Hello!
No, I am in no way making that argument, it would be a weak, flawed one. That would be like saying that beause the heterosexual divorce rate is so high, heterosexual marriages should be outlawed.
I’m saying that the automatic assumption that a heterosexual person is healthier when in a marriage or has more of the basic human rights to domestic partnership than a gay person is a fallacy. This is simply not true. There are many unhealthy, as well as healthy, heterosexual marriages, and I’m sure there are healthy and unhealthy gay unions as well.
I am saying that it seems unfair to deny a group of people certain privileges, that only they would benefit or be harmed from, based upon their sexual orientation— seems discriminatory to me. People who are not allwed to fulfill a need that is personal to them, and does not infringe on the rights of others. Yet, criminals, whose actions infringe upon and harm many, have their rights VIGOROUSLY protected under the law. It makes no sense!
Think of it this way: A convicted spouse abuser or murderer is allowed to remarry, under the law, there are no restrictions. Yet a decent person who is gay is not allowed to be legally married.
[quote]JTS wrote:
So are you saying that just because homosexual marriages tend to last longer, that it is ok for them to be married?[/quote]
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the proper spelling is “Cooties”. Hehe, j/k.
Because we are American citizens, it behooves many of us to set our religious beliefs aside and view the issue from a secular standpoint.
[quote]stonesanctus wrote:
and since girls had Kuties(?spelling)back then the dominant presence of males is common.
As far as the issue of gay marraige, a moral argument is an irrational one.
while the first amendmant alows freedom to practice any religion, it also prohibits passing federal laws “respecting an establishment of religion”.
since Christianity is obviously an establishement of religion, the principals behind it cannot be passed as federal laws without contradicting the first amendment.
at that point there would be no end to the ratification of religiously based law.
also, the constitution nowhere mentions marriage, so states can pass laws governing it freely.
That’s all i’ve got to say.[/quote]
Quite frankly it comes down to yet another God debate. Arguement really, and when that comes, I leave. I doubt anyone will miss my comments, but its like a bunch of 3rd graders arguing over pizza toppings, in mentality. Does anyone actually listen to anyone else?
-T[/quote]
Actually, it all does come down to pizza toppings. Since everyone knows that ham and pinapple is a lady’s pizza, then a male ordering ham and pinapple has obvious homosexual tendencies. So a young boy who tries to order ham and pinapple on his pizza, must be rapped on the knuckles with a ruler, and forced to order meat-lovers.
[quote]aikigreg wrote:
Nobody chooses to be the most persecuted subsect of humanity. Many fight it all their lives. I used to be ignorant like you. Try and educate yourself a little better, willya?
News flash. One of your guy friends is gay. That’s how I found out what an idiot I was.
Oh, and I’m pretty sure if you’re laughing at the gay guy in front of St. Peter, you’re likely not getting in, regardless of whether HE is or not.[/quote]
Wow, so now the fags are the most persecuted subject of humanity.
I guess we can forget the suffereing the Jews faced from Hitler, and the suffering that the Africans faced as slaves, because we all know that “Lance & Skip”, “are the most persecuted subject of humanity”.
Give me a fucking break.
Forget politics and religion.
Here it is, plain and simple, having a dick is biology, where you put it is choice.
[quote]Scott1010220 wrote:
Wow, so now the fags are the most persecuted subject of humanity.[/quote]
What would happen if you wanted to get married, and they said “Sorry, no rednecks can get married. You live in a trailer, have a dog named ‘Skeeter’, and drink Miller High Life (the champagne of beers)… that means that you don’t fit the description of what a marryable person is defined as in this country.”
You’d feel discriminated against, wouldn’t you? You might even bitch about it to someone else, and say how unfair it is.
“Hey! It’s not MY fault that I was born with a propensity to pass out in my truck after a few six packs! I can’t help the fact that I am attracted to big girls with big tattoos and even bigger hair! Why can’t Elvira and I tell the world how much we love each other, and are committed to each other, by sobering up enough to drive down to the Justice of the Peace and signing a marriage contract? We’ll only have twelve kids, I swear to God, no more than that!”
[quote]Forget politics and religion.
Here it is, plain and simple, having a dick is biology, where you put it is choice.[/quote]
That’s right. And it’s a CHOICE to define who can and can’t get married. Right now, the choice the voters made recently was to disallow gay marriage. Guess what? That can change.
I believe that we will be judged not on what our beliefs are, which are many and varied, right and or wrong, but on how we treated others in our lifetime. For me, it’s that simple. Keeps me from going insane most of the time. (and from killing some people)
[quote]chinadoll wrote:
I have two aunties who have been together since before I was born. They should be able to be married. Their union has outlasted mostly everybody’s marriages, even longer than many people my age who are on their second, third marriages! Just because a couple is heterosexual doesn’t mean their relationship is more healthy than a gay couple’s. [/quote]
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Gay marriage is a thing of love, and therefore a thing of my father… because we all know that “God is love”. Y’all read my book, right? I know there’s a couple of different printings and whatnot, but that part was pretty clear. God is LOVE.
[/quote]
Pedophiles say the same thing about marriage between an adult and a child. Using your "logic"we must then conclude that that would be “love” as well and acceptable.
[quote]Scott1010220 wrote:
aikigreg wrote:
Nobody chooses to be the most persecuted subsect of humanity. Many fight it all their lives. I used to be ignorant like you. Try and educate yourself a little better, willya?
News flash. One of your guy friends is gay. That’s how I found out what an idiot I was.
Oh, and I’m pretty sure if you’re laughing at the gay guy in front of St. Peter, you’re likely not getting in, regardless of whether HE is or not.
Wow, so now the fags are the most persecuted subject of humanity.
I guess we can forget the suffereing the Jews faced from Hitler, and the suffering that the Africans faced as slaves, because we all know that “Lance & Skip”, “are the most persecuted subject of humanity”.
Give me a fucking break.
Forget politics and religion.
Here it is, plain and simple, having a dick is biology, where you put it is choice.[/quote]
So…you CHOSE to be heterosexual? One day, you just sat down and said, “Y’know, I think boobs are going to give me an erection.”
No. Of course you didn’t.
Bu, you did CHOOSE to let everyone know–in no uncertain terms–that you were an idiot. Nice work!
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
chinadoll wrote:
I have two aunties who have been together since before I was born. They should be able to be married. Their union has outlasted mostly everybody’s marriages, even longer than many people my age who are on their second, third marriages! Just because a couple is heterosexual doesn’t mean their relationship is more healthy than a gay couple’s.
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
Damn, and you are so hot too!
[/quote]
What statistics? (Which, by the way, doesn’t need an apostrophe.) From where did these statistics come from? Do you have a source? Can you link to them?
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
chinadoll wrote:
I have two aunties who have been together since before I was born. They should be able to be married. Their union has outlasted mostly everybody’s marriages, even longer than many people my age who are on their second, third marriages! Just because a couple is heterosexual doesn’t mean their relationship is more healthy than a gay couple’s.
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
Damn, and you are so hot too!
[/quote]
You don’t think that being able to get married might change that?
Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
No, just unnatural or contrary to all major religions in the world and contrary to Darwin’s survival of the fittest theory.
If being gay were truly contrary to ‘survival of the fittest’ then there would be no gay people. So evidently they are ‘fittest’ for survival
[/quote]
You are an idiot! Please explain how a lesbian can have a baby with no sperm and a gay get another guy pregnant? Prior to modern science, these couples would die with no offspring. That means boy and girls, that their homosexual “line” would stop with them. Thus through natural selection they would be weeded out. Duh!
So you are going to say; then why are there homo’s today if it was weeded out? Well, why are there people with any genetic condition? Downs syndrome for example? Because it’s a random generic abnormality. It just happens.
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
Damn, and you are so hot too!
You don’t think that being able to get married might change that?[/quote]
Or that society’s attitude (and yours) do not play a role in the instability and insecurity of homosexual relationships? (If this is even true)
[quote]doogie wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
chinadoll wrote:
I have two aunties who have been together since before I was born. They should be able to be married. Their union has outlasted mostly everybody’s marriages, even longer than many people my age who are on their second, third marriages! Just because a couple is heterosexual doesn’t mean their relationship is more healthy than a gay couple’s.
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
Damn, and you are so hot too!
You don’t think that being able to get married might change that?[/quote]
That is why I didn’t post a source. It will be either discredited as biases or someone will say that homo’s would have a better track record if they could marry. So is that true? I don’t know.
It just amazes me when people think that they can tell God’s intentions and what he would say.
Assuming that there is some great puller of strings up there (whether I believe it or not depends on what day you ask me), how the hell can anyone think they know what he would like?
As said before, the Bible has been written over a ton of times. Secondly, the bible contradicts itself more often than many like to believe. If you recall, there is the section in Genesis I think that was used forever to defend slavery as being “OK with God”. If you look close enough you can find anything you want. So why assume you know God hates gays, and their marriage is wrong? Isn’t arrogance a sin? If not, then I’m going to rewrite the ole’ Bible and throw it in.
You fellas bamboozle me sometimes. I thought Jesus was all about acceptance.
Always reminds of South Park : “I’m sorry, ‘Mourmonism’ was the correct answer”.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
doogie wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
chinadoll wrote:
I have two aunties who have been together since before I was born. They should be able to be married. Their union has outlasted mostly everybody’s marriages, even longer than many people my age who are on their second, third marriages! Just because a couple is heterosexual doesn’t mean their relationship is more healthy than a gay couple’s.
You look so hot I hate to disagree with you. But in the absence of some naked photos of you, I must speak the truth. While it may be anecdotally true for you that your Ants have a long standing relationship, all statistic’s demonstrate that homosexual relationships are less stable than herto. Individual experience really can’t and doesn’t prove the overall trend of things.
Damn, and you are so hot too!
You don’t think that being able to get married might change that?
That is why I didn’t post a source. It will be either discredited as biases or someone will say that homo’s would have a better track record if they could marry. So is that true? I don’t know.
[/quote]
Just a tip: intelligent people tend to take you less seriously when you refer to gay people as “homo’s”. Even less so when you don’t know what an apostrophe does.
You didn’t post a source because there is none. You don’t know what you’re talking about; you just don’t like dudes gettin’ wit’ other dudes.
