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.

 

Gay marriage is now the issue through which the elite advertises its superiority over redneck masses

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I dont believe 5-year olds should be taught ANYTHING to do with sexuality-hetero or gay..Good Lord,there surely has to still be a time for just innocence and fun! Unfortunatelately due to sick dogfooks like child molesters,they DO have to be educated that they should scream,run away and immediately tell,if an adult or teenager tries to touch their privates,that type of thing..It was sad for me,having to tell my little kiddies that,but it had to be done.
My youngest daughter,i remember,asked me:"Why would some one want to touch THERE-Eeew..my pee comes out there!" And i had to tell her,there are people in this world,who have something wrong with their heads,they are insane,thats why they do that,and others are just plain evil,they like to do disgusting things to kiddies"..

Further education can be done at a later age,like 10,i dont think for younger ages than that its necessary.I take responsibility,and always have, for answering my kids questions as they pop up-It should not even be necessary to have sex education in schools,if parents,and especialy mothers,would just step up and handle important matters like this,themselves.When one of my kids asked me the first time,what is "gay" or "lesbian"? i explained,its 2 men ot 2 women, who are in a relationship,living together as a married couple,like mom+dad.Some people prefer to live that way,not with some-one of the opposite gender,its what make them happy..My kid would looked puzzled for a minute/mull it over in their minds for a minute or two,giggle,say "Oh" and be off,absorbed in whatever they were busy with before..

There is seldom a need to make such BIG ISSUES of things,when educating kids.

I dont think being tolerant of gays and lesbians is an elitist issue,personaly-its common sense,these folks exist-get over it aready-deal.Simple.Judge every person on personal merit,how they treat others,how they conduct themselves in every other sphere of their lives,not the sexual.I'll just bet there's stuff going down in some hetero couples' bedrooms that would make the average gay and lesbian person blush beetroot red! Just see life in perspective-and often,issues that seem the most complicated,are realy the most simple.




posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Schools should focus more on teaching kids and less on social engineering. People need to stop using kids as political pawns for their own agenda. The double standard is hideous, teachers are not even allowed to mention Intelligent design (Im not advocating that theory) because of its "ties" to religion, but we are allowed to teach the kids sexuality? What does that say?
"Its okay to discriminate against these people but we should educate about these people"
Leave the lessons on sexuality for kids that pursue liberal arts degrees in college.
The entire idea of teaching kids this is a slippery slope, if we continue along this route the children's books will all be replaced with things like
"I do not like green Eggs and ham- oh and By the way Im a black transgender gay pro-choice furry and I am married to a person that is the same sex as me but they are a Jewish other-kin illegal immigrant Scientologist midget with anorexia"
edit on 7-3-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Why do you disagree with homosexual "marriage"?


I don't disagree with homosexuals having a civil union and having the same civil rights as hetrosexuals.

But why call it a 'marriage'?

Traditionally marriage has denoted a union between a man and a women.

Let gays have a civil union but don't call it a 'marriage'. That's just a recipe for confusion.


How does changing what is considered "traditional" hurt you in any way? Why would you disagree with it, and how does it confuse you?
edit on 7-3-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DavidWillts
 


LOOOOL! Well said!

Loved that last bit,very funny,and quite accurate,that is propably where it will indeed end up! Yes schools should be there to teach,they are ACADEMIC institutions,after all,and parents,or single parent if thats the case,should provide guidance in all other aspects of life.I dont know WHERE folks got this idea they could just pop kids out and its everybody else's responsibility to completely take care of every aspect of raising those kids,and guiding them into adulthood,teaching them about life and the world.

Here in South Africa schools used to be on the ball,but with the new curriculums introduced after 1994, academic standards have gone south,alarmingly.My teenage daughter was highly annoyed the other day,she and one other girl were the only ones to do realy well on a certain test.The teacher warned them that they should be ready for this test,it could be given anytime.The rest were not prepared,and they all failed..So now,another test has to be written,so that the kids who failed,can be given a chance to pass.Where have you ever heard such BS?!?
Typical,there is precious little installing in kids,the concept of your actions or INactions,and their consequences.If you are not willing to teach your own kids the realities of life,dont expect the school system to do so.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by cuervo
It does naturally occur. In several species and in humans since humans recorded history.


