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.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
You know the stereotype, those who are most vocally against something harbor some desire for it.
You are vocally against marriage retaining its tradtional meaning.
Using your own line of reasoning, those who are most vocally against tradtional marriage harbor some desire for it.
So according to your own logic (twisted with the purpose of developing a clumsy ad hominem attack) you actually support tradtional marriage.
Welcome on board.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by Evansr
You know what the problem is with marojity deciding this kind of issues?
Black slaves and no rights for women..yeah, i went there.
Gays' already have equal legal rights in the UK with civil partnerships.
That has not stopped them from agitating for the legal meaning of the word marriage to be changed.
Same-sex couples may choose to have a civil partnership but no one has the right to redefine marriage for the rest of us.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But heterosexuals DO make a big deal out of their sexual preferences.
They talk about their spouses, have pictures hanging around... They procreate and brag about it. They flirt with members of the opposite sex, hold hands, hug and kiss in public. A female teacher tell her class about her husband, when she's getting married, etc. It's all very easy and acceptable in our society to flaunt our sexuality. As long as it's heterosexual.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But heterosexuals DO make a big deal out of their sexual preferences.
They talk about their spouses, have pictures hanging around... They procreate and brag about it. They flirt with members of the opposite sex, hold hands, hug and kiss in public. A female teacher tell her class about her husband, when she's getting married, etc. It's all very easy and acceptable in our society to flaunt our sexuality. As long as it's heterosexual.
If I was a golfer, I wouldn't expect people with no interest in golf to listen to me going on about it.
No one is interested in gays going on about being gay, unless they are gay.
Originally posted by Amadeo
For an apparently heterosexual male, you seem to be heavily invested in the gay marriage issue, ollncasino. Since there are many gay and lesbian couples who have already gotten "married" in a sense, can you please outline for me here exactly what the consequences of that have been for you? In your own time.
Originally posted by ollncasino
If I was a golfer, I wouldn't expect people with no interest in golf to listen to me going on about it.
No one is interested in gays going on about being gay, unless they are gay.
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Yet you expect those who are not homophobic like you are to listen to you go on for pages about your homophobia (that you wish to not refer to as homophobia, one of the most prominant symptoms). You've defeated your own argument on this one.
Originally posted by Amadeo
reply to post by ollncasino
For an apparently heterosexual male, you seem to be heavily invested in the gay marriage issue, ollncasino. Since there are many gay and lesbian couples who have already gotten "married" in a sense, can you please outline for me here exactly what the consequences of that have been for you? In your own time.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You don't speak for everyone. People are different. I happen to like hearing about love and relationships, whether they're gay or not. If YOU aren't interested in something, then don't listen to it.
I don't like to see fat people in shorts, but if I do, it's MY responsibility to turn away, not to make a law against it.
This whole idea of making laws to control the behavior of others so YOU won't be offended has really gotten out of hand. The government isn't there to make laws so that you won't have to see and hear anything you consider offensive.
Learn how to deal with your prejudices instead of asking the government to control the behavior of those who offend you.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You don't speak for everyone. People are different. I happen to like hearing about love and relationships, whether they're gay or not. If YOU aren't interested in something, then don't listen to it.
I don't like to see fat people in shorts, but if I do, it's MY responsibility to turn away, not to make a law against it.
This whole idea of making laws to control the behavior of others so YOU won't be offended has really gotten out of hand. The government isn't there to make laws so that you won't have to see and hear anything you consider offensive.
Learn how to deal with your prejudices instead of asking the government to control the behavior of those who offend you.
Two points.
It is impossible to debate with people who are pro gay marriage for long before they start making personal attacks.
It is ironic that you talk about not making laws but tunring away when in California, they introduced a bill that forced educators to teach children of all grades about gay accomplisments during 'gay month'.
Originally posted by Gemwolf
Yes. I agree. We shouldn't let gays destroy the sanctity of marriage. Heterosexuals truly value and honour marriage - something "the gays" would never be able to do. The sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour Vegas marriage and the Kardashian’s 72-hour marriage will be broken if gays were allowed to marry.
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Insults? Pointing out the progression of things isn't "insulting". Apparently we are getting closer to the crux of your issues as you are becoming quite defensive.
Originally posted by Gemwolf
Yes. I agree. We shouldn't let gays destroy the sanctity of marriage. Heterosexuals truly value and honour marriage - something "the gays" would never be able to do. The sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour Vegas marriage and the Kardashian’s 72-hour marriage will be broken if gays were allowed to marry.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Insults? Pointing out the progression of things isn't "insulting". Apparently we are getting closer to the crux of your issues as you are becoming quite defensive.
Calling someone homophobic isn't an insult?
Please, try to debate and not get personally abusive.
The fact that you are resorting to insults does suggest that you are frustrated in some manner.
By the way. I am still waiting for a coherent reason why the tradtional, legal and theological meaning of the word marriage should be changed?
Originally posted by ollncasino
You still haven't made a coherent argument why the traditional, legal and theological meaning of the word 'marriage' should be changed.