Belladonna Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 Oooookay... Gays being married - I don't support this. I'm one of those that believe the purpose to being married is (not only for love) for procreation. Man + woman = babies. However, I do support some kind of a civil union that gives gay couples the ability to legally protect their loved ones, especially when it comes to making hospitalization decisions and death. That can be a tricky area too, because are they then eligible to be on each others health plans? Should they be allowed all the benefits a spouse is even though not officially married? What do and don't they have a right to? Lots of things to consider there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daybreak Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 Bella, I'd like you to elaborate on what you feel is the 'purpose of being married'. As you know, many heterosexual married couples do not have children because they are either unable to have children, or they choose not to. Keep in mind that the term 'marriage' in this instance is not synonymous with religion, I am not arguing that gay people should be married in religious ceremonies. Please forgive my cynicism but I've simply never heard anyone discussing what exactly the purpose of marriage is outside of this debate. There are so many different types of marriage in the world (I would imagine that people in the United States would not agree with many of them). In the United States and Western culture in general, the popular social notion is that people should marry for love, this has not always been the case in the history of marriage throughout the world. Many cultures in the world have and still practice arranged marriages (pragmatic marriage). Often, these marriages are extremely patriarchal in nature and women are often expected to be virgins, are significantly younger than their betrothed (perhaps even underage by US standards), and they are not given a choice. Marriages such as these are often economic unions between families, yet they are still considered perfectly normal and expected. "Those who uphold pragmatic marriage frequently state that it is traditional, that it upholds social morals, that it is good for the families involved." Sound familiar? I think what turns people off to the notion of gay marriage is the word 'marriage', which is why significantly more people support the term 'civil unions', even if they had all the rights and privileges as heterosexual married couples. I will continue to drive the point home that the general concept of 'marriage' is not based in religion, despite the notion that most marriages are thought to take place under religious circumstances (I'm not exactly sure of the statistics on this, but I feel they are irrelevant). Here is a relatively comprehensive list of the benefits of marriage in the United States... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_rights_and...ies_of_marriage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage#Types_of_marriages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodingi Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 BTW, great post Goo. And yes, this fear of destruction is a bit weird to me. To my mind, conservative behaviours, politicaly and religiously speaking, are more likely to destroy your country than gay civil unions, Coty. But well that's just my opinion. 7120[/snapback] mmmhmmm. that's what they told ronald reagan during the 1980's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caip Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 our private parts were made differently for certain reasons, and im sure it wasnt to be playing Star Wars with glow in the dark condoms with ur best friend... males were made how they were, females how they were, so that we could mate...and you were given butts to keep ppl from getting SUPER FAT...not to have stuff shoved up...(i hope thats clean enough language for u bella)...cant think of another way to put it... 7161[/snapback] it's not only about sex...it's about feelings and love, don't you get this? I assume not... oh...and I don't think certain sexual practices are the subject of this topic. (and i can't imagine only gays like to do that ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 Yeah and many gay people don't like to have "things shoved up..." as you poeticaly stated, Sp@zz. There's a difference between what most of us can imagine and what really exists in the intimacy of two adults. Sorry, it may shock some of you, but sodomy and homosexuality are two different things. It's a sexual practice that can also exist in a straight couple. For both men AND women. And yes, some gay men consider it "dirty", or "deviant", and can make love their whole life long with someone else without even seriously thinking about it. Too many of us think that "penetration" is the norm in both homosexual and straight couples. Well, it can exist, but not always. And once more, this doesn't apply to gay people only, I know a few women who didn't like it either. But they could "make love" anyway, because there are many different ways of physically showing that another person attracts you. So, what about them? It took tremendous efforts to one of my friends to accept it, only in order to have children. In her normal sexual life, she would never have done it, and she even thought about artificial insemination. Was she a lesbian who chose to ignore her condition? No, I guess she was "born straight" but had a problem with normal straight sexual behaviours. Some people are "born gay" and don't fell confortable with some aspects of homosexual behaviours. Feelings are complicated, but so is sexuality. It's not as if gay people only could have what you'd call weird or deviant sexual behaviours... Anyway excuse me, this was off-topic again, but since this topic has turned into a definition of homosexuality, I guess it's OK if I add my 2 cts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{GD}Independent Posted July 10, 2005 Share Posted July 10, 2005 Who cares if people are "born gay"? Some people are born with the impulse to kill kittens. Some are born with the impulse to steal from others. Some people are born with the tendency to vote for democrats ) ... Point is, if we can't control our base instincts, what seperates us from animals? Sin is fun! We all enjoy some things that we know are wrong. It is our ability to resist these instincts that seperates us from mere beasts. I say, celebrate your humanity! Do what you know is RIGHT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 10, 2005 Share Posted July 10, 2005 Who cares if people are "born gay"? Some people are born with the impulse to kill kittens. Some are born with the impulse to steal from others. Some people are born with the tendency to vote for democrats ) ... Point is, if we can't control our base instincts, what seperates us from animals? Sin is fun! We all enjoy some things that we know are wrong. It is our ability to resist these instincts that seperates us from mere beasts. I say, celebrate your humanity! Do what you know is RIGHT! 7347[/snapback] ????? Well now we're comparing gay people to criminals? It's getting better. I'm sure one of our mods will appreciate this comparison. Care to explain the end of this post? Oh, being gay is definitely wrong because it's not fun enough for you, Indie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{GD}Independent Posted July 10, 2005 Share Posted July 10, 2005 ????? Well now we're comparing gay people to criminals? It's getting better. I'm sure one of our mods will appreciate this comparison. Care to explain the end of this post? Oh, being gay is definitely wrong because it's not fun enough for you, Indie? 7394[/snapback] Are you implying that one of our mods is gay, or that one of our mods is a criminal? If I have offended anyone, I apologize. I forgot the leftist insistence on PC speech. But -- if we can't say anything that might offend someone, somewhere, I guess we can abandon this thread, right? I didn't say being gay is wrong, just as having any other immoral impulse is not, by itself, wrong. Acting on our urges can be wrong, but having them is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodingi Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 well i've read this thread over and over and the two points of view i see are are religious and homophobic. both seem to have a general dislike for the gay community (maybe misunderstanding). being neither religious or homophobic, i guess i'll never understand why. i do not believe homosexuality is a choice. i have seen a relative of mine struggle with his sexuality for years. he tried & tried to be heterosexual. he was even engaged (to a female) once. during this period there were many highs and lows (mainly lows). i am not sure how he came to terms with his sexuality but once he did, his personal and professional life have improved dramically. i am very happy to see him happy. it wasn't his choice. the thing that bothers me is people say "gays cannot be married because the bible says so. these are god's words". god's words were written by a man. that bothers me some. where is this love for all mankind? we still have no proof of a god. my take is when this dude was writing the bible, he saw two men being affectionate in the market square and said "WTF is that! We gotta make a rule against that"! For the record this post was written by a known conservative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Are you implying that one of our mods is gay, or that one of our mods is a criminal? If I have offended anyone, I apologize. I forgot the leftist insistence on PC speech. But -- if we can't say anything that might offend someone, somewhere, I guess we can abandon this thread, right? Indie, it's not PC speech, it's just common sense. You shouldn't compare gay people to criminals, and you do it again in your pathetic "apology" when you ask if one of our mods could be a criminal, maybe. Of course you know I meant one of our mods is gay, and if you had read the thread, you'd know who I'm talking about. Now trying to cover this kind of mediaeval behaviour behind a call to freedom of speech is just low. So now I'm the guy who's anti-libertarian because I did attack your "freedom of speech"? HA... HA... HA... Now, about the "message" in your post: I didn't say being gay is wrong, just as having any other immoral impulse is not, by itself, wrong OK Indie, no offense, but you see, in the same sentence you say that chosing to do immoral things can be fun, and you also say that we should do what is RIGHT, in capitals. Let me sum up. So you sometimes do immoral things, but at the same time you know you shouldn't, and we all shouldn't, because you're on a vast campain for doing the "right" things in life?. Well dude you should CHOOSE, in capitals. I'm sorry, but homosexuality is not something funny, it's not a leaisure activity like smoking a joint or getting pissed, and to me it's not an "immoral impulse" either, because it simply isn't immoral if you consider the act, or way of life, apart from religion and homophobia. Which leads us to Lod's post above... For the record this post was written by a known conservative. Lod, that was great dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandre Orion Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 It has been a long time since I have replied. This is for two reasons : first, I 'm not a member of your gaming community; second, I really consider you to be so far beneath the evolved members of A N Y community to be really worth the effort. Anyway, here we go... I think that all of the discussion about a man marrying a dog, or a horse, or a rhinoceros should be