Um…dcb it might be time to stop the strawman bullcrap…
Thank you,
Zeb
[quote]ZEB wrote:
You must come up with valid reasons why we should allow gay marriage. Shortr of that you have no legitimate argument![/quote]
But your argument centers around the concept that allowing gay marriage will harm society, so we cannot allow it. You list reason after reason, sometimes logically, at other times not so much. However, Gay marriage would in my opinion stabilize the small gay population and lead to healtheir lives for many gays who aspire to marriage.
Don’t bother responding to that statement as I’ve read your thoughts on that. Really, I’m not being a jerk about it, I’ve just read it already literally hundreds of times. The problem with the debate between you and I is this: You think gay marriage would do one thing to society and I think it would do another. Since we’re not discussing a math problem there’s really no way either of us know what would actually happen, so it’s just a bunch of mental masterbation.
Are you tired ZEB? I heard that the older you get the more you have to nap in the middle of the day. Try a nice hot cup of tea, a rocking chair and a warm blanky. Don’t forget to put your teeth back in when you wake up. Just kidding bro. 
I did and in most cases they’re not much different than the general population. If you want to use HIV/AIDS as a real reason for not allowing gays to marry, I will still disagree with you, but I at least understand your line of reasoning. The list that the CDC has for Lesbians is about the same as women in general.
It’s my opinion that although I believe you truly intend to be compassionate, it’s parents who behave like you who are primarily responsible for the mental health of the gay population.
No it’s not. I was simply pointing out how your logic can be used to deny rights to large portions of the population. It might be the slippery slope argument, but I’m not the first one to use it in this thread. My logic is just as sound as yours when you worry that allowing gays to marry will result in polygamy, incestual marriage, marriage between dog and man, etc.
I’ve got no problem dropping my end of the slippery slope argument if you’re willing to do the same.
[/quote]
[quote]Do you see the reason why 70% of all Americans are against gay marriage?
Can you see now why 17 states have had gay marriage referendums and in all 17 states they were soundly defeated. Some defeated by as much as 77% (see Texas).[/quote]
No, honestly I can’t see it. But I love living in a democracy so I have no big problem at the moment with what’s going on. I’m glad that states are giving people the chance to voice their opinions on this. If the people don’t want gay marriage, so be it!
It doesn’t really matter does it? The passages in the Bible may play a big part in your marriage and in mine, but that has nothing to do with marriage in general. As you’ve stated, marriage is a 5000 year old tradition and the vast majority of people who have been married are not Christian and don’t read the Bible.
[quote]Oh my…and a father with a bad temper may pass that along to a child as well.
Why are we allowing that?
You are a silly guy [/quote]
So you’re comparing drug abuse to a bad temper? Also, you’re the one who has often compared homosexuality with a alcoholism and drug use, I’m just following your lead.
I wasn’t trying to give you a reason why gay people should marry. We aren’t creating public policy ZEB, we’re just having a conversation.
Now you’re just being a little rude.
I’ve got one more question for you ZEB and one more thought, both regarding the nature/nurture issue of homosexuality. Let me preface this by saying that I think we are in agreement that nobody knows for sure if homosexuality is a genetic trait or if it’s learned. But I think if you took your best guess you would say it’s learned, while I would say it’s genetic.
Question: Your daughter is in a loving relationship with a guy for a long time. At some point the guy asks for your blessing to ask your daughter to marry him. He’s a great guy; goes to your church, has a good job, he’s completely healthy. However, he’s a reformed homosexual. What do you say?
Thought: It seems to me that you should really hope that homosexuality is genetic. If so, we might be able to eradicate it at some point in time. I think most if not all parents would choose to have hetersexual babies if they could somehow make a choice during pregnancy. If there’s a gay gene, it may be able to be turned off at some point in time.
Nice talking to you ZEB. You’re going to win this debate my friend as I just have better things to do with my time. Besides, it’s a fruitless battle trying to win against God’s own personal Palidin.
[quote]dcb wrote:
Obesity is subjective? See this link from the CDC. Redirect Page
Now you’re going to say that those with a significant amount of muscle mass (like many on this site, including myself) may qualify as overweight or obese as defined by the BMI, but a simple bodyfat test would take care of those individuals. I’ve conducted thousands of those tests and they take much less time and effort to do than the current blood tests that are required in some states. I’m not complaining about the blood tests, I’m merely pointing out that it would be easy to calculate a BMI and then if there was any question, a follow-up bodyfat test could be performed. I believe the ACSM defines obesity as >25%(male) >30%(female). What’s subjective about that? [/quote]
What if I am borderline on the CDC obesity scale, and I am borderline on your body fat test, and I am borderline on any other test you choose to include.
So, on a good day, I make the grade. And, on a bad day, I fail. Do you give an rescind marriage rights due to the conclusion of the test? Or, do you make someone get divorced because he fails the test after he is married, but passed prior to being married?
I will assume that every person who performs the obesity and the body fat test derive the exact same results. Even if that is the case, the day to day fluxuations in an individuals scores makes the entire argument inherently subjective.
But, with gay sex, it is very obvious and objective. There is no day to day fluxuations in the sexuality of the individual. He or she is either gay or not gay.
Again, the two scenarios are completely different.
You brought obesisty up. Don’t get mad at me just because I pointed out the flaws in your argument.
[quote]
I’ve clearly shown that it’s a massive problem of much greater importance and proportion than homosexuality[/quote]
I would disagree that you have “clearly shown” anything of the sort.
I never said that. Obesity is a problem that should be dealt with, just like gay marriage is a problem that should be dealt with.
[quote]
Furthermore gay sex is not so clearly defined. [/quote]
It’s not? That’s news to me.
Well, as a matter of fact…
[quote]
I may have said otherwise before but ZEB provided us with a post a few pages ago that provides some interesting alternatives to the discussion. They weren’t ZEB’s words, so I’m not throwing him under the bus, but he did find an article that suggested broadening the definition of sex as I remember it.[/quote]
How broad of a definition do we need to not call a man having sex with a man or a woman having sex with a woman something other than sex? This hardly sounds rational.
[quote]
In regard to the issue of only allowing slender people to get married, I’m just following your logic. [/quote]
No, your logic is filled with flaws. Mine is like an unscathed pearl of wisom.
You applied it to obesity - a population that does not match.
It is definitely a very slippery slope.
I have 3 degrees in business. But, that is not what matters here.
What have I given you to take a shot at? I am simply pointing out where your argument is merritless.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Um…dcb it might be time to stop the strawman bullcrap…
Thank you,
Zeb[/quote]
That’s all he has given since he joined. He keeps clinging to the “let’s outlaw obesity” argument, and it has no merrit.
[quote]terribleivan wrote:
What if I am borderline on the CDC obesity scale, and I am borderline on your body fat test, and I am borderline on any other test you choose to include.
So, on a good day, I make the grade. And, on a bad day, I fail. Do you give an rescind marriage rights due to the conclusion of the test? Or, do you make someone get divorced because he fails the test after he is married, but passed prior to being married?
I will assume that every person who performs the obesity and the body fat test derive the exact same results. Even if that is the case, the day to day fluxuations in an individuals scores makes the entire argument inherently subjective.[/quote]
That’s such an easy thing to take care of. There really isn’t much fluctuation in %bf from day to day. Maybe a little, but not a lot. The error from day to day is more likely to depend on measurement error and these errors are known. Let’s say you have an error of 3%. Fine, you use that error plus another 2% for a 5% margin of error. So if I measure a man at 30% bodyfat, he’s obese no matter what the day to day fluctuations are.
[quote]
You brought obesisty up. Don’t get mad at me just because I pointed out the flaws in your argument.[/quote]
You didn’t point out any flaws because there are none. Nice try though.
[quote]
I never said that. Obesity is a problem that should be dealt with, just like gay marriage is a problem that should be dealt with.[/quote]
Right, so why not outlaw obese marriage?
Who are you, Bill Clinton?
[quote]
Well, as a matter of fact…[/quote]
I KNEW IT!
How broad of a definition do we need to define someone as an obese person?
I was just trying to keep the debate civil. I will continue to do so, you can reciprocate if you want to.
