Printable View
Except that homosexuality is between two consenting couples, neither of which is harmed. Beastiality is not (the animal has not given consent), and incest has the potential for harm to come to any offspring from the relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Atlantis
pets dont consent to being pets, but we still allow it, and i believe that studies have shown that incest with like your second cusin isnt really harmful. btw, what about gay incest?
True but you draw a line somewhere. That is why there are cruelty to animals laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Atlantis
As for incenst, if there is definately no chance of children then go nuts.
I bet some animals might enjoy intamacy with humans. They already think their part of the pack.
My friends dog for example will actuall jump on people's back and get very happy.. ~:eek: and i have heard similiar stories about other dogs.
Everything should be ok as long as it's between 2 consent adults. Incest between adults no problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Atlantis
Bestiality is ok, if the animal in question also have the right to vote in the next president election....... ~:cool:
We have thank you very much. And here in the US as in most of the world we draw it at a man and a woman.Quote:
True but you draw a line somewhere.
Wrong 75% of americans oppose gay marriage.Quote:
Wrong. Many people in the US--enough to count--would draw the line a little farther. Dividing the nation like this over any issue is self-destructive and stupid, and a compromise should be drawn.
There were all sorts of Polls after the Mass incident . If you inculde civil unions then the numbers change drasticly but I doubt that most Americans will ever back gay marriage..
Rasoforos will translate ( ok i ll change it a bit ) a good old wise Greek proverb:
A cucumber that doesnt grow up your ass, let it grow...
...simple as that, legalising gay marriage doesnt mean you have to go and get married to a guy...so let gay men and lesbian women get married, you dont have to go to the wedding and you dont have to buy them a present. It will only take 1 hour and it will mean a lot to them... ~:)
This is bad news. Ive currently got too much on my plate to get into yet another gay marriage discussion.. the arguments pro and against have been made repeatedly, now its up to the populations of each nation to decide.
Actually they both can. But neither will (especially on something like this) as if they cause waves they could lose their position. The senate is usually a rubber stamp cause if they have to much attention the mob might start to ask why we have a senate that is basically an appointment for life. Their role is review a bill that has gone through the house of commons and if it needs revisions will make them and send it back to the commons for a new vote. If the Governor General doesn't give the royal assent to a bill it never becomes law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
Legalising this just gave morality a black eye.
Who could support this. They had the same rights before no one was stopping them from marrying straight. Its not our fault they dont like it. :furious3:
I hope america can keep its morals in the years to come. ~:cheers:
I support it, as do most people I know. I would also support legalising beastiality and polygamy, but not incest. That actually causes much much more harm than being a homo, or a dog porker, or a polygamist ever could.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar010
ok then if the majority of your country supports it go ahead but most americans do not.
The issue was put up for vote in my state and only one county had a majority for it ~:cheers: and the rest voted it down in a land side.
a great victory ~:)
Several points need to be made in regards to this issue.
Was the process that brought state sanctioned same sex marriage done through the legislative process of Canada - or was it forced onto the state by an outside body.
From what I have read the new law followed the process that was set up by the Canadian people when their government was formed.
Society has the ablity to determine what course it wishes to follow by electing its representives in a democratic society. The Canadian people elected the people who voted this into law - not by a simple majority but from the article it seems to be an overwelming majority. If the people of Canada are not happy with this new law - they will cast their votes during the next election to show their disapproval.
The process has been followed - its not the rule of court that brought about the change - but the will of the people as expressed by their elected officials. The law seems to be written in such a way that concepts of beast love, incest and polygmy are not to be include. However I haven't seen the full text of the law to see exactly how it is written.
So while I disagree with the concept of same-sex marriage - its now a priveledge for the citizens of Canada to do with as they desire. Time will tell if its a harmful change in society values - or not. When the law is challenged by those who wish to partake in other sexual activity then we can discuss it - and only when the courts of Canada approve such a lose interpation of the law.
By the way has anyone seen the text of the new law - before they made such allegation of the door is now open to polygomy and beastility
poligamy and bestiality ? :dizzy2: next caller please !
For my part, i think i am as many canadian, i dont really care. The only thing that would tickle is if they allow adoption by gay couple. Now that would be another thing. But 2 consentant adult ? Why not !
The position of a true believer in democracy :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg