WTF!!!!??? Our country needs to get with the times!

[Keekanoo]

Originally posted by Pvt. Boisclair
If it is not a choice, then why is homosexuality not present in any other species?

In point of fact, same-sex pleasureing is found in a variety of species.

And there is just as strong evidance to support the fact that it isn't a 'choice' for many. They are driven towards it. By what? Who knows. I'm not sure there is a clear-cut genetic argument to suggest why some people are drawn towards their same sex, but I'm equally sure there isn't a clear cut argument to say that there isn't good genetic reason.

Fat argued that the Bible says it's wrong. Implying that therefore 'God' thinks it's wrong. There are many religions out there and many 'Gods'--often with contradicting dogma to other 'religions' dogmas.

Some people, whether by choice or by something deeper driving them towards it, prefer the long-term domestic/sexual partnering with someone of their same sex. Deal with it.

What these people want is to be recognized as 'couples', and to share the same taxation shelters as other 'couples'.

I am by no means gay, but I stand and applaud the efforts of such people for attempting to gain equal rights in what has been, largely, an extremely bigoted, hostile and shaming environment.

Not that I agree with marriage whatsoever But that's another topic for another day.

Keek.

[Vamprey Profile]

Originally posted by Jeffro
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Gays_and_Lesbians


N.Y. Ministers Charged for Marrying Gays
(AP) - Two ministers were charged with criminal offenses Monday for marrying 13 gay couples in what is believed to be the first time in the United States that clergy members have been prosecuted for performing same-sex ceremonies. District Attorney Donald Williams said gay marriage laws make no distinction between public officials and members of the clergy who preside over wedding ceremonies.


How can this country be so unwilling to change?

I am not gay but i am saying that these people are being treated like SECOND CLASS CITIZENS that have no rights...

And the people who help them get charged also?

sheesh...

Why is america so ?

*rant off*

feel free to leave at any time. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

[Keekanoo]

Originally posted by Rule of Wrist

And sex is necessary for the survival of the species, but are homosexuals really worried about that? If they are, they flunked biology.

Not anymore it isn't.

[King Profile]

Originally posted by Keekanoo
In point of fact, same-sex pleasureing is found in a variety of species.

And there is just as strong evidance to support the fact that it isn't a 'choice' for many. They are driven towards it. By what? Who knows. I'm not sure there is a clear-cut genetic argument to suggest why some people are drawn towards their same sex, but I'm equally sure there isn't a clear cut argument to say that there isn't good genetic reason.

Fat argued that the Bible says it's wrong. Implying that therefore 'God' thinks it's wrong. There are many religions out there and many 'Gods'--often with contradicting dogma to other 'religions' dogmas.

Some people, whether by choice or by something deeper driving them towards it, prefer the long-term domestic/sexual partnering with someone of their same sex. Deal with it.

What these people want is to be recognized as 'couples', and to share the same taxation shelters as other 'couples'.

I am by no means gay, but I stand and applaud the efforts of such people for attempting to gain equal rights in what has been, largely, an extremely bigoted, hostile and shaming environment.

Not that I agree with marriage whatsoever But that's another topic for another day.

Keek.

Well said Keek

King

[flapjack]

Isn't this a purely legal question? Look to the law to see where the term "marriage" is used and how defined. If this provides some benefit over and above those who are not in a "marriage" then there may be discrimination. I don't see a big Singles lobby out there making these arguments. Maybe it is because they have better things to do; Like trying to get laid. Seems like the only reason to get married under the law is so that if you get a divorce, there is some equitable division of assets and responsibility for children.

I wonder what rate per hour a good gay divorce attorney is getting these days?

[PudriK Profile]

Let's deal with these one at a time...

1) Marriage as recognized by the state is a legal contract, nothing more. The state does not "sanctify" the marriage, it just sets two people into a set of laws regarding custody, survivor's rights, tax laws, etc. The issue is we are prohibting two consenting adults from entering this legal contract. Prohibitons on who you are allowed to marry (ie. incest) are, or should be, based on public health grounds or other secular rationales. The fact that the state recognizes this contract has NO BEARING WHATSOEVER on the "sanctity" of your marriage. I look to GOD to sanctify my marriage, not the State of Virginia.

2) Homosexuality is part of nature... it has been in human nature since before the time of Christ, and it exists among many animal species. Scientists are still trying to determine whther it is genetic, chemical, environmental, behavioral, or a combination of these. To call it unnatural is to prove your ignorance of facts.

3) America was founded on separation of church and state. Freedom of religion... so what if your religion says gay marriage is wrong, if mine permits it, who are you to tell me otherwise? What are your grounds for prohibition? Unless they are based in public health, legal concerns, or some other secular rationale, or a common morality (like murder) they are invalid. And while the common morality argument could possible once have been used, nowadays it appears it is only common among 60% of the population. And lets not forget it was once common opinion that blacks and women were inferior. It's called progress.

4) To those who say the Bible is the basis for our laws--see the second commandment. "You shall have no other gods but me." Now see the 1st amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. " A bit of a conflict, huh? Our laws are based on English common law.

5) Didn't Christ say, don't worry about the speck in your neighboor's eye, when you have a log in your own. Take care of yourself, teach your children the way you want them taught, send them to private school if you must, but don't foist your morality on someone else. Laws exist to prevent one person from harming another and for the public weal. I have YET to hear ANY argument which demonstrates how letting two women marry has a harmful effect on anyone else--except that it "damages" the institution of marriage. See (1) above. With all the hate in the world, why are Christians so adament about keeping two people who love each other apart.

[[ECGN] Mulligan]

Damn, this board has sparked a flame. And I love it. Debate is something I enjoy. Well here it goes:

Alright, first off, the assumption that what makes you gay is just having sex with the same sex. You can be gay, and not be sexually active. You can be straight, and vow to not have sex. Sex has nothing to do with it. It is about love. Yes, this may sound cliche, but that is what marriage is supposed to be about. It is about who do you want to share in a close relationship with, for the rest of your life. You don't get married just for the sex. So why is this talk of animals coming about? It has nothing to do with being gay or straight with animals, it is about natural instinct. And yes, chimps and dogs and other horny animals occasionally engage in same sex humping. The reason why this animal argument is null and void, is because most animals don't have emotional attach to those they hump. So again I say it is emotional attachment. And yes, I think many gay people are sorta born into it, but mostly raised into it. The same way I am attracted to brown eyed brown hair girls. They say we discover our attractions at a pre puberty stage.
Even if it is a choice, or if it is not, it's hard to KNOW for sure, but that's not the issue. The issue on hand is marriage. And yes, there are two different forms of marriage. Legally binding marriages, and religiously binding marriages. Even though for the most part, religiously binding marriages will feel more meaningful. So this isn't about trying to force churches to perform gay ceremonies. For that would be disobeying the constitution. I know Catholic churches won't like that at all being forced to perform gay marriages. Some churches allow it, and they should be allowed to. Freedom of Religion. So this isn't about changing religions. It is about gay couples being allowed to be married through the eyes of the government. And that's as far as it should go. To allow a binding marriage between two persons. No animals, and no polygomy. Not because I feel polygomy is wrong, but because that would allow for loop holes with the government. So, everybody chill, try to open your mind a bit before getting all offended. Many of us are extremely religious, that's great. Many of us are liberal hippies. That's great too. Let's just all keep our minds open during this debate, and let's not turn this into an argument. A heated debate is exciting. An argument gets too dramatic. So sit, and actually listen. Don't start shaking your head or closing your ears before listening to everything the other person has to say. You may disagree with it, but listen carefully, so you can have a better stand point when it comes to the counter point side.

[[ECGN] Mulligan]

Pudrik, we were writing our rants at about the same time, and it looks like you posted yours before I got to post mine. You did a much better job of organizing, so for those of you scrolling to the bottom first, just see Pudrik's post.

[Colonel Ingus Profile]

Hows this sound then?

You can live you life any damn way you please just stop trying to force your lifestyle into mine.

The whole gay marriage thing is just an attempt by hardcore homosexuals to "Get the issue into peoples thoughts" and "make people aware" I have even been told this. Because they feel they have to "make us accept them".

I don't give a shit about how they live their life so stop trying to change mine.

Should they have the same legal rights spouses do as far as benifits and legal status? Sure why the hell not. It makes no difference to me as long as they live their life and let me live mine.

But when their political activism is dead set on "making me aware of them" then they go to far. I don't want to be aware of them. I don't go shouting into some gays face "STRAIGHT PRIDE!" and I don't need them shouting into mine "GAY PRIDE!"

But I don't think it should a friggin constitutional ammendment. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. I think the constitution is something extremely important even if our politicians don't

[SavageParrot Profile]

Originally posted by Rule of Wrist
OK, comparing anything sexual with something you need to survive, such as air or food is not valid IMO. You do not need sex to survive (I ought to know )

Ok maybe you are right, but then you reserve the right to compare the consentual sexual union of two men with the non consentual abusing of animals (and worse), a comparison with even les merit thatn mine was. You're argument is generally fine buit you really need to think about the implications of what you are saying because this comparison of yours( see post on page 2) makes you look like an ass

[JimmyTango Profile]

Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
Hows this sound then?

You can live you life any damn way you please just stop trying to force your lifestyle into mine.

They are not doing that at all.

Originally posted by Colonel Ingus

The whole gay marriage thing is just an attempt by hardcore homosexuals to "Get the issue into peoples thoughts" and "make people aware" I have even been told this. Because they feel they have to "make us accept them".

Again, no they are not. You are really comign off as some hillbilly bigot who is out of touch with this issue, and only going by what the local guy with a hood over his head is telling you to say. It is so wrong it is not funny.

Whoever 'told you this' is a narrow minded person who can not accept that someone may want to live their lives differently than them.

Ingus, I really hope you are smarter than this.

What about them 'blacks' who wanted to same rights us them 'whites?' Where they pushing their lifestyle onto back then? Or trying to get the 'issue into peoples thoughts?'

They just want the same rights and to be equal...............

[-HaVoC- Profile]

And like I said, I want to marry the Damn triplets from Playboy. All I want is the same rights as the rest of you. I just want mine to consist of three Playboy bunnies.

Why can't I get the ACLU to support my rights that have been denied?

[PudriK Profile]

HaVoc, if you can get the triplets to the court house, I'll back you up. (And give you a hand afterwards if you need it. )

The point about animals is not dogs humping random objects. There have been studies of animals which actually show a preference for the same gender. I'll leave it to you to separate love and biological attraction in humans.

Ingus, how would you differentiate between someone "pushing their lifestyle" on you and someone trying to make their grievances heard? As Jimmy pointed out, somone could have made the same argument about blacks in the 50s. Why can't they just keep to themselves, why do they have to push their issues on the rest of us?

This is the only means a minority has to have grievances addressed--by bringing them to the attention of everyone else.

And as for the whole push of gay culture... queer eye, will and grace, etc... obviously there is a market for these shows because they are successful.

The only concern I have, and where we may agree, is when it comes to sex education in public schools. I don't think that many people want their children exposed to the idea of homosexuality, or encouraged to come out, during their formative adolescent years. You can turn off your TV, but you can't (individually) control your public school counselor.

Another important concern is how do we justify restrictions against polygamy, incest, etc. without using religious moral judgements. It becomes harder to justify these restrictions against consensual unions once the moral door is openned. Public health can be used for incest. Perhaps the best argument is common moraility (99% of people agree). It's not that gay marriage is equivalent to these things, but permitting it opens a precedent that may permit them in the future. It's a subtle problem.

[SavageParrot Profile]

What's the problem with polygamy if everyone involved has consented?

[Murgatroyd]

Originally posted by SavageParrot
What's the problem with polygamy if everyone involved has consented?

Well, the worst thing I can think of is multiple menstrual cycles to keep track of...