DeletedUser8950
Pah whatever. Braindead today, have barely slept. I've already edited my post a few times.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
DeletedUser
Pah whatever. Braindead today, have barely slept. I've already edited my post a few times.
but the funny thing is he goes by perez hilton
DeletedUser8950
Well good for him. I'm off to sleep soon. Next I'll start calling you migzo or something...but the funny thing is he goes by perez hilton
DeletedUser
Well good for him. I'm off to sleep soon. Next I'll start calling you migzo or something...
ok good night
DeletedUser
Wow. I really can't believe you said that. So it's okay to be gay as long as you never act on it because the real choice is acting on it. So I guess gay people should just force themselves to date people they aren't attracted to. Maybe they should get married to the opposite sex and be miserable the rest of their lives because they are hiding who they truly are. Oh wait, that is what has historically been done by the LGBT community for years. Or are you suggesting they just not have sex at all and be celibate all their lives?
Plenty of people have swapped back to heterosexuality after taking it in the bum for a while, and plenty more people refuse sex.
I really can't understand why you're so up in arms for the gay community, many have it worse off; laws against pedophilia and bestiality.
Next time you find yourself attracted to someone just tell yourself you have no right to feel that way because not everyone would understand or accept that relationship. People might call you bad names and tell you that you are going to hell. Then turn around and find someone you are not attracted to at all, someone that might well make you feel sick if you had to even kiss them and convince yourself to date them. Not because you want to or that you feel attraction for them, but to please society. Yeah, have all the sex you want with that person.
The problem with that is, I'm not a statistical abnormality and I live in a society that accepts my life choices.
The issue has nothing to do with Perez Hilton or Miss California. The issue is whether or not citizens that live in the same country, specifically the US in this case, should all have the same rights. If we are all truly created equal then we should all have equal rights. This is a country where 11 year old boys are hanging themselves because they are being taunted at school and being called gay, where you hear time and again from gay people that they knew at a very young age they were gay, where lovers that have been together for decades are denied the right to visit each other in the hospital should one fall ill, and where homosexuals are victims of violent hate crimes. Homosexuals aren't out to recruit for their ranks or tear down the institution of marriage. They just want the same rights everyone else has. I don't think that is a bad thing. If you really want to protect the sanctity of marriage then ban divorce.
Sadly, thankfully, no one is equal. And I'm not against gay marriage. The entire issue is a non-issue for me.
DeletedUser
Plenty of people are bisexual or bicurious. Just because you are bisexual does not mean you won't find someone of the opposite sex that you want to marry and have children with. Marriage is about monogamy (it is also about property rights among other things but for the couple the focus is on monogamy). You can be bisexual and monogamous because you are in love with and devoted to the person you married or choose to be in a relationship with. That has nothing to do with denying who you are or how you feel. That has to do with making a commitment to someone. I don't see why the sex of the person you are committing to should matter.Plenty of people have swapped back to heterosexuality after taking it in the bum for a while, and plenty more people refuse sex.
Plenty more people refuse sex? Are we talking specifically about the gay community? If so usually those that refuse to act on their natural sexual preferences do so for either religious reasons, denial, or in an attempt to hide from their friends and family who they truly are. Being celibate is not natural for human beings or any species on the planet.
I really can't understand why you're so up in arms for the gay community, many have it worse off; laws against pedophilia and bestiality.
Where even to start. Many have it worse off. Ok. But this thread is about gay marriage. You want to talk about other inequalities then start a thread and we can debate them there.
Can you tell me another group of people in this country where 2 consenting adults (not closely related) would not be allowed to marry?
What does pedophilia and bestiality have to do with gay marriage? I am hoping you won't go where I think you are going to go with that. I will wait and see though. Giving you the benefit of the doubt.
The problem with that is, I'm not a statistical abnormality and I live in a society that accepts my life choices.
Did you choose to be hetrosexual? Did you ever say one day "Well I could be gay or straight...think I'll go straight". No, you naturally were attracted to the opposite sex. Gay people are the same. They are naturally attracted to people of the opposite sex.
I know, now we will hear how it isn't a choice. There are many examples of homosexuality in the animal kingdom (and like it or not, humans are just a kind of animal). Do you think monkeys or dogs or any other species that show homosexual tendencies have the reasoning capabilities to sit down and make a choice about their sexuality? No. They were born that way! Now you are going to say that humans do have the reasoning capabilities to choose what their sexual preference is. No, they don't. If someone is naturally attracted to the opposite sex there is no choice in it for them. They can deny what they are feeling but it still doesn't make them hetrosexual. That is like telling someone with green eyes that if they really want blue eyes all they have to do is decide to have blue eyes. Deciding to get blue colored contact lenses doesn't mean they aren't naturally green eyed.
Statistical abnormality? Anything can be a statistical abnormality. I am a mother of twins. Twins are a statistical abnormality. I don't consider my children abnormal nor do I consider myself abnormal for having gave birth to them. It was my life choice to give birth to twins. Should my twins or myself be denied rights others have because we are a statistical abnormality?
Sadly, thankfully, no one is equal. And I'm not against gay marriage. The entire issue is a non-issue for me.
What does 'sadly, thankfully, no one is equal' even mean. Are you sad there is inequality or happy about it? For not being against gay marriage and it being a non-issue for you, it seems you have put enough thought to form an opinion that it isn't a big deal that gays can't get married. It may not be to you but it certainly is for those who are being denied that right.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
But this thread is about gay marriage. You want to talk about other inequalities then start a thread and we can debate them there.
no it started about a celebrity that has done something in the past week or so, that got them in the news, and we will give our opinions on said person and event.
DeletedUser
I really can't understand why you're so up in arms for the gay community, many have it worse off; laws against pedophilia and bestiality.
The difference is the all-important consenting adults, which your other two topics lack by definition. If it's a morality issue, isn't a committed monogamous relationship better than promiscuity?
DeletedUser
Plenty of people are bisexual or bicurious. Just because you are bisexual does not mean you won't find someone of the opposite sex that you want to marry and have children with. Marriage is about monogamy (it is also about property rights among other things but for the couple the focus is on monogamy). You can be bisexual and monogamous because you are in love with and devoted to the person you married or choose to be in a relationship with. That has nothing to do with denying who you are or how you feel. That has to do with making a commitment to someone. I don't see why the sex of the person you are committing to should matter.
So if marriage is mostly about monogamy, then why bother pushing for marriage, it's not impossible to be monogamous outside of marriage.
Body modification isn't natural, but who says it can't be for the better(don't take it the way)?Plenty more people refuse sex? Are we talking specifically about the gay community? If so usually those that refuse to act on their natural sexual preferences do so for either religious reasons, denial, or in an attempt to hide from their friends and family who they truly are. Being celibate is not natural for human beings or any species on the planet.
No, it's about a gay guy getting butthurt over Miss California expressing her opinion.Where even to start. Many have it worse off. Ok. But this thread is about gay marriage. You want to talk about other inequalities then start a thread and we can debate them there.
Marriage, no. Two consenting adults disallowed free choice because of their offshoot morals, yeah.Can you tell me another group of people in this country where 2 consenting adults (not closely related) would not be allowed to marry?
If you're thinking I'm going to relate the disgusting practices of pedophilia and bestiality with homosexual relationships, then you're right in out field. You couldn't be further out in fact, I was merely pointing out that these groups of people are oppressed even further than homosexuals.What does pedophilia and bestiality have to do with gay marriage? I am hoping you won't go where I think you are going to go with that. I will wait and see though. Giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Not exactly, there are genes that help along the attraction process but environment does play a part. Making it not entirely natural.Did you choose to be hetrosexual? Did you ever say one day "Well I could be gay or straight...think I'll go straight". No, you naturally were attracted to the opposite sex. Gay people are the same. They are naturally attracted to people of the opposite sex.
