I'm glad I don't live in San Francisco anymore

[quote name='thagoat']say what ya want, but its still fucked up![/QUOTE]

No, your opinion is fucked up. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that you're just ignorant. You should try getting a college education where you're exposed to different people, cultures and ideas before you blindly decide that other people's lifestyles are wrong.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']Personal lifestyle topics do not belong in the realm of politics.[/QUOTE]

So, with that in mind, are you FOR gay marriage, or are you FOR the government determining who can and cannot be married? In this instance, it is the conservative approach that wants more government oversight of marriage, and liberals who don't want state-sanctioned heterosexual hegemony.

As far as "personal attacks come from the losing side," that's sometimes not true. In this case, considering the arguments made by 'thagoat,' they lack any sort of intellectual capability, short of "this is the way it must be because its the way it has been." In the event that people make such asinine statements (and my summary is very kind to his shallow mindset), responding with sound arguments to idiotic banter simply is useless. With that in mind, let the ad hominems roll!
 
I thought it was pretty clear on where I stood on the issue. No I don't believe in them, but I don't think the gov't should get involved. It isn't there role to do it. If someone were to ask me if they should practice in a gay lifestyle, I would make my case against it, but I would also tell them it is there life, and it is up to them. While I don't like it, it shouldn't be illegal. The only major problem with the gov't/court system needing involvement, is if a state says it is ok, and a gay couple go to a church that doesn't have the belief system in gay marriage. That would cause issues, as they could argue that state says it is ok, so they can be married and are being discriminated against. But with the seperation of church and state, the state can't force the church to do it. That issue of a bridge is a long way off imo though.

Just because someone makes and assinine comment, doesn't mean that one of opposing view needs to stoop to that level and say just as assinine of a reply. No one is going to be right in a discussion about someone's personal judgement system. There will be valid points on both sides, as well as respected (unrespected by the opposing side) medical people on a topic such as this. And just because one group says something today, doesn't mean that 5,10,20 years from now, they will change there mind. For example, in my 15 years of being a diabetic, the americain diabetic assoc has changed the classification of milk as a protein only, carb only, and now a mix of protein and carbs. They are the best in the world in extending the health of diabetics, but they have completly changed there opinion on things numerous times. Things as well as peoples opinions may or may not change over time.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']The only major problem with the gov't/court system needing involvement, is if a state says it is ok, and a gay couple go to a church that doesn't have the belief system in gay marriage. That would cause issues, as they could argue that state says it is ok, so they can be married and are being discriminated against. But with the seperation of church and state, the state can't force the church to do it. That issue of a bridge is a long way off imo though.[/QUOTE]
No one has ever argued that churches should be forced to perform gay marriages or accept gay parishoners. That is up to the church. Gay marriage advocates want equal benefits under state law for gay unions (i.e. tax filing, inheritance, next of kin, etc.)

Gay marriages would be performed by a justice of the peace or by a church that accepts them. No law could or should force churches to perform weddings they don't agree with.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I thought it was pretty clear on where I stood on the issue.[/QUOTE]

I'm not dense; I read what you said. I was merely pointing out that, for someone who doesn't think that government should get involved in the marriage issue, you can't seem to grasp that in the absence of government sanction, any kind of marriage should be possible.

Look at it this way: if two men decide to get married, who stops them? You guessed it, the government.

EDIT: Let me remind you that marriage is not the domain of strictly religious entities. Keeping that in mind, we find then that people get married all the time outside of the boundaries of a church. Because of this, the heteronormative rules of the church do not apply to everybody, and thus, it would be permissible for gays to get married outside of a church if the government did not intervene.

You simply can't win this argument, because your logic is flawed.

You simply *can not* have government stay out of marriage and *also* avoid gay marriage. You can see that much, can't you?
 
[quote name='thagoat']but there is direct violations of laws. and our court system lets all this b.s. slide because they are watching the same screwed up internet porno that the rest of the country is watching. if you hear a cat "bark" 100 times, you're gonna thinks its normal after a while. if you see a bunch of chicks diking out 100's of times, it'll have the same effect. it's desensitizing. but just because something isn't shocking anymore, it doesn't mean it's o.k. you know damn well that all the wheels aren't turning in those gay heads of theirs. something is "off".[/QUOTE]

Exactly my point.

Look at interracial couples. They made it legal, it happened so many times people think it's legal. Or look at, say, free black people. We're so desensitized to seeing free blacks we don't give it a second thought. And people that belong to a different religion than the king? What's up with that? Nobody is shocked by that any more.
 
How is my logic flawed. I said that I am not against gay marriage/relationships. If someone wants to get married or do anything that doesn't hurt anyone not involved, go for it. I don't approve of the gay lifestyle, but I am not god and can't cast judgement on people or tell someone that it should be a law that they can't get married, when I don't feel it is the gov't rule to be involved in this sort of area. It is a personal issue, and the gov't has no reason for being involved. I just stay clear of the subject, as it usually gets debates like these where both sides feel they are right, end up being heated discussions that 99.9% of the time don't change anyones mind.
 
Myke, I think ryan said gay marriage should be legal, but he opposes it.

Though, ryan, not all opinions are created equal. While I find your opinion to have elements of bigotry, you don't seem to want to make it law and you don't seem to just pull random "facts" out of thin air. Thegoat wants to make it law, and has no basis to his opinion. He argues that we all damn well know gays are screwed up, but has absolutely nothing to support the assumption that, in the end, we know they're screwed up, or that they actually are screwed up. He says it damages kids, but has nothing to back that up. Then he goes on to argue things like in many states gay sex is illegal, which is obviously false.

Some arguments are just better than others. It often has nothing to do with the opinion presented, but simply the argument put forth.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']Both sides make valid arguments.[/QUOTE]

Really? I haven't heard one single convincing argument as to why gay marriage shouldn't be legal. Not one. Personal beliefs and religion have nothing to do with anything - especially when the government is so intimately involved in the decision-making process. As long as the activity in question doesn't threaten the safety of anyone else, who's to say what is right and what is wrong? There's no one person or group of people on the planet qualified to make these determinations. The "majority wants it that way" reasoning completely undermines the rights that the minority should have to live as they see fit.

It's embarassing to me that as a "free" and "enlightened" country we NEVER learn from our past mistakes. Slavery, "separate but equal," laws preventing women the right to vote, etc. are all completely inconceivable concepts to me because of how unfair, prejudiced and just plain stupid they are as applied to the 21st century. I can't believe our parents and grandparents actually lived through these times and that their way of thinking could be so primitive and barbaric - it wasn't that long ago. The next generation is going to feel the exact same way about us regarding homosexuality issues. It makes me sick.
 
All Myke is saying is that no governemnt = anarchy = anything goes for marraige. People could marry cows.

Additionally, the reason the gov is involved is because of taxes.

In other words, they can't not be involved any better than, say, Walmart can say "you don't have to pay taxes when you shop from us." The gov trumps that opinion, same thing with what people think about who can get married and how - there's too much at stake for them.

At least, I assume that's what he is saying, I'm only skimming random posts.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']How is my logic flawed. I said that I am not against gay marriage/relationships. If someone wants to get married or do anything that doesn't hurt anyone not involved, go for it. I don't approve of the gay lifestyle, but I am not god and can't cast judgement on people or tell someone that it should be a law that they can't get married, when I don't feel it is the gov't rule to be involved in this sort of area. It is a personal issue, and the gov't has no reason for being involved. I just stay clear of the subject, as it usually gets debates like these where both sides feel they are right, end up being heated discussions that 99.9% of the time don't change anyones mind.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='ryanbph']For myself, I am against homosexual marriage, yes I have friends and family that are in gay relationships, but my beliefs system doesn't accept that lifestyle.[/QUOTE]

Be careful how you word your other posts, then. You have said you are both against and not against homosexual marriage (on the same page), and saying "government should not get involved" can come across as "government should not get involved and marriage should remain for heterosexuals only" and it can also mean "government should not get involved and you can marry whomever the fuck you want." Be clearer next time.

I'm smart, but I'm not a fuckin' mind reader.
 
I am not going to argue with your points about past mistakes, but to a decent size of the population, religion and personal beliefs are there arguments. You can't argue that 20 years from now the Amer Psy Dept won't change there beliefs, it may/may not happen. Just because you don't have a problem with it, doesn't mean that someone religious beliefs opposing it is not a valid argument. Society is always changings, and while you might feel that as a country we are primitave/barbaric, there are many nations that are much more primative when it comes to social issues. We are far from a perfect society but no one else is either.
 
I'll just wait until the next big earthquake hits SanFran, then watch millions of looters descend upon the city without fear of being shot at, cause nobody has any guns.
 
[quote name='javeryh']Really? I haven't heard one single convincing argument as to why gay marriage shouldn't be legal. Not one. Personal beliefs and religion have nothing to do with anything - especially when the government is so intimately involved in the decision-making process. As long as the activity in question doesn't threaten the safety of anyone else, who's to say what is right and what is wrong? There's no one person or group of people on the planet qualified to make these determinations. The "majority wants it that way" reasoning completely undermines the rights that the minority should have to live as they see fit.

It's embarassing to me that as a "free" and "enlightened" country we NEVER learn from our past mistakes. Slavery, "separate but equal," laws preventing women the right to vote, etc. are all completely inconceivable concepts to me because of how unfair, prejudiced and just plain stupid they are as applied to the 21st century. I can't believe our parents and grandparents actually lived through these times and that their way of thinking could be so primitive and barbaric - it wasn't that long ago. The next generation is going to feel the exact same way about us regarding homosexuality issues. It makes me sick.[/QUOTE]

Going a little off topic, I often wonder how many of our grandparents weren't that racist. My grandparents (born in the mid 20's) had black friends dating back to at least the mid 50's (as far back as my mother remembers). One thing I find strange though is my grandfathers tendency to buy tons of black things. For example, he had a nativity scene and the wisemen were black, and he had only 1 picture of jesus on the wall, it was of a black mary holding a black baby jesus. It doesn't look like he just bought whichever looked the best, but almost as if he was intentionally choosing black ones over white ones. Probably about 50-70% of his decorations are of black people, none of which are of the stereotypical tribal african kind. It's not like historical accuracy was his thing either, since he believed things such as dinosaur bones were just hoaxes placed there by paleontologists.

Now the terminology they used, such as colored, injin, jap etc. weren't very good, but I saw nothing to indicate that it was anything more than outdated terminology.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I am not going to argue with your points about past mistakes, but to a decent size of the population, religion and personal beliefs are there arguments. You can't argue that 20 years from now the Amer Psy Dept won't change there beliefs, it may/may not happen. Just because you don't have a problem with it, doesn't mean that someone religious beliefs opposing it is not a valid argument. Society is always changings, and while you might feel that as a country we are primitave/barbaric, there are many nations that are much more primative when it comes to social issues. We are far from a perfect society but no one else is either.[/QUOTE]

Considering laws are not supposed to be based on religious doctrine, I can't see how an essentially religious law would be desirable.

But, when available evidence hasn't turned up evidence of mental illness (other than what can be accounted for by all the social issues relating to it), and that there has been no data that showed children of gay couples were any worse or better off than heterosexual couples, you shouldn't just sit around hoping some bit of evidence comes up in the next 20 years. Sure, you can use personal opinion to argue, but I think people have to come to the realization that until strong scientific evidence begins to support them, they've lost the science and statistics argument. Currently "think of the children" is a popular argument, but has nothing to back it up.

Also, another argument against gay marriage and civil union is the effect on marriage itself. While not marriage, the netherland legalized civil unions in 1989. Since then, heterosexual marriage rates have gone up, while divorce has decreased.
 
well you still hear arguments that being gay is in there dna, (and don't argue that it doesn't as my uncle used it last fall on my grandmother) and that they don't have a choice. Last I checked, the gay gene hasn't been found, I could be wrong, as I haven't activily listened to the news in the past year...switched to sports radio at work.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']well you still hear arguments that being gay is in there dna, (and don't argue that it doesn't as my uncle used it last fall on my grandmother) and that they don't have a choice. Last I checked, the gay gene hasn't been found, I could be wrong, as I haven't activily listened to the news in the past year...switched to sports radio at work.[/QUOTE]

Even if it was a choice, unless you can show a harm being done by being gay, I don't see how that could be turned into a useful legal argument against it. Either way, the idea that it is a choice isn't supported by scientific evidence, and conversion therapy is denounced as innefective and, due to that, harmful by the APA and psychology as a whole.

Most agree that there are multiple factors influencing it, the bulk of it being biological. It's difficult to argue that environment plays a large role, especially in form of having gays around you or seeing homosexuality as normal, since gay parents do not end up with a higher % of gay children when compared to heterosexuals.

None of this means there is or isn't a gay gene.
 
What would it matter, anyway? Religion is a choice; does that mean the law should treat some religions as inferior to others?
 
[quote name='ryanbph']well you still hear arguments that being gay is in there dna, (and don't argue that it doesn't as my uncle used it last fall on my grandmother) and that they don't have a choice. Last I checked, the gay gene hasn't been found, I could be wrong, as I haven't activily listened to the news in the past year...switched to sports radio at work.[/QUOTE]
I don't think this debate will be settled until we all learn what uncle and grandmother had to say on the subject. This could be right up there with the Lincoln/Douglas debate. :lol:
 
I have one simple request of people who think homosexuality is a choice. All I ask is that they go to a gay bar, pick the first guy (or woman, if you're female) who comes along and go into a secluded area. Start making out with them (including heavy petting), and make sure that you become extremely aroused in this process. I would then suggest that, if the other person is willing, ripping off their clothes and having intense sex with them culminating in orgasm.

If you can do that, then I think you can begin to make the argument that it is a choice. It would also set you apart from 99% of the people who say "sleeping with a man is so digusting. I could never stomach that, I only like women", essentially stating that there is no choice for them and they're are naturally heterosexual, while at the same time screaming homosexuality is a choice.

edit: There's also another test you could take. Download a bunch of gay porno movies and try to make the choice to become as aroused as when you watch heterosexual porn.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I have one simple request of people who think homosexuality is a choice. All I ask is that they go to a gay bar, pick the first guy (or woman, if you're female) who comes along and go into a secluded area. Start making out with them (including heavy petting), and make sure that you become extremely aroused in this process. I would then suggest that, if the other person is willing, ripping off their close and having intense sex with them culminating in orgasm.

If you can do that, then I think you can begin to make the argument that it is a choice. It would also set you apart from 99% of the people who say "sleeping with a man is so digusting. I could never stomach that, I only like women", essentially stating that there is no choice for them and they're are naturally heterosexual, while at the same time screaming homosexuality is a choice.

edit: There's also another test you could take. Download a bunch of gay porno movies and try to make the choice to become as aroused as when you watch heterosexual porn.[/QUOTE]

Yes, all females do this and PM me with pictures plz. Thanks.
 
[quote name='zewone']I would rather live where there is same-sex partners then where a bunch of mothafuckas have guns. Once you've been held up or shot at, I'm sure your opinion will change.[/QUOTE]

People who own guns legally are the ones that usually are law abiding. Its the people that own them illegally that wont follow this law anyway that you should watch out for.
They basically gave criminals a free ticket, knowing that citizens are now unarmed with firearms.
 
Danny-o, I don't know wtf is going on with that Metroid avi, but it looks hilarious and I want to know where I can find a larger version.

Edit: ahh. That's the King of Cosmos in there. I read "ME GANNON" and thought they were connected.
 
