|
On February 10 2012 04:14 Focuspants wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 04:12 sermokala wrote:On February 10 2012 04:07 Focuspants wrote:
Guys, Sermokala isnt imposing their beliefs on anyone, theyre just telling people what they can or cannot do based on their beliefs. Stop listening to the propeganda!
The fact of the matter is, like the suffrage movement, like the civil rights movement, like any movement where a group in society was witheld rights due to some biological trait, we as a society, need to realize our follies in the past, and move forward in an effort to make everyone feel equal and appreciated.
Gay marriage hurts nobody. The argument that only Christians understand the true value and sanctity of marriage is completely ludicrous. In fact, christians have the highest divorce rates because they create such a false value for it, that people enter it unprepared. Why dont you spend all your time and resources worrying about fixing your own problems, and leave people that love each other alone.
I cant believe this is actually still an issue in American politics. Theres so much shit going on, and this still gets air time. Sad.
Good job people of Washington though! so what your saying is that there is some biological difference to gay people and by definition normal people? Thats a pretty hilarious way to start your argument. it amazes me how many people treat team liquid general like a cnn comment section. Umm... yes, they are biologically different. Not in their gender, like with women, not in their skin colour like with blacks, but with their sexual preference. You actually believe that being gay is a choice? And what do you mean "normal people". Everyone is "normal" in the sense that they are born human, and are biologically predisposed to be what they are. Normal, does not mean "not gay" to most people. But apparently it does to you.
If being gay was a choice it wouldn't be biological. by being something you are born with say being black it is in fact biological. tell me that you aren't serious with thinking this.
you're acting like being gay makes you different from everyone else. the difference between me and an alcoholic is larger then me and my black friend. you specifically are saying that they are a different group in your post.
|
On February 10 2012 04:24 sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 04:14 Focuspants wrote:On February 10 2012 04:12 sermokala wrote:On February 10 2012 04:07 Focuspants wrote:
Guys, Sermokala isnt imposing their beliefs on anyone, theyre just telling people what they can or cannot do based on their beliefs. Stop listening to the propeganda!
The fact of the matter is, like the suffrage movement, like the civil rights movement, like any movement where a group in society was witheld rights due to some biological trait, we as a society, need to realize our follies in the past, and move forward in an effort to make everyone feel equal and appreciated.
Gay marriage hurts nobody. The argument that only Christians understand the true value and sanctity of marriage is completely ludicrous. In fact, christians have the highest divorce rates because they create such a false value for it, that people enter it unprepared. Why dont you spend all your time and resources worrying about fixing your own problems, and leave people that love each other alone.
I cant believe this is actually still an issue in American politics. Theres so much shit going on, and this still gets air time. Sad.
Good job people of Washington though! so what your saying is that there is some biological difference to gay people and by definition normal people? Thats a pretty hilarious way to start your argument. it amazes me how many people treat team liquid general like a cnn comment section. Umm... yes, they are biologically different. Not in their gender, like with women, not in their skin colour like with blacks, but with their sexual preference. You actually believe that being gay is a choice? And what do you mean "normal people". Everyone is "normal" in the sense that they are born human, and are biologically predisposed to be what they are. Normal, does not mean "not gay" to most people. But apparently it does to you. If being gay was a choice it wouldn't be biological. by being something you are born with say being black it is in fact biological. tell me that you aren't serious with thinking this. you're acting like being gay makes you different from everyone else. the difference between me and an alcoholic is larger then me and my black friend. you specifically are saying that they are a different group in your post.
Your reading comprehension is absolutely terrible. I said they are BIOLOGICALLY gay. Having a biological trait that differs from someone else DOES NOT make you "abnormal". You are the one that defined them as gay and others as "normal", not me. If you think me saying that them having a biological trait that is different means I think they are not normal, then there would be no normal, because everyone has different biological traits.
The fact is, EVERYONE deserves the same rights and freedoms, because EVERYONE is human. Unless what you are doing wil cause harm to someone else, or infringe upon their freedoms (much like what youre doing), people should be allowed to pursue happiness in an equal fashion.
You are trying to argue from a position of intellectual superiority, and all of your posts wreak of ignorance. Get a grip.
|
I'm just going to stop trying to debate in this thread. no one else is trying to do anything but spread what they think with the propaganda that they can find. Its a real shame that I'm the one that has actually questioned what I believe in and all of you care about is trying to make everyone else think the same as you.
If anyone wants to actually debate about this pm me. I doubt I'll get one. you all can just act like believing the same thing as the people around you without question is the smart thing to do.
|
i'm fine with gays marrying, but i really don't like it when people flaunt their homosexuality like they deserve more respect etc than any other person (not saying this thread is an example at all i'm just saying). i know this may be offensive but i view homosexuality as something that is just not quite normal with your brain, just like any other "disorder" that people may have, because of the whole continuation of the human race thing... 
