Thread: Same Sex Marriages

Originally posted by J'Bo
and then know who is ignorant and who is open to the world.

Open to the world?? Explain this?

Originally posted by freeman1504
This, among other reasons, is why I am not religious and also why I do not believe in marriage.

Marriage is a good tax write off.

I think some of the main reason some are pushing the marriage issue, is to get the benefiets of marriage. Such as taxes, insurance etc.



My stance is, I don't dislike gay people... I strongly disagree with their actions.

Originally posted by dg806
Open to the world?? Explain this?

dg, I think it just means that some like to make themselves physically 'wide open' to loving anything and everything in the world except "ignorant" people. I feel that the retards among us need loving too - they can't help the way they were born.

Originally posted by Mudge
Huh? I view myself as primarily conservative, what is conservative to me - laze fair, of course it doesn't seem that way today does it. I have somewhat old fashioned values because thats how I was brought up. Now if you mean because I dont understand or agree with what Eskimo mothers do, this is a CLASSIC problem of one culture not understanding another. This is where things get sticky because I dont understand it, meaning I could not see myself doing it and not feeling any remorse or guilt.

How about you explain just what you mean for my little brain?

Oh I thought it was clear enough. You previously gave an example of the eskimos and how you didn't agree with it but you "understood" how they thought it "was OK" for them to kill among their own people in that societal context. But then you denied RCfootball87's exagerated comment to kill his parents if they were gay from his societal context. It appeared to be a selective deference to "understanding" and "empathy" when you permitted one social structure to kill for what they thought a legitamate purpose but not another social structure that was closer to home. Obviously the example is extreme but it was one you yourself made. I was simply pointing out the oft recurring pattern of selective "understanding" and compassion which seems to pervade much of current liberal thought.

Originally posted by OceanDude
It appeared to be a selective deference to "understanding" and "empathy" when you permitted one social structure to kill for what they thought a legitamate purpose but not another social structure that was closer to home. Obviously the example is extreme but it was one you yourself made

While it is good for a person to have the ability to look at both sides of the coin, if a mother thinks she can't feed her child - what in the fucking fuck does that have to do with my parents being gay and them needing to die? I feel it was a horrible example in the first place, because if you dont like the foster family you dont go, period.

I should also repeat, I dont think a child that grows up in such a family is the one who is going to have a problem with it, more than likely he or she is going to wish that other people weren't so ignorant for throwing rocks at him/her, pulling his/her hair, etc

I dont understand the importance of who Bob Nobody sticks his wang into.

I do not understand murder, I do not understand the desire to eat a fetus, but yes I understand the fact that a mother says they are killing thier newborn because they "cant feed it." Nowhere did I say I agree with it, since I know how to read I understand thier reason. This is a classic reason why culture clashes have been going on since earliest exploration days.

Originally posted by kuso
I would hope that was a weak attempt at humour.

LMAO!!!! I did not even catch that kuso. Has kind of a ring to it eh? I think the only weak attempt at humor so far is from freeman.

Originally posted by freeman1504
I posted my opinion. A humorous one at that. If you people lack any sort of sense of humor, why don't YOU not post anything and go to some lame-ass board where you'll feel more comfortable posting. I'm the most left of center person I know...big time liberal. It's a shame to see people like you still exist. Afraid of anything out of the ordinary. Anything that rubs YOU the wrong way shouldn't be expressed. Who made you "board-dictator". Oh, and also, lighten the fuck up. Take a god damn joke for once!

Define for me what you mean by "people like you" and the fact "that we still exist". That is not a term I'm used to hearing from the ever so tolerant left.

FYI Freeman... I have no problem with your opinion or your attempt at humor and I am in no way trying to be board dictator. When it comes to people speaking their mind and opinions, I am all for it. Anyone here that know me, knows that I have taken my share of blows for standing up with people of different opinions. But your post served absolutely no purpose other than to heat the topic up even more. If you are so poorly educated and carry such a small understanding and inability to use the english vocabulary any better than that, you are an embarassment to the educational system. Just so we are clear, I am hardly afraid of anything like the likes of you or your opinion. It was your tact of offering no valuable thoughts or opinion to the thread that I take issue with. If you can legitimately show me ANY value on ANY level that your first post had, I will publically apologize to you for my intolerance of your stupidity.

Originally posted by J'Bo
I love threads like this actually...cause i can read them and then know who is ignorant and who is open to the world. Also make pickin cyber friends easy

Sooooooooooooooooooo, are we cyber friends now J'bo???

Originally posted by dg806
Open to the world?? Explain this?

Well sorry i confused you but i am not going into detail because i will spare IM the drama. All i mean is that people who discriminate are ignorant. period.

Wait does this mean that i am discriminating discriminaters

Freeman...yah your swell

First question...Of many...
Why is it that same sex marriage affects you personally,why are you so against the idea?
Is it because somebody said so,many centuries ago and that train of thought has not evolved since then?

I'm just trying to understand the logic of the people that are dead against the idea...Is it an ideaology that has not died since way back then???So far,I hear "it's because the church says so..."

I see that my querry has been avoided like the plague,again I will ask it ,if the Pope or any religious figure decides that oral sex should be banned,HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD FOLLOW THAT LAW/RULE.
Let's not forget that even now,2003,in some states (I can't remember which one) it is ILLEGAL to perform oral sex and I mean between man and woman...
It just boggles my mind that such a law is still in vigour.Go ask any religious figure their thought on the matter.
You may say that the law books are full of these OUTDATED laws.I agree,but it's still illegal.
Is it the protestants that have this saying "every sperm is sacred"
(you might recognise it from a Monthy Pithon skit)...


Of course,there will always be two camps to every discussion.
It would be so boring if everybody thought the same way,followed the same lamb down into the precipise w/o asking questions...

Ok back to the original question...

I am laughing at this mess of a thread, my god. Honestly Why does it concern anybody if the gays get married or not. I am not for or against, I just honestly don't care b/c it doesn't affect me. If they want to get married then what does it bother you. These people will be together whether they are married or not so you aren't stopping something by being against it. I am as hetero as they come, believe me, but I do not see why soem of you are even making a stink about this. Now I am extremely against gays and lesbians raising children, not b/c of reasons already mentioned, and not b/c they won't have loving parents, but simply b/c a boy needs a father figure in his life to show him how to be a man, and he won't get that with lesbos raising him. And it is the same way with a girl, she needs a mother as well as a father, not two of the same. Teh reason I care about this is b/c once children are thrown into the mix, then the situation begins to affect other people, mainly the child they are rising, but as far as the marriage, it only affects them so who cares, there ae bigger problems inthe world we should be worrying about don't you think?

By the way RC, I have never had a problem with you before, infact I was glad to see that someone your age has done some reading to learn about the sport, but as far as this thread goes you really showed your age and acted extremely immature, you could've worded you responses differently if you want people to respect your opinion man, trust me.

Originally posted by J'Bo
I love threads like this actually...cause i can read them and then know who is ignorant and who is open to the world. Also make pickin cyber friends easy

So I'm ignorant because I have a philosophical disagreement with gay marriage? What's your definition of ignorant? From this post I may want to be ignorant the way you said it.

Originally posted by Dero
First question...Of many...
Why is it that same sex marriage affects you personally,why are you so against the idea?
Is it because somebody said so,many centuries ago and that train of thought has not evolved since then?

I'm just trying to understand the logic of the people that are dead against the idea...Is it an ideaology that has not died since way back then???So far,I hear "it's because the church says so..."

I see that my querry has been avoided like the plague,again I will ask it ,if the Pope or any religious figure decides that oral sex should be banned,HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD FOLLOW THAT LAW/RULE.
Let's not forget that even now,2003,in some states (I can't remember which one) it is ILLEGAL to perform oral sex and I mean between man and woman...
It just boggles my mind that such a law is still in vigour.Go ask any religious figure their thought on the matter.
You may say that the law books are full of these OUTDATED laws.I agree,but it's still illegal.
Is it the protestants that have this saying "every sperm is sacred"
(you might recognise it from a Monthy Pithon skit)...


Of course,there will always be two camps to every discussion.
It would be so boring if everybody thought the same way,followed the same lamb down into the precipise w/o asking questions...

Ok back to the original question...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if I were athiest I still would disagree with homosexuality. It just doesn't fit, in more ways than one.

Originally posted by freeman1504
Afraid of anything out of the ordinary. Anything that rubs YOU the wrong way shouldn't be expressed. Who made you "board-dictator". Oh, and also, lighten the fuck up. Take a god damn joke for once!

Notice how you contradicted yourself. First you say he thinks that anything that rubs him the wrong way shouldn't be expressed. By the nature of the rest of your post its obvious his post rubbed YOU the wrong way. So what do you do when you're rubbed the wrong way? You say, and I quote, " lighten the fuck up. Take a god damn joke for once!" The more you talk the stupider you sound.

geez this thread is sure funny to read ain't it gr81?

unbelievable.

Hey oaktown, what kind of music do you listen to? The reason I ask is b/c I listen to that undergroud hip-hop and most of it is from your area. IMO the top rappers are from the bay area like Sac town and the O-A-K, the list is large indeed. I would love to be down there. R U into that shit at all?

im not deep into the undeground stuff but yeah a lot of it comes right out of oak and sac town i use to listen to pac a lot before he died now i listen to puff even though he's east coast..i remember when Hammer came straight out of oak..man old skool was great

Originally posted by Dero
Ok,I work in the arts,where I would say 40% of the artistic community is either homosexual,lesbian or bi.I get along pretty good with any of them,BTW I am heterosexual.I have close friends that are lesbians and have adopted a little girl who came from a married couple(man/woman) and would get their thrills from BEATING UP their little girl.This is an extreme case I have to agree.But when my friends took custody of this little girl,(let's call her Marie)Marie would cringe and freak out at any loud noises that would happen near her( can't say I blame her after what had happen to her with her previous parents).
It took 6 months for Lucie and Andree to get Marie calmed down,and actually come and site with any men that came into the house(I guess her father was the one that beat her up the most)
Anyway,had Marie been adopted by a "normal couple" (even though I hate using that term in this situation)I don't think that Marie would had been emotionally stable like she is now.
BTW,Marie is 14 years old and has been under the care of my friends since she was 5.
I have seen my friends have very open discussion about what is suppose and what is reality according to the powers to be...
At the age of 14 Marie knows already that she is heterosexual,not belittleling her parents,but understanding herself that that is what she is,not something that somebody shuved down her throat.
Many psycologists were saying that Marie was never to grow as a normal little girl,had it not been for the loving care of my TWO LESBIAN FRIENDS.Had there been a man/father,they all agree that Marie would had rejected him totally as a parent figure.

My thoughts on the matter:
I was a catholic and do not practise anymore...
Why does the church have a say as to what people are going to be and with whoom?
I bring the church in this issue,because here in Canada the Pope is asking all catholic politicians to do what it takes to prevent the same sex marriage.

As I stated in my original post,if the Pope decides that oral sex is not moral,I wonder how many people are going to obey this absurdity??
In my eyes,I see it as the SAME THING!!!

Dero come on now,,, your talking about a very isolated incident here (your friends) and holds little water in the big picture. You know there are swarms of gay/bisexual men out there that molest little boys (even priests as we have read in the papers and the news). Change your story alittle and we can argue the total opposite of everything you just said.
In short your talking a child that was abused by a man and putting him with a female(s). The same would be true if he was molested by 2 homos and placed with a single female parent. It is the male form he would cringe too not their sexual preference. He would cringe every time he saw a man wearing a feathered boa or talk with a lisp.

With that said,, I'm coming clean and pissing off some friends here for sure. I'm against same sex marriages, same sex relationships and same sex parenting. and that is my opinion.

Originally posted by Dero
First question...Of many...
Why is it that same sex marriage affects you personally,why are you so against the idea?
Is it because somebody said so,many centuries ago and that train of thought has not evolved since then?

Simple – anyone here working has to pay taxes to pay for research to find cures for AIDS and to pay to educate dumb people for their own life style choices and then to bury them. Each day in a working life all are forced to pay some part of each person's life to subsidize the unnatural homosexual life style choice.

I'm just trying to understand the logic of the people that are dead against the idea...Is it an ideaology (sp) that has not died since way back then???So far,I hear "it's because the church says so..."

You are not listening very well – so far this discussion is best characterized by responsesthat indicate it: 1) offensive to individual sensibilities, 2) it is unhealthy to society at large and 3) it is immoral (with regard to natural law not necessarily just religion). Only a few have even mentioned religion so don’t go down that path in an attempt to split the camps.

I see that my querry (sp) has been avoided like the plague,again I will ask it ,if the Pope or any religious figure decides that oral sex should be banned,HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD FOLLOW THAT LAW/RULE.

Like the plague of AIDS no one wants to get it and I suspect most don't want to catch any bad ideas from you. Why do you insist on trying to make this a religious argument? A number here with little or no religious conviction have stated opinions against it. By the way, if you are going to attempt to use shock effect in church teaching as a goad to debate you should find it personally shocking to learn that you are completely out of tiouch with many Church teachings. Catholics and other religions have consistently taught that oral sex is deviant behavior even in marriage.

Let's not forget that even now,2003,in some states (I can't remember which one) it is ILLEGAL to perform oral sex and I mean between man and woman...
It just boggles my mind that such a law is still in vigour (sp).Go ask any religious figure their thought on the matter.
You may say that the law books are full of these OUTDATED laws.I agree,but it's still illegal.
Is it the protestants that have this saying "every sperm is sacred"
(you might recognise (sp)it from a Monthy Pithon (sp) skit)...


[i]Is the depth of your educate pedigree centered around the likes of B class Monty Python movies? If you had any credibility you just lost it in my opinion; certainly with me[i]

Of course,there will always be two camps to every discussion.
It would be so boring if everybody thought the same way,followed the same lamb down into the precipise (sp)w/o asking questions...

Its much more fun to follow a donkey to a Monty Python movie to get an education and in depth lesson along the way.
Ok back to the original question...

Oh by the way – do learn to spell it might give at least the illusion of higher intelligence that you might be above a 6th grade education.

Originally posted by J'Bo
Well sorry i confused you but i am not going into detail because i will spare IM the drama. All i mean is that people who discriminate are ignorant. period.

Wait does this mean that i am discriminating discriminaters

Freeman...yah your swell

You didn't confuse me at all! I just wanted to hear your explanation, and it seems you don't want to tell it!

Originally posted by OceanDude
out of tiouch

Originally posted by OceanDude
Oh by the way �Edo learn to spell it might give at least the illusion of higher intelligence that you might be above a 6th grade education.

What is it thats said about those in grass houses? I see punctuation is not your strong point either.

Your point about homosexulas in general and the spread of AIDS is really rather weak too. I believe the lowest % of AIDS sufferers are actually lesbians, unless of course you are only against males. Which brings up another point, one would think that if they were to marry they would be monogamous anyway right?

A couple of notes..

Dero...the Monty Python skit...the Catholics are saying every sperm is sacred, not the protestants.

Kuso...it is glass houses, not grass houses.


One point, as an employer, it definately matters to me. If the law says gays can marry, I will have to start providing benefits to "spouses" of my gay employees.

Originally posted by Pepper


Kuso...is is glass houses, not grass houses.

Is is, is it? lol

Glad my humour wasn`t a complete waste

Oh, and a champion fast edit Pepper

Wow...you're fast

LOL......just re-opened the main page at the right time to see a reply

quote:
Originally posted by Dero
First question...Of many...
Why is it that same sex marriage affects you personally,why are you so against the idea?
Is it because somebody said so,many centuries ago and that train of thought has not evolved since then?

Simple – anyone here working has to pay taxes to pay for research to find cures for AIDS and to pay to educate dumb people for their own life style choices and then to bury them. Each day in a working life all are forced to pay some part of each person's life to subsidize the unnatural homosexual life style choice.

I'm just trying to understand the logic of the people that are dead against the idea...Is it an ideaology (sp) that has not died since way back then???So far,I hear "it's because the church says so..."

You are not listening very well – so far this discussion is best characterized by responsesthat indicate it: 1) offensive to individual sensibilities, 2) it is unhealthy to society at large and 3) it is immoral (with regard to natural law not necessarily just religion). Only a few have even mentioned religion so don’t go down that path in an attempt to split the camps.

I see that my querry (sp) has been avoided like the plague,again I will ask it ,if the Pope or any religious figure decides that oral sex should be banned,HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD FOLLOW THAT LAW/RULE.

Like the plague of AIDS no one wants to get it and I suspect most don't want to catch any bad ideas from you. Why do you insist on trying to make this a religious argument? A number here with little or no religious conviction have stated opinions against it. By the way, if you are going to attempt to use shock effect in church teaching as a goad to debate you should find it personally shocking to learn that you are completely out of tiouch with many Church teachings. Catholics and other religions have consistently taught that oral sex is deviant behavior even in marriage.

Let's not forget that even now,2003,in some states (I can't remember which one) it is ILLEGAL to perform oral sex and I mean between man and woman...
It just boggles my mind that such a law is still in vigour (sp).Go ask any religious figure their thought on the matter.
You may say that the law books are full of these OUTDATED laws.I agree,but it's still illegal.
Is it the protestants that have this saying "every sperm is sacred"
(you might recognise (sp)it from a Monthy Pithon (sp) skit)...


Is the depth of your educate pedigree centered around the likes of B class Monty Python movies? If you had any credibility you just lost it in my opinion; certainly with me[i]

Of course,there will always be two camps to every discussion.
It would be so boring if everybody thought the same way,followed the same lamb down into the precipise (sp)w/o asking questions...

[i] Its much more fun to follow a donkey to a Monty Python movie to get an education and in depth lesson along the way.
Ok back to the original question...



Oh by the way – do learn to spell it might give at least the illusion of higher intelligence that you might be above a 6th grade education.



Ok,setting the topic aside for a sec here...
OD,I really do not appreciate the way that you try to put people down when they do not see life the way you do.We were having a civil debate about a topic that has views of the opposite end of the spectrum.The yes bunch and the no bunch,like any other conversation,you need them!!!
BTW,I'm very supprised at how much of a close view you have on life,for a man with such an apparent education.

I will keep it short,just to let you know that you have proven to be the agressor here sir. If a person does not agree with your views you will TRY to belittle that person,I'm not the first person you have done this to.I have noticed this in previous thread that you have participated in.You have brought many good points but it all crumbles when you put a person down and start calling that person ignorant,compared to you're highly intellectual display of self gratification!
That said I will not fall in the same path you have chosen.

But to let you know,that you have lost ALL credibility in my eyes.(sounds familliar??)
Maybe you are highly educated,but when it comes time to interact with people,you lose BIG TIME...
So here,I ask myself,which is more important a bag of knowledge as big as your's or how to treat people as human beings...

BTW,I would like to see your french vocabulary...

End of topic for me...
This is how debates usually end when the topics are politics,religion and sex...