I Am a Straight, Married Christian Male in Support of Gay Marriage

Originally posted by spw184
50 years ago..

You see my fine chaps, the conspiracy here is to destroy whites in the work force! When these blacks get freedom, they will overrun us and they will become the elite in sicioty!!

Dude, we are NOT out to get you!! We are not going to "ban" straight merriage, thats simpley retarded. I think you need to go into a bathroom and take a deep look at yourself in the mirror, because you are starting to scare me. Your mind does not seem healthy, in fact it seems vaugely like hitlers brainwashed puppets....

Also, STOP SKIRTING QUESTIONS.
this makes you have less and less cred.

Thank you.

I just couldn't even respond to the ridiculousness.

I mean why would we want to ban straight sex? We know what its like to be denyed happiness and freedom of expression, why would we inflict that on anyone else...

Also, we passed 4th grade Bio.. We know where babies come from and we know that it's prolly not going to change any time soon....

i dont exactly support gay marriage do not agree with it really

HOWEVER what goes on in someone elses bedroom isnt none of my business

wouldnt want something telling me who i can take there so dont believe in telling others.


christian white male working overtime since the election of 2008

Originally posted by neo96
christian white male working overtime since the election of 2008

reply to post by DRAZIW

What of it has been already through the courts, that is so hard to understand?
What relevance does one have with the other?
The issue here is not multiple marriages, it is about the fundamental right to choose and the persuit of happiness for a group that is being denied, that has never been discussed or even looked at until recently.
The other has already been discussed, looked at, and been through the courts, which has decided that it is not supported by the constitution of the United States of America.

The argument that is presented would never stand up in court and most judges, when presented with a religous argument would either ignore the evidence or instruct the jury to disreguard. They would then base all decisions on what the prior court cases. It would take pretty strong evidence for a court to overturn a prior decision, and especially one from a Supreme Court case.

Side note, every court case that has been heard on the issue of gay marriage, the verdict has consistenly been the same in favor of allowing same sex marriages to occure, as the laws are discriminatory in nature, where the evidence presented lacks and the those trying to prevent such can not even get their witnesses to show up to testify or answer the questions asked.

Originally posted by spw184

50 years ago..

You see my fine chaps, the conspiracy here is to destroy whites in the work force! When these blacks get freedom, they will overrun us and they will become the elite in america!!!

Remember there was a conspiracy to keep blacks down. To keep them from being educated. To keep them out of the work force. etc..

Dude, we are NOT out to get you!!

Who said anything about getting me!

We are not going to "ban" straight merriage,

You personally aren't going to ban straight marriage. This I know.

thats simpley retarded.

Many Chinese families think their Government is retarded for banning them from having more than one child.

This has become the major reason for rich Chinese to seek to emigrate to North America. They want to have more kids. But, China won't allow it.

I think you need to go into a bathroom and take a deep look at yourself in the mirror, because you are starting to scare me.

Why would you be scared? All this will happen years after we pass on from this world anyway.

We're not there yet. Scientists still need to perfect the test tube baby fetal development. Right now, they can only do in vitro fertilization. Still decades away from the required art and skill.

Your mind does not seem healthy, in fact it seems vaugely like hitlers brainwashed puppets....

What is unhealthy about it?

Hitler wanted to take over the world. That's a different kind of mind altogether. I'm just pointing out that straight marriage is different from gay unions, and if you are going to accept gay marriage, there's no longer any reason to deny plural marriage along with it. And I point to the trend I can see, which many don't realize yet, that you can't get "equality" between gay marriage and straight marriage until to deny the straight couple the right to produce their own children. This is a fact of life. We're going down the equality road. Trying to make things equal that are inherently unequal. To make them more nearly equal, we must give to one and take away from the other, until we get near equal unions.

Also, STOP SKIRTING QUESTIONS.
this makes you have less and less cred.

What was the question I didn't answer to your satisfaction? I'll try again.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Side note, every court case that has been heard on the issue of gay marriage, the verdict has consistenly been the same in favor of allowing same sex marriages to occure, as the laws are discriminatory in nature,

All laws are discriminatory in nature.

Every law denies someone the right to do something, and grants someone else that right.

The law that denies teens under 16 from having sex, discriminates against those teens. They want to have sex. They are mature enough "biologically" to have sex. Their puberty clock kicked in around 12-13 years old already. But the law won't let them. It's discrimination. They are "biologically" adult, but society considers them not adult enough for sex, even though God or Nature designed them to be able to have sex earlier than the law allows.

Why can't two 15 year olds get married? It's discrimination. Why don't we allow nambla marriages? It's discrimination.

Why can't two people get married and choose not to have sex? It's discrimination. Plutonic Marriages are not legal. Every marriage must be consummated, or it becomes annulled.

All of the laws discriminate against people who want a variation in their union from the standard form that is currently legalized. They can't get the state benefits if they don't follow the definition of marriage written into the code.

Anyone who performs the ceremony of civil marriage for the state must accept to perform that ceremony for any couple that requests it. That means Priests will have to marry gays, if they continue to marry straight couples. Or, they will have to get out of the business of civil marriage. Then, there will have to be two ceremonies, the civil ceremony and the religious blessing. Right now, a straight couple can go to one place to get all the paperwork done. After gay marriage is written into law, the straight couple will have to have two ceremonies, one for the civil paperwork, and another for the religious blessing. That's the only way the Priest will be able to play any role in the marriage ceremony.

No Priest can perform the state function without treating every couple equal, straight or gay.

So, Priests will no longer be qualified to perform civil functions.

The Church will not be able to call it a "marriage" either. They will have to use a term like "Blessing".

The whole ceremony of marriage will change.

Seriously, who cares???
Who cares how other people live their lives.
Telling someone they can't marry cos they're gay is like telling someone they aren't allowed to support a particular footy team because they're at the opposing teams ground.

Only cos it seems wrong to some, like a dog playing on the beach with its owner.
An owner has the dog well under control and cleans up any #, but you are so put off by the dogs presence and natural functions that you complain to the local council. The council then ban dogs from all beaches belonging to their jurisdiction.

Whether i support something or not shouldn't matter.
How can you/we honestly consider yourselves a free society if you have such restrictions on liberties.
I'm sorry but the term 'freedom' like the word 'racist' is thrown around far too much these days.

If someone is gay and want to marry, does it impair your life in anyway?
They are not trying to convince me to become gay. What they do in their own privacy is their issue. Whether they pet in public is no different to a straight couple petting in public. You can CHOOSE not to look.

I take more of an issue to religious and amway groups knocking on my door and trying to get me to come to their 'meetings'.
How dare they tell me at my door that I can have a better life than the one i lead or that all the products i am buying don't suit me. Thinking you're going along to a boxacise class only to have the instructor talk about supplements and how many i need to take and how many kg's i need to buy at the end of the class....wtf.....

If people just concentrated on living their own lives, a lot of the fabricated problems we see today would be nonexistent.
BTW, '#' is not a swear word when used in context like above and it shouldn't be hashed (#) out.

I had my rant now. sorry. But i feel much better.

Originally posted by DRAZIW

Originally posted by spw184

50 years ago..

You see my fine chaps, the conspiracy here is to destroy whites in the work force! When these blacks get freedom, they will overrun us and they will become the elite in america!!!

Remember there was a conspiracy to keep blacks down. To keep them from being educated. To keep them out of the work force. etc..

So you are admitting that there is a conspiracy against gays?
Also, I still do not see how this is going to lead to a world where gays run the world and straight sex is driven into hiding. I can't find the proper words to say how.... how.... I cant find a word to discribe what im feeling.

Originally posted by DRAZIW

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Side note, every court case that has been heard on the issue of gay marriage, the verdict has consistenly been the same in favor of allowing same sex marriages to occure, as the laws are discriminatory in nature,

Why can't two people get married and choose not to have sex? It's discrimination. Plutonic Marriages are not legal. Every marriage must be consummated, or it becomes annulled.

All of the laws discriminate against people who want a variation in their union from the standard form that is currently legalized. They can't get the state benefits if they don't follow the definition of marriage written into the code.

No Priest can perform the state function without treating every couple equal, straight or gay.

So, Priests will no longer be qualified to perform civil functions.

The Church will not be able to call it a "marriage" either. They will have to use a term like "Blessing".

The whole ceremony of marriage will change.

1. You can get married and not have sex, Thats your personal choice.

2. Although i would LIKE to get married by a pastor, i dont care!! I just want my tax deductions!! lol
and the church doesn't have to change their ways because gays can get married in goverment... thats stupid to even suggest.

I personally feel as if your running out of cards to play.

reply to post by DRAZIW

Name a law that discriminates.

The very nature of your argument, shows that there is a lack of understanding on the part of history.

You claim that every law denies someone the right to do something, yet even the very statement fails to hold reason and weight.

There are no laws that would deny a teen from under the age of 16 from having sex, it denies them from having sex with someone that is legally an adult. Would you allow for a 13 year old child to be hooked up with an adult? That is not only monstrous, but outrageous. There has to be some laws that protect, or else we would descend into anarchy.

Yes there are plutonic marriages, yet those 2 people who may or may not have sex, is really none of the publics business, or any bodies business on what all goes on in their house. How does it affect you, or their neighbor, or the county, city, state or government?

Your argument on the priest does not hold weight for this reason: If the couple is not catholic, a catholic priest is under no bounds of law to perform the wedding ceremony for them. None what so ever, as it would violate his bounds of faith. The law can not compel him to do such. A judge yes, but a priest no, so that argument just fell apart.

Priests are not under the control of the state. After all even the boy scouts can deny those who do not believe in god or who are homosexual, and it was upheld by the courts, as they are a private organization.

If a wedding is held by a civil official, then it is a civil marriage, they would have to wed gay people. If it is held in a religious organization, it is a religious marriage. But both hold the same weight and equality under the eyes of the law.

The whole ceremony of marriage will not change from what goes on now. So can you explain what goes on in one house, how it will affect their neighbors? From what I have seen, absolutely nothing will change, the world will not change, in fact if anything, it would be an improvement to an economy.

Anne,i don't want to be rude,but why are you on this forum?

Why don't you write on any other thread besides threads about gays and lesbians?
It's like you only came here to fight for Gay and Lesbian rights.

And OP you're probably from US or Germany,right?
Because it would explain a lot of things.
If you are,then,we have nothing to talk about.

reply to post by DRAZIW

But, after the gay revolution is complete, and straight sex banned, and the perfect child comes from the lab instead

We can easily imagine that in the future, babies will be engineered to be genetically perfect, and even reproduction (not sex!) without such genetic augmentations restricted, so that no children are left behind. But I dont think this has much to do with gay marriage.

Originally posted by Nikola014
Why don't you write on any other thread besides threads about gays and lesbians?
It's like you only came here to fight for Gay and Lesbian rights.

I comment mostly on subjects of social issues because I am raising a 3 year old boy - - - opinions do not require extensive research and links - - which would involve time I don't have.

My gay history: 20+ years ago I worked at a company who's employees were mostly gay/lesbian (including couples). I was the minority. Prior to that I was "gay ignorant".

They are just people - like everyone else. They are as diverse and individual as anyone else. They are not a "group think". As a minority group they have one thing in common - - - a natural birth difference. No different then redheads have one thing in common because of a natural birth difference.

I have been an advocate and supporter ever since - - reading and keeping up with all information.

The #1 opposition of gay rights/equality comes from religion. Religion can not deny rights.

Being 65 I have watched the continuing winning effort to diminish religious hold on this country - - such as mandatory prayer in school.

Its only a matter of time before this fight for equal rights is won too.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by DRAZIW

 

But, after the gay revolution is complete, and straight sex banned, and the perfect child comes from the lab instead

We can easily imagine that in the future, babies will be engineered to be genetically perfect, and even reproduction (not sex!) without such genetic augmentations restricted, so that no children are left behind. But I dont think this has much to do with gay marriage.

There have been studies with fruit flies - - altering brain chemicals - - changes sexual attraction from opposite to same gender.

But do we want to introduce a Mengele effect - - - altering who a person naturally is - - - who has no negative medical issue that would hamper living a normal life?

Can't you just see homophobic parents dragging their kids to the doctor - out of fear their kid might be gay - for brain chemical treatments?

I can understand prescreening eggs for inherited genetic disorders that would interfere with quality of life. But - there is nothing medically wrong with attraction to same sex.

reply to post by Annee

Can't you just see homophobic parents dragging their kids to the doctor - out of fear their kid might be gay - for brain chemical treatments? I can understand prescreening eggs for inherited genetic disorders that would interfere with quality of life. But - there is nothing medically wrong with attraction to same sex.

Well, I predict it will look similarly to how healthcare (think vaccines) is regulated today, because it is not different in principle. Some genetic modifications may be mandatory for all babies (eliminating serious genetic conditions), some may be optional for parnts to decide (hair color etc.), and some banned altogether (glow in the dark skin, lol?).

Dont know what the status of genes determining sexuality will be. I would make my children bisexual, they get the most fun..

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Annee

 

Can't you just see homophobic parents dragging their kids to the doctor - out of fear their kid might be gay - for brain chemical treatments? I can understand prescreening eggs for inherited genetic disorders that would interfere with quality of life. But - there is nothing medically wrong with attraction to same sex.

Well, I predict it will look similarly to how healthcare (think vaccines) is regulated today, because it is not different in principle. Some genetic modifications may be mandatory for all babies (eliminating serious genetic conditions), some may be optional for parnts to decide (hair color etc.), and some banned altogether (glow in the dark skin, lol?).

I'm all for science and having healthy offspring.

Its the homophobia fear mongering that scares me. My kids had friends who's parents sent them to Drug Camps every summer because of Drug Phobia. Well - - ya know some kids smuggled drugs in - - and they probably experienced more drugs at the camps then at home.

Homophobic parents already send their kids to Reparative Therapy clinics. Can't even imagine if they thought chemical brain treatment was available.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Annee

 

Can't you just see homophobic parents dragging their kids to the doctor - out of fear their kid might be gay - for brain chemical treatments? I can understand prescreening eggs for inherited genetic disorders that would interfere with quality of life. But - there is nothing medically wrong with attraction to same sex.

Well, I predict it will look similarly to how healthcare (think vaccines) is regulated today, because it is not different in principle. Some genetic modifications may be mandatory for all babies (eliminating serious genetic conditions), some may be optional for parnts to decide (hair color etc.), and some banned altogether (glow in the dark skin, lol?).

Dont know what the status of genes determining sexuality will be. I would make my children bisexual, they get the most fun..

edit on 20/9/11 by Maslo because: gbleh

Are you suggesting that homosexuality needs to be prevented via vaccine?

Originally posted by Nikola014
Anne,i don't want to be rude,but why are you on this forum?

Why don't you write on any other thread besides threads about gays and lesbians?
It's like you only came here to fight for Gay and Lesbian rights.

And OP you're probably from US or Germany,right?
Because it would explain a lot of things.
If you are,then,we have nothing to talk about.

edit on 20-9-2011 by Nikola014 because: (no reason given)

1.

Anne,i don't want to be rude,but why are you on this forum?

Well you sure as hell succeded.

2.

Why don't you write on any other thread besides threads about gays and lesbians?
It's like you only came here to fight for Gay and Lesbian rights.

Cuz she feels like it! If all she wants to comment on is threads about flying purple dinosaurs, so be it!

3.

And OP you're probably from US or Germany,right?
Because it would explain a lot of things.
If you are,then,we have nothing to talk about.

Can you say "Judgemental"?
What about "Jumping to conclusions"
Or the good old " Racist"

Where are you from?
And what do you mea "Nothing to talk about?" gay rights is an international issue, there is PLENTY to talk about.

Originally posted by spw184

Are you suggesting that homosexuality needs to be prevented via vaccine?

I think you're taking his posts a bit too seriously.

They are kind of tongue in cheek.