On May 30 2009 09:13 Aegraen wrote: Please, homosexuals stop trying to impose your ideology onto others. It's getting a tad ridiculous. You aren't happy with having the same benefits in civil unions, you just want to the name 'marriage' and to impose your views on everyone.
I have heard from homosexuals that the homosexual agenda is to make gay marriage legal, so that homosexuality will begin to be considered something that's normal in our culture.
Truly this terrible agenda must be stopped :O
Homosexuality, isn't normal. Propagation of the species is hardcoded into all species. Something that a tiny minority of the country does, isn't normal. (I'm waiting for, but, but, animals have same-sex also!) I'll pay 50$ to the first person who can show me how two female non-humans can fuck. Also, while it may happen, and rarely at that, two males having sex in the wild (lions, zebra, spiders, what have you), is not the norm.
With the laws of propagation and nature out of the way, I don't care one iota what gays do in their lives. I'm for, civil unions. I also am for abolishment of state derived benefits to all parties. Gays have every single right entitled to them as citizens of the USA under the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, and Declaration of Independence (throwing this one here, just for the hell of it). The day that gays are denied one of the rights entitled to all citizens of this country, will be the day I'll stand up for them.
At least we stopped calling it a right.
We're using normal to mean different things here. I'm using normal to mean: Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard So basically, something that's is part of the standard culture.
While you're using it to mean: Biology. Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies.
Are you saying that nothing biologically unnatural should be culturally acceptable? Because that's a pretty absurd stance to take.
No, what I'm saying is that trying to normalize something that a huge minority does, goes against what constitutes normalcy. Is pedophilia normal? Is murder, normal? Extremes, but it drives the point down, that at such huge minority, it cannot be constituted as something that is normal.
The problem with this example is that pedophilia and murder are damaging to other people. Homosexuality affects nobody except the two people involved, who in my opinion are entitled to decide what is right for them as long as it is not affecting others. You can make the argument that gay marriage affects others by giving them tax benefits or whatnot, but as long as straight couples are entitled to those benefits then the state should not be able to deny homosexual couples those same benefits. As I said in my first post, the state sanctioned institution of marriage should not exist. Have a system of unions that allows for rights such as visitation, custody, etc and be done with it. But as long as the governmental institution of marriage exists it needs to be equal for everyone regardless of their sexual affiliation.
While I agree, as long as there is state derived benefits, there should be civil unions, and marriage. To me, its a social and cultural battle as well, but I agree that they should be entitled to the same benefits, however, calling it marriage, no.
I'm just wondering how far you are going to push this. What about NAMBLA? What about Polygamy? What about pedophilia? As long as you aren't calling marriage a right, and it is indeed a benefit, then the state and ultimately the populace (voters), can decide who can, and who cannot receive that benefit. It is called a democratic notion. The will of the voters has been done.
On May 30 2009 09:13 Aegraen wrote: Please, homosexuals stop trying to impose your ideology onto others. It's getting a tad ridiculous. You aren't happy with having the same benefits in civil unions, you just want to the name 'marriage' and to impose your views on everyone.
I have heard from homosexuals that the homosexual agenda is to make gay marriage legal, so that homosexuality will begin to be considered something that's normal in our culture.
Truly this terrible agenda must be stopped :O
Homosexuality, isn't normal. Propagation of the species is hardcoded into all species. Something that a tiny minority of the country does, isn't normal. (I'm waiting for, but, but, animals have same-sex also!) I'll pay 50$ to the first person who can show me how two female non-humans can fuck. Also, while it may happen, and rarely at that, two males having sex in the wild (lions, zebra, spiders, what have you), is not the norm.
With the laws of propagation and nature out of the way, I don't care one iota what gays do in their lives. I'm for, civil unions. I also am for abolishment of state derived benefits to all parties. Gays have every single right entitled to them as citizens of the USA under the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, and Declaration of Independence (throwing this one here, just for the hell of it). The day that gays are denied one of the rights entitled to all citizens of this country, will be the day I'll stand up for them.
At least we stopped calling it a right.
Fucking means copulation. Two non-human females cannot fuck. I guess you fell for it.
Fucking is slang, you can't even try to fucking give it a definite definition.
The animal world is incredibly homosexual at times. Early civilisation had homosexuality. What you mean by "normal" is what is currently accepted by society. But society can be improved.
The only reasons for not letting gays marry are bigoted and cruel.
Ah, there goes the bigot and cruel pejoratives. You realize, this is hurting the movement, not strengthening it correct? Anyways, the population can decide who receives benefits and who doesn't, as long as it doesn't infringe on any rights. A right being those granted under the Bill of Rights and US Constitution, not whatever conjured rights you make up.
Secondly, look up fuck in the merriam-webster dictionary.
Once again. Earthworms are hermaphrodites. Not female.
