Proposition 8 same sex marriage ban poll

[quote name='speedracer']It doesn't make logical sense to me to change the name of what it is. It is a marriage. Marriage is the legal conferring of extremely personal decisions and financial access to another person. I get that the religionists get all nuts about it but like you said, it's just a word game to call it something else, isn't it?

It's just a contract, like a sole proprietorship or a power of attorney. It's a contract between consenting of age adults. That's it. We can call a sole proprietorship something else but if it's the same thing, it's the same thing. Ya feelin me dawg? So why call a marriage a civil union?
[/quote]
Yeah, pretty much. The word is a matter of contention, but it should not really matter much... ideally, I believe that the government should have a very limited role in marriage - mainly one of record-keeping that does not provide any significant perks and does not get into moral arguments of who can marry whom. It is strange to me that now gay marriages are becoming more and more acceptable, but there is still a large stigma to polygynous or polyandrous unions - where in fact our natural state throughout most of evolution was that of a mildly to moderately polygynous species. And, in fact a large number of people indirectly practice serial or even simultaneous polygyny through divorce, remarriage, mistresses, etc.
 
[quote name='dorino']Thanks, foc, knew I was forgetting something.

Also, he's black.[/QUOTE]

I just assumed "witch doctor" was double-secret dog whistle code for "black".
 
Remember when we learned in school about how institutional racism was conquered? Remember marveling at how uncivilized we used to be? We're still doing it to the gay community (though I suppose there might not be something analogous to the Uganda death penalty thing some congressionals engendered before the "babe in the woods" routine). I hope there's a day when our kids learn of how we managed to get to equal rights under the law for all regardless of things people didn't choose (like sexual orientation, resembling an illegal immigrant, etc.).
 
Uganda is something to be proud of! It's a showing of how a White European religion conquered most of the religion of said place, replacing it instead with a religion you can use to justify bigotry.
Look at India, who was colonized too by the British, where male to female Transsexuals could choose the third sex and have some honor about them and be considered special. Now most are just considered freaks! Hooray European colonialism!
Hooray Islam colonialism too! X-(

Let us not forget how Japan changed in terms of sexuality in response to the increasing United States and European influence in the world.
 
If Prop. 8 loses, churches likely will face lawsuits and persecution if they don't perform same-sex ceremonies.
Churches, synagogues, mosques and other centers of worship have beliefs, practices, and traditions they use to determine what heterosexual couples must meet prior to marriage. That isn't bias; that's freedom of religion.
The government doesn't (as of yet) tell faith-based groups who they can...
baptize
confirm
accept for a bar mitzvah
qualify for any other religious function.
Click to expand...

I have nothing against Gays getting married. If they want to then so be it. But I don't think churches should necessarily be forced to perform marriages. If they would like to then so be it. But the majority should be reserved to court marriages. That would kind of help out with the debate, although not much.

By allowing Same-Sex marriage in California they will see some amount of economical uplift..everyone(at least at first) will trail it out there to get married. Which isn't bad.
 
[quote name='ATK']But I don't think churches should necessarily be forced to perform marriages.[/QUOTE]

Well, then, good thing they won't have to. Now, if you please, don't bring in citations and claims from dumbass websites and act like they're legitimate, ok?
 
Who said churches would even have to? I mean besides the moronic fear mongers who actually think so. Although I'm sure some churches will, those that are progressive enough.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, then, good thing they won't have to. Now, if you please, don't bring in citations and claims from dumbass websites and act like they're legitimate, ok?[/QUOTE]

I wonder how long before someone brings a lawsuit against a church for discriminating against them based on sexual orientation though...
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I wonder how long before someone brings a lawsuit against a church for discriminating against them based on sexual orientation though...[/QUOTE]

I wonder how long before somebody calls the cops because McDonald's ran out of chicken nuggets...

Does it matter?
 
[quote name='SpazX']I wonder how long before somebody calls the cops because McDonald's ran out of chicken nuggets...

Does it matter?[/QUOTE]

In a world where "discrimination" is decided by fools and buffoons - yes.

Question: Is there anyone here who is not okay with a private church being allowed to deny rental or other use of it's facilities to a homosexual couple who wishes to use them to get married?
 
Since a private church can deny usage of its facilities to heterosexual people for whatever reason it sees fit, it's not really discrimination.
 
[quote name='lordwow']Since a private church can deny usage of its facilities to heterosexual people for whatever reason it sees fit, it's not really discrimination.[/QUOTE]

A private business, say, Walmart - can deny someone entry for whatever reason they see fit...


... so long as that "reason" is one that discriminates against a protected class.

So, you could tell someone they can't come in because they're wearing an offensive shirt or they have been caught shoplifting before and they're no longer welcome in the store. But you can't say "You can't come in here because you're >insert protected class here
 
Likely, neither does the church clerk that would process the paperwork to rent the property.

Ministerial exception is a tricky thing. And it doesn't address sexual orientation at all. (Although it does address gender, which *could* be a work around "We're not discriminating against sexual preference! We're discriminating against two guys.") Also, it pretty much only applies to employees that spend more work time directly tied to religious-based tasks than ones that are not religious based.

Basically, ministerial exception isn't a fool proof plan for letting a church decide which parties they want to discriminate against.

Wasn't there a thread on here about church-operated soup kitchens not wanting to hire homosexual employees?
 
i have no problem with churches deciding to keep people of certain sexual orientations from their community, that's up to them to decide -- the bible is pretty blatant about the subject. so all of that just seems like a private church matter.

girls don't belong in the boyscouts, but that's up to each organization to decide on how they want to bend their beliefs/rules.
 
For the record President Obama is HALF AFRICAN.

I think Homosexuality can be treated (no not with religion) Its a disorder when people are attracted to the wrong pheromone's thus establishing a attraction to the opposite sex. We already know that its not natural and it has very harmful affects to the community. Now its anyones choice if they was to get it treated (when treatment becomes available) but I don't think people need to parade around and advertise it, I don't want my kid thinking its ok to eat a...ick.
 
[quote name='phantasyx']
I think Homosexuality can be treated (no not with religion) Its a disorder when people are attracted to the wrong pheromone's thus establishing a attraction to the opposite sex. We already know that its not natural and it has very harmful affects to the community. Now its anyones choice if they was to get it treated (when treatment becomes available) but I don't think people need to parade around and advertise it, I don't want my kid thinking its ok to eat a...ick.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately for you, the APA disagrees. Which is why homosexuality is no longer present in the DSM.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']girls don't belong in the boyscouts, but that's up to each organization to decide on how they want to bend their beliefs/rules.[/QUOTE]

No one would ever sue over that!

Wait....

Granted, they won... but how much in legal fees did it cost them? Including the one where the state's Department of Human Rights sued... that one was probably expensive...
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, then, good thing they won't have to. Now, if you please, don't bring in citations and claims from dumbass websites and act like they're legitimate, ok?[/QUOTE]

I don't know where you got the citation from....That was from OP..

EDIT: Partly my fault for you not recognizing that (from the OP I mean). I did a raw quote. I didn't use the quote button but rather just typed the BBcode. And the fact that I just now noticed that the OP was from 2008... :p
 
[quote name='SpazX']People can sue for pretty much whatever the hell they want Bob.[/QUOTE]

And sadly enough sometimes they win, which leads to more ridiculous regulation to prevent it from recurring. See coffee is hot text on coffee cups.
 
[quote name='phantasyx']For the record President Obama is HALF AFRICAN.

I think Homosexuality can be treated (no not with religion) Its a disorder when people are attracted to the wrong pheromone's thus establishing a attraction to the opposite sex. We already know that its not natural and it has very harmful affects to the community. Now its anyones choice if they was to get it treated (when treatment becomes available) but I don't think people need to parade around and advertise it, I don't want my kid thinking its ok to eat a...ick.[/QUOTE]
Not natural, despite the fact that it happens in nature. What kind of fucked up definition of natural are you using?
 
[quote name='Clak']Not natural, despite the fact that it happens in nature. What kind of fucked up definition of natural are you using?[/QUOTE]

I think that inaccuracy is one of the lesser problems in his ridiculously retarded argument.
 
Well yeah 1) it is natural, 2) whether it's natural or not is irrelevant, natural != good and unnatural != bad. It's just stupid all around. Like saying a white house isn't sturdy because it's pink.
 
[quote name='ATK']I don't know where you got the citation from....That was from OP..

EDIT: Partly my fault for you not recognizing that (from the OP I mean). I did a raw quote. I didn't use the quote button but rather just typed the BBcode. And the fact that I just now noticed that the OP was from 2008... :p[/QUOTE]

fair 'nuff, my bad for jumping down your throat.

[quote name='phantasyx']I think Homosexuality can be treated (no not with religion).[/quote]

treat how? treat what? based on what evidence is it treatable?

Its a disorder when people are attracted to the wrong pheromone's thus establishing a attraction to the opposite sex.
Click to expand...

a disorder according to which science?
attracted to the 'wrong pheremones', again, based on what evidence

We already know that its not natural
Click to expand...

based on what evidence?

and it has very harmful affects to the community.
Click to expand...

based on what evidence? also, *e*ffects.

Now its anyones choice if they was to get it treated (when treatment becomes available)
Click to expand...

you haven't defined 'treatment' yet. you're essentially claiming we can engineer sexual preferences. if we can make gay people straight, then we can make hot chicks moist for overweight unemployed otaku. is that what we're really hoping for here?

but I don't think people need to parade around and advertise it
Click to expand...

elaborate 'parade around' and 'advertise it.' are we talking billboards on highways, or two people holding hands in public? somewhere in between? give examples.

I don't want my kid thinking its ok to eat a...ick.
Click to expand...

what kind of oral sex are you excited about your children having?
 
[quote name='phantasyx']For the record President Obama is HALF AFRICAN.

I think Homosexuality can be treated (no not with religion) Its a disorder when people are attracted to the wrong pheromone's thus establishing a attraction to the opposite sex. We already know that its not natural and it has very harmful affects to the community. Now its anyones choice if they was to get it treated (when treatment becomes available) but I don't think people need to parade around and advertise it, I don't want my kid thinking its ok to eat a...ick.[/QUOTE]

It's a complicated but interesting question.

I personally do not think that there is anything wrong with homosexuality, per se. If that is what someone chooses to do, they should be allowed to do it.

Attraction is a complicated issue as well... different people have different turn-ons and perhaps even fetishes that may change over the course of a lifetime.

The concept of treatment for homosexuality is an interesting one. My hunch is that it probably is possible through conditioning to change one's sexual turn-ons and perhaps even preferences... but I don't have any proof for that and I doubt that any IRB would let me study it - even with full consent from the participants. The bigger question is whether homosexuality should be defined as a disease or disorder. On the one hand if someone is homosexual, well adjusted, and enjoys his or her lifestyle, then I would have to say no. However, from a basic evolutionary perspective, homosexuality is a potentially terminal disorder for ones genes as it increases one's risk of being a reproductive failure.

Please don't succumb to any moralistic fallacies while reading and analyzing the above.
 
[quote name='BigT']The bigger question is whether homosexuality should be defined as a disease or disorder. [/QUOTE]

Or neither.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Or neither.[/QUOTE]
or both at the same time.

Ugh I hate when people break down every single sentence and expect me to give a response for each part, but I'll give a short one.

Gay people are know for parades, movies, TV shows ect. ect. ect. all easily accessible by young learning children and adults, so yet it is very advertised.

2 fe/males can not reproduce, they can please themselves, sure, but they have no know parts made specifically for Homo activity, so it is not natural, now it does happen in nature I won't deny that but YOU can not deny the bizarreness of that attraction and I am simply pointing it to the disruption of Pheromones and mis-attraction that occurs.

Now I didn't say there was a cure or treatment YET, but that damn sure will be available in the near future. At any given time there are about 2-4% of Homosexuals in the population, I forget where I heard that from but someone can easily look that up and find that to be correct. I am not forcing my ideals or treatment on anyone but I do find it to be a incorrect part of human nature as would the 90% plus heterosexuals would agree with me as well (I don't know how many bi-sexuals there are).
 
[quote name='phantasyx']
Gay people are know for parades, movies, TV shows ect. ect. ect. all easily accessible by young learning children and adults, so yet it is very advertised.
[/QUOTE]

Just like straight people.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Well yeah 1) it is natural, 2) whether it's natural or not is irrelevant, natural != good and unnatural != bad. It's just stupid all around. Like saying a white house isn't sturdy because it's pink.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Some animals in nature will have sex with their own young and be impregnated by them. Nature vs. Nurture has no place in this debate.
 
[quote name='phantasyx']
Gay people are know for parades, movies, TV shows ect. ect. ect. all easily accessible by young learning children and adults, so yet it is very advertised.
[/QUOTE]

You are far too stupid to even bother responding to at length like Myke tried to do, but at the very least I want to thank you for giving us this gem.

Gays: Coming for your children with their movies, tv shows, etc.
 
[quote name='bvharris']You are far too stupid to even bother responding to at length like Myke tried to do, but at the very least I want to thank you for giving us this gem.

Gays: Coming for your children with their movies, tv shows, etc.[/QUOTE]

:rofl:
 
[quote name='bvharris']
Gays: Coming for your children with their movies, tv shows, etc.[/QUOTE]
Thats almost good enough for someone's signature.

I wonder what percent of people who consider themselves gay are faking it for attention.

ex. of a gays coming for(in?) our children, all Catholic priests.
 
[quote name='phantasyx']Thats almost good enough for someone's signature.

I wonder what percent of people who consider themselves gay are faking it for attention.

ex. of a gays coming for(in?) our children, all Catholic priests.[/QUOTE]

Faking being gay or at least bi was a big thing when I was in high school. Girls always thought it was so cool for some reason and hung around them all the time. It was pretty funny. I'm fairly certain it had something to do with maturity levels, and it doesn't apply to the current statistic but I thought Id share.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']Faking being gay or at least bi was a big thing when I was in high school. Girls always thought it was so cool for some reason and hung around them all the time. It was pretty funny. I'm fairly certain it had something to do with maturity levels, and it doesn't apply to the current statistic but I thought Id share.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I agree. Gay kids are always the most popular in high school.
 
I work with a guy that defines himself as "Suffering from same-sex attraction".

He is constantly rambling on about how ridiculous it is that he can't seek professional help because the established medical community has been frightened into not being able to define it as a disorder of any type. It's hard to seek help for something powerful lobby groups have forced medicine/insurance into claiming is not a problem, he says.

He says he feels like a diabetic, and doctors are only allowed to just tell him to embrace diabetes.

So the only "treatment" he can seek are books.

It leads to some interesting conversations in-lieu of doing actual work.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I work with a guy that defines himself as "Suffering from same-sex attraction".

He is constantly rambling on about how ridiculous it is that he can't seek professional help because the established medical community has been frightened into not being able to define it as a disorder of any type. It's hard to seek help for something powerful lobby groups have forced medicine/insurance into claiming is not a problem, he says.

He says he feels like a diabetic, and doctors are only allowed to just tell him to embrace diabetes.

So the only "treatment" he can seek are books.

It leads to some interesting conversations in-lieu of doing actual work.[/QUOTE]

That's some powerful denial.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I work with a guy that defines himself as "Suffering from same-sex attraction".

He is constantly rambling on about how ridiculous it is that he can't seek professional help because the established medical community has been frightened into not being able to define it as a disorder of any type. It's hard to seek help for something powerful lobby groups have forced medicine/insurance into claiming is not a problem, he says.

He says he feels like a diabetic, and doctors are only allowed to just tell him to embrace diabetes.

So the only "treatment" he can seek are books.

It leads to some interesting conversations in-lieu of doing actual work.[/QUOTE]Heh, I'd love to know what books it is he reads for "treatment". Would probably help a lot if he just admitted he's gay/bisexual.
 
[quote name='phantasyx']

2 fe/males can not reproduce, they can please themselves, sure, but they have no know parts made specifically for Homo activity, so it is not natural, now it does happen in nature I won't deny that but YOU can not deny the bizarreness of that attraction and I am simply pointing it to the disruption of Pheromones and mis-attraction that occurs.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for making me think about all the ways they "could" do it. I'm gonna go scrap my brain out now...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top