PDA

View Full Version : Gay Marriage Debate



Pages : 1 [2]

jonyak
10-22-2008, 16:25
Are you implying that his intelligence is only an act?

Don't take that shit Aragoni

could someone who is stupid act smart???

Kin
10-22-2008, 16:27
you act alot more intelligent than he does though.


Hahahaha... A quick recap for the one who's 28 and claiming maturity.



this Kin guy is one of the most ignorant people I have ever seen...


you are a sad pathetic person.

you are so ignorant you don't even know what you are ignorant about.


don't even bother with this douchebag.

haha he's just an ignorant child.


4.a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage.


hahaha the kid owned himself.


he owned himself again.:lmao:


You're almost 30... Hopefully you're deluded enough for this to go over your head and under your feet as well.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 16:28
could someone who is stupid act smart???

He might have advisors telling him what to say

jonyak
10-22-2008, 16:28
He might have advisors telling him what to say

hmm never thougth about that.

didn;t work to well for bush though.

Kin
10-22-2008, 16:30
oh snap he pulled that card, we all lose...

to someone who is only 22 and has only 1000 posts.:lmao:



Can't forget that one... Cause we all know the real WINNARs have tons of posts from sitting online all day.



Its all fitting together now... My apologies... You have my sympathy.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 16:30
hmm never thougth about that.

didn;t work to well for bush though.

Very good point.

Fool me once.. shame on me .. fool me twice....... they fool ya but ya can't git fooled again.

Oh the profundity

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 16:30
Its a natural thing... because you say so?

Awesome reasoning there. :rolleyes:

Homosexuality exists in many other animals too, not just us.
In addition, sexual desire is not a conscious choice.
All evidence shows it to be biological, which would mean yes, homosexuality, just like heterosexuality, is a natural occurrence.
There is absolutely no evidence to show that we can consciously change our sexual desires.

Sorry, but homosexuality is not a choice.
Do you remember choosing heterosexuality?

There is no reason why homosexuals can't get married.
I think marriage is stupid, and I'll never do it, since men do NOT benefit whatsoever from it (hurts them actually).

But alas, since the government decided to fiddle with this stupid religious ceremony, and it's now also government-based, then you can't hold to the old "religious" reasons for them not getting married, since it's now a government thing. And since it IS a government-based adoption, and since we have equality under a secular government, then there is no valid reason to oppose gay marriage.

Blame the government for adopting marriage.
It shouldn't have, but it did.
And since it did, then it needs to be fair for all.

Case rested, win.

jonyak
10-22-2008, 16:33
Homosexuality exists in many other animals too, not just us.
In addition, sexual desire is not a conscious choice.
All evidence shows it to be biological, which would mean yes, homosexuality, just like heterosexuality, is a natural occurrence.
There is absolutely no evidence to show that we can consciously change our sexual desires.

Sorry, but homosexuality is not a choice.
Do you remember choosing heterosexuality?

There is no reason why homosexuals can't get married.
I think marriage is stupid, and I'll never do it, since men do NOT benefit whatsoever from it (hurts them actually).

But alas, since the government decided to fiddle with this stupid religious ceremony, and it's now also government-based, then you can't hold to the old "religious" reasons for them not getting married, since it's now a government thing. And since it IS a government-based adoption, and since we have equality under a secular government, then there is no valid reason to oppose gay marriage.

Blame the government for adopting marriage.
It shouldn't have, but it did.
And since it did, then it needs to be fair for all.

Case rested, win.

I agree. but it has all been said already.

but that is a great synopsis.

Crying Hyena
10-22-2008, 16:38
This topic has been pissing me the fuck off for the last two weeks. Religious people keep defining marriage in fucking religious terms without even doing their own damn research. If you go back in history, the word marriage meant "to own". The man married the woman. The woman was married off to the man. Sheesh! if you want to argue semantics, argue that!

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:00
Sexual desire is not a conscious choice?

I beg to differ...

So basically that comment says to me:

"I've got wood and I'm going to stick it in anything or anyone that results in my sexual gratification being granted"

Sorry, I wouldn't buy that for a dollar.

My sexual desire is to me, a very conscious choice.

I choose to be hetero, I choose to enjoy a female as a sexual partner because I have no desire to have sex with a man and never will.

Therefore it is indeed a conscious choice in my opinion.

Hitom
10-22-2008, 17:01
Therefore it is indeed a conscious choice in my opinion.

Therefor you are indeed a fucking idiot in my opinion.

Kusghuul
10-22-2008, 17:01
So basically that comment says to me:

"I've got wood and I'm going to stick it in anything or anyone that results in my sexual gratification being granted"

I choose to be hetero, I choose to enjoy a female as a sexual partner because I have no desire to have sex with a man and never will.


Sexual desire is what you're attracted and turns you on.

iPwn
10-22-2008, 17:02
Septus for president.

Aragoni
10-22-2008, 17:03
Sexual desire is not a conscious choice?

I beg to differ...

So basically that comment says to me:

"I've got wood and I'm going to stick it in anything or anyone that results in my sexual gratification being granted"

Sorry, I wouldn't buy that for a dollar.

My sexual desire is to me, a very conscious choice.

I choose to be hetero, I choose to enjoy a female as a sexual partner because I have no desire to have sex with a man and never will.

Therefore it is indeed a conscious choice in my opinion.

*facepalm* I take that as in you didn't read the link I sent? It's proven that homosexuality is something you're born with and not a choice.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:04
Sexual desire is not a conscious choice?

I beg to differ...

So basically that comment says to me:

"I've got wood and I'm going to stick it in anything or anyone that results in my sexual gratification being granted"

Sorry, I wouldn't buy that for a dollar.

My sexual desire is to me, a very conscious choice.

I choose to be hetero, I choose to enjoy a female as a sexual partner because I have no desire to have sex with a man and never will.

Therefore it is indeed a conscious choice in my opinion.


Isn't that exactly the point? You have no desire to have sex with a man, because you are naturally heterosexual. Do you get to choose who you're attracted to? could you make yourself attracted to a man for a million dollars? no you couldn't because it isn't a choice. I never chose to be attracted to women. it just happens. I don't choose which women i am attracted to either. I either am or i'm not

Hitom
10-22-2008, 17:06
Isn't that exactly the point? You have no desire to have sex with a man, because you are naturally heterosexual. Do you get to choose who you're attracted to? could you make yourself attracted to a man for a million dollars? no you couldn't because it isn't a choice. I never chose to be attracted to women. it just happens. I don't choose which women i am attracted to either. I either am or i'm not

What if you forced yourself to be attracted to one, or the other. What would happen then? Cancer?

Kusghuul
10-22-2008, 17:07
What if you forced yourself to be attracted to one, or the other. What would happen then? Cancer?

Beta?

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:07
What if you forced yourself to be attracted to one, or the other. What would happen then? Cancer?

Que?

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:09
*facepalm* I take that as in you didn't read the link I sent? It's proven that homosexuality is something you're born with and not a choice.

I don't think it is completely 100% proven.

How do you explain bi-sexuals then? Isn't that a choice?

I don't even want to hear the "they are just experimenting" argument.

I come from the old school that determines that if you want to blow another dude, you're gay, no ifs and or buts about it. There is no switching back and forth.

Here again, before anything I say gets misconstrued. I have nothing against gays.

But the color black is black, the sky is blue and if you want to sex up another man, you're a homosexual.

Duncandun
10-22-2008, 17:10
Not in US laws (at least not that I am aware of). He is afriad that allowing the change of definition to give gays equal rights in union and thus calling it a "marriage" would allow all sorts of other perversion of "marriage". Take the example of human to animal, multiple partners, no age restrictions, so on. In argument these things could now be possible due to discrimination of beliefs.

Making a new "Union" and giving the same lawful rights to this new union as marriage. The exception being it is now defined as same sex partners.

Not sure if I am getting the point across clearly here.

tell him using a logical fallacy to make his point automatically invalidates his argument.

Mo0rbid
10-22-2008, 17:10
But the color black is black, the sky is blue and if you want to sex up another man, you're a homosexual.

yes, who in their right mind would disagree

Kusghuul
10-22-2008, 17:11
I don't think it is completely 100% proven.

How do you explain bi-sexuals then?

I don't even want to hear the "they are just experimenting" argument.

I come from the old school that determines that if you want to blow another dude, you're gay, no ifs and or buts about it. There is no switching back and forth.

Here again, before anything I say gets misconstrued. I have nothing against gays.

But the color black is black, the sky is blue and if you want to sex up another man, you're a homosexual.


Gays exist, so why not bisexuals? On a genetic level, there's nothing hampering it.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:13
Gays exist, so why not bisexuals? On a genetic level, there's nothing hampering it.

