another post about gay marriages... but this one might make you go "hmmmm"...

TD said:
then youre not a victim
Click to expand...

That's as far as I'm reading. I'm sick of people wanting there to be victims. Be a victim if you want. I refuse to play that game.
 
Thulsa Doom said:
must have missed it. can he do it again?



So if "the people" vote Jim Crow laws back into existance then its ok?



So if I arbitrarily decide (along with the majority of "the people") that you personally should not be allowed to marry the willing legal adult you love then youre not a victim of my attempt to control your behavior? Behavior that does no harm to you or others? How bout if I decide I can declare null and void any marriage you may already have partaken in simply because I dont like who you married? Still not a victim? *waiting for technical loophole argument*

As for homosexual marriage being the cause of the end of civilization as we know it, as patently ridiculous as this old argument is, its also quite irrelevant. You simply cannot create laws that dont allow one group to do what another group can do simply because you associate that one group with immorality (as defined by religion to boot).
Click to expand...
No T-Doom, you need to re-read. You missed a number of points by several people.

You seem to completely miss that a sexual behavior does not quailfy as a civil rights issue.

The men and children of NAMBLA must be victims too, they must keep up the fight and show in equality of it all.

People love to play the victim, portaying your self as victim does not mean that you are victim.
 
freako104 said:
do you mean to say there arent victims Gonz? or those that say they are kind of Bullshit?
Click to expand...

Goes kind of like this, freeako...

Homosexuals are invisible to society as a group in most cases. Nobody knows who is gay, and who is straight until you open your mouth and say "I am gay". In fact, most people don't care. They'll respect that choice and move on. The problem comes when an 'activist' decides that everybody must like that choice. That is where the problem lies. The argument has been going on for quite some time over how a person becomes gay, but the point is moot. If it's a choice, then most of society will not like that choice. If it's because of a natural 'flaw' (and I put it in quotes so as not to offend), then it can, in the future, be possibly corrected. :shrug:

For those who try to equate their lifestyle 'choice' with the struggle of minorities for equality, you really need to step back, take another look, and re-read my first 2 sentences to use as a guide.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
You seem to completely miss that a sexual behavior does not quailfy as a civil rights issue.
Click to expand...

yes the avoidance tactic of blaming a people for their behavior and ignoring completely their fundamental nature. If homosexuality became the accepted christian norm overnight and therefore the majority of citizens declared that all heterosexuals needed to stop their immoral sexual behavior, would you toe the line and start having gay sex? could you?

The men and children of NAMBLA must be victims too, they must keep up the fight and show in equality of it all.
Click to expand...

no just the children are. because they are.... (wait for it)... CHILDREN. Missed that part about LEGAL WILLING LOVING ADULTS did you?

People love to play the victim, portaying your self as victim does not mean that you are victim.
Click to expand...

but being discriminated against makes you a victim by definition. deal with it.
 
Gato_Solo said:
For those who try to equate their lifestyle 'choice' with the struggle of minorities for equality, you really need to step back, take another look, and re-read my first 2 sentences to use as a guide.
Click to expand...

what do your first two sentences have to do with two men marrying each other? can they do that invisibly?
 
yes the avoidance tactic of blaming a people for their behavior and ignoring completely their fundamental nature.
Click to expand...
A person of Negroid blood will always be a person of Negroid blood. A person of female genes will alwys be a person of female genes (even with the stupid surgeries). An act of homosexuality can next time be an act of heterosexuality.
 
Male/male this time. Next time male/female. Pretty cool how that works huh? I'll bet you can't wake up tomorrow & be Caucasian. Choice/heredity.
 
So... is this your way of saying they are just being gay on a whim? Or because they want to be rebellious? Would you choose to have gay sex if it was the established norm?
 
I believe that homosexuality is a genetic anomoly. It serves no purpose. They have a trait in which they prefer a same sex partner. They are also perfectly capable of making a choice. As am I. I have no interest in pursuing homosexual relations. I don't expect them to go out of their way to pursue heterosexual relations. I also am offended that they try to equate the two. If homosexuality had some evolutionary advantage I could be persuaded to rethink my position.

I've friended many of the homosexuals I've know throughout my life. I'd never support them in a homosexual marriage. I dont mind homosexuals. I despise moral equivalency.
 
Thulsa Doom said:
So... is this your way of saying they are just being gay on a whim?
Click to expand...

Yes...You've got it...finally. The light bulb has lit, ladies and gentlemen.
Not exactly a whim, but, there you go. People make 'bad' choices every day, but you don't hear them claiming that they deserve anything. :shrug: I'll add a disclaimer to this, because you usually try to spin the answer to fit your own view...and also because those who are homosexual have been wavering back and forth on the 'nature vs choice' issue for quite some time as well...

Not all gay people 'choose' their homosexuality. Some actually are biologically wired that way (a very few, but there you are), and some have it forced upon them (psychological trauma after abuse as children), but the vast majority choose to live that way. We've had this discussion before, too...
 
Thulsa, if a civil union and a marraige afford the same rights under the law there is no civil rights issue. The equivicacy has been met. End of story.

The issue is the definition of marrage. The gay people are demnding the difinition to include them. They want to force their homosexual behaviors to be considered the same heterosexual behaviors, validation.

So get off this “civil rights” issue, there is none.
 
Aftere spending tens of millions of dollars over the last decade to prove there is a genetic factor to support the cause, they have exactly nothing to support it.

There may be some natual cause of it, a mutation of sorts, but they have found a big goose egg to support that too.

As far as the natual benefit of such a gene would be in a place like China where the sex’s ratio has ben preverted by infacided, then the preverted gene would come in quite handy.

Show the value homosexuality has in the grander law of nature.
 
Gonz said:
I believe that homosexuality is a genetic anomoly. It serves no purpose. They have a trait in which they prefer a same sex partner. They are also perfectly capable of making a choice. As am I. I have no interest in pursuing homosexual relations. I don't expect them to go out of their way to pursue heterosexual relations. I also am offended that they try to equate the two. If homosexuality had some evolutionary advantage I could be persuaded to rethink my position.

I've friended many of the homosexuals I've know throughout my life. I'd never support them in a homosexual marriage. I dont mind homosexuals. I despise moral equivalency.
Click to expand...

Two things:

1. Remind me to once again give my reasons why homosexuality may be evolutionarily useful. Apparently it never sunk in or was ignored the first two times I did it here. Making moral judgment calls on the basis of your vast scientific expertise is suspect at best quite frankly. But please correct me if you happen to be an evolutionary biologist with experience in this arena.

2. Ignoring point one, you still cannot make law based on dime store evolutionary opinion. You cannot even make law based on what may be established as useful or useless evolutionary purpose of a gene or genes or behaviors (how freaking scary is that thanks). So telling gays that they may not marry because of this doesn’t work. Try something else.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Yes...You've got it...finally. The light bulb has lit, ladies and gentlemen.
Not exactly a whim, but, there you go. People make 'bad' choices every day, but you don't hear them claiming that they deserve anything. :shrug: I'll add a disclaimer to this, because you usually try to spin the answer to fit your own view...and also because those who are homosexual have been wavering back and forth on the 'nature vs choice' issue for quite some time as well...

Not all gay people 'choose' their homosexuality. Some actually are biologically wired that way (a very few, but there you are), and some have it forced upon them (psychological trauma after abuse as children), but the vast majority choose to live that way. We've had this discussion before, too...
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight… the “vast majority” of gays are just gay for the heck of it. Because apparently its cool to be looked down on and criticized as less then a man or more then a woman and thought of as disgusting by millions and millions and MILLIONS of “right thinking” Americans and by the Christian bible itself? Why would they all choose to do that? And how, pray tell, are you so in touch with all these millions of homosexuals that you have the inside scoop on how they consciously chose to be gay? Please enlighten us on that one. You really need to get yourself a grant somewhere with that kind of inside information.

And interesting that in the same breath you acknowledge that SOME are WIRED that way. So you freely admit that homosexuality occurs NATURALLY among humans. Yet you still turn around and say oh but most of them aren’t really gay and are just choosing to be that way despite what an awfully ridiculous choice that is in this society? Baffling.

So ok lets look at this choice thing then. Ever had a desire to have sex with another man? If the answer is yes then do you consider yourself a homosexual who made the right choices? If the answer is no then why is it you insist that others make choices that you yourself are automatically immune from because of your nature?
 
Thulsa Doom said:
. . please correct me if you happen to be an evolutionary biologist with experience in this arena. . .
Click to expand...
please qualify yourself as to why you are qualified to speak to this.
 
The only hard-wired proof there is "I was born gay" THATS IT! That is the only proof of they have to offer of homosexuality being hard-wired.

We can however find many sources of trauma and improper 'nurturing' that has lead to homosexuality.

So what you are saying is: I don't have the right to place a moral judgment on someone for their behaviors. I have to accept their behaviors even if it goes against my personal judgment (personal is not religious)

 
ResearchMonkey said:
The issue is the definition of marrage. The gay people are demnding the difinition to include them.
Click to expand...

the “gay people” simply want to get married. the “straight right wing fundamental people” are going out of their way to say NO YOU CANT. THAT’S the issue. The government should have no place at all in this issue whatsoever. But they want to stick their nose in it because homosexuality is so reviled by so many Americans that they think they can dictate what gays can and cant do. It doesn’t effect you or your marriage whatsoever. If it does prove it. And EVEN if it does how does that give you the right to discriminate against homosexuals for that reason?

They want to force their homosexual behaviors to be considered the same heterosexual behaviors, validation.
Click to expand...

wait wait… which “homosexual behaviors” are we talking about now? The working for a living behaviors? The brush of the teeth behaviors? The living in society and buying a house and driving a car and getting along with the neighbors behaviors? You know.. the same ones you already do? Oh wait that’s right… I forgot… gays are defined ONLY by the kind of sex they have. Ok so what kind of sexual behaviors are we talking about here then. anal sex? Oh wait men and women do that. That wont work. Sodomy? Oh wait men and women do that too. That wont work either. Hmmm… im stuck. Could you help me by telling me what behaviors homosexuals engage in that heterosexuals DON’T? thanks so much for your help.

As far as the natual benefit of such a gene would be in a place like China where the sex’s ratio has ben preverted by infacided, then the preverted gene would come in quite handy.
Click to expand...

was this your twisted way of actually hinting at an evolutionary purpose for homosexuality?

Show the value homosexuality has in the grander law of nature.
Click to expand...

law of nature? Are you asking how it could be evolutionarily beneficial in a human population
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top