Same sex marriage officialy legal through all of Canada Today
- Thread starter Mystech
- Start date
So you're saying that children (that you may know) don't think homosexuals are disgusting...really???? :bugeye:
So you're saying that gay and lesbians don't commit suicide? Really???
So you're saying that gay/lesbians don't have emotional problems like other people do? Really??????
So you're saying that gay/lesbian handle divorce well? Unlike the rest of us? Really????I know from personal experience that children being reared by gays do in fact grow up to hate the gay parent! FACT! Not Fiction! Really I do!
And last but not least. The best way(though there are other ways)to kill something is not to lead it to it's death? Really???
These are Truths
I'm once again...not a homophobe...I have no FEAR of any homosexual..I will admit that I am discriminating against the question of their parenthood abilities. Yes I am. And you and Bells are discriminating against me (being as I'm not homosexual) because I have a different opinion or like than you do! There are no holes in my post. I can't help that once I give a statement you can't seem to follow it. It's because of you and Bells loooonnnng post that you're confusing yourself. My post have never changed. I am profoundly against homosexuals from marrying and adopting (I'm from FLA where there both illegal). I don't believe in any unatural birth! Never stated otherwise. I'm not a racist and I never said that I wasn't being prejudice. You're being prejudice also. Homosexuals do not belong to another group of people.
One of my two reasons I don't want gays to marry. Never waivered!
Race means this:
human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution
A genealogical line; a lineage.
Humans considered as a group.
Discrimination means this:
the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently (don't homo's want us to treat them like their not the same)
Homosexuals are human woman and man, they have the same right under law. Homosexuals choose to have sexual relations with each other!
I have never waivered on any of these subjects.
Oh yeah, and by the way Neildo Dildo....My great grandfather was a white man....so I'm White, black,and indian. There's no color line here!
One more thing.....please, please by all means tell me this isn't a truth!
And Bells I already told you that you're not worthy of any response by me!
Last edited:
Well, who's discriminating? The government certainly isn't because homosexuals can marry someone of the opposite sex just as easily as heterosexuals. If any one's discriminating, it's the force that causes homosexual attraction.
Are you sure? In the US it's illegal to have more than one wife. Those who have more than one wife break the law, and the Utah police go after them sometimes even.
Yes, it's in a way discrimation, but you cannot also claim the state is doing that. For example, if a guy, during the normal course of his liife, is unable to find a wife, it's not the state's doings.
Again, what in the hell is the point of those questions? Those are NOT limited to homosexuals, lol. They happen to heterosexuals, but guess what? Even more often to heterosexuals! All those points you mention do not all of a sudden make someone a bad person to raise a child, be them hetero or homosexual.
So you're saying that heterosexuals don't commit suicide? Really???
So you're saying that heterosexuals don't have emotion problems like other people do? Really??????
So you're saying that heterosexuals handle divorce well? Unlike homosexuals? Really???? I know from personal experience that children being reared by heterosexuals do in fact grow up to hate the hetero parent! FACT! Not Fiction! Really I do!
Pretty stupid questions, I swear. They have nothing to do with this discussion at all.
No, you are a homophobe. You fear homosexuals bringing up children badly when in FACT they do not bring them up any worse than a heterosexual. Go look at the numerous other studies which your fundamental Christian website says are all wrong yet their study is the only correct one, lol.
I'm not discriminating against you because you're not homosexual. I'm not homosexual and I don't know if Bells is or not, I only know that Mysech is, but I'm discriminating against you cause you're using idiotic reasons to defend your beliefs of disliking homosexuals. If you AT LEAST had SOME sort of solid argument rather than showing nothing but erroneous "facts" and highly biased religious opinion, then I wouldn't discriminate against you even if you have an opposing view as I. I'll admit 100%, every single time, that I discriminate against idiots like that. And I'm also proud of it.
What are you talking about no holes in your posts? You're posting false proof and "scientific" studies. What do you expect us to respond in regards to that? It's pure rubbish. What you're doing is no different than pseudosciencers posting in the science folders and then being shot down because they have no proof but rather made up whacky theories. And well, you're getting the exact same response for the same exact type of behavior.