At this point I find it impossible to conceive how fertilizing excrement qualifies as a natural means for survival of the species. Which group is intelligent now? Just because we witness something in nature doesn't mean it's a good idea to replicate. Lighting naturally strikes objects outside. Let's all go out during a storm because "it's natural."



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
But why call it a 'marriage'?

They don't want your tolerance. They want your applause. Until you celebrate their unions you won't be giving them what they want.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   
This guy really nails it about being used for instant moral and intellectual superiority over red necks or religious. I couldn't put my finger on what makes me sick about this whole thing. But this guy said it. It's a short hand way for all of that ilk (lefty elitist secular humanist types) to say 'I'm better than you.' Brilliant.

Count me as a proud low life, red neck, backwards, unsophisticated boob.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
Yet, I am not religious and I disagree with homosexual 'marriage'. Homosexual civil unions are fine. Homosexual 'marriage' is not.


Honestly, I'm not trying to troll, but could you please explain to me how one word... marriage.. makes a difference? Are they not worthy of bearing the same title as you? Such a statement would certainly confirm that many opponents use the term "marriage" to look down with undiluted snobery upon their critics and opponents. "I'M ENTITLED TO BE MARRIED, BUT YOU'RE NOT."

In my opinion, if the government is going to remain in the marriage business, then the ground should be level for all. Civil unions for legal relationship purposes, and marriage for religious purposes.


Originally posted by Captain Obvious
At this point I find it impossible to conceive how fertilizing excrement qualifies as a natural means for survival of the species.


Who said that reproduction was a required prerequisite to marriage? Are you saying that if a couple is unable to reproduce, they should be prohibited from getting married? With that reasoning, evangelical opponents to gay marriage should be encouraging people to have premarital sex, thus making sure that they meet the reproductive requirements prior to getting married. Maybe while we're at it, we can simply prohibit all post menopausal women, men who require Viagra to get it up, or any others who aren't able to reproduce, from tying the knot with the person that they love.


Originally posted by Captain Obvious
They don't want your tolerance. They want your applause. Until you celebrate their unions you won't be giving them what they want.


I see it this way... they protest to gain equal rights. Give them the right to marry and they won't have any more reason to protest. Instead of holding a gay rally, they can instead do something productive like spend time with family, etc.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Holy Frack!

I hear this crap everywhere! Work, TV, ATS, friends, etc.

Does everyone agree that marriage is about companionship and intimacy?

Well anyways,

When the church started, it wasn't that popular until the Romans stooped the prosecution. Once the east fell, there was really no central authority. Christianity, was mostly community based, which made a whole wide range of sects of Christianity appear, instead of a centralized power that radiates its "glory" like we see today.

Now, Listen up, this is the important part!

Once the empire fell, everyone was mostly jobless. What happens when people got no money for food?. Thats right they look for another job. Which the pro-roman catholic church was still pretty new. Now they got all these great minds that had studied at those Greco-roman colleges to hire for their church.

Now what happens when you get education involved? thats right they come up with way for their institution to succeed cause its the only way they can afford those pimp-out carriages and those budwieser-horses. Well once they start organizing these comunities to follow them.

Guess what they did? Thats right! they made every aspect of daily life revolve around the church instead of god.

Now dont get mad! they capitalized on morality, instilling fear of "hell" on people. Which ultimately gave them control of all aspects of the "Christian people" which a big one here is morality.

So, what have I said here?

I really dont give a frack what the "Church" says is right or wrong. I really dont give a frack if the feds think gays are wrong. You know why! because

people have the right to live as they want!, with whomever they want!, and claim the same right as everyone else have!

I SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE!

TO THOSE THAT OPPOSE IT, YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE!

why are you a hypocrite? cause you want your views/beliefs to be accepted when you dont even accept others belief/views.

finally got it off my chest.


OK....Am sure lots of peeps just wanna come after me with those love inspired prayers but save it cause those english professors are going to try to rip me a new one. but dont bother replying to my post or giving stars cause i really dont give a #! and i prob wont read your replys so there is really no point to argue with me.

