Gay Marriage

[InfectedMushroom]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Fortunatly some of us have evolved beyond the need to believe in imaginary friends. I understand though that since you are an intelectual infant you still feel the need to have one.
I have no problem with that, as long as you don't try to tell me how to live my life.

Your point makes no sense. Please ask your imaginary friend to help you rephrase it. Or better yet, just fvcking think for yourself.

An extremely flawed, prejudicial, ignorant, and bigoted argument when attacking relgious concepts or religious followers.
Faith in a Supreme Being of some sort does not make an individual an "intelectual infant" (nice spelling! ), nor does it preclude independent thought, nor do all persons who maintain such faith seek to tell others how to live their life. It is simply a natural and ancient human way of trying to make sense of an existence that, quite frankly, does not make sense.

And you atheist extremists need to recognize (before you being to arrogant or bigoted) that you are grossly outnumbered. Some 90% of the world proclaims a faith of some type to some sort of "Sky God". IMO, you have not "evolved" beyond some need, but have forsaken a part of your humanity. You are IMO free to do so, but a little less lip and and a little less bigotry on your part would be greatly appreciated.

Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

When I will hear a little less lip and a little less bigotry from the "invisible friend" crowd I will tone down my voice too.

 

[Willian]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Todd33
Religious people are bigots. They always fight civil rights. God wanted women to be barefoot and pregnant, God wanted blacks to be slaves, God loves the white man, God hates Muslems, now God hates gays. They love to use God to hate. Times change and religious type always fight it. We'll all look back in twenty years and laugh at them.

They do the same thing to science.

To sum up my post, if your going to try and complain about the bigotry of someone, check your own first.

Amen !

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

That's funny, I have a problem with people forcing their sexual perversions on society. What a coincidence.

Who have I "thumped" with my beliefs? If anybody is attacking others with their beliefs it's you. I'm sure the irony is lost though.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Religious people are bigots. They always fight civil rights. God wanted women to be barefoot and pregnant, God wanted blacks to be slaves, God loves the white man, God hates Muslems, now God hates gays. They love to use God to hate. Times change and religious type always fight it. We'll all look back in twenty years and laugh at them.

They do the same thing to science.

Either you are joking, or hanging out with the wrong "Religious people." Either way, your first sentence is the pot calling the kettle the "n" word.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

That's funny, I have a problem with people forcing their sexual perversions on society. What a coincidence.

Who have I "thumped" with my beliefs? If anybody is attacking others with their beliefs it's you. I'm sure the irony is lost though.

Ahhh yes "forcing." So why the fvck was I labeled a troll earlier? I demand an apology from whoever doubted my sincerity.

Zephyr

 

[InfectedMushroom]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

That's funny, I have a problem with people forcing their sexual perversions on society. What a coincidence.

Who have I "thumped" with my beliefs? If anybody is attacking others with their beliefs it's you. I'm sure the irony is lost though.

why do you care if 2 men or 2 women fvck each other? and how is that sexual perversion? how is the fact that they would like to have the same rights as a same sex couple imposing their way of life on you? you are the one imposing your views on them by telling them they have no such rights.
got it?

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

That's funny, I have a problem with people forcing their sexual perversions on society. What a coincidence.

Who have I "thumped" with my beliefs? If anybody is attacking others with their beliefs it's you. I'm sure the irony is lost though.

why do you care if 2 men or 2 women fvck each other? and how is that sexual perversion? how is the fact that they would like to have the same rights as a same sex couple imposing their way of life on you? you are the one imposing your views on them by telling them they have no such rights.
got it?

Ewwwwww it makes people squeamish to talk about sex, especially gays.

Zephyr

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Vic, my reply was for HoP who has demonstrated through his posts to be a bible thumper.
If you would note my post, I do say that I have no problem with people believing in some kind of god, but have a great problem with those who try to impose their god and their beliefs on me.

That's funny, I have a problem with people forcing their sexual perversions on society. What a coincidence.

Who have I "thumped" with my beliefs? If anybody is attacking others with their beliefs it's you. I'm sure the irony is lost though.

why do you care if 2 men or 2 women fvck each other? and how is that sexual perversion? how is the fact that they would like to have the same rights as a same sex couple imposing their way of life on you? you are the one imposing your views on them by telling them they have no such rights.
got it?

I don't care. They can do whatever they want. I'm not trying to change their life style. I just don't want them changing the current definition of marriage.

Get it yet? I'm not trying to change them...so I'm not forcing anything on them. They are trying to change marriage...they are trying to force their beliefs on society.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor


I don't care. They can do whatever they want. I'm not trying to change their life style. I just don't want them changing the current definition of marriage.

Get it yet? I'm not trying to change them...so I'm not forcing anything on them. They are trying to change marriage...they are trying to force their beliefs on society.

If the church really wants to preserve the meaning of marriage, I think they need to realize the consequences. The primary one would be the removal of legal ties to marriages since the law should not support a religious-based belief that restrict a person's legal rights (custody, tax, etc...). The definition of marriage HAS to change if the gov't is tangled in the whole thing. Once separated, then the Church can make up any definition it wants.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

If the church really wants to preserve the meaning of marriage

who cares what any church has to say? It?s what the people want that?s important, so let?s leave churches out of this, unless we?re willing to give mirage back to the churches? didn?t think so.

I?m against homosexual marriage because it gives a government stamp of approval to homosexual sex, an activity that is physically destructive to those involved.

I?m for any communal-property contract between any number of any sexed adults, as long as there is no social implication of approval of any sort of sexual activity.

Marriage itself should be a matter for churches and have no legal effect on your life, so whoever you are you can say ?we are married by XYZ church? and people can take it as they want. All necessary legal connections to marriage should be done through previously said communal property contracts.

But t?ll we can reach this utopian state we have a vested interest in not putting a government stamp of approval on sex between people of the same sex, for the same reasons we don?t put a government stamp of approval on drinking or overeating.

 

[Ozoned]

I don't think an acceptable argument exists. I think it is an emotional issue.

That being said, put it on the ballot and see what the emotion of the country is. (at this point in time)

???????????????????

 

[nageov3t]

if they get married, then we'll get married... everyone will get married and it will be anarchy! ohno!

 

[Kibbo]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain


But t?ll we can reach this utopian state we have a vested interest in not putting a government stamp of approval on sex between people of the same sex, for the same reasons we don?t put a government stamp of approval on drinking or overeating.

I agree with your final goal fo a true separation of Church and State. Please tell me how homosexuality is akin to two habits that will kill you. If anything, the encouragement of monogamous relationships will make it safer. This is true for straights and gays.

 

[PatboyX]

kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

 

[Klixxer]

I have a problem with infidelity, a BIG problem with infidelity, as i see it all married people are subject to some sort of infidelity, i want to end this moral perversion forced upon me and that is eating up my tax money with benefits i cannot have because i am not a perverted married man.

You see, if you are married, and lust for another woman, attracted to another woman than your wife, you are a moral pervert.

I see no escape except to ban marriage, and have you ever doubted, ever, the faith of christianity (the ONE TRUE FAITH)? Then clearly you are not fit to live in the free world, i will label you either a deviant pervert or a terrorist, i just cannot decide which.

Oh crap, i forgot, i am all of the above, i better nuke manhattan to clean up the US, whaddayathink? A lot of deviant people would go down, i am sure the christian right would agree with me in this matter, after all, if you are not a White Anglo Saxon Protestant married to a woman lusting for no other, you are a deviant, so says Jesus.

OR the Christian right are so miserable with their own pathetic little lifes and their lusting after other women than their wifes that the need this to point their fingers.. "look at them, at least i am not as bad as they are, at least i am not homosexual".

The bigotry makes me sick, this is not just in the US, but we have progressed further in the EU.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Corn

Since I am the all knowing, all seeing Corn, I decide!

Hah, hail be to teh almighty Corn!

No, the Almighty Cornholio!!:laugh:

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

Here we go again. People fighting for gay marriage are the equivalent of those fighting segregation. :roll: You wish. I suppose it's completely escaped you that skin color is something you are born with and can't change. Homosexuality is something you are not born with and that can and often does change.

And, frankly, I haven't heard a solid argument FOR gay marriage that wasn't also based on emotion, so let's drop the hypocritical self-righteousness, k?

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: PatboyX
kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

Here we go again. People fighting for gay marriage are the equivalent of those fighting segregation. :roll: You wish. I suppose it's completely escaped you that skin color is something you are born with and can't change. Homosexuality is something you are not born with and that can and often does change.

And, frankly, I haven't heard a solid argument FOR gay marriage that wasn't also based on emotion, so let's drop the hypocritical self-righteousness, k?

Yeah, fighting segragation, MLK was totally wrong, we are NOT equal, you tell em big boy.

It's not so much that anyone (sane) really needs an argument FOR it, two adult lovers who want to get married, no slippery slope, we don't even have to mention sexes, why is your bigotry so great that you refuse to integrate and realize that everyone is as much worth as you are, is it because you need others to say "at least i am better than them"?

What is wrong with you people, who do you think you are to judge, do you try to emulate god and think you have the power to judge others?

ALL of you are false christians, you are all so quick to judge but when it comet to yourself, what have YOU done for anyone today?

Against integration and against marriage between adult lovers, christ would spit on you.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: PatboyX
kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

Here we go again. People fighting for gay marriage are the equivalent of those fighting segregation. :roll: You wish. I suppose it's completely escaped you that skin color is something you are born with and can't change. Homosexuality is something you are not born with and that can and often does change.

And, frankly, I haven't heard a solid argument FOR gay marriage that wasn't also based on emotion, so let's drop the hypocritical self-righteousness, k?

i would like it if you would not attack me personally again.
i apologize if i set you on the defensive, that was not my intent.
but i thank you for bringing up a good point that i tried to touch upon (but failed.) i think a lot
of the trouble with allowing gay marriage stems from it validating homosexuality. if this is validated
it would suggest that it is NOT a choice and, as you pointed out, not everyone agrees on that issue.
it seems to me that the argument for allowing gay marriage goes as follows:
1. homosexuals are humans.
2. they deserve to have the right to marry.

other arguments ive heard suggest that the institute of marriage may be stregnthened by the allowance of people who truly want to be together to get married. perhaps helping to quell the societal urge for all men and women to seek marriage as a goal, helping to eliminate the gross number or hideous unions in our nation.

you may not see this as the same as segregation but i do and i believe that many other people would agree with me.
i did not mean to set you off but i do feel as though your calling me "hypocritical" and "self-righteous" was uncalled for.
if you believe it was necessary, i would like you to do me the courtesy of pointing out why you felt this was a good way to make your point and perhaps you could show me where i was being hypocritical and self-righteous.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Corn

Since I am the all knowing, all seeing Corn, I decide!

Hah, hail be to teh almighty Corn!

No, the Almighty Cornholio!!:laugh:

A special message for Red. :evil:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Corn

Since I am the all knowing, all seeing Corn, I decide!

Hah, hail be to teh almighty Corn!

No, the Almighty Cornholio!!:laugh:

A special message for Red. :evil:

LOL:laugh:

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: PatboyX
kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

Here we go again. People fighting for gay marriage are the equivalent of those fighting segregation. :roll: You wish. I suppose it's completely escaped you that skin color is something you are born with and can't change. Homosexuality is something you are not born with and that can and often does change.

And, frankly, I haven't heard a solid argument FOR gay marriage that wasn't also based on emotion, so let's drop the hypocritical self-righteousness, k?

i would like it if you would not attack me personally again.
i apologize if i set you on the defensive, that was not my intent.
but i thank you for bringing up a good point that i tried to touch upon (but failed.) i think a lot
of the trouble with allowing gay marriage stems from it validating homosexuality. if this is validated
it would suggest that it is NOT a choice and, as you pointed out, not everyone agrees on that issue.
it seems to me that the argument for allowing gay marriage goes as follows:
1. homosexuals are humans.
2. they deserve to have the right to marry.

other arguments ive heard suggest that the institute of marriage may be stregnthened by the allowance of people who truly want to be together to get married. perhaps helping to quell the societal urge for all men and women to seek marriage as a goal, helping to eliminate the gross number or hideous unions in our nation.

you may not see this as the same as segregation but i do and i believe that many other people would agree with me.
i did not mean to set you off but i do feel as though your calling me "hypocritical" and "self-righteous" was uncalled for.
if you believe it was necessary, i would like you to do me the courtesy of pointing out why you felt this was a good way to make your point and perhaps you could show me where i was being hypocritical and self-righteous.

Ummm. i thought the very point of his post was that it was like segragation and he supports segregation too.

Maybe he just ate too much cabbage as a kid?

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: PatboyX
kibbo, i have been looking for this same thing. strong arguments against. it seems like at this point in our existance as a nation, there are many more pressing issues to worry about but this one keeps coming back.
all the arguments made seem to be these sort of intangible ways to side-step the fact that allows gays to marry would validate the gay lifestyle in america, accept that homosexuality is not a choice and sort of bring a number of beliefs about the homosexual community being "wrong" down. or at least help lessen the taboo of it all.
ive heard all the arguments you have listed and none of them seem to hold up at all.
i have not seen a strong argument in here yet. and i feel you are correct that in 20-30 years it will look the same as it does to look back on the people who rallied against integration.

Here we go again. People fighting for gay marriage are the equivalent of those fighting segregation. :roll: You wish. I suppose it's completely escaped you that skin color is something you are born with and can't change. Homosexuality is something you are not born with and that can and often does change.

And, frankly, I haven't heard a solid argument FOR gay marriage that wasn't also based on emotion, so let's drop the hypocritical self-righteousness, k?

1) You are retarted.
2) Are you gay? Have you asked every single gay person on earth if they made the choice to be gay? If not then you have no idea whether or not it is a choice for everyone.
3) What if gay people "chose" to be straight? By your definition they shouldn't be allowed to marry because their sexual preference is a "choice".
4) Don't try to act like you read every bit of psychological evidence out their. Having a mother that is a graduate psychologist who works in an AIDS clinic I can tell you that MOST LICENSED psychyatrists believe homosexuality is genetic like skin color.
5) Please read and have some sort of intelligent argument before you ever post again.

 

[piasabird]

1. Marriage is a union between a Man and a Woman; Duh! You can call it something else but it is not marriage.

2. You can either be for marriage and family or for Gays; you can not be both. They oppose each other.

3. You will burn in Hell! This is obviously against most people's religious beliefs.

4. Gay Divorce. Just wait for the lawyers to get into this one!

5. The majority of people in America are against it, except for Stupid Liberal Judges. I am surprised Liberal Judges that decide to rewrite the constitution are not linched. They will definitely be held accountable some day. This is an attack on the very fabric of our society. It is akin to a pagan festival and Roman Debauchery.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

As long as they are not allowed to adopt/raise childen and stuff, then I suppose it could work. There are probably other restrictions that would need to be placed on gay marraiges as well that I can't think of right now.