We sure as heck aren't the one's confused. You blame it on our long posts, we blame it on your brainwashed religion. Our posts are only long because we're tearing all the holes in your posts apart.
What unnatural births are homosexuals doing? Other than the ones with the money to get artificially inseminated, nearly all do the good ol' fashioned man and woman reproductive sessions.
What? What do you mean "in a way" it's discrimination? It flat out IS discrimination. For the guy who is unable to find a wife, at least he as the FREEDOM and the OPTION to marry a wife if he ever finds one. It IS the state's fault because they won't allow a homosexual, or heck, even a straight person who may want to marry the same sex but doesn't want to have sex with them.
Only prejudiced against you and others like you. I also highly dislike that you claim to be American, and seem to be proud to call yourself one, yet you do not act like one. America is all about freedom yet you promote the hindering of freedom by placing restrictive laws on people that do not harm others. Sad.
And you're correct, homosexuals do not belong to another group of people, only another category much-like blue-eyed girls belong in the blue-eyed group. Brown-haired people belong in the brown-haired section. Big-nosed people belong in the big-nosed section. Big hands and big feet people belong in the big hands and big feet category.
It's the religious conservatives that put homosexuals in another group of people. They're also the ones that place limitations and restrict our freedoms. They say you cannot pledge yourself to whom you want through marriage, it HAS to be of the opposite sex. You guys, and those types, say marriage is about sex and reproduction, but those who choose to get married yet not have children or those that cannot biologically produce a child due to reporductive problems aren't banned from marriage as homosexuals are, so that is, in fact, discrimination.
The law of marriage being between a man and woman is NOT for reproductive reasons, it is only for religions reasons. That is another error in the law as CHURCH and STATE or supposed to be SEPERATE.
- N
okinrus said:
It's like lots of people/organizations/groups in the world ....if they don't like something, they just scream "Discrimination!" and the most of the world bows down in abject horror. ...LOL!
No, the gays are being discriminated against ....But NOT by the marriage laws!
They just don't like to admit it 'cause it just ruins their whole day!
Now watch ...someone will post some crap about "love", as though the laws somehow require that the two people must be in "love" to get married! ...LOL! "Love" ain't got nothin' to do with marriage law.
But, Okinrus, I'm finally glad to see that some else agrees. I was beginning to think that everyone here is homosexual or supported homos. Thanks,
Baron Max
Well at least the good thing about this thread is that everyone continues to diminish marriage to the point of there being no reason to marry, which is a good thing in my eyes as I don't care for marriage. I'm only arguing all this for the civil rights morality of it all. Anything that can be done while married can be done while single (except government benefits), and you have more freedom as well. Silly, outdated, traditionalists.
No marrying for love. No marrying to have children. What's the point again? Oh yeah, all for benefits, heh.
- N
Bells
Staff member
ReighnStorm
Yes gays and lesbians commit suicide. So do heterosexuals... so your point being? But the point you fail to consider is the reason many homosexuals commit suicide. They don't commit suicide because they are homosexual. They commit suicide because people like you drive them to it because people like you think they are disgusting, nasty, degrading and depressing. After all, you were the one to say that you would never encourage someone to suicide but you do think it's just best to lead them to killing themselves. If there is a distinction there, I'm yet to find it.
Yes gays and lesbians do have emotional problems like 'other people'. They are people aren't they? Plus they have the additional burden of people like you demeaning their existence in the hope it leads them to kill themselves.
As to divorce. That's something to be determined since they aren't allowed to marry. The whole reason for this post. You keep harping on about homosexuals 'being' married but fail to realise that they aren't allowed 'to' marry. I'm guessing that since divorce is never easy on any person, once they are allowed to marry, it will be difficult for them as well, as it is for everyone else who gets a divorce. Now if you think because divorce is difficult for them that they should not marry, then using that argument, no one should be allowed to marry.