Embrace Ignorance should be the theme for a lot of you guys on this site.

Smellz ya'll laterz aligatorz.




posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Legal Marriage is a contract. That is all it is.

I don't care where the "root word" came from. Lots of "root words" evolve over the years.

Sanctity of Marriage is a total BS argument of convenience.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by morf991




but dont bother replying to my post or giving stars cause i really dont give a #!


Well, too bad, 'cause I'm giving you a star anyway!



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 




Sanctity of Marriage is a total BS argument of convenience.


I think your argument is a BS argument of convenience. Ooooo what now?
Not that it matters.. on your high high horse I doubt you care about the moral objections from those that view marriage as a historical connotation of marriage to religious beliefs. By "protecting" the rights of the minority you destroy the rights of the majority.

Call it a civil union and provide the same legal benefits. That seems rational. Unless of course your a self absorbed morally superior Progressive who sees the views of others as being backward archaic opinions which you deem weightless in comparison to your far superior opinions.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Annee
 




Sanctity of Marriage is a total BS argument of convenience.


I think your argument is a BS argument of convenience. Ooooo what now?


You can define your marriage any way you want.

You can not define someone elses.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

By "protecting" the rights of the minority you destroy the rights of the majority.


Please explain how the rights of the "majority" are being destroyed. Are you not being allowed to get married? Are you not allowed to marry the one you love? Are you not allowed to have a family? Are you not allowed to get married in a church? Are you not allowed to get a marriage license from the state? How are your rights destroyed if 2 people you don't even know get married and call it a marriage?



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by ollncasino
 


This isn't a left-right issue.

This is an issue that concerns life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


How is calling it marriage any of the above , of they call it a civil union and get all the rights of a married couple of heterosexual persuasion , why do the gays have to push the envelope ? Gays are the minority bt force the majority to bend to their wills always citing homophobia and discrimination .

I read a lawsuit where a transtesticle was suing to have all state and public forms to have an option of "it" because. Tis so called intelligent person did not identify with all the normal titles of Mr. , Mrs. Miss amd so on. I wish these people the best in life but get back in the closet please .



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok
. . . . why do the gays have to push the envelope ?


Why does the majority feel the need to deny a minority equality?

Equal is Equal - - - - it is NOT - - - Different but Equal.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Legal Marriage is a contract. That is all it is.

I don't care where the "root word" came from. Lots of "root words" evolve over the years.

Sanctity of Marriage is a total BS argument of convenience.









I wonder how many of these people who push for their issues to be accepted by all will have the guts to toe the line of America was ever converted to Sharia law . I am fairly sure they will shut up quick because they have no real moral conviction .



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok
I read a lawsuit where a transtesticle was suing to have all state and public forms to have an option of "it" because. Tis so called intelligent person did not identify with all the normal titles of Mr. , Mrs. Miss amd so on. I wish these people the best in life but get back in the closet please .


And the problem with that is? These people?

Hardly anything new or exclusively about Transgender.


Since as early as 1795, this property has led to the call for gender-neutral pronouns. The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is a common justification, in addition to humanist and pluralistic reasons, for applying gender-neutral pronouns to the English language. Attempts to invent pronouns for this purpose date back at least to 1850. en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Azadok
. . . . why do the gays have to push the envelope ?


Why does the majority feel the need to deny a minority equality?

Equal is Equal - - - - it is NOT - - - Different but Equal.


They were offered equality thru civil union but that was not good enough , now they got some bullsh * t law passed where home schoolers can not teach that homo sexual behavior is a sin if the homeschoolers religion believes so . That's Bullard another example of reverse discrimination by a minority against a majority . In this republic the majority is suppose to be able to have the last word in a legal sense.
edit on 7-3-2012 by Azadok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Azadok
. . . . why do the gays have to push the envelope ?


Why does the majority feel the need to deny a minority equality?

Equal is Equal - - - - it is NOT - - - Different but Equal.


They were offered equality thru civil union but that was not good enough


Because it is NOT Equal.




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join