Five reasons why gay marriage is a basic, conservative value

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

So being heterosexual is, by definition, about sex as well?

Isn't it weird - - - that no one is more obsessed with gay sex then anti-gays.

I know its shocking - - that gays have jobs/careers - - hobbies - - eat and crap - just like heteros.

You know the stereotype, those who are most vocally against something harbor some desire for it. We see it happen more and more.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Annee

 

Again, you are creating a false dilemma. There are other better alternatives.

I'm staying on subject.

You are doing everything you can to divert the subject.

Originally posted by mazzroth
reply to post by kissy princess

 

Where do I begin ? perhaps there is no point taking this further as we agree to disagree. My life experiences in this department have taught me a few things, the first being that if an argument is "agenda driven" then truth and facts are usually the first casualty. I have no reason to contest your obvious acceptance of Homosexuality, I haven't read whether you have come out of the closet or one of the PC crowd trying so hard to be part of it so I don't know your agenda.

But one thing is clear, if you accept Homosexuality then you have to accept the whole of it and not just the bits you think are ok and sanitized for the general public so it appears clean and healthy and normal. One simply fact is that Gay Men participate in the act of Anal Sex, this is not hygienic and would never actually produce anything close to a loving healthy child and in fact would statistically improve the chance of a venereal disease contraction due to the promiscuity of that demographic.

Heterosexuals participate in anal sex as well. Heterosexuals participate in oral sex. In fact, there is no aspect of homosexual sex that heterosexuals do not also participate in other than the gender of the person participating with them. Not ALL do, but then, not ALL homosexuals do either.
Unless you are going to say that heterosexuals participate ONLY in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation (and we all know that isn't the case), you have no argument there.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

So, if, at some point in time, closing in ever more quickly, white males or Christians become the minority,

How about Atheists as the majority.

Voting on the rights of Christians.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

So, if, at some point in time, closing in ever more quickly, white males or Christians become the minority,

How about Atheists as the majority.

Voting on the rights of Christians.

edit on 23-5-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)

From the logic given, that makes it completely ok doesn't it?

reply to post by Annee


No I am not diverting the subject. I'm expanding it because I'm positing that your false dilemma is not the only option. There is a better option that maintains both rights and liberty. You are trying to shut me down, why is that? It almost seems as though you have a hidden agenda to push beyond equal rights for all...

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Annee

 

No I am not diverting the subject. I'm expanding it because I'm positing that your false dilemma is not the only option. There is a better option that maintains both rights and liberty. You are trying to shut me down, why is that? It almost seems as though you have a hidden agenda to push beyond equal rights for all...

Is it an option that hasn't been posted yet? If so, please post it. If it's something that's already been posted, then it's been refuted and isn't an adequate option.
So, what's your new option?

reply to post by PurpleChiten


I already did post it in this thread.

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Frankly marriage has a length-of-recorded-history-long definition that has not changed in all those years. Now some want to change the definition of this ancient subject? That's more than a bit crazy.

At the same time, Marraige, as it's defined in the US, is a financial discrimination, as it stands now. The cost it takes to do all the things marriage legally does for a couple is quite high for anyone who is not married to attain. This is where the problem could be addressed and still keep both sides happy.

Take out the word marriage, put in slavery, and see how ignorant this sounds.

Some things that are not right just take an incredibly long time to be fixed based on the fact that there will always be more unpleasant and ignorant humans than decent and wise ones.

Originally posted by babybunnies
During the primaries, the GOP candidates kept invoking Margaret Thatcher as a stalwart example of their Conservative values.

Santorum AND Romney both invoked the memories of her in charge of the UK during speeches.

Good old Maggie was FOR gay rights, including civil unions. She was actually a very progressive leader for her time. She was also in support of the idea of humans contributing to global warming, despite everyone telling her that she was nuts, and was pro choice, and was all for redistribution of wealth by de nationalising many of the Government run companies, such as British Telecom (I made a killing on BT stock).

Today, the GOP would call her a moderate socialist if they reviewed her true positions.

I had to laugh at how you made Thatcher out to be some great leader of the UK in her time only because you made a killing on shares in BT, thats typical of anyone that supports thatcher and her regin of terror they got rich. The poor that she trampled and tested new taxes on are all forgotten.

If I could go back in time and have her shoot I would in a heart beat.

As for the OP gay marriage should have nothing to do with politics it should have anything to do with the men and a women getting married. I belevie that myself, a polition, a goverment, a country or a religion have should have absolutly zero say in gay marriage, only the people getting married should have a say in it.

Gays have no right to hijack the word 'marriage' and force the majority to consider a union between two men to be the same, in a very legal sense, as a union between a man and a women.

Yeah I hate when people hijack words and make us redefine traditional crap...*shakes fist

Now those darn liberals are making us redefine "marriage" as a union between 1 man & 1 woman after thousands of years of being between 1 man & many women

reply to post by freakjive


how about joining the army?

