Printable View
Highlighted to show that the constitution guarantees us liberty, basically the freedom from unwarranted government interference in our lives. Not allowing two people who love each other to marry is a hell of an interference.Quote:
Originally Posted by m52nickerson
So is regulating how far houses are away from the road, whether we use heroin behind closed doors or if we do business from our home.Quote:
Originally Posted by m52nickerson
You've cited the term "civil liberties" which could literally mean anything at all.
No, there are reasons, such as utility and government easements, for house setbacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
I would agree, but I think drugs should not be illegal.
Liberties protect people from unwarranted government interference, since no one can show their gay neighbors getting married would take away from their life, it is unwarranted interference.
Yes civil liberties protect people from unwarranted government interference. So expand upon that and demonstrate how individual rights are being violated because the state has developed over time through legal precedence a definition and a license requirement for people to be married. And remember state sanctioned marriage goes back a long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by m52nickerson
So here is what you got - the state should of never gotten into the concept of marriage in the first place by your arguement. That it did is because the people desired for some type of legal concept concerning marriage. Which takes it out of the basic human rights catergory and makes it something else.
The arguement is not so much that is a basic right - that its a concept that if people wish it to change then it must follow the constitutional process to be changed by the legislative body or the people through the amendment process.
In otherword - if the desire for the change is so great then society will have it changed.
Of course these are Civil rights. Gays existed since the beginning of the human history(and not only amongst the humans) and it matters few this was exposed or not. They simply exist. And I can see no reason why they should hide or be discriminated for this.
However, this does not mean they should always try to focus the public attention on themselves(yet this is their answer to those who try to deny their existence so it is not entirely their fault). They are simply ordinary people like you and me.
Note: I mean the real gays not those becoming gays because of any sort of trend. That's something I can not approve.
What the? Why is one wrong and the other not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Asen
Sexuality is part of your nature. I can not approve changing it because of any sort of trend. Be yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Of course, I have heard stories about people trying with the both sexes in order to try... Well, this can be acceptable, I think. But being slave of a trend... :no:
Good luck with that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Asen
I'm doubtful there are even real gays, look throughout history at how people do homosexual acts either because its part of their culture or for political power or whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
IIRC all the Roman Emperors bar one had homosexual sex... this seems to suggest that people have a choice in going against the normal, some just engage only in homsexual sex and make it their identity.
Even if it was inherent, good luck giving real gays sexual rights that fake gays can't have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
The sexual orientation argument is totally absurd. This is what it has come down to. We are that bored and MUST find a new crusade - even one as ludicrous as this one.
Gay giraffes making out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Most mammals have gay sex. That is because sex, unlike what they thought two thousand years ago, does not merely serve procreation. Intelligent, higher animals, like man, use physical bonding as an essential part of group dynamics. It is extremely unnatural to supress gay instincts within yourself or others. Supressing homosexuality destroys the natural, God-given fabric of society.
Hahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I suggest you take a close look at the mating habits of pets - no, they are not 'just playing around'. Like all other mammals, dogs and cats don't stick to male/female mating. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
If you run a zoo and supress physical homosexual relationships between your animals, I think there's a fair chance you'll be locked up for cruelty to animals. Yet, rights that even petting zoo guinea pigs have are not extended to human beings. :shame:
Well, it is obvious you can not separate them to "fake" and "real". If somebody is determined to follow any trend, I can not stop him of course. This is maybe a matter of education, personal misinterpration. In fact the problem with the trends (trend for smoking, drugs and so on) is another problem I do not want to discuss now.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Yet there are truly people who are born homosexual (some of them quite talented ) and I can not see why they can not have rights. They suffer once because of the prejudice and twice because the politicians (and I won't be surprised if some of them are hidden homosexual - not that I really care!) deny rights to them. That's stupid.
Real, fake, born, choice, it does not matter.
Well, from legislative point of view it does not matter, I agree. And this is what is the matter of discussion now.Quote:
Originally Posted by m52nickerson
I never thought I would see the day when we could have a gay marriage thread merged with an animal rights thread :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I'd be interested to know the percentage of "real" versus "fake" gay people.
I mean, I get the trend/phase argument. There are misunderstood people out there that go through phases where they try to fit in. There's been plenty of women that I've personally dated that say they thought they were a lesbian at one point, and tried it out to see how it goes.
I personally think that most people have a moment, in the back of their minds at least, where they question themselves and wonder if a random thought now and then means anything. Sometimes when a person has few friends or abusive parents or has trouble fitting in, or is just a really open personality, they seek out others with similar tendencies.
It's usually the same story over and over. Girl gets idea in her head, meets another girl. They have a "relationship" that doesn't even progress to kissing until after the first month. Rarely do they even do anything. Some of them try simple things. Few go all the way. Then, after a while, the majority decide they are heterosexual and date men again (or in some cases, at the same time).
I hate to compare, because the situations aren't the same, but it's in some ways similar to that "goth" phase some teens go through. In order to fit in and be an individual at the same time, some rebel against the supposed norm, and dress and act differently. Most people grow out of it (I personally hate goth culture... in the quest to be nonconformist, they start to talk, dress, and act alike, and start listening to the same depressing music. How sad and ironic.) but some people don't and they decide that's who they are. Those are the trend/phase/experimental faux gays.
Others are gay. Really gay. Truly gay. As in, tried to be straight and didn't like it. As in, tried gay once and decided it was fabulous. As in "hey, let's exclusively date only the same gender and never look back" gay. As in "nothing makes me happier than explicit gay imagery deleted" kind of gay. As in Mark Foley gay. As in Liberace gay. As in Elton John wearing a whip cream teddy GAY. (Emphasis on teh gay) As in Angelina Jolie naked and licking their bodies would not turn them on in a million years gay. As in Johnny Depp and Brad Pitt in a naked towel-snapping contest would not stir erotic feelings in them gay. (Can't neglect my lesbian friends) As in John Goodman and Roseanne Barr in a banana eating contest gay. As in man dressed as Judy Garland in the Wizard of Oz gay.
I don't know about you, but when you're that gay, you're not pretending anymore. At least that's what it seems like to me.
I think some people are so afraid of gays and gayness that they want to imagine that they are all pretending. Well, when you're in the middle of a explicit gay imagery deleted and your expletive deleted takes his explicit gay imagery deleted and explicit gay imagery deleted all over your expletive deleted you're gay, you're not pretending.
Can you deal with that? :laugh2:
I can. Because I have a girlfriend I can go explicit straight imagery deleted and to be honest, when I'm doing that, gay people don't bother me. And when I'm done explicit straight imagery deleted, the last thing on my mind is how gays are destroying marriage, because I can tell you, straight people are doing a explicit straight imagery deleted bang up job. And I can have a heterosexual relationship without gayness ruining it.
Can't you?
It seems to me that if your church doesn't want to recognize gay marriage, that's your church. Fortunately not everyone goes to church, and some have differing opinions. The state is secular, and it should be a right for legitimate gay couples to have the same rights of visitation and property and so forth that straights have, and therefore there can be no argument against legal unions, which already exist for non-gays and gays alike.
If they want to call that marriage, and if they want the state to call it marriage, I don't care. It doesn't affect me in any way. And it's frankly none of my business.
The "real" gays being talked about here are simply people with a notion stuck in their head.
I don't see why institutions should be redefined to fit to every little notion people take.
History proves this, but noone will acknowledge that fact.
You know, when I was around 11 or 12 I got the notion stuck in my head that I liked women.
I don't suppose you'd like to talk me out of it, Rhyfelwyr?
:eyebrows:
Nah that's normal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
Gay people just need to get rid of their notions and act in their natural manner.
No more ridiculous effimeninity please, that's a quite modern invention, ties in with the whole image for them.
Well,not a single family ( and in historical background dynasty) was ruined by this "modern invention". Homosexuals also have their hearts broken(I think there were even some dramatic examples ending with suicides)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
And how would you comment the animal homosexuality?
All right, all right, agreed.
The obnoxiously flamboyant acting does grate on my nerves. Normal or natural gays call them "queenies" because they are annoyed by them too. Fortunately they are the small minority. They just get a lot of media attention because they are a negative and controversial stereotype.
I also happen to think that acting obscenely in public, or in front of children, is bad behavior for anyone of any sexual orientation, and what goes on at pride parades is not for children to see. I wish they'd tone it down, but I'd rather see people enjoying themselves instead of hating one another.
Other than that, I'm on board with defending whatever law-abiding people do, even if I wouldn't personally enjoy it.
of course....:rolleyes2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
the reason I like being with girls instead of being with a guy sucking is :daisy: is simply because the idea hasn't come into my mind.
thanks for clearing that up....I never understood how my entire sexual identity was such a frail thing...
I´m scared now...what if I get one of those pesky ideas all of a sudden????? :wall:
people are what they are....the idea that one would should a sexual orientation that brings you nothing but trouble in our world is ridiculous.
Standing up for rationality Ronin?
For shame. Surely you realize rationality has a liberal bias.
And yet they do. Reminds me of a guy in my school a couple of years below me, he kept lisping away to his friends about how he was deciding whether or not he was gay. Guess what - he decided he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
Note how he decided.
He knew he could, and indeed should, be normal - he just chose not to be.
And now he wants to wreck an ancient institution for that... no thanks. :no:
Anecdotal evidence means nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
I'd like to point out that in ancient times this institution allowed a man to divorce his wife at will (still the same in some Islamic cultures), take multiple wives, did not punish cheating, allowed the noble who owned the land to have sexual rights to the wife on the first night of their union, and that in the Bible itself it reads that if a man is to rape a woman, what he must do to rectify the situation is to pay her father a few silver shekels and then marry her, and all is well. One might also observe the tradition of arranged marriage, where little girls are pawned off in the to wealthy men to be used as sex objects, in many cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
So ancient institutions have changed over time, (thank God/Allah/TheFlyingSpaghettiMonster), and it should again. This time, to include people who have been left out unjustly.
If you really want things to stay as they were, then I suppose polygamy is OK. That's another form of traditional marriage. And they married awfully young back then, too.
Quote:
Deuteronomy 22:28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
22:29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her...
And which of the above is comparable to homosexuals being unable to marry?
Calvin sorted pretty much everyting you listed in Geneva anyway. :beam:
Is there any scientific evidence behind the causes of homosexuality?
EDIT: Stop quoting OT! :wall:
Well Im glad this has descended into quoting the bible my work here is done.