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.
Who knows for sure if being gay is born or learned
Originally posted by ashley
Monogamy is singular. Polygamy is plural. I think that having more than one husband,not just wives would be considered polygamy.
You're right, just looked it up again. I stand corrected.
Sure womens rights and black rights are the same thing. They didnt have them at one time and they wanted to be treated like everyone else.
Yes, I said that women's rights and black's rights (them being alike) are unlike gay rights. One, they have all the other rights and have always had them. And two, it is seen in some circles as a lifestyle, which is vastly different than skin color or sex.
Who knows for sure if being gay is born or learned, but does it really matter.
It does matter. If it is not a born into thing, then it weakens the arguement.
(you might know...ha,ha,)
What's this mean anyway?
[Edited on 24-2-2004 by ashley]
Originally posted by enomus
homosexuality has been observed in over 450 species of animals in the wild and in captivity and throughout the history of mankind, i'd call that a pretty natural phenomenon.
Are you seriously going to compair cognizant thinking gay people to animals, many of whom also hump trees, sofas, and other inanimate objects?
maybe it's a natural form of population control? i don't think it'll ever be the norm, nor is it meant to be, but it is a reality and it's not ever going to go away so why discriminate?
Here I agree with you. I never said not to give them recognition.
What if...we disconnected marriage and the state? What if we left marriage and all its forms to its respective religions and instituted civil unions all around? The religious could still wed and keep their union symbolically holy and civil unions could take care of the legal side of things.
You know what I'm sick of? Religious Eunuchs constantly pulling the Catholic Church into child sex accusations while trying to prove a point.
Originally posted by enomus
What if...we disconnected marriage and the state? What if we left marriage and all its forms to its respective religions and instituted civil unions all around? The religious could still wed and keep their union symbolically holy and civil unions could take care of the legal side of things.
what if...we just stopped using religion to control other people's lives and just let gay people get married? what if...we stuck to the topic at hand, gay marriage between two adults, and stopped trying to equate it with child molestation?
[Edited on 25-2-2004 by enomus]
Actually I think the topic of this thread is NAMBLA.
If a guy wants more than ONE wife, it should be mandatory to have a psyche evaluation..
Originally posted by enomus
Actually I think the topic of this thread is NAMBLA.
touchy touchy, don't get upset with me because your opinion lacks any real substance beside blind religious based hate.
and actually, for the mentally challenged, the topic at hand is why is NAMBLA used as an argument against gay adults from getting married. i think you've done a smashing job of proving the NAMBLA retards have no real argument. carry on, sir.
Astro, why should we keep straight marriage if there are straight pedophiles out there who might like to marry an 8 year old? The NAMBLA argument is lame and fallacious.
Originally posted by enomus
i'll go out to my ledge if you crawl back under your rock, deal?
Originally posted by Amuk
Astro, why should we keep straight marriage if there are straight pedophiles out there who might like to marry an 8 year old? The NAMBLA argument is lame and fallacious.
Good luck I have brought this up a hundred times in several different threads an NOBODY has given an answer for it.
Maybe because there isnt one?