11 of 11 US states vote against gay marriage

[suzerain]

However, to give this post even some slight topic relevance .... to all those who are opposed to gay marriage.... in what way does the granting of equal rights to homosexual couples affect you? Is it any of your business what gender or species another person's life partner is?

 

The personal belief that the way I do it is the correct way, as nature indended, adding to society through the ability to procreate - or the natural POSSIBILITY of procreating (don't get into the whole "so infertile people can't get married - they have the physical organs to do so, they just do not operate correctly).

 

I don't want to have to tell people I recently got married and have them ask me "Oh, thats nice - Man or woman?".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There is no such thing as a "correct way".

 

To imply that such is the case is simply the next step of narrow-minded conservatism along the line from decreeing that sex in anything other than "Missionary" position is "sinful" or "wrong"

Thankfully, the majority of the planet is not mired in the 14th century on that mindless attitude.

 

Likewise, the idea of adding to society. which adds to society better?

the drug-taking single mother with the screaming baby that's the result of an unprotected f*ck with a chav from the local housing estate while drunk in the toilets of the local nightclub...

or the Marriage of two loving adults whose successful income and expenditure to the deveopment of the local community and economy and who happen to be of the same gender and who maintain their privacy outside their own home.

 

Frankly, if the former is more "right" then the latter then people's priorities need re-assesing. Badly.

 

Is sodomy "wrong"? is lesbianism "wrong". absolute nonsense. I've had plenty of partners who happen to be bisexual, I've had threesomes with other men, and I've had threesomes with two other women, and I can say with certainty that the only point where sexual orientation is actually relevant to it being "right or wrong" is when it comes to the intention to procreate. if one woman and her girlfriend gain fulfilment in a mature, open minded relationship, is this "sick" or wrong? Far from it. The very couple I am thinking of when I write that description are so perfectly suited to each other that they seem inseperable.

 

 

is the correct way, as nature indended, adding to society through the ability to procreate

 

To be blunt, do you intend to conceive a child with your partner every time you shag?

No?

then the notion of right and wrong for sexuality is not only nonsense, but hypocritical. S&M, Bondage, Teasing, playing with feathers, kissing of giving a hug are activities that have no actual relevance to the procreation and adding to society. therefore, we should not participate in any of those activities becasue they are "wrong too?" I can understand if S&M is'nt your cup of tea, it's not mine either (though enough catholics have been flagellants over the centuries to work out that someone enjoyed it...) but if anyone were going to say that a hug or kiss is wrong, then, a debate about sexual activty is probably a bad idea untill they've actually experienced reality.

 

 

Likewise, Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the hangup about somoene mistaking you for gay and asking what gender you're married to.

 

That's already here, in the world, and to think that prevention of marriage rights for a same-sex couple would stop that is naive and foolish in the extreme.

Now, admittedly, in my social group, it's a lot more open than in, say, Alabama, but I quite regularly will respond to a comment of a friend or partner having a new partner by having to ask "ooh, great, is it a he or she?" Sometimes, the response is "both".

 

If anyone is afraid or offended that people are going to have to ask what gender a marriage partner is, then, pretty blatantly, then the questioner does not know who you are - and therefore they are just as likely to ask if it's a man or woman if you were to say that you have a partner you've been going out with for 5 years.

 

 

Suzerain

with a tiny fonted-tagline because someone will assume it's a comment about 'em... nyer.

[Abramul]

Can't homosexuality be wrong for a specific person, though? I don't really have a problem with gay guys (in fact, if another guy asked me out, although I'd refuse, I would consider it a compliment...not to eloquently worded, but hopefully you get what I mean), but I couldn't go that way myself.

[Peregrine]

Can't homosexuality be wrong for a specific person, though?  I don't really have a problem with gay guys (in fact, if another guy asked me out, although I'd refuse, I would consider it a compliment...not to eloquently worded, but hopefully you get what I mean), but I couldn't go that way myself.

 

 

Of course it can be considered wrong for someone. Nobody's saying that if homosexual marriage is legal, you have to go marry another man.

 

The issue here is whether you have a right to make everyone else follow your definition of "right". And you don't.

[Zmid]

Just in my defense, I never said that gay couples couldn't have the same benifits. I simple said they should get it through marriage... they should get it through civil unions. THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME THING.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Good idea, except for one thing - YOU may see it as the same thing, but the word 'marriage' has all sorts of meanings attached to it beyond the legal rights granted by it, so even if you have a 'civil union' which gets the same legal rights, it could very well still be seen as an inferior clone of marriage rather than something just as good.

 

However, to give this post even some slight topic relevance .... to all those who are opposed to gay marriage.... in what way does the granting of equal rights to homosexual couples affect you? Is it any of your business what gender or species another person's life partner is?

 

The personal belief that the way I do it is the correct way, as nature indended, adding to society through the ability to procreate - or the natural POSSIBILITY of procreating (don't get into the whole "so infertile people can't get married - they have the physical organs to do so, they just do not operate correctly).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And what right have you to impose your personal beliefs on everyone?

 

I don't want to have to tell people I recently got married and have them ask me "Oh, thats nice - Man or woman?".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What's the difference between asking what gender they are and asking what she (or he) looks like?

 

Can't homosexuality be wrong for a specific person, though?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Of course. No-one is saying that it should become law that you have to be homosexual, or that you have to enter into a homosexual marriage. What is being said is that you should have the choice to do so or not.

[postaldudeleo]

Wow, people calm down and eat tranquilizers.............

 

Im just gonna argue a few simple facts.

 

1. Gay marrige is disliked because plenty of gay couples adopt children and screw them up. Not all but a few are enough to spread dislike.

 

2. Generally people dislike the idea of 2 horny guys buttvulking. Its not the idea of right or wrong. It's SIMPLY IDEA OF OPINION. Thats it. people find it sick, and thus dislike it.

What do you expect.

 

3. Gays have the same rights and shouldn't be persecuted. I think gay marrige isn't a good idea but a. I dont care enough to argue b. don't feel the need to go hate gays. No body should be persecuted except nazis who are f_cks.

 

4. Honestly, no one cares what relegion thinks. Relegion should never influence politcs but it does influence opinion such as stated in point 2.

 

5. Gays can have marrige but Provincetown MA is a good example of gay marrige gone bad. EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. I went there on vacation while driving around cape cod MA and am scarred for life. Imagine this, a bald 50+ year old man on high heels, a purple dress, latex boob replacers, and another bald old guy wearing nothing but boxers with chest hair the size of a big musache. Did i mention that they have banana tatoos on thier arms. Not all gays are like that but that is just a example of too much freedom. (Ps, for thsoe that dont knwo what provincetown Cape cod is, it is a small city in cape cod that has 92 % of thier poulace being gay, or hemophodites.

 

This discussion isn't really going anywhere as opinion can't be combated espesially if people arn't optimistic to change. The SAME facts are being restated agian and agian. Also by the way, it's not like people are doing poo like having sex with 3 goats while covered in ranch dressing. (this is a porn ad that came to my spam email)

[ThetaOrionis01]

I think you may wish to look up a couple of terms in your dictionary, namely 'fact' and 'opinion'. What you have presented are not simple facts, but highly prejudiced and ill-informed opinions.

[ImmortalSnafu]

Thank you Postaldudeleo. Truly, you are a shining beacon of wisdom that enlightens us all with your infinite knowledge .

 

If only there were more people like you, think of how great our world would be!

 

 

By the way... I've been to Provincetown a dozen times, it's a nice town. Nice art galleries.

[Marxist ßastard]

PostalDudeLeo:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gay marrige is disliked because plenty of gay couples adopt children and screw them up.

 

Even if that did happen, it would be a product of homosexual partners that adopt children -- and since these couples are not necessarily married, and marriage does not increase the likelihood of this occuring (once again, if it does occur at all), what happens when homosexuals adopt children is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

 

The fallacy is still very much in place if you brought that point up purely to point out that people find homosexuals "icky --" even if that is the general consensus of the population (which I am certainly not claiming as truth), opinion should have no place in law.

 

...That is just a example of too much freedom.

 

To say that "too much" freedom exists undermines the very concept of freedom, and is thus contemptible.

 

Also by the way, it's not like people are doing poo like having sex with 3 goats while covered in ranch dressing.

 

You've never been on IRC, have you?

 

Ay, first there was the Genius of the Year Award, and then came the Tux Award, followed by the Idiot of the Month Award and the prestigious Giant Turtlefish Award.

 

...But now, the torch has been passed, and thus, in reward for your great fervor in furthering the opposing side's arguments, I grant you the first award ever given during a debate: The Red Herring.

[Dark0ne]

To imply that such is the case is simply the next step of narrow-minded conservatism along the line from decreeing that sex in anything other than "Missionary" position is "sinful" or "wrong"

Thankfully, the majority of the planet is not mired in the 14th century on that mindless attitude.

 

Thankfully I am not the only non-Christian who believes sex is special (not sacred, special) and should be kept only for such cases that involve a special person...that is my opinion of sex, and the opinion of many others (I would claim a majority, without the FOX statistics to back it up). I know I saved my virginity for someone I truely loved, and it pleases me that I did. Similarly I don't plan to idly spread my seed if I ever leave the one I love.

 

Likewise, the idea of adding to society. which adds to society better?

the drug-taking single mother with the screaming baby that's the result of an unprotected f*ck with a chav from the local housing estate while drunk in the toilets of the local nightclub...

or the Marriage of two loving adults whose successful income and expenditure to the deveopment of the local community and economy and who happen to be of the same gender and who maintain their privacy outside their own home.

 

And which adds to society more, the two homosexual men who adopt a child, screw up the childs life, not because they're homosexual, but because they force their homosexuality upon him -- or the loving 2.4 children family complete with loving house-wife and hard working and caring father?

 

Your proposed situation is just that; a situation which could be reversed yet have an "inexplicable" tendency of having a higher ratio among homosexual couples rather than straight ones.

 

Is sodomy "wrong"? is lesbianism "wrong". absolute nonsense. I've had plenty of partners who happen to be bisexual, I've had threesomes with other men, and I've had threesomes with two other women, and I can say with certainty that the only point where sexual orientation is actually relevant to it being "right or wrong" is when it comes to the intention to procreate.

 

I'm sorry, was this meant to persuade me to think that sex between a man and another man was naturally right -- or was this meant to make me think "Wow, Suzerain's had sex with 2 other people (not just goats) at the same time! He MUST be right"? Frankly it makes me think lower of you, and also pity you. This is my opinion, as is everything I say here. I do not say you're wrong, but I definately don't agree with you.

 

if one woman and her girlfriend gain fulfilment in a mature, open minded relationship, is this "sick" or wrong? Far from it. The very couple I am thinking of when I write that description are so perfectly suited to each other that they seem inseperable.

 

Quote me saying a woman and a woman together within a relationship is wrong. I believe I said I believe I'm doing it the right way ;)

 

To be blunt, do you intend to conceive a child with your partner every time you shag?

No?

then the notion of right and wrong for sexuality is not only nonsense, but hypocritical

 

The personal belief that the way I do it is the correct way, as nature indended, adding to society through the ability to procreate - or the natural POSSIBILITY of procreating

 

I do not doubt a man can have sex with another man in the act of love, without the possibility of procreating. I do not believe it's naturally right.

 

Now, admittedly, in my social group, it's a lot more open than in, say, Alabama, but I quite regularly will respond to a comment of a friend or partner having a new partner by having to ask "ooh, great, is it a he or she?" Sometimes, the response is "both".

 

If anyone is afraid or offended that people are going to have to ask what gender a marriage partner is, then, pretty blatantly, then the questioner does not know who you are - and therefore they are just as likely to ask if it's a man or woman if you were to say that you have a partner you've been going out with for 5 years.

 

ONground (rather than under) I believe telling someone I've had a relationship of 5 years would suggest to them a relationship of the straight persuasion. Same if someone told me of their relationship of 3 years. Despite knowing several homosexuals and being particularly friendly (working in an office for 2 years) with one I'm not inclined to ponder "wonder if its a male or a female" - of course you live in a very different lifestyle to me, one which maybe isn't so shielded, but instead front-line and pioneering.

[Marxist ßastard]

Mr. Robin, I would suggest that your next post include at least one argument -- from reason -- as to why homosexual marriages threaten the perpetuation of the state and thus must be banned by law.

 

So far, the only thing close to this has been your argument that a homosexual union that adopts children could produce dysfunctional members of society, but, as a previous post -- one which you, yourself quoted -- pointed out, that argument also has a clear converse; in addition to that, this whole class of argument has been refuted at least once before, the latest falsification occuring in the post directly above yours.

 

The majority of your posts in this thread have been even worse than that, and can generally be classified as your opinions regarding the sanctity of marriage, statements downplaying the significance of what is happening, arguments from authority, and almost complete non sequitors regarding the legal drinking age.