No, I wasn't going to say that at all, now you're just putting words in my mouth. They can't change their sexual preference, but they can choose to act on it, despite being 'unnatural' not to act on it.I know, now we will hear how it isn't a choice. There are many examples of homosexuality in the animal kingdom (and like it or not, humans are just a kind of animal). Do you think monkeys or dogs or any other species that show homosexual tendencies have the reasoning capabilities to sit down and make a choice about their sexuality? No. They were born that way! Now you are going to say that humans do have the reasoning capabilities to choose what their sexual preference is. No, they don't. If someone is naturally attracted to the opposite sex there is no choice in it for them. They can deny what they are feeling but it still doesn't make them hetrosexual. That is like telling someone with green eyes that if they really want blue eyes all they have to do is decide to have blue eyes. Deciding to get blue colored contact lenses doesn't mean they aren't naturally green eyed.
Sure, do you deviate from social norms and do you have maladaptive behavior?Statistical abnormality? Anything can be a statistical abnormality. I am a mother of twins. Twins are a statistical abnormality. I don't consider my children abnormal nor do I consider myself abnormal for having gave birth to them. It was my life choice to give birth to twins. Should my twins or myself be denied rights others have because we are a statistical abnormality?
Both, inequality is just that amazing.What does 'sadly, thankfully, no one is equal' even mean. Are you sad there is inequality or happy about it? For not being against gay marriage and it being a non-issue for you, it seems you have put enough thought to form an opinion that it isn't a big deal that gays can't get married. It may not be to you but it certainly is for those who are being denied that right.
Sadly people are placed lower than others, but if they weren't things wouldn't work until people could throw their ego's away, which they can't.
The difference is the all-important consenting adults, which your other two topics lack by definition. If it's a morality issue, isn't a committed monogamous relationship better than promiscuity?
If we're going by the, "Is it natural" argument, then promiscuity is.
DeletedUser
If we're going by the, "Is it natural" argument, then promiscuity is.
I really don't care if homosexuality is a matter of choice or birth, or some combination of both, or if it varies by individual. Consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with each other and it's none of your business. The old bigoted argument is that interracial marriages were immoral because the races are too different. Now the argument is that homosexual marriages are immoral because they're too similar.
Goldilocks: "This marriage is just right!"
DeletedUser
As far as that goes, murderers, rapists, thieves and other criminals are also oppressed, but for what they do rather than who they are. As far as I know, there is no currrent law against homosexuality, but there is against child molestation, child endangerment and animal cruelty. I think that comparing the rights of the 3 groups is not even in the ball park. Other than prostitution (and gambling to some extent), most actions between 2 consenting adults are considered to be acceptable.If you're thinking I'm going to relate the disgusting practices of pedophilia and bestiality with homosexual relationships, then you're right in out field. You couldn't be further out in fact, I was merely pointing out that these groups of people are oppressed even further than homosexuals.
Sure, do you deviate from social norms and do you have maladaptive behavior?
If we're going by the, "Is it natural" argument, then promiscuity is.
Are you saying that there is absolutely nothing about you that deviates from "social norms"? I find that very hard to believe, since I don't know any person anywhere who has all traits and characteristics of what is considered to be average, typical or normal. That in itself would make you a bit of a deviate, so should you not be given all rights given to the rest of society? I smoke (a few cigarettes a day), I don't drink and I don't date. I don't consider any of those things to be perverted, but they are also not the norms these days.
DeletedUser
I said for the couple the main focus was on monogamy but there were legal benefits as well. These are the things homosexuals are being denied by not being able to enter into marriage.So if marriage is mostly about monogamy, then why bother pushing for marriage, it's not impossible to be monogamous outside of marriage.
