EPTedit: vrooks, i naturally assumed you were joking since you were born and stayed alive. Good argument, this gets you far in debate.
The Protection of Marriage - Page 2
| Blogs > Suggestion Box |
|
banged
United States46 Posts
edit: vrooks, i naturally assumed you were joking since you were born and stayed alive. Good argument, this gets you far in debate. | ||
|
Meta
United States6228 Posts
How would you know, is the real question. You've yet to provide any references. I believe what you are saying is simply your opinion. According to everything I've researched, your opinion is wrong. | ||
|
banged
United States46 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:36 Meta wrote: How would I know? I know because I read the article I posted, and they seemed to have solid arguments. How would you know, is the real question. You've yet to provide any references. I believe what you are saying is simply your opinion. According to everything I've researched, your opinion is wrong. well my friend, you are the one to prove this wrong. Since this is the state of things in the US as of now. And if you can prove this wrong, you can also try to convince people to support gay marriage. Until then your argument is as good as anyone saying that Bush blew up the twin towers. It does seem likely to me, but I don't hop on the bandwagon. | ||
|
Augury
United States758 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:23 banged wrote: vsrooks, there's no "branches" of Christianity. There's cults and sects, and they usually sick brainwashed people. Sicker then the "christians". Does Buddhism accept fags? Or does it not say anything about it? And why would u bring this up since there's literally no buddhists in the US? And the few that we have would stil lbe against it? and Pagan religions? I mean what are you, 11? I cant even say 13, this has to be 11 same sex couple will have impact on childs' life. Starting with social life. First of all, bring some strong arguments before u start saying something that contradicts common sense. Then i will waste time giving you an answer. Yes there are different branches and denominations of Christianity, branches of Christianity: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant.... Christians only make up 75% or so of the USA and as far as me including other religions into the argument, I felt the need to include them when you made a blanket statement regarding all religions: "marriage is a sacred act in every religion while gay relationship isn't". Also not every Christian in the US is against gay marriage. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:07 banged wrote: are you going to determine which one of them worthy of adopting a child? I don't really care if you want to spend your tax money on "straight" marriages, that's been decided for you already. If you are not happy, move the fuck out. The democracy is the majority, so as long as its true, you can stick to crying about fags being mistreated, noone cares. adopting a kid into a "same sex marriage" type of family is just retarded. You are not educated enough to advocate this type of sick shit so i won't even argue. Until it's proven that those type of families DO NOT IMPACT kids' life in ANY WAY, you better calm down and stop talking out of your ass. Kids should not be adopted by fags, as well as single mother/fathers. This society isn't ready for these kids just yet. Maybe in the future, and i'm talking about single mothers/fathers, not fags. It's been proven, you failed abortion. | ||
|
banged
United States46 Posts
| ||
|
banged
United States46 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:49 Jibba wrote: It's been proven, you failed abortion. your input is great, when are you going to college btw? | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:53 banged wrote: your input is great, when are you going to college btw? When are you going to Disney Land? | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:50 banged wrote: u meant "branches" that support gay marriage, don't give me orthodox, catholic, protesant bullshit now. None of them fucking support it. And who cares for those christians that think its fine? How can u call yourself a christian and not accept Christianity? This is worthless. Theres the majority that DOESN'T LIKE IT and there's nothign u can do about it. So until u change peoples view on this issue don't be complaining about a ban. Hell, u can gather a bunch of pedophiles and advocate underage sex. Even make up your own "branch" that supports it. Get real. Just like the majority of Americans supporting segregation? The reason we have certain checks and balances in our legal system is so shit like this doesn't happen when the majority goes against the ideals in the constitution. If you think marriage is a religious institution, that is supremely idiotic. If you think that the fact that it offends the religious has anything to do with it, that is also very idiotic. The United States Constitution gives me the right to offend you, but you do not have the right not to be offended. Boo hoo. In reality, your argument comes down to hatred. You lost all credibility when you used the word "fag". People like you make the world a bad place. Reading your previous posts, you are the same pathetic cretin who pushes around fellow human beings, as capable of the same love and understanding that any human could naturally possess, who have been proven to raise healthy children through research. When I read your posts, I feel ill, because you radiate no aura of intelligence or insight, but the blind, ignorant, reactionary hatred that kept blacks enslaved for almost a century. You're sick. It won't be long before a mod bans you, for populating our forum with your belligerent, nonsensical, incendiary trash. You can argue for Proposition 8 all you want, but if you do it like a brainless retard, don't expect to be here very long you insensitive and hateful prick. | ||
|
t_co
United States702 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:50 banged wrote: u meant "branches" that support gay marriage, don't give me orthodox, catholic, protesant bullshit now. None of them fucking support it. And who cares for those christians that think its fine? How can u call yourself a christian and not accept Christianity? This is worthless. Theres the majority that DOESN'T LIKE IT and there's nothign u can do about it. So until u change peoples view on this issue don't be complaining about a ban. Hell, u can gather a bunch of pedophiles and advocate underage sex. Even make up your own "branch" that supports it. Get real.  | ||
|
t_co
United States702 Posts
On November 06 2008 12:51 banged wrote: another concern is benefits. People do not want to spend their tax money on supporting these gay prides and their "families". As long as they get NO BENEFITS whatsoever, i DON'T CARE. Get your own "church", get your ugly ass certificate and live your ugly life without ever popping out in front of me. obvously they can't be allowed to adopt children. That's just fucking rude. LoL... wow. Wow. | ||