The OP that kicked the hornets nest.

1. Do as you would be done by.
2. Let he/she who is without sin cast the first stone.
3. Ones sexual preference pales in comparison when we see what is currently being done by people, to other people, plants and animals, on this planet.

If you were at deaths door resultant from, say, renal failure or other and the only person willing & able to help was the one you despise, would you rather die than choose life?

Clean up your own backyard before peering over the fence to criticize the state of you neighbours backyard.

God loves, people hate!

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I love your reasons and agree with them all. The conservative side of me is the reason I agree that ALL people should have equal access to the same liberties and freedoms, without interference from the government. If they are going to offer a contractual agreement to some people, it should be available to all.

In the UK, gays have access to the same rights via a 'civil union'. That is not enough for them however. They also want their civil unions to be called marriages.

This isn't about legal rights. It's about the gay community demanding that the heterosexual majority lend them moral support.

Marriage means a legal union between a man and a women. Not between two men.

You are right, it is totally about forcing the majority to deem their lifestyle choice as "morally right". It has nothing to do with "civil rights" and everything to do with morals. But people cannot see this nor understand it when their own morals are dictated by society. People think that they are "good" as compared to other people, not any higher standard. Even if the government made no 'tax breaks' or monetary favouritism to heterosexual marriages, it would not satisfy the gay agenda. They will not be satisfied until our morals support them and APPROVE of their lifestyle. And to that end, Hollywood and school systems are indoctrinating each generation to do just such a thing, teaching our most innocent children that it is not only a perfectly acceptable lifestyle but one that is normal and healthy. But instead, they are just teaching rebellion to our youth.

Lenin had it right in the secular world "The best revolutionary is a youth devoid of morals."

Romans 1 talks about the depraved mind in verse 29, "They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters…" The list goes on, concluding with verse 32; "Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

That's why the same media teaches that God is a bigot. They seethe and rage against Him, rejecting fully His Salvation and healing. And they will not stop until as many are on board, teaching our little children that sodomy and lesbianism is A-OK. It's not, it's rebellion against the Creator. And people wonder who the "armies" are that will rise up to fight against Jesus' return. Many of our own children.

Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Lenin had it right in the secular world "The best revolutionary is a youth devoid of morals."

Can the bigoted passive hatred for freedom of all not be construed as so immoral that it is in accordance with Lenin's maxim?

A generation of backwards homophobic youths would have suited Lenin well.

reply to post by WhoKnows100


I'm totally saving this post, to show to friends and others who try to tell me that organized religion isn't scary. Thanks for the perfect example of why those of us who were raised outside of cults are highly disturbed by many who were or embrace them.

Children who embrace diversity are going to go to war with Jesus 2.0......oh Lord!

If you have a problem with Gay marriage, then in my eyes you are most likely either;

Racist
In the closet
Brainwashed by religion
or
Just not a very nice person

Hey that's just my opinion, try not to take it personally.

If straight people just let Gay people get on with their life in the 1st place, there wouldn't be a problem in the 1st place...

The whole world has gone to **** anyway. Just like Sodom and Gomorrah was thousands of years ago so it is today. This is not new. Sin is sin and it's just way more rampant. I thank God for people standing up to gays like Will Smith did by b**** slapping them.

Yes, non-interference from Government and personal responsibility are deeply Libertarian-Republican values. Nice OP.

Having a very close friend who only just revealed to me today his sexuality, i feel obliged to comment.
Imagine how difficult it would be having pent up your sexuality for so many years and having to construct some false image of yourself to conform to societies unjustified standards. It was so difficult that you kept this pent up for 10+ years and only then when you had the courage and mindset to come out and express who you actually are you are told that its not socially acceptible and you cannot have a loving relationship. How devastating.

Firstly for the religious types that will come crusading in at this point, gay marriage was at a point acceptable within the christian community. However, humanity is ever the victim of sexual repression and the hinderance in the development of sexuality is sure to follow.
If you read the words of the (old or new) testament where it starts to speak of masturbation as a sin because it is "wasting the seed" you can very quickly conclude why homosexuality was concidered so deviant, that of course is if you didn't close off your critical thinking as soon as you opened the book.

For people who complain about children who are raised by gay couples there is actually evidence that children raised in lesbian households actually are more well adjusted AND i saw a video of a kid raised by a gay male couple who had some sort of doctorate degree and seemed very well grounded. The only difference it makes to the child is yes the bullying that follows. Why does that occur? Because of the percieved deviance.

Why should the government dictate your sexual and love life? It has happened for far too long. Even though i agree there are some laws that need to be in place to stop the manipulation and abuse of man, women and children noone should tell you who you can and cannot love.



www.gaychristian101.com...