Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Bush vs Gay Rights

page: 12
0
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 09:30 PM
link   

If the premise of this is true, how do gays who are determined by birth change streams in midlife and become straight, marry the opposite sex and live on this way??

It happens all the time. These persons all reflect on the CHOICE they made in being Gay.


i honestly don't believe it happens all the time.


No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable.


why would anyone choose to be gay? i think most of us hetrosexual males would agree the idea of sexual contact with another man is down-right repulsive, how do you fake that? and for what possible reason?!




posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Hey Enomus, KJ, Jez and James.....
No dissection of my last posts??, i know it was long, but i was resoponding to 3 of you....
or is silence because my points had too much legitimacy in a logical discussion, without all the inflamitory rhetoric.
Specifically....wheres your detailed plans for implimentation of this gay marriage adgenda OTHER than "give me give me"?
AND...what about the rights of a democratic society to decide if/what boundaries they wish their culture to have/not?
ALSO... what about already established legal/social discrimination examples i posed?
(OMG...notice i havnt thumped the bible once so far!!! imagine that...opposition not based on religions ideology....but on a logical examination of sociology.)



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by CazMedia
Hey Enomus, KJ, Jez and James.....
No dissection of my last posts??, i know it was long, but i was resoponding to 3 of you....
or is silence because my points had too much legitimacy in a logical discussion, without all the inflamitory rhetoric.
Specifically....wheres your detailed plans for implimentation of this gay marriage adgenda OTHER than "give me give me"?

it's almost humorus that you would look at gay marriage as a selfish act, almost. i'm not a politician or lawyer, it's not my job to impliment detailed plans, nor would i put the effort into it here because it would do little to change the narrow-minded views people like yourself hold. if i could show you how uncomplicated it would be i doubt it would change your opinion anyway, no? i'm here to talk about my personal opinions on homosexuality in general and what i believe is the right thing to do, sometimes doing the right thing is the harder road to choose, but because changing something might be hard, it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

AND...what about the rights of a democratic society to decide if/what boundaries they wish their culture to have/not?

yes, to some extent that is just a natural process, the rest is dictated by law. it's not illegal to be a homosexual, why shouldn't they be allowed to get married? do the democratic masses have a say in who you choose to marry? that's just retarded and another possible reason no one responded to your original post.

ALSO... what about already established legal/social discrimination examples i posed?
(OMG...notice i havnt thumped the bible once so far!!! imagine that...opposition not based on religions ideology....but on a logical examination of sociology.)

i don't believe anything you've said so far has had anything to do with logic, but that's just my opinion. we can agree to disagree.



[Edited on 11-3-2004 by enomus]



posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
I found this on a friends blog: Incase you do not realize it is a mockery of the flimsy defences conservatives use to defend their foolish position that gay marriage should be illegal.

Taken from goddessjady, who took it from some other people on Live Journal.

12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriage will Ruin Society:
Written by GatorGSA (the UF Gay-Straight Alliance: gatorgsa.org)

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses,
polyester, and birth control are not natural.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce
children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally
married because the world needs more children.

3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight
parents only raise straight children.

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney
Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and
it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry
Whites, and divorce is illegal.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts,
because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have
historically protected the rights of minorities.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like
ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the
entire country. That's why we only have one religion in America.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same
way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy
behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a
dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.

10. Children can never succeed without both male and female
role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to
raise children.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society.
Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we
could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't
adapted to cars or longer lifespans.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as
marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate
but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools
for African-Americans worked just as well as separate
marriages will for gays & lesbians.

[Edited on 11-3-2004 by QuestForSafety]



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Responce to enoumus
How did you infer i said marriage was selfish?...i didnt, but isnt it? Its a CHOICE that 2 people make because they want to. What makes this issue seem MORE selfish is the fact that the gay community only ever wants it for themselves WITHOUT concern for the majority or the societies RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION....like you just EXPECT that the enitre nation will bend to your demmand.
NARROW MINDED? I know my post was long, but as i stated in it, "im trying to keep an open mind, but"...AGAIN, id be more open to change of this nature IF i was provided more than a list of demmands without ANY plans for execution, or examination of the pro's and con's of the idea....IF YOU QUESTION THE GAY MARRIAGE ADGENDA>>>YOU ARE BRANDISHED A BIGOT!!!! WHY? We simply have legitimate (sometimes not) questions that those asking for consideration NEED TO ADRESS...
I AGREE WITH YOU...that doing the right thing is often hard, AND that because its hard doesnt mean it shoudnt be done...HOWEVER....just because a thing CAN be done doesnt mean it SHOULD be done either. (I can commit crimes, or play in traffic too)
You said that you agree that a society HAS the right to self determination/identity....If so, then you must also agree that if a society decides that an act is not appropriate for their culture (lets say murder), than it is acceptable for them to have made that decision and set their own boundaries...whether or not you think their decision is correct or not. I.E. its still their right to choose, right or wrong. R U trying to say that we (US society) does not have this right? This democracy has already said who i can/cant marry....i cant marry under a certain age, also they can deny my right to marry an immigrant (My friend just did, they went thru the microscope before the state would grant the license), Society says i cant have more than one wife....and currently I CANT marry anothrer man....Hmm so weather or not you like those ideas, you agree that society has the right to have determined these boundaries for itself.? My so called "retarted logic" which escapes you seems very linear and self evident. (NO offense to any mentally challenged people that might have been offended by enomus use of derrogatory slang.)
You compleatly side stepped the question i posed about already existing legal forms of discrimination...WHY? is it because it totally shoots holes into the argument that "discrimination in any form is wrong"
No comments on my not seeing oppression here?
Its hard to say your oppressed when no one is forcing anyone to get married, why? BECAUSE getting married is a CHOICE not a right. Getting a drivers license is a CHOICE not a right..(both are responsibilities).. there is a big difference between CHOICES and RIGHTS.
Of course we can agree to disagree, and i love it....that is one freedom we can share together.



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Caz, don't twist my words...what i said was;


AND...what about the rights of a democratic society to decide if/what boundaries they wish their culture to have/not?

yes, to some extent that is just a natural process, the rest is dictated by law. it's not illegal to be a homosexual, why shouldn't they be allowed to get married? do the democratic masses have a say in who you choose to marry? that's just retarded and another possible reason no one responded to your original post.


you forgot the TO SOME EXTENT...who you choose to marry is not something society should have any say in. should we forget about our individual rights and pursuit of happiness completely and let the masses make all our decisions for us? yes, society can collectively decide murder is wrong and not allow it but we're not talking about murder, we're talking about two consenting tax-paying adults wanting to get married.

if it's not illegal to be gay, why should it be illegal for them to get married? what is your personal opinion Caz, why should gay people be allowed to contribute to our society but not be allowed to marry whoever they choose?



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Quest, that is a great list and sums up most of the arguements the anti gays have.

Anyways, Crazi was it? What is your problem with two consenting tax paying adults getting married?



posted on Mar, 12 2004 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Sorry, boys and girls. I know I was missed.

I only want to say one thing.

Caz, bud, please try to break up your text from a laborious slab of words to seperate ideas and sections.

Thanks



posted on Mar, 13 2004 @ 04:31 PM
link   
KJ, you weren't missed, much.
But hey, missed a few posts, wanna answer some?


Anyways, what is the republican stand on gays?

Homosexuals want to come into churches and disrupt church services and throw blood all around and try to give people AIDS and spit in the face of ministers.
Pat Robertson, a republican.

The Homosexual blitzkrieg has been better planned and executed than Hitler's.
Rep. William Dannemeyer.

NOW is saying that in oreder to be a woman you've got to be a lesbian.
Again, Pat Robertson.

Anyways, that's all for now.



posted on Mar, 13 2004 @ 04:49 PM
link   
No, not really. Everything that need be said on this post has been.

Also, don't take Pat to represent all conservatives, or even all Republicans.

We are not all a bunch of bigots and haters, as much as some want to make us.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Of course Pat doesn't represent all republicans, just like Bush doesn't. But they do represent alot of them. Also, those were just three quotes, two from Pat, one from another guy who is in congress.

Anyways, gay marrige is right, won't say good or bad, cause in the past slavery was good, racism was good, medicine was bad, free thinking was bad, so what is once bad is good and what was once good is bad, so can't say something is good or bad, but if it is right or wrong.

Edited part. BTW KJ, what do you think about the list? I want, no, need to hear your opinion on that. Don't matter if you agree with it or against it, I like your thoughts and opinions on this matter for you have been for the most part sane and knowledgable(and I screwed that word up) but you know what I mean.

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by James the Lesser]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Of course they represent some.

But trust that there are many of us who rage against them more than we do liberals.

There are plenty of blind people in the world.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:33 PM
link   
BTW KJ, what do you think about the list? I want, no, need to hear your opinion on that. Don't matter if you agree with it or against it, I like your thoughts and opinions on this matter for you have been for the most part sane and knowledgable(and I screwed that word up) but you know what I mean.

And of course more people rage against them than liberals, liberals want us to move forward, advance. The conservatives want us to go back to when the rich white males held the power and the rest were their servants.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   
The list of quotes?

Is it even in this thread?



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 06:49 PM
link   
No, the list of reasons why gay marrige should be banned. The first one was it is not natural, so are glasses and plastic and so forth.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Oh ok, happy to oblige, and I appreciate the civility (honestly).

So, here we go.

12 Reasons Same-Sex Marriage will Ruin Society:
Written by GatorGSA (the UF Gay-Straight Alliance: gatorgsa.org)

1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses,
polyester, and birth control are not natural.

The fact that it is unnatural is used unilaterally, as an absolute. This to me promotes a fallacious arguement by speaking in absolutes. Not all natural things are good and not all unnatural things are bad. This proves nor disproves anything.

2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.

This is sort of true. It's not so much that they specifically "produce" children, but rather they do the act that produces children. The act of consummation is the fulfillment of the ritual of marriage. It is, to use the definition, the completion of the ceremony that has been celebrated and done in western society for quite a long time. By definition, gays can not complete the transaction. Although I think this is a fairly weak arguement, it is never the less true to form.

3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.

The topic of children is almost a whole arguement althogether. But the brief points are as follows. It's is not the gay child people are concerned about. It is the fact that children raised in gay house holds are more readily having sex. They are concerned about a more "loose" lifestyle which they believe propagates the problem. I do not really see it that way, but I am reserving judgement on this category until I can get more information from informed and fair sources (better studies, etc)

4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.

This is a fallacy that seems prevelent these days. Justify wrong with wrong. While I agree that lately hetrosexual marriage is not as cohesive as it used to be, and divorce is ramant, this is by no means a justification for gay marriage. To you, that would be like saying, if divorce rates were very good, then gay should not have the right to marry. They are not related except in the increase in self serving people (but that hits almost every problem in America).

5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.

Marriage is not the thing that has changed. It is moreso the laws surrounding it, and the view of it. Women were never meant to be property according to the Christian model of marriage. Because the man is the head does not mean the woman is less of a person. Same goes for blacks and whites. It has nothing to do with marriage, but rather the inequities built into society at the time. Aside from that marriage, during these periods was a strengthening aspect to the country.

6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.

There is a serious difference between the judges being honest and fair conceding only to the law as it exsists, and being an activist judge (which mind you a good many have even claimed to be). Activist judges say to hell with the law, we will interprit it how we want so as to change public policy. This is not uniformly true, and there are cases to be made in States that have ambiguous laws, but the intent of the law must also be considered.

7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we only have one religion in America.

You can not impose your view on someone who is not prescribing to what you are selling. Marriage is a religious element that has taken a governmental dynamic. The only thing entitled to them under the law, is the rights associated with that dynamic.

8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.

I feel sorry for anyone who really believes this stuff. They are mostly old wrinked idiots who fight to keep the world in the 1950's vision they remember. Pearls while vacuuming ladies?

9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.

This is taken to extreme, but the underlying principle seems to be true and a case could be made for it. For homosexuals to be able to be married, we would have to allow one "alternative lifestyle" into the fold. Now much as it would be rediculous to allow blacks to vote (although race is a different thing in my opinion) there would be no justification to disallow asians. It could lead us down a slippery slope. This can not be proven though, as there really is no true working model to go from. Strictly conjecture either way.

10. Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.

No one, I repeat no one that I have ever heard, says that a good mother and father combo is NOT as good as any other. Having a good mother and father is the best a kid can get. Being raised by either the mother or that father is a draw back for most kdis and only serves to worsen the problem.

11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society.
Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.

I don't know where they got this. I have never even heard the arguement before.

12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as
marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.

There is a serious difference in public education (specifically originated and provided by the government) and marriage, which is a religious coupling that was seen as stabilizing as was given certain breaks. They can not be seperate from something they can not be a part of. Considering that religions across the country would not marry homosexuals, then they do not apply to the term marriage. They are however entitled to the rights and priviledges extended by the government alone. If it is recognition they seek (which I believe it is), then they are going about it the wrong way.



Phew. All done.



posted on Mar, 17 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Well KJ, yes, all natural isn't always good. Cyanide is all natural, and anyone will tell you it bad, well, except for tobacco companies.

And well, the rest will look at later. Well, the part about the women wearing pearls, that was good KJ. But hey, it is an arguement against gay marrige.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   
So KJ, they need a good mother and father or they will be screw ups? That would explan me, but what about my sister/ Our mom raised us and she in college getting straight A's. A freind of mine has to great parents and is currenlty in rehab. Sorry, but the whole need a mommy and daddy arguement kinda sucks.

Will add more later, gotta go, dinner burning.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   
It seems some here are delving deeply into the world of relativism.

Everything is relative to my position. Your statement is relative. The Law is relative to your law.

Sex between men and men is natural. In your relative world.

In the eyes of the majority of of the world it is not.

Since such unions do not produce anything but death, how can such sex be natural.

Let us tell it like it is. It is not natural in any sense, normal in any sense or productive in any way besides producing disease.

Tell me I am wrong.

I do not need twelve reasons to say homosex is is wrong.

And that bunny says it all



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
So KJ, they need a good mother and father or they will be screw ups? That would explan me, but what about my sister/ Our mom raised us and she in college getting straight A's. A freind of mine has to great parents and is currenlty in rehab. Sorry, but the whole need a mommy and daddy arguement kinda sucks.

Will add more later, gotta go, dinner burning.


My whole point was that there is no better thing for a child than a good mother and a good father.

A crappy mom and dad is not as good as a good set of gay parents, but I think it's sad that things have denigrated to that point.

The single parent issue in this country has hurt our youth, in that many more kids are raised by their mothers now than ever before (I don't even know if there are statistics about this), the country is going to hell.

Not that moms aren't really good sometimes, but it doesn't give the kids all they should have.

Men are just not taking responcibility, but I guess that is true for both genders, but on different issues.






top topics



 
0
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join