|
banged
United States46 Posts
On November 06 2008 13:56 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Just like the majority of Americans supporting segregation? The reason we have certain checks and balances in our legal system is so shit like this doesn't happen when the majority goes against the ideals in the constitution. If you think marriage is a religious institution, that is supremely idiotic. If you think that the fact that it offends the religious has anything to do with it, that is also very idiotic. The United States Constitution gives me the right to offend you, but you do not have the right not to be offended. Boo hoo. In reality, your argument comes down to hatred. You lost all credibility when you used the word "fag". People like you make the world a bad place. Reading your previous posts, you are the same pathetic cretin who pushes around fellow human beings, as capable of the same love and understanding that any human could naturally possess, who have been proven to raise healthy children through research. When I read your posts, I feel ill, because you radiate no aura of intelligence or insight, but the blind, ignorant, reactionary hatred that kept blacks enslaved for almost a century. You're sick. It won't be long before a mod bans you, for populating our forum with your belligerent, nonsensical, incendiary trash. You can argue for Proposition 8 all you want, but if you do it like a brainless retard, don't expect to be here very long you insensitive and hateful prick. actually majority of americans, including myself, supported Obama. I don't know what majority you talking about, you must've separated "white majority" from "majority of americans" in your mind. This is a worse crime then using word "fag" for queers. If i lost my credibility using word "fag", then i must say - you never even had yours. Peace out, i do hope "mods" won't consider the amount of butt kissing you've done to get me banned. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On November 06 2008 14:10 banged wrote: actually majority of americans, including myself, supported Obama. I don't know what majority you talking about, you must've separated "white majority" from "majority of americans" in your mind. This is a worse crime then using word "fag" for queers. If i lost my credibility using word "fag", then i must say - you never even had yours. Peace out, i do hope "mods" won't consider the amount of butt kissing you've done to get me banned. I can't believe you really thought I was using the word "majority" in a modern context. You have to be a troll. NO ONE is this stupid. | ||
|
Suggestion Box
China115 Posts
On November 06 2008 09:10 x89titan wrote: i am offended by this. you calling religious people stupid? o hell nah. get ready to be destroyed....in 09 I'm calling people stupid who think that whatever government calls marriage must be marriage. That they can't tell the difference between a legal term and a moral term. If my church says gay marriage isn't marriage, we don't give a FLYING FUCK what the government says is or isn't a marriage and why the hell should you? They only use the term to give people basic rights like visiting their loved one in the hospital, sharing house and income, etc. Basic functions for anyone who chooses someone to live cooperatively with, and I think we should allow anyone to obtain these abilities whether they are lovers or not--whether they are heterosexual lovers or not, too. If I want to grant these legal privileges to my aunt I should be allowed, and why not anyone else, regardless of... sexual relationship? How ridiculous is it to base all this on sexuality anyways? So yes, people who need to "protect marriage" just seem stupid to me. I haven't seen good reasons for it. I don't think this applies to all religious people, but the ones voting to bash gays, yes they're stupid. [B]On November 06 2008 10:19 0cz3c wrote: The separation of Church and State is simply meant to prevent a theocracy. Its separation means that the two can co-exist, and can intertwine, but one cannot rule the other. For example, the state cannot ban worship of religions. Likewise, Church alone cannot act as the decider of a political race. It's a given that religion can influence a citizen's decision for whom to vote, but it within itself cannot determine the elected official. The religious implications in marriage are not to obtain legal benefits (so you have absolutely no reason to attack this, especially if you believe in the extreme degree of separation of church and state that you imply); on the other hand, it is discrimination from a legal standpoint. You're wrong sir. The separation of Church and State is also to prevent religious discrimination. To prevent the state from corrupting religion(s), not just vice versa. People are taking what the government says marriage is and isn't as important to their personal (actually religious) beliefs. They don't realize that this very fact, the fact that the government's definition of marriage exists at all, is corrupting the meaning of the word marriage. It is the beginning of government effecting religions, the very reason religions have (and should) be for the separation of Church and State. For them to miss this point, and instead to try to legislate their religious beliefs/opinions onto the entire country, is utterly ignorant. They would not tolerate this if any other religion achieved this. We have the separation of church and state, also, for the very reason that it might not be YOUR church that gets state backing. So unless you want religion to turn into a popularity contest where the most popular beliefs become the only allowed ones, you sure as hell should favor the separation of church and state. And if you say, "hey, my religion is the biggest, who cares?" then you are still stupid, because once your church gets intertwined with government your church will change and no one will be able to stop it--it will change and it won't be what you wanted it to be, but it will still be the state religion. This has happened throughout history, so please don't act like the separation of church and state is a bad idea. It's the very reason we have problems with so many Islamic countries, as well as countries in the past of the Christian variety. The legal status of marriage should have nothing to do with religion and religious people don't realize this. They are tying "the sanctity of marriage" to the government, a huge blow against religion, by trying to legislate "the definition of marriage." And if you say, they aren't doing it for any religious reasons, then they are just doing it to take rights away from a specific group, which is unconstitutional as it violates the principle of equal protection under the law, something I think non-idiots will agree we simply can't do without. | ||
| ||