As to you knowing for a 'fact' that children brought up by gay parents hate them... Is that because you're on the sidelines feeding the child hateful little messages about the parents? I too know children who have homosexual parents and they are normal, happy and well adjusted kids. But I guess that's because they don't have people like you trying to poison their minds about their parents.
Now onto your last point. You see Reighn, you may sit there and try and think of the best ways to kill someone. But most of us are not that way inclined. I know you will actively participate in leading others to their deaths because you find their sexual orientation 'disgusting', but most of us don't lead others to suicide like you do. Most of us work on the other side trying to get the people you're trying to play pied piper to, to simply not listen so that they don't kill themselves.
Children wouldn't care who they were placed with under normal circumstances. As long as they were well treated and loved, do you think that children would care? It is because vultures like you prey on their minds and tell them what YOU think is right and wrong and disgusting that these children may end up caring.
Now I must admit, the idea that you aren't going to reply is quite fine by me. You've already portrayed yourself as being who and what you are... someone of no consequence who uses her colour and her sex to try to achieve her own sense of superiority over others.. You try to achieve this by degrading homosexuals and demeaning them and as you've pointed out, you hope it leads them to their deaths. What you have failed to realise is that you are in fact, a boil on the backside of humanity.
Okinrus
And yet here you are.. responding. Ironic isn't it? Now tell me Reighn, are you not responding because you are simply just unable to? Got no answers to give? You are in fact the hypocritical coward I see you as being? Oh wait.. that's right.. you're not responding because 'I'm not worthy'.ReighnStorm said:
Funny thing about this point is that children usually don't distinguish between who's a homosexual and who's a heterosexual until it is pointed out to them and they are told that homosexuality is 'disgusting' to use your own words. It is when people like you point out to them that you think homosexuality is wrong, that the children, impressionable as they sometimes are, jump on the homophobic bandwagon. And I don't know about anyone else here, none of the children I know think homosexuality is disgusting. They simply weren't brought up to hate like the children you know hate Reighn.ReighnStorm said:
Yes gays and lesbians commit suicide. So do heterosexuals... so your point being? But the point you fail to consider is the reason many homosexuals commit suicide. They don't commit suicide because they are homosexual. They commit suicide because people like you drive them to it because people like you think they are disgusting, nasty, degrading and depressing. After all, you were the one to say that you would never encourage someone to suicide but you do think it's just best to lead them to killing themselves. If there is a distinction there, I'm yet to find it.
Yes gays and lesbians do have emotional problems like 'other people'. They are people aren't they? Plus they have the additional burden of people like you demeaning their existence in the hope it leads them to kill themselves.
As to divorce. That's something to be determined since they aren't allowed to marry. The whole reason for this post. You keep harping on about homosexuals 'being' married but fail to realise that they aren't allowed 'to' marry. I'm guessing that since divorce is never easy on any person, once they are allowed to marry, it will be difficult for them as well, as it is for everyone else who gets a divorce. Now if you think because divorce is difficult for them that they should not marry, then using that argument, no one should be allowed to marry.
As to you knowing for a 'fact' that children brought up by gay parents hate them... Is that because you're on the sidelines feeding the child hateful little messages about the parents? I too know children who have homosexual parents and they are normal, happy and well adjusted kids. But I guess that's because they don't have people like you trying to poison their minds about their parents.
Now onto your last point. You see Reighn, you may sit there and try and think of the best ways to kill someone. But most of us are not that way inclined. I know you will actively participate in leading others to their deaths because you find their sexual orientation 'disgusting', but most of us don't lead others to suicide like you do. Most of us work on the other side trying to get the people you're trying to play pied piper to, to simply not listen so that they don't kill themselves.
You are also discriminating against the homosexual as well, not just their parenting abilities.
I'm not discriminating against you. I simply don't like you. I personally find you repulsive. It's not that you have a different opinion than I do. It is the fact that you are so hypocritical about your opinion. The "I don't want anyone to commit suicide" comments, said soooooo plaintively... but you would happily lead someone to their death and think that the best way.