(i'm straight myself)
|
Guys it's that simple:
People who are against gay marriage are just exactly like theists. They don't have any argument that has not been disproven thousands of times. But it's not worth discussing with them, as you wouldn't discuss with kitten not to hunt the mouse. Similar to animals, their lack of intellect makes it impossible for them to comprehend the fact that their beliefs are what they are: beliefs and nothing more. I, as an open-minded person ( read: atheist ), see, that gay marriage is obviously not a problem for anyone who is not gay, so there is no reason whatsoever to prohibit it.
|
United States7488 Posts
Please don't make this thread a debate about religion. If you do I will close it.
|
On February 09 2012 13:02 Yosho wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 13:00 1Eris1 wrote:On February 09 2012 12:55 Yosho wrote:On February 09 2012 12:49 bRiz wrote:
Don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, it's a positive answer to a problem being experienced in the GLT community, but I personally prefer to keep marriage between a man and a woman, though I don't think I'd vote for a restriction like that. Just a personal opinion. I wouldn't vote for this to pass but if I would vote to not let is pass. Although even in nature gay animals exist, I feel it's like any other deficiency that people / animals can be born with. One of the sole thing we rely on to define life is reproduction. You cannot do this naturally on gay people. Not to be rude but I don't count this as a step up, but as a step down. You say they are born with it, than why does it matter if they can get married? It's not like you're going to convince one of them to turn straight, and thus reproduce anyways. I figure it goes against nature. Why support it further? Mentally ill people who are born with deficiency's also should be restricted on what they can and can't do. I would not like a mentally handicapped person to operate extremely heavy machinery. And I don't think gay people should marry. I feel it's a defilement of what marriage is.
This argument is flawed because marriage goes against the idea of living to procreate, it limits you to one partner. If procreation is the name of the game then you want many partners. Also there's no laws saying sterile people cannot marry.
|
On February 10 2012 04:29 sermokala wrote:
I'm just going to stop trying to debate in this thread. no one else is trying to do anything but spread what they think with the propaganda that they can find. Its a real shame that I'm the one that has actually questioned what I believe in and all of you care about is trying to make everyone else think the same as you.
If anyone wants to actually debate about this pm me. I doubt I'll get one. you all can just act like believing the same thing as the people around you without question is the smart thing to do.
The irony is delicious.
|
Wait, sermolka, I asked you to explain yourself and you went off on a tangent. Majority minority doesn't matter. I asked to explain further on how being against gay marriage is not imposing your beliefs on others. I still didn't get an explanation or perhaps I didn't understand it. I'm not understanding you.
|
On February 09 2012 11:39 Boblhead wrote:
mostly democratic states vote yes on gay marriage. Southern states and republican majority states will vote against because they are anti gay or don't support it because of their church/ religion. Plus the amount of money churches put in to stop these things from passing is insane.
Time for me to go south
|
On February 09 2012 12:55 Yosho wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 12:49 bRiz wrote:
Don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, it's a positive answer to a problem being experienced in the GLT community, but I personally prefer to keep marriage between a man and a woman, though I don't think I'd vote for a restriction like that. Just a personal opinion. I wouldn't vote for this to pass but if I would vote to not let is pass. Although even in nature gay animals exist, I feel it's like any other deficiency that people / animals can be born with. One of the sole thing we rely on to define life is reproduction. You cannot do this naturally on gay people. Not to be rude but I don't count this as a step up, but as a step down.
The way i see this is that the world i kind of over populated as it is and our species is pretty secure in its survival at least for now that the whole reproductive thing becomes mute to me, if anything its good to have non-reproductive couples so that orphaned or unwanted kids can still have a home with parents that will care for them and so they won't become a burden upon society because they had no support otherwise.
|
People keep regurgitating the same trite arguments against gay marriage even after they've been thoroughly disproved. I am personally a little repulsed by two men kissing. I also don't like turnip greens. So guess what... I don't kiss guys and I don't eat turnip greens. Taking other people's rights because YOU don't find it appropriate is simply wrong.