Edit: The point I was trying to make, is that nature didn't create females to fuck each other. Nor, did they create males to fuck each other, just so happens they have an oriface that it fits into.
Once again. Earthworms are hermaphrodites. Not female.
Edit: The point I was trying to make, is that nature didn't create females to fuck each other. Nor, did they create males to fuck each other, just so happens they have an oriface that it fits into.
well nature didn't create dicks so we could masturbate but pretty much everyone does it
so if 2 guys or 2 chicks love each other then what is the problem ? or would u suddenly be ok with 2 chicks getting married if one of them got a sex change operation ?
Once again. Earthworms are hermaphrodites. Not female.
Edit: The point I was trying to make, is that nature didn't create females to fuck each other. Nor, did they create males to fuck each other, just so happens they have an oriface that it fits into.
This talk about whether women can fuck or not is silly.
Fucking is defined as penis going into vagina. Therefore two women can't fuck unless one of them has a penis. And if you've never seen a women with a penis, then you haven't read as much hentai as I have
However fucking as a slangword is defined loosely. I've seen it used to refer to homosexual sex., but being a slangword it has no formal definition.
^ and that's really all there is to say on the matter ^
why is the genitals important to wether they are allowed to marry? if it's because they can't have chrildren then sterile hetrosexuals should be denied it aswell.
It seems to me that there are MANY more important things we should be worrying about. I could give a shit about what you stick your dick in as long as it's of age and not retarded.
On May 30 2009 09:13 Aegraen wrote: Please, homosexuals stop trying to impose your ideology onto others. It's getting a tad ridiculous. You aren't happy with having the same benefits in civil unions, you just want to the name 'marriage' and to impose your views on everyone.
I have heard from homosexuals that the homosexual agenda is to make gay marriage legal, so that homosexuality will begin to be considered something that's normal in our culture.
Truly this terrible agenda must be stopped :O
Homosexuality, isn't normal. Propagation of the species is hardcoded into all species. Something that a tiny minority of the country does, isn't normal. (I'm waiting for, but, but, animals have same-sex also!) I'll pay 50$ to the first person who can show me how two female non-humans can fuck. Also, while it may happen, and rarely at that, two males having sex in the wild (lions, zebra, spiders, what have you), is not the norm.
With the laws of propagation and nature out of the way, I don't care one iota what gays do in their lives. I'm for, civil unions. I also am for abolishment of state derived benefits to all parties. Gays have every single right entitled to them as citizens of the USA under the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, and Declaration of Independence (throwing this one here, just for the hell of it). The day that gays are denied one of the rights entitled to all citizens of this country, will be the day I'll stand up for them.
At least we stopped calling it a right.
We're using normal to mean different things here. I'm using normal to mean: Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard So basically, something that's is part of the standard culture.
While you're using it to mean: Biology. Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies.
Are you saying that nothing biologically unnatural should be culturally acceptable? Because that's a pretty absurd stance to take.
No, what I'm saying is that trying to normalize something that a huge minority does, goes against what constitutes normalcy.
How statistically prevalent does something need to be before it can be "normalized"?
On May 30 2009 11:39 s_side wrote: It seems to me that there are MANY more important things we should be worrying about. I could give a shit about what you stick your dick in as long as it's of age and not retarded.
On May 30 2009 09:13 Aegraen wrote: Please, homosexuals stop trying to impose your ideology onto others. It's getting a tad ridiculous. You aren't happy with having the same benefits in civil unions, you just want to the name 'marriage' and to impose your views on everyone.
I have heard from homosexuals that the homosexual agenda is to make gay marriage legal, so that homosexuality will begin to be considered something that's normal in our culture.
Truly this terrible agenda must be stopped :O
Homosexuality, isn't normal. Propagation of the species is hardcoded into all species. Something that a tiny minority of the country does, isn't normal. (I'm waiting for, but, but, animals have same-sex also!) I'll pay 50$ to the first person who can show me how two female non-humans can fuck. Also, while it may happen, and rarely at that, two males having sex in the wild (lions, zebra, spiders, what have you), is not the norm.
With the laws of propagation and nature out of the way, I don't care one iota what gays do in their lives. I'm for, civil unions. I also am for abolishment of state derived benefits to all parties. Gays have every single right entitled to them as citizens of the USA under the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, and Declaration of Independence (throwing this one here, just for the hell of it). The day that gays are denied one of the rights entitled to all citizens of this country, will be the day I'll stand up for them.
At least we stopped calling it a right.
We're using normal to mean different things here. I'm using normal to mean: Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard So basically, something that's is part of the standard culture.
While you're using it to mean: Biology. Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies.
Are you saying that nothing biologically unnatural should be culturally acceptable? Because that's a pretty absurd stance to take.
No, what I'm saying is that trying to normalize something that a huge minority does, goes against what constitutes normalcy.
How statistically prevalent does something need to be before it can be "normalized"?
You still haven't answered this Aegraen :/
Thats for each person to answer, and generally for society to decide. My personal opinion on the matter, at least 15%.
On May 30 2009 11:43 travis wrote: that's because he very very clearly chooses the posts that will be easy for him to respond to, and doesn't respond to the other stuff.
this has been pointed out over and over, in other threads than this one as well.
There's like 8 people I'm talking to, I have a life outside this forum. How about you go into every thread and debate with multiple people. Of course its not reasonable for me to respond to every post.
On May 30 2009 11:43 travis wrote: that's because he very very clearly chooses the posts that will be easy for him to respond to, and doesn't respond to the other stuff.
this has been pointed out over and over, in other threads than this one as well.
Oh man This is one of the disadvantages internet debate has over irl debate
Ah, there goes the bigot and cruel pejoratives. You realize, this is hurting the movement, not strengthening it correct? Anyways, the population can decide who receives benefits and who doesn't, as long as it doesn't infringe on any rights.
I'm trying to not get banned after my first post so I'm going to keep this extra nice. "The population can decide who receives benefits and who doesn't, as long as it doesn't infringe of any rights." This, then, means that slavery was fine? Imagine if we tried to tell all black people that they are allowed to have civil unions but that they are barred from marriage because that isn't "normal" - even thinking that would get you labeled a racist. You, instead of being racist, are homophobic.
A right being those granted under the Bill of Rights and US Constitution, not whatever conjured rights you make up.
The constitution was written with the goal that the majority would never be able to take away the rights of the minority. The fact that you don't consider marriage a right for gays is laughable. Again, imagine if you tried to say that blacks should only get civil unions to 'preserve marriage'. There is absolutely no justification for saying "we have x, but they shouldn't get it because they're black/gay/insert-physical-characteristic-here." I really wish you could be gay (or any minority) for a day so that you could see the real consequences of your discrimination.
being gay isn't natural/normal and therefore gays don't deserve what we have
This arguments really makes me think you're trolling, but i'm gonna respond anyway - hopefully you are just very young and haven't seen much of the real world yet. This line of thinking is exactly how the Holocaust was caused - anyone (specifically Jews) who isn't of the 'Aryan race' i.e. normal was killed. I'm sure we can both agree that this is something that we would all like to avoid repeating.
On May 30 2009 09:13 Aegraen wrote: Please, homosexuals stop trying to impose your ideology onto others. It's getting a tad ridiculous. You aren't happy with having the same benefits in civil unions, you just want to the name 'marriage' and to impose your views on everyone.
I have heard from homosexuals that the homosexual agenda is to make gay marriage legal, so that homosexuality will begin to be considered something that's normal in our culture.
Truly this terrible agenda must be stopped :O
Homosexuality, isn't normal. Propagation of the species is hardcoded into all species. Something that a tiny minority of the country does, isn't normal. (I'm waiting for, but, but, animals have same-sex also!) I'll pay 50$ to the first person who can show me how two female non-humans can fuck. Also, while it may happen, and rarely at that, two males having sex in the wild (lions, zebra, spiders, what have you), is not the norm.
With the laws of propagation and nature out of the way, I don't care one iota what gays do in their lives. I'm for, civil unions. I also am for abolishment of state derived benefits to all parties. Gays have every single right entitled to them as citizens of the USA under the Bill of Rights, US Constitution, and Declaration of Independence (throwing this one here, just for the hell of it). The day that gays are denied one of the rights entitled to all citizens of this country, will be the day I'll stand up for them.
Fucking means copulation. Two non-human females cannot fuck. I guess you fell for it.
Fucking is slang, you can't even try to fucking give it a definite definition.
The animal world is incredibly homosexual at times. Early civilisation had homosexuality. What you mean by "normal" is what is currently accepted by society. But society can be improved.
The only reasons for not letting gays marry are bigoted and cruel.
Ah, there goes the bigot and cruel pejoratives. You realize, this is hurting the movement, not strengthening it correct? Anyways, the population can decide who receives benefits and who doesn't, as long as it doesn't infringe on any rights. A right being those granted under the Bill of Rights and US Constitution, not whatever conjured rights you make up.
Secondly, look up fuck in the merriam-webster dictionary.
Fuck is used too frequently by people who didn't look it up in the Merriam-Webster dictionary for me to take Merriam seriously on this one. But that's just spitting hairs.
Just because most of the population decide that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry doesn't mean that it's not cruel and bigoted. It's bigoted because it's justified on the most ignorant grounds - 'Gay is unnatural' 'They want to make my children gay' 'They want to force churches to marry them' 'Gays are violent protesters' - and because it feeds on the bigoted anti-gay sentiment that exists. It's cruel because it punishes a segment of the population simply for their choice of sex.
EPT