On the contrary. We do follow your statements. It is you who seems unable to keep track of the venom that comes out of your fingertips as you type.
Or do the long posts confuse you?
True. All your posts have given the same disgustingly hateful and hypocritical messages. And you're from the Bush state. How wonderful for you! Old right wing George will be proud that someone from his brother's state is towing the right wing line.
Is there such a thing as an unnatural birth? Has science devised a way that a baby is now born out of an artificial machine? Babies are still coming out of women Reighn. Ergo, there is no such thing as an 'unnatural birth'.
Yes you are racist. Your comments against whites denote you as being a racist.
So we're being 'prejudiced' because we don't think homosexuals belong to another group of people and therefore the law should not treat them as though they do belong to another group of people? Alrighty then... Maybe it's best you don't reply Reighn. Your complete lack of understanding is no longer as amusing as it was before.
So because YOU find it disgusting, others must as well? And who is it degrading, depressing or nasty to? You? But who are you? Oh yes, you're a woman "designed to procreate with a man".
Children wouldn't care who they were placed with under normal circumstances. As long as they were well treated and loved, do you think that children would care? It is because vultures like you prey on their minds and tell them what YOU think is right and wrong and disgusting that these children may end up caring. So you'd say you chose to have sex with a man? Not because it is natural to you, but because you made a conscious choice that you will only have sex with a man? Homosexuals don't make a conscious choice who they are attracted to, Reighn. Just like heterosexuals don't make a conscious choice who we are attracted to.
I thought you said you weren't racist? So you don't blame your great grandfather for "causing the turmoil" as well? The reason civil rights are now needed for homosexuals is because people like YOU are now causing the turmoil. You don't seem to think that homosexuals are even humans. It is sad how you seem to forget the treatment your ancestors faced, as you now treat others the same way your ancestors were treated.
Now I must admit, the idea that you aren't going to reply is quite fine by me. You've already portrayed yourself as being who and what you are... someone of no consequence who uses her colour and her sex to try to achieve her own sense of superiority over others.. You try to achieve this by degrading homosexuals and demeaning them and as you've pointed out, you hope it leads them to their deaths. What you have failed to realise is that you are in fact, a boil on the backside of humanity.
Okinrus
Yes, but the law states that you can ONLY marry someone of the opposite sex. That is discriminatory. And the force that causes homosexual attraction? So should we blame the fact that they were born that way discriminatory? Are the genes discriminatory? If someone believes in God, should they accuse God of being discriminatory for being the force that causes homosexual attraction? What is the force that causes homosexual attraction Okinrus? Are we talking "the force" as in Star Wars force here?
Note the "sometimes". The police go after them when they've tried to cheat on their taxes or claimed multiple social security payments... or for lack of a better term, when they've tried to cheat the system. In most cases, the police and Government leave them alone. While it is illegal to have more than one wife, but it is not illegal to be legally married to one wife and have multiple common law/de facto wives.
Interesting point. But if the guy does find a wife, he can marry her provided she's of legal age. The State won't prevent him from marrying her or recognising her as his wife if and when he chooses to marry. Homosexuals on the other hand do not have that right. Their partners are never recognised as the spouse, even if they live in a common law or de facto marriage because they are homosexual. They are not allowed to marry because they are homosexual. It is the law that discriminates against homosexuals. Let us imagine a scenario where a gay couple have been together for say 15 years. They have lived together for all those 15 years as though they were married, shared bank accounts, shared everything. They own their own home, etc. One of them has an accident and dies. The deceased one has a life insurance policy that would pay a sum of money to their spouse or next of kin. The surviving partner is not permitted to be given that sum of money because the law does not recognise them as being the spouse or next of kin. Had they been married however, the surviving partner would automatically be paid that sum of money. It is discriminatory and unfair. Their relationships aren't even recognised as a common law/de facto relationship at law. They aren't allowed to marry either. These things happen on a daily basis.
Bells said:
It's applied equally to all citizens! And that, my friend, is NOT discriminatory.