- Ability to make medical decisions for your spouse
- Receiving public assistance benefits on behalf of your spouse
- Social Security, disability and medicare benefits can all be paid to a spouse as can veteran and military benefits
- Having your spouse covered under your medical insurance plan
- Ability to take bereavement leave should your spouse die
- Ability to use FMLA time should your spouse become ill
- The right to sue on behalf of your spouse
- Visiting rights if your spouse is in jail or the intensive care unit at a hospital
- You cannot be called to testify against your spouse as most states have laws protecting your conversations as privileged
- If you divorce, you are automatically entitled to a share in the community property
- The right to make funeral and burial arrangements, consent to any after-death procedures and grant or refuse any bestowments to friends and family members, assuming they do not conflict with a legal will
- A married couple can also file tax returns jointly
- The ability to create family partnerships to address business income
- Self-employed individuals can extend investing opportunities to their spouse through an individual 401(k), a benefit not afforded to unmarried couples or registered domestic partnerships
That makes no sense to me as to relevance of the debate.Body modification isn't natural, but who says it can't be for the better(don't take it the way)?
As a gay man in his 30's I am pretty sure Perez Hilton has heard worse than what Miss Cali said. His feelings weren't hurt. He was shocked that on a national platform, a woman trying to win a contest where she would represent all Americans, would alienate a group of people like that.No, it's about a gay guy getting butthurt over Miss California expressing her opinion.
For the record, I don't have a problem with Miss Cali saying what she said or that she believes what she believes. I think she showed poor judgment in the way she answered and that is why there is a controversy about it. The question was approved by the Miss America council (or whatever heads it up) as appropriate.
So you are saying gays are immoral?Marriage, no. Two consenting adults disallowed free choice because of their offshoot morals, yeah.
Actually I said I was giving you the benefit of the doubt because I know you a little bit. I was really hoping you wouldn't go there and would have been very saddened if you had. There is a large section of the population who would make those arguments though. Glad to see you aren't one of them.If you're thinking I'm going to relate the disgusting practices of pedophilia and bestiality with homosexual relationships, then you're right in out field. You couldn't be further out in fact, I was merely pointing out that these groups of people are oppressed even further than homosexuals.
Ok, so genes are a factor in the attraction process. Environment plays a part. I believe both to be true. If your genes have programmed you to be homosexual that does not mean your environment can turn you straight. Nor does it mean if you are programmed to be hetrosexual that your environment will turn you gay. You will have a strong tendency to be how you are programmed though.Not exactly, there are genes that help along the attraction process but environment does play a part. Making it not entirely natural.
I apologize. The "you" was more of a general "you" to those that would say those things because many people do argue those very things. If I made assumptions, again I apologize.No, I wasn't going to say that at all, now you're just putting words in my mouth. They can't change their sexual preference, but they can choose to act on it, despite being 'unnatural' not to act on it.
Why should social norms be accepted? Depending on where you live the norm can vary greatly. I'm sure what is considered normal social behavior in the US varies from what is considered normal social behavior in other parts of the world. Even in our own country the norm can vary depending on location.Sure, do you deviate from social norms and do you have maladaptive behavior?
Inequality is amazing? People are placed lower than others because of ignorance, intolerance, fear, and the need for others to feel superior. That isn't amazing.Both, inequality is just that amazing.
Sadly people are placed lower than others, but if they weren't things wouldn't work until people could throw their ego's away, which they can't.
DeletedUser
I just want to make a few points/actually questions (not That I agree either way w/ my points).
First, If u believe "we are all created equal", then u can not believe in evolution. Right?
Second, "Social norms???" For decades (actually centuries) when women came of age in alot of countries they got married and had children. That was a norm, now it is illegal to marry someone under the age of 18 (and yes some places it is lower but not the point), and looked down upon because society changed the rules. Why???
First, If u believe "we are all created equal", then u can not believe in evolution. Right?
Second, "Social norms???" For decades (actually centuries) when women came of age in alot of countries they got married and had children. That was a norm, now it is illegal to marry someone under the age of 18 (and yes some places it is lower but not the point), and looked down upon because society changed the rules. Why???
DeletedUser
So you are saying gays are immoral?
Yes, gays are immoral. They go against the morals created by the society they reside in.
Why should social norms be accepted? Depending on where you live the norm can vary greatly. I'm sure what is considered normal social behavior in the US varies from what is considered normal social behavior in other parts of the world. Even in our own country the norm can vary depending on location.
Folkways vary quite a bit, but morays are fairly constant in most societies(no killing, don't steal).
Inequality is amazing? People are placed lower than others because of ignorance, intolerance, fear, and the need for others to feel superior. That isn't amazing.
Ah, double definitions, so amazing.
I really don't care if homosexuality is a matter of choice or birth, or some combination of both, or if it varies by individual. Consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with each other and it's none of your business. The old bigoted argument is that interracial marriages were immoral because the races are too different. Now the argument is that homosexual marriages are immoral because they're too similar.
Goldilocks: "This marriage is just right!"
Civil unions anyone?
And no, consenting adults shouldn't be able to privately do whatever they want.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Wrong. One has nothing to do with the other.First, If u believe "we are all created equal", then u can not believe in evolution. Right?
Because it was realized that those under under the age of 18 are, for the most part, not mentally mature enough to make an informed consent. Also, child marriage was/is, by and large, instituted within male-governed societies, where women did/do not have rights.Second, "Social norms???" For decades (actually centuries) when women came of age in alot of countries they got married and had children. That was a norm, now it is illegal to marry someone under the age of 18 (and yes some places it is lower but not the point), and looked down upon because society changed the rules. Why???
So basically what you're saying is, rights be damned, let the REIGNING moral majority rule even if that moral majority takes away Constitutional rights.Yes, gays are immoral. They go against the morals created by the society they reside in.
You really need to research this issue, as you don't know enough to be discussing it. Still, I find it absolutely ironic that you would sit there and say same-sex activity is immoral, but would point to civil unions as being acceptable.Civil unions anyone?
Hmm, so even though it is legal, and (based on your earlier comment) even acceptable, for a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, to have civil unions... somehow this translates to them not being allowed to marry?And no, consenting adults shouldn't be able to privately do whatever they want.
Exactly where are you from, Bizarro World?
DeletedUser
Dr.FP is either trolling, or displaying a huge case of the hatemongering.
DeletedUser
Oh I don't know about that John, he's demonstrating an ample amount of ignorance, which is actually quite common. I suppose we can refer to him as a commoner, don't you think?
DeletedUser
Oh I don't know about that John, he's demonstrating an ample amount of ignorance, which is actually quite common. I suppose we can refer to him as a commoner, don't you think?
I'd hate to belive the common people are that way, but I guess you are right.
Filthy commoners!
DeletedUser
I don't think we are all created equal but we should all be treated as equals. Everybody is exceptional in their own way.
DeletedUser
Yes, gays are immoral. They go against the morals created by the society they reside in.
So did interracial marriages at one time. Is your point that society can be stupid, or that we should endorse its stupidity? (loaded question, but I couldn't resist)
Folkways vary quite a bit, but morays are fairly constant in most societies(no killing, don't steal).
Actually, morals do change from society to society and even within a society, over a length of time. For example, one of your "universal morals" that you sited was "no killing". Unfortunately, there have been many societies that have practiced ritual sacrifice, been very pro-war as a society, deliberately sent the aged or those not able to contribute to society to die, etc.
For within a society, take a look at the US. Not 150 years ago, a man was able to marry a 12 year old girl. Today, that is one of our society's biggest taboos (pedophilia).
Looking at homosexuality specifically, there have been many societies that have embraced homosexuality. Socrates, for example, said that the highest form of love is that between an older man and a young boy... The ancient Egyptians, similarly, accepted homosexuality. As did at least some American Indian tribes. The list goes on.
Civil unions anyone?
Civil Unions seem to me to be of the same kind of ilk as the "Separate But Equal" treatment of the south. Next, we'll have gay and straight water fountains, I suppose...
I say, leave marriage up to the churches to define (and some churches, indubitably, will be okay with gay marriage...) and let everyone be able to have civil unions (performed by the state), as well.
And, under the eyes of the law, marriage and civil unions have absolutely no difference.
And no, consenting adults shouldn't be able to privately do whatever they want.
Who should decide what consenting adults do privately?
Last edited by a moderator:
Share: