits.
By the way can’t two unrelated people already have a joint bank account?
[quote]Shall I continue? I would post more, but it’s getting busy around here. See y’all later.
[/quote]
You have tried to give some legitimate reasons for gay marriage. You also did so without spouting off about anyone who opposes these things as hate filled. I appreciate your efforts and applaud your tone.
You know we are never going to agree on this topic, but at least we can debate it without name calling and that’s a step in the right direction. And again it’s far more than most of your cohorts have been doing!
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
This NAMBLA analagoy people are making does not hold. We do not condone things that are crimes and have victims. Pedophilia is such a crime whether heterosexual or homosexual. Two autonomous adults choosing to engage in conduct that some find wrong and reprehensible is not the same thing. In respect to the two people getting involved, no one is getting hurt.[/quote]
It’s only a crime because society has determined the age of consent. That determination was a moral decision, just like Texas making a moral decision (law) that homosexual marriage is wrong. There is no difference. Both laws are based on moral judgments from society.
[quote]demonthrall wrote:
I have never heard a sound argument against gay marriage except for religious beliefs - which the supreme court has shown time and time again that the constitution will not favor.
Yes, this country was founded on forms of christianity, which can be interpreted to frown on homosexuality, but the last thing this country will turn is more religious… Equal rights for all in my eyes is being held back by this issue.[/quote]
You don’t seem to get it. The constitution allows any man and woman to marry. The law currently allows anyone to marry someone of the opposite sex. There is no discrimination in that. Allowing same sex to marry would require a change to the law to give special rights. Not allowing special rights is not discrimination.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Religion has lost every battle to progressiveness. This one will be no different.
Lorisco wrote:
DrunkenIrish26,
What is “progressive” about the declining morality of western society? You only enjoy the freedoms you do because of the moral values of society. If everyone decided it was ok to rape and pillage there would not be enough police or national guard to do anything about it. So the removal of the hundreds of moral-based laws is not “progressive” and would be a large step backward to a less civilized society.
Fuck this. Don’t you dare get on a rant about how people who are gay are immoral just because they are gay. I will put any single one of my gay friends up against you in a Moral-a-Thon any day of the week, and you will be soundly “hom-owned” by them with ease. And even though I have never met you, I am quite confident of this. You know why?
Ever take care of an kid with cancer? Ever wipe a sweet old lady’s butt for her without making her feel embarrassed about it? Ever sat up all night with a confused old man, and talked with him so he wouldn’t be so scared to go to surgery tomorrow?
[/quote]
Time for your mind to see the truth my friend. And it’s not as neat and clean as you want to believe.
The answer to ALL those questions is YES! I have done all those things as I am a Registered Nurse.
So while I support my colleges in practice and their ability to care for others, THAT has nothing to do with the morality of sleeping with someone of the same sex. You want to conveniently combine them to relieve your own concerns about the issue, but it’s not that simple or easy.
And again you try and combine issues for the sake of your own comfort. Sorry buddy, but you can’t get out of this that easy. I fully support, as does ZEB, the uniting of all humans on common ground and issues. I also support all homosexuals as human beings. However, while I care for them as humans I don’t condone their behavior. Their behavior is separate from them as humans.
[quote]
But you are lucky, Nabisco, because whether you realize it or not, this decline you are so afraid of will never happen as long as people like my “immoral” friends at the hospital here are around.
Shame on you.[/quote]
“nabisco”? I like this, it’s funny!
So bro, now you are faced with actually having to use your brain. I do the same job as you homo friend and I happen to disagree with their sexual behavior.
So who should really be “shamed” now?
Now you are going to have to decide the merits of a gay lifestyle regardless of ones occupation or caring for others.
Gay marriage will create a more stable home environment for children.
The problem with that one is that first of all we don’t know why gay people are gay. You can scream from the roof tops that they are “born that way” but there is no proof. Hence, how do you know that you are not creating more homosexuals simply by placing them in such an environment.[/quote]
ZEB, the kids are there already. What I mean is that there are plenty of families like my friends here in the lab who are WAYYY ahead of you here. You look at a homosexual like its something that is a tragedy. They’re different, ZEB. They aren’t hurting anybody with what they do behind closed doors, so why not give them a measure of equality?
I think that maybe you are looking at this from the wrong angle. Here you are thinking that the problem is gayness, but it’s not. It’s US. WE are the problem in that we have persecuted and discriminated against these people since time immemorial, not because they are bad, but because they are different.
This is why we will never see eye to eye on this, ZEB. You look at a gay man or woman and see “sinner”. To you, they are intrinsically wrong because of what they are. I look at a gay man or woman and see “person”.
I’m pretty sure that wasn’t me. In fact, ironically, I think that was first brought up in another thread by a gay man who posted after you and I had one of our trademarked arguments. He admitted to flirting with suicide, drugs, etc. And it was because he felt so isolated and unaccepted, remember? Your idea is that we just brainwash him into thinking that he’s not gay anymore. My idea is that we as a society just stop hounding kids like him. Maybe a little reassurance and understanding would do better than being cast out and labelled a “sinner”? Just a thought.
Still with the mild homophobia. You’re so worried about gayness like it’s some plague that you will prefer to have kids growing up without parents?
Lothario hypothesis #1: Maybe a child of two gay parents will be fine, as long as the gay couple is well-adjusted? What we will see with the child is that he will have a greater understanding of a single-gender family, because he/she is part of one. Oh! The tragedy!
Lothario hypothesis #2: Let’s pretend that gayness is solely a choice for a second. My dad was a doctor before he retired, and would have loved it for me to be one too. I decided to not go to medical school. How did that happen? I had the grades. I was raised in a medical atmosphere. I just didn’t want to be a doctor. It wasn’t my bag. I… turned out different than my parents. My two brothers aren’t even in the medical field at all. Go figure.
[quote]2) Publicly recognizing the validity of gay relationships will strengthen the ties of the gay community to the rest of us as a whole, thus making our society stronger.
Wow, where do I begin with this one?
Some ties do not need to be strengthened, especially when we don’t know why they are there to begin with.
I want to strengthen the ties of the Polygamist community to the rest of the country. When I’m done championing that cause I want to strengthen the incest community to the rest of the country. Yea…I want to make sure that every tiny percentage of minority groups who choose (or who claim they are born that way) to be different are indeed strengthened to the rest of the country.
Do you think the country wants that? [/quote]
Well I certainly know that YOU don’t want that. After all, a gay person is just like a pedophile, remember? And yes, I can see the similarity between an adult having sex with a child and an adult having sex with another adult. Might as well throw a llama in there too. I don’t know how many times I have said this to you:
This is YOUR sexual hangup, ZEB. I suggest lots of lesbian porn. That way, you don’t have to see any penises and get all ookey about the whole deal. I happen to like “Girl Power 2”. But watch out because on the DVD, there are some ads for phone sex services that have cumshots and anal and whatnot. Just stick to the lesbian part and you’ll be fine.
[quote]Some of you don’t like the fact that I continue to point out that the number of gays who want to marry are less than 1%. However, I think that is a very important point. And I want to know that once the gates are opened to include this tiny percentage where do we then stop?
I am not talking about NAMBLA now (while there is a good argument as some gay groups are championing that specific organization). I am talking about Polygamists and those who are interested in sanctioning incest (for adults of course).
I don’t think the country should be embracing either anymore than they should be embracing homosexual marriage. I think gay people have proved one very important thing. If you scream loud enough and have enough money behind you, you become important somehow…
Who will be the next group to stand up and become “important?”[/quote]
So your saying that once we allow gay marriage, then we will necessarily have to legally recognize NAMBLA and incest? In bizzarro world, I guess that makes sense. Maybe the 'ludes are getting to you?
Come ON, man! LOL The homophobia is showing. Two beautiful women having sex is a joyous and wonderful thing. Especially if they’re in a hot tub with me. Try it, and get back to me with an apology for all this crap.
But seriously, you maybe haven’t noticed that your argument against gay marriage in this vein is nothing more than a slippery slope? I could use your EXACT logic to argue against women’s suffrage, desegregation, etc… It doesn’t hold up.
“Oh man, we can’t let women vote, or else they’re gonna say that four year olds should vote, too. And then the monkeys! This country is going to go to hell!!”
[quote]You know we are never going to agree on this topic, but at least we can debate it without name calling and that’s a step in the right direction. And again it’s far more than most of your cohorts have been doing!
[/quote]
Oh yeah… dummy head!!
PS I wasn’t kidding about the lesbo porn. It will do you some good, man… I swear. Girl Power 2. Get one of your friends to rent it for you or something.