Bells said:
No, that's not true. If the guy finds that he wants to marry his sister or mother, the state won't let him do it. See? Even straight guys are required to pass the tests before they can marry!!
Bells said:
Pretty stupid of them to not change the policy, huh? Any you blame the marriage laws for the guys stupidity? Why?
And just so you know, the same thing can occur with a couple who've remarried and not changed the beneficiary on a previous life insurance policy ...the second wife is shit outta' luck! But you want to blame the marriage laws for the couple's stupidity? Why?
Did y'all see where a couple of straight guys in Toronto are planning to get married ...just so they can get the benefits of marriage? Is the tax and government benefits all that remains of "marriage"?
Baron Max
God, nature, situations that cause homosexuality, or the homosexuals themselves.
Well, it's a bit incorrect to say it's illegal to have more than one wife. There're not able to marry. It's not a matter of illegality. Here's a fairly famous <a href="http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2000%20130ap.htm">case</a>. Notice how only one wife is considered his common law wife.
Life insurance is a separate from the State, and I'm pretty sure provisions could be made so that the life insurance money goes to the gay partner.
Bells
Staff member
So if it is God, nature and "situations" that cause homosexuality, the homosexual individual should be punished and discriminated against for something that is out of their control?okinrus said:
Hmm I found that interesting. However as the article itself claimed, charges against bigamy is quite rare. I think the reason they went after this guy was because he had taken the girls in as his 'wives' when they were still minors and the fact he owed $50,000 "in welfare the state paid his family". Usually in most cases in Utah, one wife is married legally (as in a legal union - eg marriage certificate) and the rest are classified as de facto's or common law wives or mistresses I guess. This guy had claimed that each of the women were his wives and claimed state support for all of them and not just one of them. In cases of bigamy, only one wife will claim support from the state and the others don't claim family support but other support that does not involve putting the man of the house as the spouse. It seems the State of Utah will only prosecute in very rare cases where as I had stated before, the people try to cheat the State and as in this case, where the girls are minors when taken as "wives"... which is only pursued in the event of the State investigating something else, realise that the other wives were minors when they entered into the relationship with the "husband".
Yes life insurance is separate from the State. But the State makes the insurance laws that the insurance companies must comply with. And provisions aren't always available. The thing is okinrus, the insurance provisions should recognise their relationship. Even if one partner puts down the other as a next of kin, another person can still come onto the scene and claim the insurance money if they can show that they are related to the insured individual. For example, if the insured person has relatives who refused to have anything to do with him/her because he/she was homosexual and the insured had been in a relationship for so and so years and put the partner as next of kin, the family members can pursue the money in the courts and usually win. Gays and lesbians have no rights or safeguards in such situations. It is unfair and highly discriminatory. A will can be contested in court by relatives because the partner is not considered a spouse or next of kin. However if it were a heterosexual couple in a defacto relationship, the surviving 'spouse' or partner would receive the benefit. Do you see where the discrimination lies now okinrus?
OK, this is the problem....you said I had a distorted view of reality....Everything above IS REALITY...just like it is for normal people.....how could you not understand my post to your response???? I made a statement of phrase that was true and you say it's distorted. Isn't this post about homosexuals????? Shouldn't I be speaking to that??? I thought that this was clear??? Reasking the questions for heterosexuals does not change the fact about homosexuals. There's not enough evidence or proof to confirm or deny either side...That's why I always say that it's my opinion only!
To Bells
Since you keep talking to me and begging for a response .............
So let me get this straight.....You and Neildo Dildo initially have a problem with me because I stated and I quote "Let them have their marriage"? :bugeye:
The act of discriminating.
The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.
Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
Is this what you're asking me to do...Because I most certainly do discriminate against homosexuals sexual preference...but in the eyes of the law (which would not be right to change) Homosexuals are human males and females just like heterosexuals. You're telling us not to discriminate, which means that we should not see there distinctions, sexual or otherwise... OK...I won't....
Since you keep talking to me and begging for a response .............
I do notice your play on words.....So where's your proof on that?