Allow me to use your bigot logic: Anyone who is opposed to gay marriage should be castrated because I THINK that anyone that painfully stupid should not be allowed to procreate. Get it? Probably not... because you're an idiot.
|
On February 10 2012 04:31 AlphaWhale wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 13:02 Yosho wrote:On February 09 2012 13:00 1Eris1 wrote:On February 09 2012 12:55 Yosho wrote:On February 09 2012 12:49 bRiz wrote:
Don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, it's a positive answer to a problem being experienced in the GLT community, but I personally prefer to keep marriage between a man and a woman, though I don't think I'd vote for a restriction like that. Just a personal opinion. I wouldn't vote for this to pass but if I would vote to not let is pass. Although even in nature gay animals exist, I feel it's like any other deficiency that people / animals can be born with. One of the sole thing we rely on to define life is reproduction. You cannot do this naturally on gay people. Not to be rude but I don't count this as a step up, but as a step down. You say they are born with it, than why does it matter if they can get married? It's not like you're going to convince one of them to turn straight, and thus reproduce anyways. I figure it goes against nature. Why support it further? Mentally ill people who are born with deficiency's also should be restricted on what they can and can't do. I would not like a mentally handicapped person to operate extremely heavy machinery. And I don't think gay people should marry. I feel it's a defilement of what marriage is. This argument is flawed because marriage goes against the idea of living to procreate, it limits you to one partner. If procreation is the name of the game then you want many partners. Also there's no laws saying sterile people cannot marry.
Don't even dignify that bigot with a response
This is basically your argument Yosho:
"I don't think black people should be citizens. I feel it's a defilement of what citizenship is."
See I can be a bigot too ^^
Or "I don't think short people should be able to vote. There are options available for a short person to "fix" their shortness, so they should do that and then they can vote."
Those are completely invalid arguments because you are denying someone a right based a simple biological characteristic that has no bearing on the issue at hand. Yes there is plenty of empirical evidence suggesting that a highly cognitive deficient person should not operate machinery as it would endanger the individual and others. There is no such danger to society at large or the individual in question in allowing them to have a legal marriage.
Congratulations to Washington! One more step towards ending our generations civil rights movement.
|
What an awful thread, but a great thing for Washington. As said many times here, an atheist can have a marriage in a church, obviously the bible can be ignored in that case, so why not a few others. Go and marry and have a good time, I say.
Random pic I found. No atheists but the point remains.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On February 10 2012 05:13 Chibithor wrote:What an awful thread, but a great thing for Washington. As said many times here, an atheist can have a marriage in a church, obviously the bible can be ignored in that case, so why not a few others. Go and marry and have a good time, I say. Random pic I found. No atheists but the point remains. + Show Spoiler +
Its not even about getting married in a church, its about getting married in the eyes of the law (that whole separation of church and state thing)
Like I couldn't care less about clergy allowing gays to marry in their churches. But for a state or federal government to say you can't get legally married; is nothing but a violation of their rights.
off topic: I'm surprised no one (that I've seen) has used the Rick Santorum argument, my personal favorite:
If you let two guys marry what's to stop a guy from marrying a horse?
EDIT: also, nice picture. Support love^^
|
off topic: I'm surprised no one (that I've seen) has used the Rick Santorum argument, my personal favorite:
If you let two guys marry what's to stop a guy from marrying a horse? That's a joke, right? A serious presidential candidate of arguably the mightiest country in the world did not really say that, right?
|
I personally think the government shouldn't have anything to do with marriage.
|
On February 10 2012 05:33 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +off topic: I'm surprised no one (that I've seen) has used the Rick Santorum argument, my personal favorite:
If you let two guys marry what's to stop a guy from marrying a horse? That's a joke, right? A serious presidential candidate of arguably the mightiest country in the world did not really say that, right?
Actually i think he said dog not horse. Prompting Dan Savage to googlebomb him.
|
On February 10 2012 05:54 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 05:33 Thorakh wrote:off topic: I'm surprised no one (that I've seen) has used the Rick Santorum argument, my personal favorite:
If you let two guys marry what's to stop a guy from marrying a horse? That's a joke, right? A serious presidential candidate of arguably the mightiest country in the world did not really say that, right? Actually i think he said dog not horse. Prompting Dan Savage to googlebomb him.
Point being, Yes Rick Santorum used the same style of argument
2 men being allows to marry will inevitably lead the way (or prevent our ability to stop) a man from marrying an animal.
The Youtube clip is readily available. Jon Stewart has aired the clip more than once.
EDIT: before someone jumps down my throat, I brought his argument up sarcastically because people have used every other absurd baseless anti gay marriage argument already. I don't endorse Rick's argument lol.
|
On February 10 2012 04:30 Silidons wrote:i'm fine with gays marrying, but i really don't like it when people flaunt their homosexuality like they deserve more respect etc than any other person (not saying this thread is an example at all i'm just saying). i know this may be offensive but i v iew homosexuality as something that is just not quite normal with your brain, just like any other "disorder" that people may have, because of the whole continuation of the human race thing... (i'm straight myself)
This is highly offensive. You really think that gays will end the reproduction of the human race? No. We are reproducing just fine as the vast majority of people are straight. If anything, there's too many people here. Do some research and actually learn about being gay. Then you wouldn't spout such arrogant remarks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/420286_370287986329968_153786011313501_1417413_1069140387_n.jpg)