Also: for everybody that believes it to be a choice, could you tell us about the time you chose between heterosexuality and homosexuality? Which factors influenced your decision? I know that according to the republicans, the choice is made the day you turn eighteen - was it like that for you?
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Even if it was a choice, unless you can show a harm being done by being gay, I don't see how that could be turned into a useful legal argument against it. Either way, the idea that it is a choice isn't supported by scientific evidence, and conversion therapy is denounced as innefective and, due to that, harmful by the APA and psychology as a whole.

Most agree that there are multiple factors influencing it, the bulk of it being biological. It's difficult to argue that environment plays a large role, especially in form of having gays around you or seeing homosexuality as normal, since gay parents do not end up with a higher % of gay children when compared to heterosexuals.

None of this means there is or isn't a gay gene.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't arguing if it was a choice or not. I was just pointing out that gay right defenders will dismiss statements due to personal morality, religion, or even studies that difer with there opinion solely for the purpose of it not agreeing with them. But they us staments such as it is a dna issue, with no proof of it. It happens on both sides, as both sides want there point of view to be generally accepted....alonso, it was good discussing with you as always. I wasn't happy with you thinking I was a bigot, but I know being at work, sometimes I just type of bunch of info, without proofreading, or explaing something in detail, I can see where you come to that conclusion.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']I don't think this debate will be settled until we all learn what uncle and grandmother had to say on the subject. This could be right up there with the Lincoln/Douglas debate. :lol:[/QUOTE]
grandma was upset for awhile, but life goes on, and everything is fine now
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I have one simple request of people who think homosexuality is a choice. All I ask is that they go to a gay bar, pick the first guy (or woman, if you're female) who comes along and go into a secluded area. Start making out with them (including heavy petting), and make sure that you become extremely aroused in this process. I would then suggest that, if the other person is willing, ripping off their clothes and having intense sex with them culminating in orgasm.

If you can do that, then I think you can begin to make the argument that it is a choice. It would also set you apart from 99% of the people who say "sleeping with a man is so digusting. I could never stomach that, I only like women", essentially stating that there is no choice for them and they're are naturally heterosexual, while at the same time screaming homosexuality is a choice.

edit: There's also another test you could take. Download a bunch of gay porno movies and try to make the choice to become as aroused as when you watch heterosexual porn.[/QUOTE]
I never stated I believed it was a choice, my belief is that there is an/several incidents that happened in one's life that lead them to that. I have no study that I can refer to, but the 15 or so gay people I interact with on a daily basis, all had several major issues, that one shouldn't have to live with. I was pointing out that pro gay lifestlye supporters argue they don't have a choice, but as of yet there is no scientific proof that it is in there dna...maybe someday we will find it, maybe not..but untill then my opinion on why someone is gay is just as valid as the next persons...and for the argument for a straight person to go and watch gay porn, doesn't mean that they will become gay. Everyone is different and will react differently to actions that occur in one's life.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I never stated I believed it was a choice, my belief is that there is an/several incidents that happened in one's life that lead them to that. I have no study that I can refer to, but the 15 or so gay people I interact with on a daily basis, all had several major issues, that one shouldn't have to live with. I was pointing out that pro gay lifestlye supporters argue they don't have a choice, but as of yet there is no scientific proof that it is in there dna...maybe someday we will find it, maybe not..but untill then my opinion on why someone is gay is just as valid as the next persons...and for the argument for a straight person to go and watch gay porn, doesn't mean that they will become gay. Everyone is different and will react differently to actions that occur in one's life.[/QUOTE]

Psychological problems some gays have are linked to the social stigma and effects of having to live as a gay person (or repress it), not due to homosexuality itself. It's a difficult way to live, and it's difficult to denounce a major aspect of your life.

Also, not being in the DNA does not mean there's a choice. The DNA is just a blueprint, there are many other factors that go into the end result.
 