Still it's a choice for bi-sexuals, I didn't get to edit that in before you quoted me, is it not?

being gay has a very distinct possibility of being a choice IMO.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:13
I don't think it is completely 100% proven.

How do you explain bi-sexuals then?

I don't even want to hear the "they are just experimenting" argument.

I come from the old school that determines that if you want to blow another dude, you're gay, no ifs and or buts about it. There is no switching back and forth.

Here again, before anything I say gets misconstrued. I have nothing against gays.

But the color black is black, the sky is blue and if you want to sex up another man, you're a homosexual.

But that doesn't mean you're choosing to be gay does it? I mean who in their right mind would choose to be ostracised and all of that?

Now the argument as to whether it's a biological thing or a social thing is definitely contentious. But i don't think you can sensibly argue that your sexuality is a matter of conscious choice

Kusghuul
10-22-2008, 17:16
Still it's a choice for bi-sexuals, I didn't get to edit that in before you quoted me, is it not?

being gay has a very distinct possibility of being a choice IMO.

Choice who you're attracted to? Like you said yourself, if the person wants to blow some dude and fuck some bird, wouldn't that make him bisexual?

Aragoni
10-22-2008, 17:16
I don't think it is completely 100% proven.

It is 100% proven.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7456588.stm


How do you explain bi-sexuals then?

Very good question because I can't answer it.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality#Etiology), by the looks of it, answers the question.

Edit: Nvm what I wrote.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:16
But that doesn't mean you're choosing to be gay does it? I mean who in their right mind would choose to be ostracised and all of that?

Now the argument as to whether it's a biological thing or a social thing is definitely contentious. But i don't think you can sensibly argue that your sexuality is a matter of conscious choice

There again, you quoted me before I edited in the bi-sexual being a choice.

Folks are choosing to be with both men and/or women, being gay or lesbian could also be a choice IMO.

Just because procreation is gentically capable and sound, many choose not to have children. Why? Because it's either what they want or don't want.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:18
It is 100% proven.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7456588.stm



Very good question because I can't answer it.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality#Etiology), by the looks of it, answers the question.



Maybe my reading comprehension sucks (slept 3 hours tonight) but then how come you said that homosexuality is a choice then? I mean, if it's a choice and not genetically then you should be able to switch to heterosexuality whenever you wish.

Those are not the only two options to consider. It may not be genetic, but it could still be a social or psychological issue, over which you have no control

@ Barbarossa

But wanting to have children or not is not comparable to sexual desire. Procreation happens as a result of two heterosexuals acting upon their sexual desires. I mean you don't see animals considering their financial situation before they decide to fuck do you?

Just because someone is bi-sexual doesn't mean it's a choice. they might just find that they're attracted to both. Whether that be biological or social

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:21
It is 100% proven.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7456588.stm

Sorry. I don't think it is. That's my opinion.

Very good question because I can't answer it.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality#Etiology), by the looks of it, answers the question.

It's because it's not 100% proven.



Maybe my reading comprehension sucks (slept 3 hours tonight) but then how come you said that homosexuality is a choice then? I mean, if it's a choice and not genetically then you should be able to switch to heterosexuality whenever you wish.

I made that statement saying this was my line of thought concerning the matter. I should have made it clearer what my intent by that comment was...sorry.

There is nothing any of you can link, say or provide that will convince me that being gay is not a choice.

I do not doubt the born that way theory but I do not think it applies to everyone who 'practices' homosexuality, meaning bi-sexuals.

Choice, my friend, choice...that is the key word.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:26
I made that statement saying this was my line of thought concerning the matter. I should have made it clearer what my intent by that comment was...sorry.

There is nothing any of you can link, say or provide that will convince me that being gay is not a choice.

I do not doubt the born that way theory but I do not think it applies to everyone who 'practices' homosexuality, meaning bi-sexuals.

Choice, my friend, choice...that is the key word.

In my opinion that is an unusual thing to claim. You say that you choose to be hetero. I could very well use that to argue that you are naturally bi-sexual or a-sexual, and are only attracted to women because you choose to be. So you're basically saying that you could choose to be homosexual if you wanted, but you just don't want to?

Sorry quoted the wrong post there

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 17:31
Sexual desire is not a conscious choice?

I beg to differ...

You can beg to differ all you want, but you have nothing to substantiate your idea that what I said is not true.


So basically that comment says to me:

"I've got wood and I'm going to stick it in anything or anyone that results in my sexual gratification being granted"

Sorry, I wouldn't buy that for a dollar.

That made no sense.


My sexual desire is to me, a very conscious choice.

I choose to be hetero, I choose to enjoy a female as a sexual partner because I have no desire to have sex with a man and never will.

You just said you CHOOSE to have sex with a woman, and then base that on your DESIRES, for which you have no choice over (your own admittance). Thusly, you AGREE with me that sexual desire, which is what we were discussing (not your actions), is not a choice.

Case closed.


Therefore it is indeed a conscious choice in my opinion.


Again, your actions are a conscious choice - I don't disagree with that.
However, your sexual desires are not, and all the evidence supports me, and none supports you.

Crying Hyena
10-22-2008, 17:32
I made that statement saying this was my line of thought concerning the matter. I should have made it clearer what my intent by that comment was...sorry.

There is nothing any of you can link, say or provide that will convince me that being gay is not a choice.

I do not doubt the born that way theory but I do not think it applies to everyone who 'practices' homosexuality, meaning bi-sexuals.

Choice, my friend, choice...that is the key word.

They have actually made mice gay. One experiment was using an environmental contaminant fount in plastics which, when digested, mimics a developmental hormone. The mice grew up with brains of the other sex. The other experiment was genetic and the behavior traits associated with males was now found in female mice. Personally I think it's a mix. Some people don't have a choice but other might and due to social influence, they choose to be in the closet.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:36
In my opinion that is an unusual thing to claim. You say that you choose to be hetero. I could very well use that to argue that you are naturally bi-sexual or a-sexual, and are only attracted to women because you choose to be. So you're basically saying that you could choose to be homosexual if you wanted, but you just don't want to?

I disagreed with some saying that sexual desire is a conscious choice.

I find error in that statement, which led to everything I've said.


It has to be a choice. How do you explain bi-sexuals [no one has here yet IMO]?

I'm trying to say I am right, nor am I saying this is how anyone is. This is what I beleieve, my opinion.

Sexuality is a matter of choices:

Do I sleep/not sleep with this skank?

Do I wear/not wear a condom?

Just examples.

Many consider anal sex an unnatural act and for all bases purposes it is. The anus is not a sexual organ, but neither is the mouth, the breasts or the ear for that matter. People do sexuals things with these non sexual body parts though.

Why? They chose to do so.

So why can't homosexuality be a choice then?

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:42
I disagreed with some saying that sexual desire is a conscious choice.

I find error in that statement, which led to everything I've said.


It has to be a choice. How do you explain bi-sexuals [no one has here yet IMO]?

I'm trying to say I am right, nor am I saying this is how anyone is. This is what I beleieve, my opinion.

Sexuality is a matter of choices:

Do I sleep/not sleep with this skank?

Do I wear/not wear a condom?

Just examples.

Many consider anal sex an unnatural act and for all bases purposes it is. The anus is not a sexual organ, but neither is the mouth, the breasts or the ear for that matter. People do sexuals things with these non sexual body parts though.

Why? They chose to do so.

So why can't homosexuality be a choice then?

Practicing Homosexuality is indeed a choice. But we must make a distinction between commiting a sexual act, and sexual desire. If what you're saying is, that one cannot be homosexual without actually commiting a homosexual act, then yes of course it is a choice. But as far as sexual desire is concerned, which i'm sure you'll agree is what most people use to define one's sexuality, there is better evidence to suggest that is not a choice

For example. I would choose to stick my dick in a woman's mouth before i'd choose to stick it in a pineapple. This is in fact a choice. But i do not choose which i prefer. I have a strong desire to stick it in a woman's mouth and no desire to stick it in a Pineapple.

And believe me, if i could choose to be pineapple-sexual i would

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:44
You can beg to differ all you want, but you have nothing to substantiate your idea that what I said is not true.


That made no sense.



You just said you CHOOSE to have sex with a woman, and then base that on your DESIRES, for which you have no choice over (your own admittance). Thusly, you AGREE with me that sexual desire, which is what we were discussing (not your actions), is not a choice.

Case closed.




Again, your actions are a conscious choice - I don't disagree with that.
However, your sexual desires are not, and all the evidence supports me, and none supports you.

You don't have anything that supports what you say to be true or false.

It's all your opinion, just like my comments are my opinion.

BTW I really don't think a topic like this is something to wave the flag of epeen victory over.

jonyak
10-22-2008, 17:47
as far as I am concerned, sexuality seems to be somewhat of a spectrum, much liek the political one.

with homosexual on one end, and hetero on the other.

some people just happen to fall somewhere closer to the middle.