So when I say that same thing......
It's racist??? huh??? Only someone like you are allowed to have feelings about it? These are my feelings about it and ........You called me a racist, yet now you say YES! It's true....says alot about you! :bugeye:
I'm not trying to poison anyones mind! That's just it. You bring up poison when speaking on gays having children! You know children that are being reared by gays and they are fine. I know adults who have been reared by gays who are not fine! It does go both ways you know. Theres not enough proof to state either way as of yet. That's why I said at the beginning of my post that we will just grow old and weary over it!
I guess you still didn't get it. Leading them to their deaths allows the cause to die out! It's born, it lives, it procreates, gets old then die. So I guess that's exactly what you're doing. I'm not doing anything except giving my opinion.
So let me get this straight.....You and Neildo Dildo initially have a problem with me because I stated and I quote "Let them have their marriage"? :bugeye:
My comments against white people are true. Period....Has nothing to do with racism....It's funny you try to use that alot.
And how once again did you come up with this doozy???......
The act of discriminating.
The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.
Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
Is this what you're asking me to do...Because I most certainly do discriminate against homosexuals sexual preference...but in the eyes of the law (which would not be right to change) Homosexuals are human males and females just like heterosexuals. You're telling us not to discriminate, which means that we should not see there distinctions, sexual or otherwise... OK...I won't....
Yes, I find being gay degrading, depressing and disgusting...I find most people on this site to be the same (mainly you) . But that's an opinion of mine....No one else has to recognize it and call it their own. I've never asked that anyone do so. It seems that you think only you're opinion counts! Everybody's count. Oh and the statement you made "Children wouldn't care who they were placed with under normal circumstances" I agree especially because a gay adoption isn't under normal circumstance. A vulture preying on the minds of children? I'm not the one trying to change the law and force this on the children! You are!!
That's exactly what gay/lesbians are trying to do! Thanks for pointing that out.
Last edited:
ReighnStorm said:
Oh do please try to back this up, I need a good laugh. Just because you're a rampant heterosexist doesn't mean that the other side are a bunch of homosexists. We're not the ones out there preaching that anyone is some sort of sub-human or a bunch of diseased mentaly ill degenerates.
I never said that they were or ever will be! So you're saying that you're not using you're sexual preference in order to change a law? Is that it? I don't have to (try) back that up..It's directly in front of your face.
Is this what you think you are....exactly what is a sub-human?
So exactly what are you preaching about?
You're saying that you want to be treated just like everyone else and you do not want to be recognized as different. Then you turn around and say "but the government needs to change the laws so we can marry each other because we are different!??? Or choose to have sex differently??? (note above statement).
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
I guess it's just me and no one else huh?????
http://www.defenseofmarriagecoalition.org/
Measure 36, which amends the Oregon Constitution to legally recognize marriage only between a man and a woman, passed in Tuesday's election by 57 percent to 43 percent, the smallest margin among the 11 states that had such measures, most of which passed by 70 percent of more. Oregon's measure was approved in every county except Multnomah and Benton.
"What this really demonstrates above anything else is that basic rights should not be put up for a popular vote," said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force,
Once again???????
And
In the end these people are still human man and woman and can marry each other.....your point?????????Also by the way you say and I quote "It's the religious conservatives that put homosexuals.....". Isn't it religion or the life thereof that started the sanctity of marriage in the first place?
So you're for something and against it at the same time? How do you come up with these things?
Last edited:
ReighnStorm said:So you're saying that you're not using you're sexual preference in order to change a law? Is that it? Then you are all the proof needed
My goodness, what a confused bigot you are! First off we're not using our sexuality for anything - we are using appeals to the founding principals of this nation to have laws targeted against us (Much like jim crow laws were targeted against blacks) repealed. You are the ones with the hang-up on sexuality, not us. Generally if we're in the gay-rights movement we've already gone through the angst and bo hooing about sexuality - we're over it, and it'd be nice if everyone else was, too.