[quote]terribleivan wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Um…dcb it might be time to stop the strawman bullcrap…
Thank you,
Zeb
That’s all he has given since he joined. He keeps clinging to the “let’s outlaw obesity” argument, and it has no merrit.[/quote]
I never said to outlaw obesity, I was talking about marriage.
[quote]dcb wrote:
terribleivan wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Um…dcb it might be time to stop the strawman bullcrap…
Thank you,
Zeb
That’s all he has given since he joined. He keeps clinging to the “let’s outlaw obesity” argument, and it has no merrit.
I never said to outlaw obesity, I was talking about marriage.
[/quote]
Thank you for correcting me. Outlawing marriage of obese people is much more civil! LOL
[quote]dcb wrote:
That’s such an easy thing to take care of. There really isn’t much fluctuation in %bf from day to day. Maybe a little, but not a lot. The error from day to day is more likely to depend on measurement error and these errors are known. Let’s say you have an error of 3%. Fine, you use that error plus another 2% for a 5% margin of error. So if I measure a man at 30% bodyfat, he’s obese no matter what the day to day fluctuations are. [/quote]
Don’t ever let anyone tell you that you are not fair when you bring that idea up at the next psychiatric convention.
[quote]
You didn’t point out any flaws because there are none. Nice try though.[/quote]
Hubris - pure and simple.
It’s time we broaden the definition of sex. LOL
I don’t know. Why don’t you ponder that one while you are pondering the definition of sex.
[quote]
No, your logic is filled with flaws. Mine is like an unscathed pearl of wisom.
LOL. I’ll give you a “d” for your wisdom and say that’s a damn good line. :)[/quote]
Ma 'n Pa will be so proud!
[quote]
You applied it to obesity - a population that does not match.
In many important ways it does.[/quote]
Go back through the thread, my friend. Your agrument does not hold water.
You are fun to debate. Keep er comin’!
[quote]dcb wrote:
This sounds like you are trying to divert the discussion from the self-destructive lifestyle issue.
No, I’m comparing what you’re saying is a destructive lifestyle with a much greater self-destructive lifestyle. It is you that is trying to divert the discussion. On a site like this one, it’s surprising that you would do this. Your logic regarding gay marriage is clear, and I get it. I’m just saying you could easily apply it to other populations. Why are you so ready to deny gay people certain rights, but allow them to much bigger groups of people who are causing more harm?
[/quote]
And again you don’t address the issue. I was responding to your comments about sin and religion. I’m fine with talking about the health issues of gays. But let’s keep religion of out it.
No, I think a two word response that has no logic and no proof shows that there is nothing more to say. So that would not even be enough support to enter into a debate.
In any case, no insult was intended. I was just being sarcastic (as I do from time to time), but I will tone it down if it offends you.
Nothing, as marriage is not linked to obesity and has not been shown to produce obesity. It’s true that stats show slight weight gain with marriage, but not obesity. So the fact that obese people marry has no impact on their obesity. So marriage for obese people is not a risk factor for obesity.
So your analogy of gays and obesity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
And again you don’t address the issue. I was responding to your comments about sin and religion. I’m fine with talking about the health issues of gays. But let’s keep religion of out it.[/quote]
That’s okay with me as well. I misunderstood what you were talking about.
[quote]
No, I think a two word response that has no logic and no proof shows that there is nothing more to say. So that would not even be enough support to enter into a debate. [/quote]
I think it’s pretty clear what my two word response meant since the right of gays to marry straight people isn’t really what we’re talking about. But I do see what you’re saying.
You’re misunderstanding me. I see how you got that from my original post, but I clarified this in my last response to you. Once again, I am not talking about lean people who get married and then gain weight. I’m talking about the millions of obese people who are already unhealthy when they tie the knot.
How can anyone argue about this. Do we, or do we not have a massive problem with obesity in this country? 30% of adults in the U.S. are defined as obese.
Granted, there are a few of us who slip through the cracks when it comes to the BMI, but don’t kid yourself. People like us are few and far between. Obese people have kids and raise them to be obese.
I’m not even arguing with you about your stance on gay marriage here. I’m saying why are you so concerned about the health of gay people who willfully engage in their lifestyle, yet you’re unconcerned with the doomed offspring of the obese.
[quote]dcb wrote:
I’ve got one more question for you ZEB and one more thought, both regarding the nature/nurture issue of homosexuality. Let me preface this by saying that I think we are in agreement that nobody knows for sure if homosexuality is a genetic trait or if it’s learned. But I think if you took your best guess you would say it’s learned, while I would say it’s genetic.[/quote]
Agreed.
If he is a reformed homosexual I have no problem with that. Naturally, I would want this to be longer than a few weeks.
Would I have rather had her marry a man that was not a “reformed” anything? Sure, because not unlike alcoholism there is always a chance of slippage. But overall, the rate of reform is pretty good.
I agree, but obviously at this point no one knows for sure. But I just bet that there is something that goes very very wrong at a young age.
Check out some of those statistics relative to molestation, fatherly neglect (for boys), etc.
No, I’m not winning anything (directly). However, the country is winning by not allowing gay marriage
I know you are joking because I see that smilely face. But, it is odd that in this day and age one cannot “try” to be a good Christian without getting it thrown up in his face that he is “God’s paladin.”
There was a time in this country (not long ago) that attempting to live a spiritual life was considered admirable by others. Naturally that spiritual life has rules. How can there be “right” if there is no “wrong?” Think about it.
Take care dcb.
See you next time around
[quote]dcb wrote:
I’m saying why are you so concerned about the health of gay people who willfully engage in their lifestyle, yet you’re unconcerned with the doomed offspring of the obese.
[/quote]
Well, I just couldn’t resist this one dcb.
You see AIDS can be spread among the heterosexual population and kill completely innocent people.
Remember Paul Michael Glaser? Probably not huh?
He played one of the starring roles in Starsky and Hutch in the original TV series.
Seems that his wife (and child too I think) both died because of a blood transfusion that was carrying the AIDS virus.
I don’t like it when I read about homosexuals killing each other, it’s just very sad. However, I have to assume that they understand that very dangerous game that they’re playing.
But I get just a bit irrate when I hear about innocent people who also die because of that one very dangerous act that two men do.
I think Starsky got HIV from Hutch and passed it to his wife.
Anyone that has seen the show would know that those two hugged a bit too much.
[quote]dcb wrote:
I’m not even arguing with you about your stance on gay marriage here. I’m saying why are you so concerned about the health of gay people who willfully engage in their lifestyle, yet you’re unconcerned with the doomed offspring of the obese.
[/quote]
Nobody here said that they are unconcerned with the problem of obesity.
I think I have said the same thing to you at least 20 times. Here, I’ll say it again:
I AGREE OBESITY IS A PROBLEM. LET’S FIX IT!!!
I’ve had to tell you the same thing more times than I have to tell my four year old son. Please let it sink in - We care.
Is it me, or do the liberals keep jumping through the door like stormtroopers on this thread. They keep dying, but they just keep coming. It’s like they’ve been cloned.
Homosexuality is just evolution’s way of making sure the weak and unfit don’t breed.
Have a great weekend and a great NYE everyone!
I’m hosting a bash tomorrow night so I’m going to be absent from these forums until next week.
Stay lean, stay straight
Cheers
dcb
Come on now we have to take this to 2000 posts!
Happy New Year To ALL
Gay Marriage = OK
Married gay couple with children, fuck no.
Imagine how it would be for the kid.
First day of school? Asking a new friend if they want to come round for tea?
Parents Evening… The poor kid would go into hiding.
[quote]alstan90 wrote:
Gay Marriage = OK
Married gay couple with children, fuck no.
Imagine how it would be for the kid.
First day of school? Asking a new friend if they want to come round for tea?
Parents Evening… The poor kid would go into hiding.[/quote]
Of course, the logical next step from gay marriage is adoption. Rosie O’Donnel is not the exception - she is the norm.
Have you heard the argument that kids all over need good homes, so let the gay couples adopt and give them good homes? Well, much like you, I don’t buy that argument, but like I said…adoption is the next step.
Of course, I disagree with gay marriage for many other reasons as well, but hopefully you will think hard on this point when making your decision.