I like to think that sexuality is a combination of both nature and nuture. some people are born pure homo, some pure hetero, some are more in the middle and society dictates to them who they should be with. In fact I bet most of us are more in the middle.

I have no source for this other than personal experience and knowing alot of both bisexual and gay people.

Duncandun
10-22-2008, 17:48
It has little to do with the bible these days. People are not that stupid as to ignore nature entirely. We dont see dogs, cats, elephants, horses, ect, fucking eachother in the pooper. We sure dont expect the most advanced life form on the planet (humans, well most of the time) to be doing that shit either. Its not natural. If people want to defile the way nature works they can do it in doors. I am sure not going to support my gov giving any special treatment to people who should be seeking treatment for an illness. Im all for covering gay folks in the mental system. The fact remains there is something wrong with them. They do this of there own choosing. That should not be supported by gov.

actually you do, fuckingmoron.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 17:49
Practicing Homosexuality is indeed a choice. But we must make a distinction between commiting a sexual act, and sexual desire. If what you're saying is, that one cannot be homosexual without actually commiting a homosexual act, then yes of course it is a choice.

I believe that is a fair assessment of the argument I'm trying to make.



But as far as sexual desire is concerned, which i'm sure you'll agree is what most people use to define one's sexuality, there is better evidence to suggest that is not a choice

For example. I would choose to stick my dick in a woman's mouth before i'd choose to stick it in a pineapple. This is in fact a choice. But i do not choose which i prefer. I have a strong desire to stick it in a woman's mouth and no desire to stick it in a Pineapple.

And believe me, if i could choose to be pineapple-sexual i would

Freaky analogy but yeah, I can agree with that.

Gibsnag
10-22-2008, 17:52
;1844849']That's fine. You still don't have the right to rewrite the code of religion.

And you don't have the right to impose your religious code on other people.

The assumption that your religious code is even marginally important to me, or anyone outside your particular religious cult is hilarious.


;1844849']
And has been said, civil unions should accomplish the same thing. It simply wouldn't have any religious significance.

There are multiple religions which allow for same sex marriages anyway. And many countries (including the UK iirc) in which marriage has no specific religious significance.


;1844849']
I know you really hate those evil holy men, and just HAD to bash me, but try reading the thread before you run off at the mouth.

Oooh, burn.

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 17:59
Gay marriage is wrong, period. Can two women make a baby, by themselves, or two men. No, thus it is wrong.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 17:59
Freaky analogy but yeah, I can agree with that.

It would definitely be cheaper and much easier to find a date

@ Spetznaz. Can you make a baby by posting stupid comments on the internet? because if you can't then by your rationale, what you're doing is wrong.

Note the 'full stop' removing any need for me to type 'Period'

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 18:06
It would definitely be cheaper and much easier to find a date

@ Spetznaz. Can you make a baby by posting stupid comments on the internet? because if you can't then by your rationale, what you're doing is wrong.

Note the 'full stop' removing any need for me to type 'Period'

Your an idiot, I was saying that it is unnatural to be gay. PERIOD! Can't make baby/unnatural. There is a reason why straight couples can have sex and make give a person life.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:07
Your an idiot, I was saying that it is unnatural to be gay. PERIOD! Can't make baby/unnatural.


No, What you said is "It is wrong"

Nowhere in your post did you say unnatural

LordTenacious
10-22-2008, 18:09
I've always liked these threads where everyone, including myself, can flaunt how ignorant they are.

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 18:12
No, What you said is "It is wrong"

Nowhere in your post did you say unnatural

What I meant was that it is unnatural. THUS, IT IS WRONG. As in why I think it is wrong.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:14
What I meant was that it is unnatural. THUS, IT IS WRONG. As in why I think it is wrong.

And that brings me back to my point that you posting on the internet is unnatural, so by your rationale must also be wrong.

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 18:15
And that brings me back to my point that you posting on the internet is unnatural, so by your rationale must also be wrong.

Tell me how it is unnatural...........

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:17
Tell me how it is unnatural...........

Again i am just using your reasoning. It can't make a baby can it?

Unless i'm wrong, in which case i'm going to put on some gloves

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 18:19
Again i am just using your reasoning. It can't make a baby can it?

Unless i'm wrong, in which case i'm going to put on some gloves

Wow, that is your reasoning. That has nothing to do with posting on the internet, making babies I mean. Gay marriage, marriage, does.

Gibsnag
10-22-2008, 18:19
What I meant was that it is unnatural. THUS, IT IS WRONG. As in why I think it is wrong.

This is the funniest argument against same sex marriage.

What the fuck in modern society isn't unnatural? Is me talking with idiots like you across (quite possibly) thousands of miles natural? Is living till 80 natural? Is eating our food cooked natural? Is living in warm houses natural?

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:20
Wow, that is your reasoning. That has nothing to do with posting on the internet, making babies I mean. Gay marriage, marriage, does.

How so?

spetznaz007
10-22-2008, 18:24
How so?

Or gay couples, not exactly marriage, but gay people and straight people in general. They can have children, the others can't.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:33
Or gay couples, not exactly marriage, but gay people and straight people in general. They can have children, the others can't.

So you're saying being gay is wrong because you can't have children?

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 18:38
Every known empire in the history of man that has allowed homosexuality run freely has fallen. Look it up, its true.

I'm an extremist (conservative), so I'm kind leaning one way ;).

Internet politics are the dumbest topics since HP tried to make a gaming computer.

-Ethnine-

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 18:40
Every known empire in the history of man that has allowed homosexuality run freely has fallen. Look it up, its true.

I'm an extremist (conservative), so I'm kind leaning one way ;).

-Ethnine-

Can you give any examples of empires which have restricted gays which have lasted?

Shane
10-22-2008, 18:43
GETTING BACK ON TOPIC...


I don't think it is completely 100% proven.

How do you explain bi-sexuals then? Isn't that a choice?

To believe that being gay is a "choice", I say this. I am mildly bisexual. I enjoy the opposite sex far more than the same sex, but every once in a while I have gay thoughts, tendencies, wills. I have never acted on them with another being, but I do know this to be fact as I experience it.

Would I prefer not to experience it? It makes me who I am.
Would I say I have a choice in the matter of experiencing it? Definitely not. I do not have the power to tell myself that I'm not having these feelings while I am. It's not my fault and it should not be looked down upon because we are all human beings. As long as the other person consents by their own will, I don't see a problem with anything to anyone.

Which is why I think sex or marriage with animals is wrong. The animal is definitely not consenting, and you can't say that it wants to consent, because you cannot read an animals mind.

Hecubis
10-22-2008, 18:45
I consider freedom of association between consenting adults to be a basic human right and am quite uncomfortable with the idea that relationships should require permission from the state. I also believe everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law and the state should not be allowed to discriminate against people based on something that does not concern them, like sexual preference.

Marriage shouldn't even be a legal matter at all as far as I'm concerned. The state has no business getting involved in the first place. Marriage is essentially just a contractual agreement between consenting adults and the state has no legitimate right to interfere.



What the fuck in modern society isn't unnatural?

Nothing is unnatural. Humanity is a product of nature just like everything else on this planet, it's not like we slipped through some sort of membrane from another dimension or something. The very concept of "unnatural" is strictly a religious concept, it doesn't exist in reality because everything is natural.

DougDread
10-22-2008, 18:49
As many people have pointed out, the real debate is not so much over the right for gays to have a legal union with the same benefits as marriage, it's the debate of using the word marriage themselves.

Marriage is a word originating in religion and religions like Christianity define the word to mean the union between a man and a woman. Have they changed the definition before? Yes, but for the sake of religious rights they want to have the sole right to change the definition of an originally religious term.

What I forsee will end up happening is that the definition of marriage will be recognised by the government to include gays. Marriage is not a trademark and so there is no right for any private body to dictate the definition of a word, just as the term McJob will not have it's definition changed in Webster just because McDonalds cries about it. The church in response will likely create a way to separate the lawful definition from the religious definition, such as adding the prefix 'lawful' for the law's definition and 'religiously' for their own definition. This will be their way to preserve their religiously defined word within their circle.

As long as there is the right to religion, there will be no way the government can force any religion (Christianity) to accept gays equally as it is against the religion to do so. As such the ability for gays to be married in churches will be based on the minister/priest's personal views and allowances.

Frankly if I were gay and believed in Jesus Christ but didn't hold the values of the established church, I would try to create a separate organization of Christianity that believed in accepting gays equally. It would have it's own sub-name just as Catholics and Protestants are different categories. Because honestly, no law is going to change the church's mind about what they stand for and as such gays will never be fully considered equal in a church until the opinions of the church itself change.