Second, you didn't say "trying to change laws" you said us that homosexuals are trying to use their sexuality to gain a sense of superiority over others, so don't try to bait and switch, it's not going to work.
Check out HRC.org - the home page of the world's largest gay rights organization, and note their logo - a blue square containing a bold yellow equals sign. Does this communicate the idea of homosupremacy to you? Just because you want to dominate others doesn't mean that everyone is out to dominate you.
ReighnStorm said:Is this what you think you are....exactly what is a sub-human?
So exactly what are you preaching about?
You'd do better to examine what you are preaching. This is nothing but a regurgitation of the rhetoric which you and your side have been spewing from the begining.
ReighnStorm said:
You were doing okay for the first half of this paragraph and then you flipped right on your back again. Once more you have it backward - we don't want legal reorganization of our marriages because we're different, we want legal recognition of our marriages because we are not different in any significant way to disqualify us from such a civil contract. Also we'd much prefer if the government simply hadn't changed the laws in the first place. Prior to 1996 there really wasn't much standing in the way of same-sex couples marrying legaly.
ReighnStorm said:
I couldn't agree more - that's just not how our democracy is supposed to work. How would you like it if right after the Civil War the American People voted on whether or not to reinstate slavery? Do you think you'd be free to talk so uppity to a white guy like me, especially on an expensive piece of electronic communication equipment? Your stance on this gay-rights issue is practically a conflict of self interest, and certainly an abandonment of any lessons learned from the history of the treatment of African Americans. There was once a man who had a dream, and all you can do is say “Wake up and smell the coffee!”
Congratulations on being a human failure.
ReighnStorm said:
Hmm yes, I do believe that is my point, actually. Homosexuals are still human. They technically can marry someone of the opposite sex, but then our culture tends to frown on rape, doesn't it? So why then should we create a sort of rape-culture where individuals are forced to marry people whom they are not attracted to in order to exercise their full rights as a citizen?
They are human you say, yes, and as we have found attraction to the opposite sex is not a characteristic which all humans share, yet our laws do not reflect this. It creates a clear inequity, your needs are addressed while mine are not, and morons like you go into irrational flights of fancy about why they should not be addressed. You're a real humanitarian.
ReighnStorm said:
I'm not against anyone's religion - I'm just against having someone else's religion forced on me.
Also, the civil institution of marriage long pre-dates any Judeo-Christian religious connotations involved in the matter, nor is the purpose which the institution of marriage serves purely a religious one. Also, were it somehow a religious affair then how is it that our government should be involved in it in the first place? Doesn't that seem slightly odd to you? Homosexuals are not fighting for reorganization of their religious marriages by any religious denomination, they are fighting for a civil contract which by every legal principal our nation is based on they should rightly already be able to do.
And of course there is then the fact that "sanctity of marriage" is nothing but a silly peice of rhetoric which was invented within the last three or four years or so, and in truth Marriage is not one single static entity but instead we can even see how it has drasticaly changed even just within the few hundred years of the history of the Nation of the United States. Getting into that, however, would likely be a tangent to this responce.
Also, on a more personal note - more question marks and exclamations to not add any validity to your argument. Please stick to the standard prescribed amount of punctuation. It saves server space.
Well, if I'm a Bigot then so are you!
Bigot - a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
Here's another play on words that I noticed
So in which ways then would you say you are different???
Or are you not different at all???So what is the difference between homosexual and heterosexual...I thought it was this:
homosexual - involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex.
heterosexual - tendency to direct sexual desire toward the opposite sex b : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between individuals of opposite sex.
Am I wrong?
I'm sorry, but are you speaking for all homosexuals..plus I was replying to Bells. The actual words came from her.
Do you mean me personally or all heterosexist like me?
After the civil war blacks were still not considered equal! And that's just it....A piece of paper would not stop the majority of people who wanted to bring back slavery! Having the right to live and breath is not the same as wanting the right to marry one's own sexual parts.They have every right to exercise their opinion and beliefs...just like you and I do. That's also just it....If African American people are telling you that this is wrong (especially after what they went through) then there must be some truth to why it should not be allowed. People under religion, people of color, sane people are all telling you that this is not right! Yet we aren't human enough to have an opinion...right??? Isn't that what you're really wanting to say?