disqualified. That is stupid. You will (as a species) have your proof in some time about 'men' marrying' other species. But, for the time being, let's consider some very important aspects of such a life. You do not understand what it is to be in Love. If you have never been in Love with someone of your same sex, then I would probably assume that you have never been in Love at all. It is not so preposterous. You, especially 'les garçons' you think that your involvement with girls has been your natural compulsion to ... I think that you are seriously mistaken. I will continue this enty later.................. Gay marriage is no more abnormal than any marriage between two people who evenually find their happiness, or between two people who eventually divorce. Gay marriage is as normal as any marriage between two human beings. Children notwithstanding. Think about it........................... Alexandre Orion Lyon, France Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[FF5]Knix Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 It has been a long time since I have replied. This is for two reasons : first, I 'm not a member of your gaming community; second, I really consider you to be so far beneath the evolved members of A N Y community to be really worth the effort. What kind of love do you speak of when you say.... If you have never been in Love with someone of your same sex, then I would probably assume that you have never been in Love at all. If you are talking about physical love, your are out of your cotton-picking skull. I'm hoping you are just not explaining yourself clearly in a foreign language. And if you are not a member of our gaming community....you come around uh why again mon ami? I'm sure you can find another forum to fit your high morality level. Au revoir! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belladonna Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Alexandre - if you're going to insult the community and our members, don't bother coming around any more. I don't care how intellectual a person is, that still doesn't give them permission to be rude and condescending. Please read the forum rules and adhere to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Factor Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 [suggestion] maybe alexandre is gay?...and he is tryin to protect his beliefs... and thats why he sounded so harsh in his defence... he got a lil mad maybe... and then also the language barrier... same with jac...its impossible to tell what they mean half the time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caip Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 [suggestion] and then also the language barrier... same with jac...its impossible to tell what they mean half the time 7775[/snapback] I don't think there's a "language barrier" due to Alexandre's pretty good english. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 1 ) Yes, Alexandre is gay 2 ) He's american. No, Knix mon ami, all the people who post things you don't like are not necessarily europeans 3 ) Fac/Spazz, you know, I don't get what YOU mean half of the time... JK my friend. Nonetheless, I don't see how he (Alex) hopes to catch people's interest with such rude words. I think his post applies to people who compared homosexuality to bestiality, more than to just anybody in the community. I know him quite well, and I guess what he meant is that it's finally just a matter of love between two people. I have to disagree with this. Some boys will fall in love with others, while most of the rest will only have (boy) friends all their life long, and homosexuality will never, ever become a dilemma anytime. Now, time to add something more personal. We talked about theorical aspects of this problem quite a lot, let's speak about it in more practical terms. I once fell in love with another boy. He is gay, but I'm not. That's why I think homosexuality and pure love for any other human being are two different things, with due respect, Alexandre. He fell in love with me too, but since I felt absolutely no sexual attraction, it ended up as a friendly relation. Therefore, I know that I'm "straight". Sexuality plays a big role in any kind of "more than friendly" relation. If you have to put it aside, no long-term, stable relation is possible, I think. It would have been the same thing with a girl. I could have met the woman of my dreams, intellectually and morally speaking, but without any sexual attraction on one side, (or even worse, on both sides) it would have lead to nothing serious. I hope I clarified Alexandre's post enough. Please don't all feel insulted. I'm sorry for those who compared homosexuals to criminals or to people who are happy ****ing pigs, but after all, who insulted who in the first place? No offense, but very insulting things have been posted earlier in this discussion, and no-one reacted until someone "named names". What's worse, tell me: clearly telling someone to f*** off, or sneaking around and quietly explaining him the best 10 ways to f*** off without using the word? Bella, you told Alex to read the rules. I agree that his post didn't stick to them. But some of us should go buy themselves some education and respect for the others, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moody Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Gay marriage is no more abnormal than any marriage between two people who evenually find their happiness, or between two people who eventually divorce. Gay marriage is as normal as any marriage between two human beings. Get the fu*k outta here Of course its not normal dude! I have nothing against it but its sure aint normal Dont try to say something else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Well Moody, ain't that the most interesting and constructive post I've ever read? What a nice way of putting an end to a discussion, since there's nothing we can add. If that's all you have to say, you'd better stay out of the conversation. Thanks for posting your point of view, now please let people who actually have THINGS TO SAY post their opinion. I'm sorry to discover that the last part of my post above also applies to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moody Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Man+Woman=Normal Man+Man= Not normal Woman+Woman= Not normal (Lesbians can be hot though) Genesis...Dont tell me being gay is normal I understand that some people are and have nothing against it but its not meant for a man to put his stick in another man Or a woman muffdiving another I have a relative who is gay and i still like him just the same, I just said that it cant be normal..Everyone know that..Well so i thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Then if you thought so, I guess you can add some arguments to your speech, Mood. What's "not normal" for you? Considering you "have nothing against it" as you said above, what is the problem? You can't just state that something is "not normal" and tell others to shut up about that. Where did you get this idea? Is it a personal thought, does it have a sociological or religious origin? Enlighten us about your conception of normality, please. It seems you've hopped in the subject without reading the most important posts in it. Most important on both sides, I mean. (edit) By the way, since you don't consider homosexuality as something normal but have nothing against it either, what do you have to say on the main subject, which is, should I remind you of it, gay marriage. (And enough about hot chicks having sex together, each and every teen has already talked about this in the conversation.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moody Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 LMAO! Hey dude! This topic was off topic long time ago anyway...I never said i had a problem with it, not my fault if you missunderstood it And obviously you cant take a joke either And no I dont think its normal...Not even Mari who is lesbian thought its normal like she said in some of her posts above so why do you who isnt even gay think it is? ...And about the subject then who is "Gay marriage" since it seems like you are the new admin in this forum Thats up to them, i have nothing against that but i dont like gays to adopt kids. Not because they would be bad parents, im sure they wouldnt but i think about the kid..Think about the kid in school for example..Dont you think the others kids would pick on this child? In most cases they would..And it wouldnt be normal for a child to have two fathers ot two mothers..Thats my wiew..No need to start an argument just because everyone doesnt think like you Gen Theres nothing you or anyone else can do about..Everyone will have their own wiews and thoughts about stuff..This topic was made just for people to tell how they think about it i presume, not for everyone to agree..And who did i tell to sh*t up about it anyway? You said that in the beginning of your last post..Im trying to read all my posts but i cant find the thing about "sh*t up"..Maybe its you who needs to read the posts more carefully Thats the problem about this place..Everyone takes everything so dam serious..Chill out mon ami and let everyone say what they think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genesis Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 Sorry dude, I didn't mean to be rude. when I talked about that "shut up" behaviour of yours, I was refering to this: I have nothing against it but its sure aint normal. Dont try to say something else. You see? I didn't mean that you actually told anyone to shut up, Mood. And I'm not saying that I'm the new forum admin either. I was trying to explain Alexandre's post when you came to put fat in the fire saying "get the f*ck outta here", that's all. Oh, was that the "joke" you were talking about?? About everyone taking things "so damn seriously", as you say, ain't it absolutely normal since we're in the "serious discussions" thread? And NO, I'm not the new admin, definitely NO. I just wanted you to explain WHY you consider homosexuality (AND, therefore, gay marriage) as "not normal", that's it. But please go on, since you didn't say anything about that yet. And why would I have to be gay to consider homosexuality "normal"? Would I have to suffer from AIDS to help those who are ill? Would I have to live in Africa to give money to africans? Come on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moody Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 When i told Alexandre to "get the fu*k outta here" i meant that as a joke. And when i say people take things serious i mean nolf,this forum, the whole online thing..This is not real life but many people think it is..I know this is serious disgussion thread And i was also kiddin about the "admin" thing..And i thought i already explained to you many times why i dont think gay is normal Like i said...Man+Woman=True..If everyone was gay we wouldnt survive long now would we?Thats why i dont think its normal..A man is made for a woman,woman is made for a man..Not man+man or woman+woman..I got a penis for a purpose you know Thats why i dont think being gay is normal..Got it yet? So my final answer to this will be...I have nothing against homosexuals but still i dont understand why you turn out to be gay cause i think a man and a woman are made for each other and i concider that as normal..But in the same time they must do the way they feel..If they feel good to be with someone of their own sex, fine with me..I wont stop them even though i prefer a woman myself So to all you homosexuals out there!!! Keep going in the backway!! j/k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[FF5]Knix Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 I didn't know he was an American! But now that I do....I have a trade for you Gen. You get to keep Mssr. Orion, and you send US 1) A big wheel of brie. 2) A big tub o' Dijon Mustard 3) One creme brule 4) and a carton of frozen croissants And we call it even eh? Now to what you wrote. Like I posted in my response to your buddy Alex....did he mean physical love or regular love? What you claim to have experienced with your friend was emotional love. I have friends who I love as friends. I don't worry about any homosexual connetation as I know there is NO sexual interest involved. Don't call it marrige, give it a different name with the same rights (union works for me), but marrige means a WHOLE different thing to a whole many of people. What kills me on this topic, is that every time the Republican party offers to open this topic up to a country wide vote, the democrats shoot down the idea. They wish to keep it on the state level of voting..........which has backfired on them in 2004. THe gay rights movement realises that if they do pose this issue to a country wide vote....it will lose...and lose big. I guess that makes the majority of us AMericans, as unsensitive bigoted a--h-les. The gay rights movement thinks that people are just being "stubborn" and "un-educated" when they disagree with their requests on gay adoption, or gay marrige, etc. What they fail to realise, is that this has nothing to do with being stubborn, but in fact has to do with you not having offered up a sufficiant arguement in your favor for those people to change their minds. The gay rights movement should throw ALL their money into medically proving that homosexuality is a process of nature and not nurture. If they were able to create unrefutable evidence to this fact, THEN they could push their cause to much greater effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daybreak Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 KNIX,Jul 17 2005, 08:22 AM] Don't call it marrige, give it a different name with the same rights (union works for me), but marrige means a WHOLE different thing to a whole many of people. What kills me on this topic, is that every time the Republican party offers to open this topic up to a country wide vote, the democrats shoot down the idea. They wish to keep it on the state level of voting..........which has backfired on them in 2004. THe gay rights movement realises that if they do pose this issue to a country wide vote....it will lose...and lose big. I guess that makes the majority of us AMericans, as unsensitive bigoted a--h-les. The gay rights movement thinks that people are just being "stubborn" and "un-educated" when they disagree with their requests on gay adoption, or gay marrige, etc. What they fail to realise, is that this has nothing to do with being stubborn, but in fact has to do with you not having offered up a sufficiant arguement in your favor for those people to change their minds. The gay rights movement should throw ALL their money into medically proving that homosexuality is a process of nature and not nurture. If they were able to create unrefutable evidence to this fact, THEN they could push their cause to much greater effect. 7827[/snapback] First of all, gay people wish to be 'married', just like straight people, not separate but equal. Secondly, of course it will 'lose big', that's why Republicans keep dragging it up, so they can get rid of it once and for all. Third, let's get real here, many times people are being stubborn and uneducated. I don't expect everyone to keep up on the latest studies and to understand what is genuine psychological research or religious propaganda, which is another reason why this country is not ready to decide on this issue. It sounds incredibly ignorant when people say that they don't want gay people to adopt because their kids will be made fun of in school, ya'll are right, let's just let em' sit in foster care until they're 18 and have absolutely no family at all just so they won't get made fun of. I'm sure everyone involved would appreciate the fact that you thought about their well-being. Secular studies have also shown that adopted children of gay parents have no greater chance of being gay than anyone else, so don't dredge up that old argument either. So as far as a 'sufficient argument', all you have to do is listen. Fourth, proving homosexuality is nature and not nurture? The reality is that this type of research is only a vain attempt to quell the moralists. I've studied this research in the past couple of years and the end result, if we ever get one, will probably be extremely complex. What if it's not genetic? What if it's learned before age two? Is that still a moral choice on the part of the individual? I'll be honest here, I'm pretty shocked and appalled that so many people seem to carry the Bible around and read it like stereo instructions for life. Even if something doesn't make any sense to them, they'll just buy it and go on condemning people at their leisure. This is at the heart of this issue. It feels good to have moral superiority over other people, it serves the ego. When people attempt to argue from a religious standpoint, they don't realize that they cannot be argued with, it is not possible. (edit)-Knix, most of this is not directed at you, or at anyone in particular....just getting my point across in a single post... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
![[TNT] Sonic Goo](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%201024%201024%22%20style%3D%22background%3A%2362c4b2%22%3E%3Cg%3E%3Ctext%20text-anchor%3D%22middle%22%20dy%3D%22.35em%22%20x%3D%22512%22%20y%3D%22512%22%20fill%3D%22%23ffffff%22%20font-size%3D%22700%22%20font-family%3D%22-apple-system%2C%20BlinkMacSystemFont%2C%20Roboto%2C%20Helvetica%2C%20Arial%2C%20sans-serif%22%3ET%3C%2Ftext%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.