The other option is to just make a stand in your current establishment and hope that eventually the social norms will change the church rulings just as the change from polygamy to one man one woman did. It may not happen in your lifetime (or it may) but there is a good chance it will happen eventually.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 18:58
GETTING BACK ON TOPIC...



To believe that being gay is a "choice", I say this. I am mildly bisexual. I enjoy the opposite sex far more than the same sex, but every once in a while I have gay thoughts, tendencies, wills. I have never acted on them with another being, but I do know this to be fact as I experience it.

Would I prefer not to experience it? It makes me who I am.
Would I say I have a choice in the matter of experiencing it? Definitely not. I do not have the power to tell myself that I'm not having these feelings while I am. It's not my fault and it should not be looked down upon because we are all human beings. As long as the other person consents by their own will, I don't see a problem with anything to anyone.

Which is why I think sex or marriage with animals is wrong. The animal is definitely not consenting, and you can't say that it wants to consent, because you cannot read an animals mind.

Since you quoted me...

I don't look down on anyone because of their sexual orientation, preferences, etc. so let's get that out of the way.


Still if you are 'bi', you are making choices about what gender you are having sex with. To me, that has nothing to do with actually being gay or not, it's a matter of choice.

This is why I think homosexuality, be it gay or lesbian, can also be a choice.

What about the folks who became 'gay' because they had bad sexual experiences with the opposite sex be it rape, incest, molestation, etc.

They made a choice to have sex with the same sex not because of genetics, but because of the necessity [to them] to have their sexual desires fulfilled.

What about women who are so fat they can't find men willing to have sex with them? A lot of them probably aren't gay at all but they found another fat woman with a similar mindset and made the choice to engage in 'gay' sex.

I believe sexual urges determine what action a person takes to satisfy their sexual desires, it's why a lot of people do what they do because they cannot achieve what they desire in a 'normal' manner.

Edit: And I say normal in the loosest term of the word since I lack for a better word.

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 19:03
Can you give any examples of empires which have restricted gays which have lasted?

1. American Indian (over 1,000 years)
2. Ireland (over 1,000 years)
3. Israel (over 1,000 years)
4. United Kingdom (over 1,000 years)
5. America (over 222 years)

And more I'm sure. Note* I never said it was wrong or right, its a moral issue so its more of a personal question of what you think is morally right?

Fallen Empires:

1. Rome
2. Persian Empire
3. Greek Empire
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. China
7. Canada (they haven't fallen or anything, they've just not gone anywhere)
8. India

Every Empire that allows it is pretty much rotten, its pretty straight forward really. Like I said, I'm not saying whether it is wrong or not. I'm just trying to clear up an interesting fact. I base everything on a strict moral, simple fact what is right and what is wrong. That's just how I roll ;).

-Ethnine-

Crying Hyena
10-22-2008, 19:03
So you're saying being gay is wrong because you can't have children?

I guess birth control is wrong then too according to him.

Crying Hyena
10-22-2008, 19:05
1. American Indian (over 1,000 years)
2. Ireland (over 1,000 years)
3. Israel (over 1,000 years)
4. United Kingdom (over 1,000 years)
5. America (over 222 years)

And more I'm sure. Note* I never said it was wrong or right, its a moral issue so its more of a personal question of what you think is morally right?

Fallen Empires:

1. Rome
2. Persian Empire
3. Greek Empire
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. China
7. Canada (they haven't fallen or anything, they've just not gone anywhere)
8. India

Every Empire that allows it is pretty much rotten, its pretty straight forward really. Like I said, I'm not saying whether it is wrong or not. I'm just trying to clear up an interesting fact. I base everything on a strict moral, simple fact what is right and what is wrong. That's just how I roll ;).

-Ethnine-

Your forgot Nazi Germany

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 19:06
I guess birth control is wrong then too according to him.

Makes no sense to do something if their is no outcome...besides getting AIDs of course :).

-Ethnine-

Shane
10-22-2008, 19:08
1. American Indian (over 1,000 years)
2. Ireland (over 1,000 years)
3. Israel (over 1,000 years)
4. United Kingdom (over 1,000 years)
5. America (over 222 years)

And more I'm sure. Note* I never said it was wrong or right, its a moral issue so its more of a personal question of what you think is morally right?

Fallen Empires:

1. Rome
2. Persian Empire
3. Greek Empire
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. China
7. Canada (they haven't fallen or anything, they've just not gone anywhere)
8. India

Every Empire that allows it is pretty much rotten, its pretty straight forward really. Like I said, I'm not saying whether it is wrong or not. I'm just trying to clear up an interesting fact. I base everything on a strict moral, simple fact what is right and what is wrong. That's just how I roll ;).

-Ethnine-

Some of your countries are pretty up for debate...

American Indian were branched into many warring factions over the entirety of the continent.

Ireland was at war with itself and split into two parts.

The United Kingdom is an okay bit, though it was once ruled with a kings iron fist and now it's just patsy.

United States. We discriminated against blacks too, don't you know. I'm sure that worked fine (free labor is always awesome) until we decided it was a step in the wrong direction and liberated.

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 19:08
1. American Indian (over 1,000 years)
2. Ireland (over 1,000 years)
3. Israel (over 1,000 years)
4. United Kingdom (over 1,000 years)
5. America (over 222 years)



-Ethnine-

All fallen with the exception of America, which last i checked has gays running freely.

And by the way, what 1000 year Irish empire? And what 1000 year UK empire?

Dhig
10-22-2008, 19:12
Its ok for me as long as they stay out of my face with what they are doing with eachother.
Two guys is just disgusting imo. Girls is not disgusting for me but if they do it to eachother there are less girls for me :( :( :(

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 19:14
1. American Indian (over 1,000 years)
2. Ireland (over 1,000 years)
3. Israel (over 1,000 years)
4. United Kingdom (over 1,000 years)
5. America (over 222 years)

And more I'm sure. Note* I never said it was wrong or right, its a moral issue so its more of a personal question of what you think is morally right?

Fallen Empires:

1. Rome
2. Persian Empire
3. Greek Empire
4. Japan
5. Germany
6. China
7. Canada (they haven't fallen or anything, they've just not gone anywhere)
8. India

Every Empire that allows it is pretty much rotten, its pretty straight forward really. Like I said, I'm not saying whether it is wrong or not. I'm just trying to clear up an interesting fact. I base everything on a strict moral, simple fact what is right and what is wrong. That's just how I roll ;).

-Ethnine-

Uhh since when were American Indians, The Irish, The Isrealis and Americans considered empires?

Ever think most of those empires fell due to corruption vs. homosexuality?

"Oh Noes, our empire is gonna fall cuz a few boys are peter puffing in the closet".

America [and any other country] will fall because of corruption and ineptness not because of gays.

tallefred
10-22-2008, 19:15
I fucking hate people who think that just because they were born white/straight/Christian/whatever are better than other people. I don't care what excuse you have for hating gays, you're a bigot.

You have absolutely no right to dictate what people do as long as it does not harm you or anyone else. In the case of homosexuality, they are hurting absolutely no one, unless you're a member of some religions who believe they are hurting themselves. In that case, it's still none of your fucking business.

Kin
10-22-2008, 19:16
So some people that can do more then resort to insults and claims of ignorance have appeared huh?


Too bad they weren't around when I was posting earlier. Instead I got stuck with the "l33t internet poster guy". lol

Kin
10-22-2008, 19:17
I fucking hate people who think that just because they were born white/straight/Christian/whatever are better than other people. I don't care what excuse you have for hating gays, you're a bigot.

You have absolutely no right to dictate what people do as long as it does not harm you or anyone else. In the case of homosexuality, they are hurting absolutely no one, unless you're a member of some religions who believe they are hurting themselves. In that case, it's still none of your fucking business.


Rofl... What a great addition to this thread.


haha

Honest Bill
10-22-2008, 19:32
See i have absolutely no problem with bigotry as long as the bigot has the knackers to be open and honest about it. Like the guy above who says gays disgust him. Fair enough, that's your call. It's the people who try to rationalise it using their phony and flawed logic that i don't understand. They have no leg to stand on, and should just be man enough to say what they actually think, rather than coming out with this 'unnatural' bollocks

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 19:35
I fucking hate people who think that just because they were born white/straight/Christian/whatever are better than other people. I don't care what excuse you have for hating gays, you're a bigot.

You have absolutely no right to dictate what people do as long as it does not harm you or anyone else. In the case of homosexuality, they are hurting absolutely no one, unless you're a member of some religions who believe they are hurting themselves. In that case, it's still none of your fucking business.


I'll admit being a bigot just to see you get mad:D.

Listen I'm not judging anyone, or anyone's opinion here. In fact I think the whole topic is just stupid. Were supposed to be the smartest beings on our planet, yet we worry over the dumbest things, and debate over the dumbest things...all over the internet! Come on, really now :lmao:.

-Ethnine-

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 19:39
I'll admit being a bigot just to see you get mad:D.

Listen I'm not judging anyone, or anyone's opinion here. In fact I think the whole topic is just stupid. Were supposed to be the smartest beings on our planet, yet we worry over the dumbest things, and debate over the dumbest things...all over the internet! Come on, really now :lmao:.

-Ethnine-

It's like 3 guys arguing over over who has the biggest dick when in fact the only dick that matters is the one that works when it counts...

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 19:42
You don't have anything that supports what you say to be true or false.

Yes, I do. I already stated it.
You should go back and read some, liar.


It's all your opinion, just like my comments are my opinion.

Nope. Evidence supports sexual desire not being a conscious choice.
Can you make yourself sexually desire the gender you're not currently attracted to? Right now? Can you do it? No, right? Bingo.


BTW I really don't think a topic like this is something to wave the flag of epeen victory over.


Why not? It's been over and done with for awhile.
All those stating that they can consciously change their sexual desires have not been successful at showing that this can be done, whilst all the evidence to the contrary is out there.

A fail for the anti-gay people.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 19:51
Yes, I do. I already stated it.
You should go back and read some, liar.

You provided no evidence, just your opinion.

No links, no quotes, just your opinion.

I suppose your written word is the evidence.

Let's see a phD then, okay.



Nope. Evidence supports sexual desire not being a conscious choice.
Can you make yourself sexually desire the gender you're not currently attracted to? Right now? Can you do it? No, right? Bingo.

Explain bi-sexuality then if this is not possible. You keep claiming 'evidence' but you've yet to actually provide any other than YOUR opinion.



Why not? It's been over and done with for awhile.
All those stating that they can consciously change their sexual desires have not been successful at showing that this can be done, whilst all the evidence to the contrary is out there.

A fail for the anti-gay people.

Again, how do you account for bi-sexuality then?

I'm hardly anti-gay and if that is the impression you're getting from my posts, you've obviously no reading comprehension skills whatsoever.

Kin
10-22-2008, 19:54
They're right because they said so... You musta forgot... lol

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 19:57
They're right because they said so... You musta forgot... lol

:bang:

Dammit, they should have a warning for the OT header:

"Toss logic and intellect out the door before you enter these portals"

Septus
10-22-2008, 19:59
Whats stoping gays from marrying now? The only reason they need it is for medical reasons. So why not fight for that, why piss off bunch of christians? Seems counter productive.

Christians think their hetero relationships are "righteous" while the homosexual relationships are "sinful, evil, hellworthy, whatever." That's all well and good, the tides of society won't change until those old people die off, and most people understand that.

What open minded people don't want is government ACKNOWLEDGING this bigotry by segregating the relationships (ie. "Oh you're normal, you get this license. Oh, you're a fucking faggot, you get this license.") Which is what two sets of licenses would be - government validation of bigotry.



I honestly would say he would be all for that. He thinks it was a big mistake to allow african americans equal rights. He is extreamly racist.

Some one needs to watch American History X... Or just get ass raped by some nazis.

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 20:06
You provided no evidence, just your opinion.

No links, no quotes, just your opinion.

I suppose your written word is the evidence.

Google is your friend.
Try it sometime.


Explain bi-sexuality then if this is not possible. You keep claiming 'evidence' but you've yet to actually provide any other than YOUR opinion.

One more time, then that's it.
Can you change your sexual desires via a conscious decision? No?
We have seen homosexuality in other animals.
Many people are hurt or killed for their homosexuality, do you think they choose this kind of life because it's nice and fluffy?

Like I said, Google is your friend, you lazy S.O.B.
Start here:
http://www.yffn.org/admin/ncod/facts.html
and work out from there.

Fact: Sexual desire is determined by your biological makeup.
Do you disagree? Then go ahead right now and choose to like the gender you don't like. Tell me how long before you start to feel your attraction shift. Is it happening yet? How about now? No? Maybe tomorrow morning it will go into affect. What do you think? Hrm. No luck?


I'm hardly anti-gay and if that is the impression you're getting from my posts, you've obviously no reading comprehension skills whatsoever.

You just need to go to Google instead of thinking we are going to educate you on here.

Septus
10-22-2008, 20:08
Explain bi-sexuality then if this is not possible. You keep claiming 'evidence' but you've yet to actually provide any other than YOUR opinion.

That has nothing to do with what he said. He was asking if you right now, could give yourself a boner by thinking about dudes. Since it's a choice and all. Go ahead, put on a gay porno and rub one out.

jonyak
10-22-2008, 20:10
So some people that can do more then resort to insults and claims of ignorance have appeared huh?


Too bad they weren't around when I was posting earlier. Instead I got stuck with the "l33t internet poster guy". lol

haha.. funny, thats exactly how you acted.

just shut the fuck up and go back to playing wiht yourself.

Ps: you still continued to avoid my question.

Duncandun
10-22-2008, 20:12
god this thread is such a trainwreck, it derailed on page one too.

who would have known!

tl;dr biggots and ignorant people argue with semi-ignorant and probably bigots for other reasons about why being gay is a choice or why it isn't and that the other guys are just bigots.

bigot.

Gibsnag
10-22-2008, 20:15
Nothing is unnatural. Humanity is a product of nature just like everything else on this planet, it's not like we slipped through some sort of membrane from another dimension or something. The very concept of "unnatural" is strictly a religious concept, it doesn't exist in reality because everything is natural.

I know. I was attempting to use his definition of unnatural to argue against him.

Barbarossa
10-22-2008, 20:27
That has nothing to do with what he said. He was asking if you right now, could give yourself a boner by thinking about dudes. Since it's a choice and all. Go ahead, put on a gay porno and rub one out.

It has everything to do with what he said.

This has nothing to do with me, it does have to do with the fact that bi-sexuals make the choice of engaging in homosexual behavior or not engaging in homosexual behavior. It's still homosexual behavior regardless of whether they consider themselves fully gay or not.

Others do it as well who do not consider themselves gay, but take same sex partners out of 'necessity', I've already explained why. Granted this isn't the 'norm' but what is the norm?



I'm not returning to this thread.

I'm allergic to ignorance and one sided arguments that have no facts to back them up.

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 20:29
Google is your friend.
Try it sometime.



One more time, then that's it.
Can you change your sexual desires via a conscious decision? No?
We have seen homosexuality in other animals.
Many people are hurt or killed for their homosexuality, do you think they choose this kind of life because it's nice and fluffy?

Like I said, Google is your friend, you lazy S.O.B.
Start here:
http://www.yffn.org/admin/ncod/facts.html
and work out from there.

Fact: Sexual desire is determined by your biological makeup.
Do you disagree? Then go ahead right now and choose to like the gender you don't like. Tell me how long before you start to feel your attraction shift. Is it happening yet? How about now? No? Maybe tomorrow morning it will go into affect. What do you think? Hrm. No luck?



You just need to go to Google instead of thinking we are going to educate you on here.

Something deep down inside of me wants to call you a fag, just to see your face turn red.

Listen, I don't believe homosexuality has anything to do some biological makeup. You choose to hump a guy or you don't, its not that hard really...:D.

No offense guys, but do you get the idea our generation is screwed? I mean really were a bunch of immoral idiots that, at this rate, will run (or ruin) this world some day. Just not looking so good for us at this point...but as long as we have Darkfall I'm ok with that :lmao:.

-Ethnine-

Septus
10-22-2008, 20:34
Others do it as well who do not consider themselves gay, but take same sex partners out of 'necessity', I've already explained why. Granted this isn't the 'norm' but what is the norm?

I'm sorry, can YOU back that up? If *you* can't consciously decide to just fuck a dude, how can you say other people do?

I understand what you mean, that maybe the rejection had something to do with the construction of their sexual identity. But to say it's a CONSCIOUS choice is bullshit.

Same thing goes for bi-sexual. Sure they choose to fuck the dude, but they didn't choose to be attracted to him.



I'm not returning to this thread.


Yeah, saying the other side is full of shit and pure opinion and then just spouting baseless opinion isn't a very solid foundation for your case. Good move on not coming back.

VidarDf
10-22-2008, 20:35
Why was he banned?

MyNameIsSteve
10-22-2008, 20:39
Hey, as long as they are happy, I don't care if 2 guys marry each other, or 2 girls for that matter.

Hitom
10-22-2008, 20:42
Hey, as long as they are happy, I don't care if 2 guys marry each other, or 2 girls for that matter.

Would you care if they where sad?

Fizbanui
10-22-2008, 20:42
Hey, as long as they are happy, I don't care if 2 guys marry each other, or 2 girls for that matter.

Agreed, it really doesn't hurt anyone if there is gay marriage. But I don't care...if there is one or not...

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 20:43
That has nothing to do with what he said. He was asking if you right now, could give yourself a boner by thinking about dudes. Since it's a choice and all. Go ahead, put on a gay porno and rub one out.

bhahahaha!! Exactly!! :D:D:D:lmao::lmao:

Duncandun
10-22-2008, 20:44
I'd just like to comment that Florida has an amendment on the ballot that is attempting to OUTLAW gay marriage, civil unions, lawful unions etc.
An outright attempt from extremist and fundamentalist religious people to ban any form of union(for anyone, including straight people) other than marriage.
Unfortunantly floridas amendment process allows this kind of outright biggotry and hate(see Pregnant Pigs).

So, any floridians out there, unless you agree with this message... vote against amendment 2 in the election.(and vote no for pretty much all of them unless you know about them - there are 13 on the ballot this year, be careful:))

Brightrise
10-22-2008, 20:52
This thread is great at showing people's personalities.

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 20:53
It has everything to do with what he said.

This has nothing to do with me, it does have to do with the fact that bi-sexuals make the choice of engaging in homosexual behavior or not engaging in homosexual behavior. It's still homosexual behavior regardless of whether they consider themselves fully gay or not.

Dude, are you so thick?
Actions and desires aren't the same thing.
People can ENGAGE in homosexual behavior, if they are gay or not.
But usually, it's logical to conclude that the REASON why the are ENGAGING in homosexual behavior is because they are HOMOSEXUAL, or at least bi. Being bi means you're SEXUALLY ATTRACTED (not actions) to both genders, instead of just one. Some people who are bi usually lean to one or the other (Except that Tela Tequila or whatever her name is, she is pretty much equal to both).


Others do it as well who do not consider themselves gay, but take same sex partners out of 'necessity', I've already explained why. Granted this isn't the 'norm' but what is the norm?

If you're bi, you'll fuck either gender, as I've said, but usually prefer one over the other. It happens.


I'm not returning to this thread.

You've got nothing to add to it anyways except babble.


I'm allergic to ignorance and one sided arguments that have no facts to back them up.

Yup, you aren't backing anything up, and now you're running away because you know damn well that you've lost.


Something deep down inside of me wants to call you a fag, just to see your face turn red.

Won't phaze me. :) (But I love pussy!)


Listen, I don't believe homosexuality has anything to do some biological makeup. You choose to hump a guy or you don't, its not that hard really...:D.

You've mentioned two separate things above.
Homosexuality is a sexual desire. If you can't choose to change your sexual desire, like I'm sure you'll agree, then you HAVE to, out of logical necessity, conclude that it's biological. Your want for the opposite sex is due to your biological makeup. If you disagree with this, you'll have to make yourself want the same sex to prove your own point. You cannot, so you must agree. But since you do agree, then you lose this argument. It's kind of a no-win situation for you.
Second, actions don't always represent perceived desires, but most of the time they do.


No offense guys, but do you get the idea our generation is screwed? I mean really were a bunch of immoral idiots that, at this rate, will run (or ruin) this world some day. Just not looking so good for us at this point...but as long as we have Darkfall I'm ok with that :lmao:.

Being gay is not immoral. There's nothing wrong with it.
It's not their fault that they got hosed in the "normalcy" genes or whatever, and are now left to hump those of their own gender. They didn't choose it and we have no "fix". Many of them are so used to it, they don't want to be "fixed". It's biological, and all the evidence suggests this, and none say otherwise. So disagree all you'd like, you'll never be taken seriously.

Damwa
10-22-2008, 20:54
Instead of having their own "contract" between them... They wanna corrupt Marriage.


Nothing more, Majority of people don't care if they had something equal to marriage of their own for Man on Man/ Girl on Girl.




But it just so happens that Marriage happens between a man and a woman... so... Find some new way to try and validate yourselves??? Kthx

[..]

They want to corrupt the sacred institution of marriage? The homosexuals are going to corrupt the *sanctity* and *purity* of marriage?!!


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 21:03
They want to corrupt the sacred institution of marriage? The homosexuals are going to corrupt the *sanctity* and *purity* of marriage?!!


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

You're right buddy.
1 out of 2 people get divorced today.
It's such a joke.
I'll NEVER get married after listening to Tom Leykis.

Ziegler
10-22-2008, 21:12
Being gay is not immoral. There's nothing wrong with it.
It's not their fault that they got hosed in the "normalcy" genes or whatever, and are now left to hump those of their own gender. They didn't choose it and we have no "fix". Many of them are so used to it, they don't want to be "fixed". It's biological, and all the evidence suggests this, and none say otherwise. So disagree all you'd like, you'll never be taken seriously.

I'll disagree with this...and you can take your scientists and shove them up your ass. I know ALOT of gay people and the ones I've known as friends, have all, except for one, been sexually abused in their younger life. The one guy...yeah, it's biological for him, he's been gay since kindergarten, just took him til his twenties to figure it out.
SO, there are some that are biological, there are also, and in my experience, alot more that are that way from sexual abuse. Now, you go ahead and throw up a buncha studies and links and shit, and I'll ignore them over the facts as I have seen them in the actual world that doesnt have some kind of politcal agenda unlike most studies.

Now my question is this....if it isnt immoral to have sex with a person of the same gender...then you'd have to agree it isnt immoral to have sex with a dog...sheep...dolphin...right? your morals aside, if the animal doesnt complain, then it is ok, am I right?

Fizbanui
10-22-2008, 21:16
Now my question is this....if it isnt immoral to have sex with a person of the same gender...then you'd have to agree it isnt immoral to have sex with a dog...sheep...dolphin...right? your morals aside, if the animal doesnt complain, then it is ok, am I right?

No, you are just a retard. Don't blame yourself, you were born into it.

Ziegler
10-22-2008, 21:16
No, you are just a retard. Don't blame yourself, you were born into it.

explain why please?

Why is it bad for me to have sex with an animal?
If the animal isnt harmed and actually enjoys it....what's the problem?

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 21:19
Dude, are you so thick?
Actions and desires aren't the same thing.
People can ENGAGE in homosexual behavior, if they are gay or not.
But usually, it's logical to conclude that the REASON why the are ENGAGING in homosexual behavior is because they are HOMOSEXUAL, or at least bi. Being bi means you're SEXUALLY ATTRACTED (not actions) to both genders, instead of just one. Some people who are bi usually lean to one or the other (Except that Tela Tequila or whatever her name is, she is pretty much equal to both).



If you're bi, you'll fuck either gender, as I've said, but usually prefer one over the other. It happens.



You've got nothing to add to it anyways except babble.



Yup, you aren't backing anything up, and now you're running away because you know damn well that you've lost.



Won't phaze me. :) (But I love pussy!)



You've mentioned two separate things above.
Homosexuality is a sexual desire. If you can't choose to change your sexual desire, like I'm sure you'll agree, then you HAVE to, out of logical necessity, conclude that it's biological. Your want for the opposite sex is due to your biological makeup. If you disagree with this, you'll have to make yourself want the same sex to prove your own point. You cannot, so you must agree. But since you do agree, then you lose this argument. It's kind of a no-win situation for you.
Second, actions don't always represent perceived desires, but most of the time they do.



Being gay is not immoral. There's nothing wrong with it.
It's not their fault that they got hosed in the "normalcy" genes or whatever, and are now left to hump those of their own gender. They didn't choose it and we have no "fix". Many of them are so used to it, they don't want to be "fixed". It's biological, and all the evidence suggests this, and none say otherwise. So disagree all you'd like, you'll never be taken seriously.

Dude, I find it funny that your trying to prove the unprovable to an extremist. Listen mate I'm not hear to try and prove you wrong, I'm here to tell you that you are wrong. We can never agree, thus we can never stop arguing. So the simple solution to all this shit (forgive my choice of words), is to just except that we all have different moral codes.

I'm damn proud to call myself a moral man, and a Christian. And I am damn proud that this is my moral opinion, and that I believe in a truth. You can base all the scientific evidence against me and I will still stand on the same moral truth.

You on the other hand do not seem to agree with my moral truth, so we continue this debate over and over? No. We just move on through life like we did before, because that's the type of people we are :).

No offense man, but I can not, nor will I, ever agree with you on this topic. Because morally I am right, and thank goodness I have a right to say that :D.

-Ethnine-

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 21:25
I'll disagree with this...and you can take your scientists and shove them up your ass. I know ALOT of gay people and the ones I've known as friends, have all, except for one, been sexually abused in their younger life.

Bahahaha!
I know quite a few gay people and NONE of them have been sexually abused. You're so full of crap.
I know some people that have been sexually abused, but are straight to this day!
You're attempting to suggest that sexual abuse leads to homosexuality, yet you don't say how. :bang: Duh-uh?


The one guy...yeah, it's biological for him, he's been gay since kindergarten, just took him til his twenties to figure it out.
SO, there are some that are biological, there are also, and in my experience, alot more that are that way from sexual abuse.

Wrong. Sexual abuse does not change one's sexual desires.
Absolutely no evidence whatsoever for that in your favor.


Now, you go ahead and throw up a buncha studies and links and shit, and I'll ignore them over the facts as I have seen them in the actual world that doesnt have some kind of politcal agenda unlike most studies.

Right, because you only care about what you want to believe.


Now my question is this....if it isnt immoral to have sex with a person of the same gender...then you'd have to agree it isnt immoral to have sex with a dog...sheep...dolphin...right?

You're unable to create a slippery-slope argument here, because we are speaking of human beings, thanks. I'd say nice try, but it wasn't.

Fail.

Brightrise
10-22-2008, 21:27
I'm damn proud to call myself a moral man, and a Christian. And I am damn proud that this is my moral opinion, and that I believe in a truth. You can base all the scientific evidence against me and I will still stand on the same moral truth.

That makes you a fanatic, which makes your input worthless in any debate where your opinion comes from your faith (unless you're arguing with other fanatics of the same faith).

So why are you in this thread?

Damwa
10-22-2008, 21:28
I'll disagree with this...and you can take your scientists and shove them up your ass. I know ALOT of gay people and the ones I've known as friends, have all, except for one, been sexually abused in their younger life. The one guy...yeah, it's biological for him, he's been gay since kindergarten, just took him til his twenties to figure it out.
SO, there are some that are biological, there are also, and in my experience, alot more that are that way from sexual abuse. Now, you go ahead and throw up a buncha studies and links and shit, and I'll ignore them over the facts as I have seen them in the actual world that doesnt have some kind of politcal agenda unlike most studies.

Now my question is this....if it isnt immoral to have sex with a person of the same gender...then you'd have to agree it isnt immoral to have sex with a dog...sheep...dolphin...right? your morals aside, if the animal doesnt complain, then it is ok, am I right?

Well, actually I would concur: if the animal doesn't suffer then there is no immediate and reasonable basis for asserting "immorality".

If someone were to eat his own feces; would you call him *immoral*?
There is a difference between aesthetics and ethics.
There is a difference between indignity and immorality.

DocGonzo
10-22-2008, 21:30
so much bullshit...so little time to type

bestiality - not human beings, cannot give consent...NOT a suitable analogy, they are property, you can do whatever you want with property...but you can't "marry" anything that cannot give consent...not your dog or your toaster

bi-sexuality - as was stated earlier, sexual proclivity is based on DESIRE, which is hard wired and cannot be controlled by conscious thought or action...it can be denied consciously, but Mr Happy doesn't get hard if there is no desire...a bisexual gets turned on (usually by the PERSON and NOT the plumbing) by either sex...simple as that, people turn them on sexually...it's not about genitalia

the word "marriage" - sorry it predated Christianity or Judaism, and means different things to different cultures

here in the U.S. there are two variation...a church marriage, and a civil marriage certificate

NO ONE can tell a church how to define it by their tenets...however, under the secular auspices of the governmental document...certain legal ramifications occur --- next of kin, insurance, social security...depending on the state there are well over 100 instances where recognition by the state of a "marriage" grants rights to the couple that are not had by singles

as to why the word "marriage" is important, as has been pointed out...as long as ONE person gets a marriage license..then ALL should have it

separate but equal does NOT pass legal muster in the U.S.

so...either change ALL such licenses to be "civil unions" or enable ALL unions to be "marriages" it matters not...as long as all are the same

churches are free to recognize or not , as suits them...but the Law must remain impartial

finally as to whether homosexuality or bisexuality is a "choice"...an earlier poster had it right, if you think it's a choice...go on and grab some gay porn and see if you get turned on...or take your gay friend to a strip club and see if he gets a boner from a lap dance

homosexuality occurs among all species of mammals, and thus cannot be anything other than "natural"....duh

nuff said?

Yantheman
10-22-2008, 21:32
Now my question is this....if it isnt immoral to have sex with a person of the same gender...then you'd have to agree it isnt immoral to have sex with a dog...sheep...dolphin...right? your morals aside, if the animal doesnt complain, then it is ok, am I right?

Its funny to see this pathetic attempt at logic, when the basis of that attempt is entirely illogical.

Brightrise
10-22-2008, 21:33
so much bullshit...so little time to type

bestiality - not human beings, cannot give consent...NOT a suitable analogy, they are property, you can do whatever you want with property...but you can't "marry" anything that cannot give consent...not your dog or your toaster

bi-sexuality - as was stated earlier, sexual proclivity is based on DESIRE, which is hard wired and cannot be controlled by conscious thought or action...it can be denied consciously, but Mr Happy doesn't get hard if there is no desire...a bisexual gets turned on (usually by the PERSON and NOT the plumbing) by either sex...simple as that, people turn them on sexually...it's not about genitalia

the word "marriage" - sorry it predated Christianity or Judaism, and means different things to different cultures

here in the U.S. there are two variation...a church marriage, and a civil marriage certificate

NO ONE can tell a church how to define it by their tenets...however, under the secular auspices of the governmental document...certain legal ramifications occur --- next of kin, insurance, social security...depending on the state there are well over 100 instances where recognition by the state of a "marriage" grants rights to the couple that are not had by singles

as to why the word "marriage" is important, as has been pointed out...as long as ONE person gets a marriage license..then ALL should have it

separate but equal does NOT pass legal muster in the U.S.

so...either change ALL such licenses to be "civil unions" or enable ALL unions to be "marriages" it matters not...as long as all are the same

churches are free to recognize or not , as suits them...but the Law must remain impartial

finally as to whether homosexuality or bisexuality is a "choice"...an earlier poster had it right, if you think it's a choice...go on and grab some gay porn and see if you get turned on...or take your gay friend to a strip club and see if he gets a boner from a lap dance

homosexuality occurs among all species of mammals, and thus cannot be anything other than "natural"....duh

nuff said?

Thumbs up.

DocGonzo
10-22-2008, 21:34
oh...damn, one more bit

folks bitch about homosexuality due to biblical references...Leviticus to be exact

now, you are aware of the OTHER laws in Leviticus, which has since been shown...even by the most extreme rabbis, to be out of date and just silly?

shellfish, wearing cloth of two different threads, slavery, planting two crops in the same field...so many others...

try this link for some pwnage against Leviticus - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWqgD7lGneU

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 21:39
Dude, I find it funny that your trying to prove the unprovable to an extremist. Listen mate I'm not hear to try and prove you wrong, I'm here to tell you that you are wrong. We can never agree, thus we can never stop arguing. So the simple solution to all this shit (forgive my choice of words), is to just except that we all have different moral codes.

Whether you agree or not with me is not the issue. The point is that I assert my position and I back it up logically. I have done that, the other side has not. Any dolt can see that, except the ones that want to agree with YOU, apparently. The debate is over, and I already won.


I'm damn proud to call myself a moral man, and a Christian.

I'm sorry to hear that. I can help you with your Xianity (that's how 'we' spell it). Morals are better and stronger without religion. They mean more, too.


And I am damn proud that this is my moral opinion, and that I believe in a truth. You can base all the scientific evidence against me and I will still stand on the same moral truth.

Haha, when there is scientific evidence against you, then you can't say that you have the "truth". Truth is the degree to which a statement corresponds with reality. Science is the study of that nifty thing called "reality". You can molest the word "truth" all you want, because it sounds "perty", and it makes you feel fuzzy.. but that's all you're doing - you're molesting our English language to try and make yourself feel satisfied, when in reality you don't have CRAP for truth. You're pathetic.


No offense man, but I can not, nor will I, ever agree with you on this topic. Because morally I am right, and thank goodness I have a right to say that :D.

You will not agree because you're infected with religion. It's a disease of some kind. It stops you from thinking logically and rationally. You're destined to be wrong about many things, merely because you were brainwashed/indoctrinated by your parents who didn't know better - or you were just too gullible and ignorant to know better as you got older (mixture of the two).

Ziegler
10-22-2008, 21:39
Bahahaha!
I know quite a few gay people and NONE of them have been sexually abused. You're so full of crap.
I know some people that have been sexually abused, but are straight to this day!
You're attempting to suggest that sexual abuse leads to homosexuality, yet you don't say how. :bang: Duh-uh?
No, I am not saying it leads to it, it isnt a definite thing...some may indeed turn to it though. It isnt hard to think that if you were abused by your mother, and not just sexually, that you would have an adverse reaction to females for the rest of your life.
That's just common sense.



Wrong. Sexual abuse does not change one's sexual desires.
Absolutely no evidence whatsoever for that in your favor.
Which again...is why I say take your studies and shove them, I tend to actually observe the world and people around me. Tells alot more than you think. I know different for a fact. like it or not, insult me or not...doesnt change the facts that I know.




Right, because you only care about what you want to believe.
No, because I am old enough to know that most studies are extremely biased one way or another, and put no fiath in them at all. The same people that were telling us the world would freeze over by this time back in the 70's and the same ones telling us it is overheating....same thing different subject...bias based on an agenda.




You're unable to create a slippery-slope argument here, because we are speaking of human beings, thanks. I'd say nice try, but it wasn't.

Fail.

Humans have nothing to do with it at all. It's a question of abandoning all morality. If I have a sexual desire to screw a goat, I want to know what is wrong with it? ( I do ask this, because one of the major proponents of gay marriage in california is also ok with beastility)

and this thread so needs a NAMBLA link...but I'd probably get banned again.

Kusghuul
10-22-2008, 21:45
Humans have nothing to do with it at all. It's a question of abandoning all morality. If I have a sexual desire to screw a goat, I want to know what is wrong with it? ( I do ask this, because one of the major proponents of gay marriage in california is also ok with beastility)

and this thread so needs a NAMBLA link...but I'd probably get banned again.

But then i'd say you're forcing yourself onto someone/thing. That's not right. But if the goat agrees, sure, go ahead.

Damwa
10-22-2008, 21:45
The basic premise for asserting that some manner of interaction between consenting parties (of a non-exploitative nature) can be immoral, simply by virtue of the particulars of the form of interaction per se; would seem to require some manner of ethical "platform" that asserts that there is a certain proper purpose for human beings. That is; some manner of teleology of humanity. Lacking such a foundation or platform it would be difficult to establish any action as being immoral per se, irrespective of any harmful or exploitative nature of the action; either by virtue of some specific circumstances or by virtue of some inherent premise (of the action).


Think of it this way: we can only state that a tool is being used improperly, by being able to state its proper function (as being defined by a maker) - if we were in possession of some tool, the intended function of which was unknown to us, we would be unable to discern any (speculatively) proper or improper use of the tool, except by virtue of some consequences/outcomes in regard to either the user, the tool, other objects involved or the task being performed.
In so many words... an' stuff...

HedraFan3030
10-22-2008, 21:46
I am supprised that they didn't lock the thread if they banned him (op) for this. The marrage system we have right now is perfect.

1. States issure their own marrage licences indpendently from eachother

2. No state has to reconize another states marrage licence.

Personally I don't have a problem with it...

There that is my +1

Brightrise
10-22-2008, 22:00
For the record, the OP wasn't banned for this, but a post that got deleted.

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 22:01
No, I am not saying it leads to it, it isnt a definite thing... [\quote]

It's a complete shot in the dark, and you fail.

[quote]Which again...is why I say take your studies and shove them, I tend to actually observe the world and people around me. Tells alot more than you think. I know different for a fact. like it or not, insult me or not...doesnt change the facts that I know.

Yea, just like you KNOW that there is some deity in the clouds somewhere, right? :idea: My gosh man. You're hopeless.
Do you support the Tooth Fairy too? :bang:


No, because I am old enough to know that most studies are extremely biased one way or another, and put no fiath in them at all. The same people that were telling us the world would freeze over by this time back in the 70's and the same ones telling us it is overheating....same thing different subject...bias based on an agenda.

Hah, so you'd rather put "faith" in some book we wrote ages ago that's a failed science, telling us there are magical, invisible sky-daddies somewhere, and that we can magically live after we die, and there are fictional places where we can live happily ever after depending on what we "believe"? Yea, real good method for the "truth" you have there, buddy. :lmao:


Humans have nothing to do with it at all. It's a question of abandoning all morality. If I have a sexual desire to screw a goat, I want to know what is wrong with it? ( I do ask this, because one of the major proponents of gay marriage in california is also ok with beastility)

We are speaking of human beings. If you want to discuss screwing other animals, you can, but the slippery slope argument didn't start with gays.

As long as the goat agrees, you can screw a goat, ok?

HedraFan3030
10-22-2008, 22:07
For the record, the OP wasn't banned for this, but a post that got deleted.

What was the post that got deleted say?

Ethnine
10-22-2008, 22:08
Whether you agree or not with me is not the issue. The point is that I assert my position and I back it up logically. I have done that, the other side has not. Any dolt can see that, except the ones that want to agree with YOU, apparently. The debate is over, and I already won.



I'm sorry to hear that. I can help you with your Xianity (that's how 'we' spell it). Morals are better and stronger without religion. They mean more, too.



Haha, when there is scientific evidence against you, then you can't say that you have the "truth". Truth is the degree to which a statement corresponds with reality. Science is the study of that nifty thing called "reality". You can molest the word "truth" all you want, because it sounds "perty", and it makes you feel fuzzy.. but that's all you're doing - you're molesting our English language to try and make yourself feel satisfied, when in reality you don't have CRAP for truth. You're pathetic.



You will not agree because you're infected with religion. It's a disease of some kind. It stops you from thinking logically and rationally. You're destined to be wrong about many things, merely because you were brainwashed/indoctrinated by your parents who didn't know better - or you were just too gullible and ignorant to know better as you got older (mixture of the two).

Listen, I'm not going to post on the internet trying to help you understand. I am not attacking you, but for some reason you seem to think I am. And you are acting way too harsh to be someone of a sane mind.

anyway, I can back it up and I have. I have at least four homosexual friends, each will tell you out right that they are not doing it because they feel the need to do it. They will tell you they enjoy the life-style. There is your prove, now go smoke something to clam yourself down :).

By the way I'm not a religious person, look up the definition. I am on the other had a Born-Again (might as well look that one up while your at it, ok cup-cake ;))

I love debating with people that are so serious, cause they just go over the top to prove a point that is based on their personal bias.

Good times, I wonder when you will get the idea your not getting anywhere :).

-Ethnine-

DocGonzo
10-22-2008, 22:14
Listen, I'm not going to post on the internet trying to help you understand. I am not attacking you, but for some reason you seem to think I am. And you are acting way too harsh to be someone of a sane mind.

anyway, I can back it up and I have. I have at least four homosexual friends, each will tell you out right that they are not doing it because they feel the need to do it. They will tell you they enjoy the life-style. There is your prove, now go smoke something to clam yourself down :).

By the way I'm not a religious person, look up the definition. I am on the other had a Born-Again (might as well look that one up while your at it, ok cup-cake ;))

I love debating with people that are so serious, cause they just go over the top to prove a point that is based on their personal bias.

Good times, I wonder when you will get the idea your not getting anywhere :).

-Ethnine-

calling bullshit on the anecdotal allegations about the "four friends" from someone who calls themselves "born again"

you can only come out of the womb once..."born again" is a non-sequitor, you may speak of some subjective internal revelation...but that only makes you a gnostic...and thus heretic ...to mainstream Christianity..

not thta that is any kind of problem, but someone can take a fistful of acid and think they saw god as the flying spaghetti monster, their claim is EXACTLY as valid as any "born again" type

and neither are relevant to the thread's conversation

Mushukyou
10-22-2008, 23:09
Listen, I'm not going to post on the internet trying to help you understand. I am not attacking you, but for some reason you seem to think I am. And you are acting way too harsh to be someone of a sane mind.

You can interpret it as harsh if you'd like, that's fine. But when you express irrational viewpoints and assertions, I will correct them. If you feel my correction is in err, then you are free to assert such as long as you show how they are in err.


anyway, I can back it up and I have. I have at least four homosexual friends, each will tell you out right that they are not doing it because they feel the need to do it. They will tell you they enjoy the life-style. There is your prove, now go smoke something to clam yourself down :).

Sorry, but some gay people telling you they enjoy being gay because they enjoy the lifestyle is not in any way "proof" that homosexuality is a choice. We already asked you people to choose to be gay for awhile, but you people have not responded. Sexual desire drives one to do homosexual acts.


By the way I'm not a religious person, look up the definition. I am on the other had a Born-Again (might as well look that one up while your at it, ok cup-cake ;))

I was born right the first time - atheist.


I love debating with people that are so serious, cause they just go over the top to prove a point that is based on their personal bias.

You can't hold up against a serious debate, which is why you're cowering away. Use logic, and you'll find that you don't have much to stand on.


Good times, I wonder when you will get the idea your not getting anywhere :).

Another failed debate tactic from you. :bang:
Also, it's spelled "you're". It's not possessive.

Hackapell
10-22-2008, 23:15
Deadman15 was banned for being the alt of somebody who is permabanned and I am sad we did not pick this up earlier. :(

Anyways this thread has run its course and is just a nonstop circle of "no u" "NO U" so time to close it for the repeat in a week or two. Never stop, cycle of Forumfall.