How can one exactly be a human failure? We don't have the same beliefs...It is our right to disagree! I'm not forcing your hand...I say fight for what you believe (even if it's stupid), fight non the less.....and all you can say is someone is a human failure. You're the one that's not genetically correct!
Last edited:
ReighnStorm said:
No, actually, I'm completely fine with the idea that you might hate one in ten people for absolutely no good reason, and feel that they are below you - I wasn't going to invite you to my birthday party anyhow - It's your right. Note that I am not the one arguing that anyone's rights should be withheld or any people be oppressed for rather trivial matters.
My world view accounts for people like you and allows me to be mellow about it. If I am bigoted against anything it’s bigoted opinions being used as models for national policy.
ReighnStorm said:
Very good, that's it - or rather that's close enough to it - ancillary activity which could be considered a part of one's sexuality are also included (dating, and just generally how one socializes with a member of the same sex vs the opposite sex) but that's slightly more subtle than is necessary to get to the core of the issue.
Now why does this matter, again? I don’t expect you to answer coherently – I’ve been asking for a while and I can’t seem to get an answer that doesn’t boil down to “it just does”.
ReighnStorm said:
Oh? But what happens when someone's "freedom" Is exerted over others such to prevent them from exerting the rights of their "freedom"? Isn't that what slavery is in the first place? Are you trying to make an argument in favor of organizing our society such that the will of the majority trumps all and your rights are provisional based entirely on the whim of those in power? That's a very dangerous sort of thing to suggest - and you'll have a lot of work to do in destroying the constitution before it's achieved. Somewhere our founding fathers are rolling in their graves. . .
Also, you are a human failure because you have betrayed one of the most noble ideals ever conceived of by man. One which, as an American, and especially as an African American, I really feel you should be particularly in tune with.
Well I don't think anyone is saying that they want to marry a groin, so I don't see how this matters very much. Also, slaves were still quite free to live and breath. Are you trying to say that you feel that full equality under the law as promised by our constiution is not a worthy goal even if abolishing slavery was? I don't see how one view can be held without the other.
ReighnStorm said:
How is he not "genetically correct" if he was created that way?
By the way Reign, there is no evidence whatsoever that homosexuals have a greater chance of committing pedophilia. As a matter of fact, the reasons why men commit sex acts on boys is a matter of convience more than it is a matter of homosexuality. Boys do not get pregnant and they are 80% less likely to report the crime. Most pedophiles are actually heterosexual males, and they prey on females and males as a matter of opportunity more than sexual preferance. The majority (77%) of sexual predators reported that they are heterosexual males, and 56% of them are married with children of their own, according to the Department of Justice. In fact, Incestous relationships are rarely homosexual (3% of those reported), but mostly heterosexual. So your reasoning around not wanting them to adopt is extremely flawed.
Bottom line is that in Canada, human beings are now equal. The prudity of the United States is clear and discriminatory at it's very core. You'll find the inequality in my post here;
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=832864#post832864
So you're ok with hating someone for no good reason.
That's just it! Your rights are not being witheld. Is it new law that you want?
AND You think that the sanctity of marriage is trivial??
Which means that you're a Bigot!
You're exactly right...they are turning in their graves at the thought of realizing that the founding of these terms would now be used as a joke for gays.
Noble huh??????/ let me remind you yet again
I can't believe that you're putting gays in the same light as slavery? How unjust is that! I do believe that gay bashing and crimes against them because they are gay need to be addressed before we can move on to something as important as marriage. I'm simply against gay/lesbian marrying until that issue (among others) is addressed and resolved. I don't see how you would disagree with me on that. I said this a long time ago. Which is funny...because I once again said that you should be allowed to marry...just for different reasons
I also think with making new law or changing this current law would in fact open other said issues by reg humans such as yourself to dispute important laws (some have been given as examples already.)
Last edited: