Gays can't marry in Cali or whatever.

[AchrisK]

Hardly a convincing case knowing that all world is going to hell due to over-population. China anyone?

This was a specific point I was making per a request from WAIF.

 

[Matt]

Homosexuality is usually something you were born with, but the whole nature vs. nurture argument comes into play here. Obviously there will be some people who change their sexuality. No big deal.

However, I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want homosexuals to be able to marry. How does it affect anyone personally? This is private stuff, and it shouldn't matter to anyone who isn't gay. Chris, if you are as accepting and tolerant as you say, I'm pretty sure you should change your view on this. Also abortion. The fact that the government feels the need to control women is appalling to me.

 

[Alter]

I will not say my beliefs have nothing to do with my views, but even apart from that, the whole thing doesn't make sense. It's not natural. I am not saying that the love between two people is not real or genuine. But even evolution says male + female = survival. The outie goes into the innie, and it produces offspring. And don't reply with talk of overpopulation, because I am merely addressing the "natural" and "intended" design that we have before us (weather by nature or by Creator). So homosexuality is not the norm. Well, we are humans with free will, so of course people will not be limited by what the "norm" is, and that is their choice. But since the family is the cornerstone unit of a strong society, I believe it should have a special place. It should be what it is, and if something else comes along, it can be something else. There can be similarities, but it is not the same. There are things that I don't like about it becoming combined with norm. It will start to be viewed as an option that is just as acceptable as the normal, natural option. People will begin choosing it, not based on feeling they can't seem to deny, but because it is just one of their choices. I don't want my kid (or anyone's kid) being indoctrinated in school that homosexuality is one of two valid choices. If my kid comes home one day saying he is gay, I will still love and accept him. But that is not my desire for my kid. I am all for homosexuals being accepted as people, just like anyone else, but I am not for homosexuality being accepted as a norm, because I believe it is not a norm. I will not put my stamp of approval on a lifestyle I think is unnatural, and I prefer that my country not embrace this unnatural lifestyle as the same as the traditional family.

I know you're all going to FREAK OUT. I can hear the veins in your necks already bursting. But this is how I feel, and how I believe.

It does not matter if you think it is normal. It is about allowing them to be given their deserved rights as a human being in the United States. A just government would give them their rights because they would not be effected by religion and they would know that their is no evidence from a good source that suspects that gay family is worse than straight. The traditional family is just a idealistic idea created in your head, and when think of the normal American family you will see how fucked up it is, and you are living proof. Just because you feel it does not fit your ideal views of how you want your fucking son to see how a family is raised does not mean that two normal gay men or women can not live their separate lives.

Their nothing harmful about gay marriage. No evidence that supports it is more "harmful" than a normal one. Why not allow people live a lifestyle that is not harmful? What you believe is a direct attack on the bases on which this country was founded on: freedom. And I am sorry to say that fear of your fucking son seeing two guys get married on the basing of love is a fucking form of tyranny upon a whole lot of people.

 

[AchrisK]

It is pretty hilarious that America still hasn't 'legalized' gay marriage in many states--there is no good argument against it.

I mean if you are a religious leader and you disagree with the idea on religious grounds, than okay you should maintain the right to not marry gay couples if you so desire (freedom of religion and all that). However, gay marriage should still be possible through the state or religious organizations who choose to accept it.

Don't worry, it will happen.

 

[Cythraul]

I can't even count the number of times this thread has made me facepalm already.

 

[Alter]

Oh, and your whole argument about it being "unnatural" is also bullshit because you can not tell me that each and every time you see a women that make consensus of getting attracted to her. You don't. It is just a natural reaction, and it is the same with them.

 

[waif]

Man + woman = kids. Kids raised by loving families = mostly healthy. Healthy boy kid + healthy girl kid = new family. On it goes. Even messed up people can get together and have a good marriage and raise good kids. Families taking care of each other is good for society. Parents caring for kids. Kids growing up and caring for their parents. These are good things.

Sure. But not the only good things. There are other things that are good. You seem to be acting like the only way things can happen is boy meets girl, fucks her, and they have babies in a little house with a white picket fence, and that's the way it should be and by God that's America and these fucking faggots are trying to ruin it.

What do studies show? That homosexual couples make more money, on average? That means little. But I don't doubt that some homosexual couples would raise kids better than many straight couples. But gays can't make kids, so that's not the typical, natural family unit. What percentage of gay couples say they want to, or strive to have kids? Is having kids the norm within gay couples? I would assume it is much more common in lesbian couples, since women have natural, biological desires towards motherhood (as opposed to men who have a more emotional desire toward fatherhood, or not).

What's with you and normal? Why does everything have to be normal? There is no normal. We live in an increasingly multi-racial society with lots of different cultures. Your idea of normal is not someone else's, and you have no right to try to impose it on someone else and in response to my imagination of your response YES YOU FUCKING ARE IMPOSING YOUR CONCEPT OF NORMALITY ON OTHERS.

Well, that is why in my other post I talked about it becoming more of a choice as it becomes more normal in society. I wasn't saying it was a choice for everyone who is homosexual. I know that it some people get those feelings from who knows where.

No. See, something that's genetic does not become socially triggered.
That said, there are a lot of theories, some of which say it's a social thing (which is unlikely) and some which suggest it's a mix of genetic and environmental factors. The end result is that increased acceptance of homosexuality in others won't result in more homosexuals, just more choosing to be open about it. Because that's really the only choice they have. Oscar Wilde was married, but today he could choose not to pretend. He could not choose to prefer women.

Like I said (though I was typing as you posted this (I am slow). I don't doubt that some homosexuals, especially lesbians, would desire to have chillins. But do you see the word "artificial" in artificial insemination? It's not the natural, normal way.

Again with the fucking normality.
And as for natural, living "naturally" we tend to die in our early 30s. So fuck that.

 

[AchrisK]

Homosexuality is usually something you were born with, but the whole nature vs. nurture argument comes into play here. Obviously there will be some people who change their sexuality. No big deal.

However, I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want homosexuals to be able to marry. How does it affect anyone personally? This is private stuff, and it shouldn't matter to anyone who isn't gay. Chris, if you are as accepting and tolerant as you say, I'm pretty sure you should change your view on this. Also abortion. The fact that the government feels the need to control women is appalling to me.

Just because I accept people doesn't mean I am going to just change what I believe. Like I said, I see it as way more important how you treat people, than if you agree with them. Is that that foreign of a concept? Or maybe it's just not voiced very often. All I can do about any of this is cast one vote and raise one son. I am not raising him to hate, and my vote is no bigger than that of anyone else. You (directed at everyone) talk about being open minded, but that ends when someone disagrees with you. Come on!

 

[Matt]

Just because I accept people doesn't mean I am going to just change what I believe. Like I said, I see it as way more important how you treat people, than if you agree with them. Is that that foreign of a concept? Or maybe it's just not voiced very often. All I can do about any of this is cast one vote and raise one son. I am not raising him to hate, and my vote is no bigger than that of anyone else. You (directed at everyone) talk about being open minded, but that ends when someone disagrees with you. Come on!

I'm not open minded when it comes down to things like this and never claimed to be.

 

[AchrisK]

All I am saying about normal and natural is that I prefer to keep marriage for the traditional, natural and normal (by nature's standards) family unit. I am not advocating oppressing or tormenting gays.

 

[Ultimate_Symphony]

This was a specific point I was making per a request from WAIF.

Still I am showing you the weak points in your argument, yet see no counter-argument backing up your opinion. I would like to see your response (dissect it) to my second paragraph and see where you stand.

 

[Alter]

I am not open-minded. I am fair minded. It is not fair to not give them rights. It is not fair to millions who want that right, and people like you deny them that right based on false beliefs about it being "unnatural", religiously biased thoughts and imposing your idea "norms" on others when it would not effect you at all.

 

[Valerie]

Just because I accept people doesn't mean I am going to just change what I believe. Like I said, I see it as way more important how you treat people, than if you agree with them. Is that that foreign of a concept? Or maybe it's just not voiced very often. All I can do about any of this is cast one vote and raise one son. I am not raising him to hate, and my vote is no bigger than that of anyone else. You (directed at everyone) talk about being open minded, but that ends when someone disagrees with you. Come on!

Since when is supporting freedom and citizen's rights close-minded?

 

[waif]

How are we not being open minded? we let you vote, didn't we?
Being open-minded doesn't mean not talking about things you disagree about, it means debating them rather than saying "fuck you, asshole."

 

[Alter]

All I am saying about normal and natural is that I prefer to keep marriage for the traditional, natural and normal (by nature's standards) family unit. I am not advocating oppressing or tormenting gays.

You are oppressing their right to gain benefits from legal marriage. How is that right? All it is is giving them the legal benefits, this would not effect you at all.

 

[AchrisK]

There is an utmost difference between humans and animals, and that is ''feelings''. The only purpose that sex(or partnership) fulfills in animals is reproduction (and depleting their horny-ness meter), yet they still practice homosexuality, therefore making it natural. We as humans have other intentions when we pair off, some wants kids, while others just strive for companionship. As these other elements come into play, our manner of judging this equation should be different, making your argument completely off-base.

You are right. I agree with you that humans are not just animals and are infinitely more complex in most every way. My point about nature, once again, is that nature itself shows that male + female = the normal, natural way of a species. Based on this, that normal is different than alternative, I prefer that marriage be kept for the natural, and something else be for the alternative. That's all.

 

[seedofvengeance]

This issue is about gay couples having marriages recognized under the law, not under the church. Your religious beliefs have no place here. End of discussion.

I don't have a dot big enough for this statement.
I don't understand the problem with giving them a document thta says they're married or recognizing their unions under the law. Being gay is not a normal thing, and kids aren't going to choose to be gay because the law gives them equal rights to be so. Implying so is dumb, period. Natural or not, it should hold no bearing on the law. It's a lifestyle that a large group of people hold, and should be protected by the law. This is just an issue as whether to give them the same rights as far as taxes and such go. Individual churches and religions can not recognize the union all they want, that should have no bearing on the law at all. This is a religious issue being decided by a secular government, this issue is one of the simplest issues that our country has, easily solved by simple logic. Your personal feeling and belief matter not.

 

[waif]

You are right. I agree with you that humans are not just animals and are infinitely more complex in most every way. My point about nature, once again, is that nature itself shows that male + female = the normal, natural way of a species. Based on this, that normal is different than alternative, I prefer that marriage be kept for the natural, and something else be for the alternative. That's all.

Separate but equal, eh?
Also, stop saying natural. Homosexuality has been recorded in animals. It occurs in nature. That makes it natural. So shut the fuck up about nature, because you are factually wrong there and it's not a matter of opinion or open-mindedness. As far as normal, yes heterosexuality is the norm, but so what?

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

This is a train wreck of stupidity on Ack's part. Sorry bro, but you're not in league with us, sorry.

 

[waif]

Tbh I think he's doing pretty well, considering.
Considering that his views are as far as I can tell based on a mix of ignorance/lack of thought and a fixation on normality.