It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush vs Gay Rights

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Well, as said, world population is out of control, but gay marrige, yeah, that has nothing to do with population control. If the person is gay, they are already helping fight the overcrowding of the world.

Second, the animals being gay. It is part of psychology, that is why we use animals in psychology studies. Guess what? Being gay is natural. One is born gay, some may become gay to be a rebel, but most are born gay. So for the religous nuts, god made them gay, HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Third, you have two gay men, they have a "civil union". They are normal people, just gay. But according to you people, they get married, they grow fangs, turn into all powerful unstoppable monsters that spread gayness to all the boys and girls in a 100 mile radius. WTF!?! Wait, WHAT THE #!?! Discrimination is unconstitutional, so can't have civil unions for gays, and marrige for straights. Just like you can't have a drinking fountin for a white man, and a drinking fountin for a black man.




posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Well, as said, world population is out of control, but gay marrige, yeah, that has nothing to do with population control. If the person is gay, they are already helping fight the overcrowding of the world.

So I guess the number of them who are getting babies made to order are helping too. Come on, this is a dumb reason to be for it.

Second, the animals being gay. It is part of psychology, that is why we use animals in psychology studies. Guess what? Being gay is natural. One is born gay, some may become gay to be a rebel, but most are born gay. So for the religous nuts, god made them gay, HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

No one has ever proved that. There is no science to back up anything but conjecture and theory.

Third, you have two gay men, they have a "civil union". They are normal people, just gay. But according to you people, they get married, they grow fangs, turn into all powerful unstoppable monsters that spread gayness to all the boys and girls in a 100 mile radius. WTF!?! Wait, WHAT THE #!?!

Geez, who've you been talking to lately? We do not think that, well, at least I don't.

Discrimination is unconstitutional, so can't have civil unions for gays, and marrige for straights. Just like you can't have a drinking fountin for a white man, and a drinking fountin for a black man.

I don't think the idea example translates.




posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   
There is to proof! Have you not read the other posts? The posts that talk about animals being gay? And highly doubt they can choose to be gay, but are born gay! And made to order babies? What this? Never heard of that, more info. if you could? Wow, like a mail ordered bride or different??



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
There is to proof! Have you not read the other posts? The posts that talk about animals being gay? And highly doubt they can choose to be gay, but are born gay! And made to order babies? What this? Never heard of that, more info. if you could? Wow, like a mail ordered bride or different??


Yes, this alleged proof from the animal kingdom.

Here is #8 of the ten reasons to spay your dog.
"8. Less mounting or humping behavior. Male dogs that are neutered are not as likely to mount or hump the legs of your house guests."

Here's a little something from North Bay Canine Rescue & placement center.
"Animals don't share our sexuality. They are not motivated by sexual pleasure, but rather by an instinct to breed. Unlike humans, they don't have sex for romance, for fun, out of guilt, aggression, depression, or joy; they don't have sex because they're happy, sad, angry, high, or just plain in love. For animals, it's not that complicated or convoluted. In fact, it's quite simple: the female animal goes into estrus (heat) and the male reacts to her pheromones which triggers the instinct to breed. (Mounting or "humping," outside of actual breeding, should not be confused with sex; it's about dominance.)"

Dog are some very smart animals, but in the end, they are still only animals.

Are you really going to compair gay people to this? I'd be insulted if that was your only proof.

A LITTLE BREAK FOR COMEDY



posted on Feb, 27 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Here's a little something from North Bay Canine Rescue & placement center.
"Animals don't share our sexuality. They are not motivated by sexual pleasure, but rather by an instinct to breed. Unlike humans, they don't have sex for romance, for fun, out of guilt, aggression, depression, or joy; they don't have sex because they're happy, sad, angry, high, or just plain in love. For animals, it's not that complicated or convoluted. In fact, it's quite simple: the female animal goes into estrus (heat) and the male reacts to her pheromones which triggers the instinct to breed. (Mounting or "humping," outside of actual breeding, should not be confused with sex; it's about dominance.)"


while that may be true with dogs, maybe we should try something else, like the bonobo chimpanzee. they share over 98% of our genetic profile which is about the difference between a fox and a dog...i think you'll agree thats a more realistic comparison?

from - songweaver.com...

Despite the frequency of sex, the bonobo's rate of reproduction in the wild is about the same as that of the chimpanzee. A female gives birth to a single infant at intervals of between five and six years. So bonobos share at least one very important characteristic with our own species, namely, a partial separation between sex and reproduction.

if you read that article theres some interesting observations, and you'll be happy to see some good points made why homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom might not be the end all be all of proof that it is completely genetic, but it also raises a lot of interesting points for anyone who cares to read it.



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
My favorite irony here is that VP Cheney's daughter Mary is a lesbian.....
I wonder what the Cheney family thinks aobut this?

[Edited on 28-2-2004 by Facefirst]



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Hopefully, they feel the same way any loving family would....support their daughter and her choices. and know that it is nobody's business but their own.

john



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 08:28 AM
link   
It is possible to love a person and hate what they do.

Have kids, you'll find out.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
It is possible to love a person and hate what they do.

Have kids, you'll find out.


could you really "hate" your child if you found out they were gay?



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   
No, that was my point. Parents love their kids, but can very easily hate what they do.

I couldn't hate my kids, and I don't care if they grow up gay, but I hope they don't.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Man, just hear the same people saying the same stupid things to support gay marriage. People like to repeat themselves even after what they claim to be true has been proven to be a theory at best. This topic will never be resolved and it proves that some people want chaos to take over one day in the future. No rules, no control, let everyone do as they wish and think only about yourself. Nothing is more important than the individual I guess and people just don't want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. It speaks a lot of the people who claim they are so much more enlightened then every one else. Maybe it just proves they are more selfish.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mandalorianwarrior
Man, just hear the same people saying the same stupid things to support gay marriage.

kind of like the same stupid things people say to justify discriminating against it.

People like to repeat themselves even after what they claim to be true has been proven to be a theory at best.

do you have anything specific to say at all? as we'll see below, i'd say not really.

This topic will never be resolved and it proves that some people want chaos to take over one day in the future. No rules, no control, let everyone do as they wish and think only about yourself.

and how exactly did we get from gay marriage to total anarchy?!

Nothing is more important than the individual I guess and people just don't want to be a part of something bigger than themselves.

ummmm, what's wrong with being an individual? what bigger thing are you talking about? and what exactly does this have to do with gay marriage/rights?

It speaks a lot of the people who claim they are so much more enlightened then every one else. Maybe it just proves they are more selfish.

selfish? kind of like the people who think they can dictate what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home?



[Edited on 29-2-2004 by enomus]



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Enomus, you have not said ANYTHING to prove your case either. That is one of my points. Sorry, I'll say things so specific that you'll need an equation to figure them out. Be real. This is a subject that people talk about because it is more philisophically based.

What have you said that is so specific and can be considered the "law" since it was put together so soundly. I think we have all seen your posts as well. This debate will go on forever. You've said a lot of stupid things yourself. It's funny how you think that you have busted the case for gay marriage.

Anarchy has to start with the loss of values within society, figure that one out cause it isn't that hard. So you don't think that changing a value that mankind has held since the dawn of history could lead to bigger changes that may cause disruption? It also had been mentioned a while back so that is why it was brought up. It shouldn't be that hard to find.

There is nothing wrong with being an individual until you try and force your lifestyle onto everyone else. Especially when a lot of people are not for it. So you are saying that nothing is bigger than yourself? I think that says a lot about you as an individual. Humanity and it's survival is pretty important. Of course we have over population but we also have a lot of people who die every day.

I want to see one of the most beautiful foundations of humanity stay the way it is, it's not broke so don't fix it. I do not wish to dictate what people do. I just think that it's important to keep some of the values that humanity has usually agreed with since the recording of our history. Of course there have been gays in the past but maybe it had been frowned upon by so many for a reason. It goes against what human nature should be about.

Your post trying to slam mine was so weak that I don't know why you bothered to post it or what you thought you would prove. It just is an attempt to go tit for tat with my post and really neither of us are going to be able to prove what we want. We both have the right to post what we want and I'm sure that the two of us have angered others with our thoughts. My posts are no prize either, just an opinion that is founded on a belief in something bigger than giving into any urge for something desired.

I'll go along with whatever the court decides. I have nothing personal against gays. If they win then what can we do about it? If they lose what can we do about it? I just think it would be a mistake if gay marriage was allowed. There are more important things to worry about than this. I just get so sick of this issue being so blown out of preportion. it's all we hear about and it doesn't only have to be excepted, everyone has to be so proud for something that they may be firmly against.

Someone said that 10% of our public is gay, BS!!! The study that found that, if there is any, has to be one of the worst to have ever taken place. There is an agenda behind it if it ever happened. There is no way that 10% of our public is gay. Think about that people, that is not a small number. Are they including bi's or people that have tried something once? That should be based on a lifestyle, not some individual event. Even if it was based on an individual event I think the number is way high. Who really thinks that 10% is the accurate number? ONe out of every ten people, what a joke and a sad attempt to prove a point by a previous poster or who ever did the study.

It's a topic based on philosophy and belief. This makes all of our opinion on values the most important point to the situation. Do I have to make up numbers like that study did to make my post specific and important?



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
k, I'm done with this topic. I will try and force myself to be more open to the idea of gay marriage. I just don't want people to try and force it on me. That's what's going on now with the small numbers of people being such loud mouths for their cause. I guess that's how things get done though. I am a lot more neutral on this debate than it may seem. I tend to lean against it, obviously. I just get sick of people saying their is no argument against gay marriage. There are some I believe. I also think that their are some for it. I also tend to play devils advocate and it can piss off some of my friends
and yes I do have some. To each his own and best of luck to both sides. Keep the debates coming cause it's fun watching both sides get into it. Maybe we can learn something from each other. Even Enomus, although he isn't a fan of my posts. I should give him more credit than I did in the last post, he aint that bad.

PS, I forgot to add that I still think that 10% study has to be WAY off. Oh well. Studys are never accurate anyway.

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by Mandalorianwarrior]



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I think that the problem of "gay marriage" WILL have to be settled on a federal level. I don't like Bush, but I can see mass confusion coming if it is left up to the states.
The topic is too important to be left up to the states. We're talking about complicated matters like inheritance, medical issues, etc.
Personally, I prefer to see the original definition of marriage affirmed as between a man & a woman, (There is a man sitting in jail right now in UTAH, on charges of POLYGAMY.)
I SUPPORT some type of civil union for gay couples. Maybe ALL of this can be written on a federal level......not just Bush's concept of love/marriage alone.
Gay marriage is not like the civil rights movement. Blacks were PHYSICALLY different from Caucasians. IT WAS NOT A BEHAVIOR SITUATION. (Lifestyle)
Being Gay is perceived as a behavior. As such, it needs to be treated differently.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 12:42 AM
link   
I agree, a federal issue. I wish it wasn't because the feds already get involved in so much.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Imzadi

Being Gay is perceived as a behavior. As such, it needs to be treated differently.



But it is not their 'behaviour' it is who they are. This is not a 'life style choice' as some poeple like to think, it's who and what they are which is being descredited which is clearly wrong....especially in the supposedly free America.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Im not against union... I believe there is so much strife because marrige is a religous word.. you know? How many catholic churches do you know of out there that will be happy to provide same sex marriges.. I believe that there should be civil union, and coupled gays and others should be allowed the same rights any straight married coupled should be allowed..

BUSH=Dushe



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Mandalorianwarrior, i don't understand your idea that people are trying to force something on you. no one is asking you to be gay, no one is asking you to go to a gay wedding, no one is asking you to do anything but accept the fact that gay people have always been a part of our society and will always be a part of our society and should be allowed their pursuit of happiness with the same rights as the rest of us.

in addition, i posted the original 10% statistic, it's originally from a study Alfred Kinsey published in 1948.

Fortune, 1991, p. 42: "Kinseys classic 1948 studies suggest that about 10% of American adults are homosexual, a figure that more recent surveys support."


keep in mind, during the 40's and 50's is was illegal to engage in sex with a same sex partner, so i'm sure many people were (and still are) afraid to admit to being gay. also keep in mind people weren't considered gay in the study unless they had only had sex with same sex partners for a specific amount of time, so that doesnt include bi sexuals. having grown up in new york city, spending some time in california and currently living in south florida, i can tell you that number doesn't seem inflated to me at all.

a further source to prove the point;

Bryant Welch, testified on 2/6/89 that the APA had found "in fact all the research supported the conclusion that homosexuality... is a sexual orientation found consistently in about ten percent of the male population and approximately 5 percent of the female population.... research showed that across different historical eras and in totally different cultures the incidence of homosexuality remained the same irrespective of public attitudes and prohibitions."

some additional reading for those that think homosexuality is a choice or mental disorder heres an article from the American Psychological Association entitled, "Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality".

a brief clip;

Is sexual orientation a choice?

No. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. And some people report trying very hard over many years to change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual with no success. For these reasons, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation for most people to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

Is homosexuality a mental illness or emotional problem?

No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental disorder or emotional problem. Much objective scientific research over the past 35 years shows us that homosexual orientation, in and of itself, is not associated with emotional or social problems.


taken from - www.youth.org...



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Um, again with the whole seperate but equal, you can't do that. Discrimination is illegal, sorry for you.

Anyways, E has brought real proof, not religon or opinion, but proof. Let's see some evidence, real evidence against gay marrige. And the defining of marrige between a man and a woman, why? Again it comes to the gays are evil, persecute them!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join