[quote name='Rozz']This is the "Land of the Free" after all.[/QUOTE]

The owner of the bar I frequent has "Live Free or Die" tattoo'd in a scroll around a pink triangle, with the date 11-2-04 (the date many states legally voted in gays as second class citizens) on his forearm. This reminded me of that.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The owner of the bar I frequent has "Live Free or Die" tattoo'd in a scroll around a pink triangle, with the date 11-2-04 (the date many states legally voted in gays as second class citizens) on his forearm. This reminded me of that.[/QUOTE]

Are you in New Hampshire?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Nope. Kentucky. Not a big gay population, but a good-hearted cohort regardless.[/QUOTE]

oh... live free or die is the NH state motto... that's why i asked
 
[quote name='thagoat']but there is direct violations of laws. and our court system lets all this b.s. slide because they are watching the same screwed up internet porno that the rest of the country is watching. if you hear a cat "bark" 100 times, you're gonna thinks its normal after a while. if you see a bunch of chicks diking out 100's of times, it'll have the same effect. it's desensitizing. but just because something isn't shocking anymore, it doesn't mean it's o.k. you know damn well that all the wheels aren't turning in those gay heads of theirs. something is "off".[/QUOTE]

Yeah you're right. People like Leonardo Da Vinci were really off. He didn't do anything signifigant like make the first possible flying machine or make a diagram of the Human Body that's even used today.
Oh yeah GOD forbid Gays should be accepted and not treated like shit. This is a gay RIGHTS issue with the marriage bit and you need to realize it.
If you want your precious marriage you can have it, just without the rights attached to it by the government.
 
" You can't own a gun, but you can marry a man?

I'm sorry but i actually was rolling on the floor laughing after i read that :lol::lol::lol::applause:
 
[quote name='U2K Tha Greate$t']" You can't own a gun, but you can marry a man?

I'm sorry but i actually was rolling on the floor laughing after i read that :lol::lol::lol::applause:[/QUOTE]

GOD you're weird. Btw you need to Muff Dive, boring in bed Fred.
 
[quote name='U2K Tha Greate$t']" You can't own a gun, but you can marry a man?

I'm sorry but i actually was rolling on the floor laughing after i read that :lol::lol::lol::applause:[/QUOTE]

I fail to see the humor in this.
 
[quote name='javeryh']I fail to see the humor in this.[/QUOTE]

I can help here:

Step 1: buy a plastic bag
Step 2: turn around in a circle as fast as you can 10 times
Step 3: Quickly place bag over your head and breath heavily for 2 minutes
Step 4: Remove back as say hellow to pretty wavy lines on active computer monitor
Step 5: Laugh out loud as wavy lines amuse your now primative mind
Step 6: Wake up the next morning and hope to hell you'll never need those million brain cells again.
 
[quote name='U2K Tha Greate$t']" You can't own a gun, but you can marry a man?

I'm sorry but i actually was rolling on the floor laughing after i read that :lol::lol::lol::applause:[/QUOTE]

That was too funny I forgot to laugh. Let's all synchronize and roll on the floor laughing together.
 
[quote name='thagoat']my bum smells like poop. also, i don't like the idea of gay marriage. not for my sake, but for the kids sake. if they grow up thinking this is normal/acceptable, our country will continue its slide into the gutter. i don't know about you but my gut instinct just tells me that gay couples are fucked up.[/QUOTE]

It's not the government's place to regulate morality. They can't judge what people do as long as it doesn't negatively affect the people around them. When it comes to the kids, why not also ban porn and shit?

I think we should worry more about kids who get their asses kicked by their drunk dads more than ones who agree with gay marriage.
 
Just because something is gross doesn't mean it should be illegal. Shitting is gross and that's legal. Being anti-gay marriage is moronic.
 
What started as a joke has now turned everyone into dogmatic lunatics.

Guys, go play some PGR3, wipe the drool off your faces, and forgot all about differences.
 
[quote name='rallen']What started as a joke[/quote]

my ass.

has now turned everyone into dogmatic lunatics.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the vs. forums.

Guys, go play some PGR3, wipe the drool off your faces, and forgot all about differences.
Click to expand...

The last post was from Saturday night/Sunday morning. You do know what they say about sleeping dogs, don't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top