Dubya to Jump Shark

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Thud
Or perhaps you are. I always interpret 'deviant' as 'different from existing norm(s)'. That hardly qualifies homosexuality as deviant these days, perhaps from your own perspective but that could hardly be called objective.

Actually, that exactly qualifies homosexuality,  as is indicated by the current proposed legistion in most states.

[Thud]

Originally posted by Martlet
I don't have the slightest idea what you are trying to say.

Sorry.

Very well, I'll elaborate. You claim that legalizing SSM's would put them in the center of society thus influencing all the children with their little fragile minds bla bla....
Homosexual sex would stay in the bedroom irregardless, as heterosexual sex is supposed to despite heteros being allowed to marry.
Now explain to me what the influence of legalized SSM would be on bring gay sex out of the bedroom into society?
It does not change a thing for the environment, your children will still see two men or women walking hand in hand, just with wedding rings.
The worry that SSM's may change everyday life for others is just a pathetic excuse behind which people like you, who just don't approve of gays, hide themselves.

[Frogm4n]

martlet is just a scared white man holed up with his guns trying to protect his family from the big bad world outside. Kinda pitty the poor guy.

[Thud]

Originally posted by Martlet
Actually, that exactly qualifies homosexuality,  as is indicated by the current proposed legistion in most states.

As you might understand, my interpretation of 'existing norms' is hardly influenced by what conservative U.S. state legislation has said on any given problem...

Not because I am not a citizen of those but rather because I believe they don't reflect the way a modern society should be set up.

[-dead-]

The problem with bandying about the word deviant is that you are required to define what is normal to define what is deviant.

It's really a question of context: which terms are we using? The problem being that in order to measure a circle one can start anywhere. In the sweeping general terms of "heterosexual" and "homosexual", the homosexuals can be considered deviant - but then so would virgins be. But if we get down to specifics, a lot  - probably all of the heterosexuals end up deviants. Is doggy style deviant? Is liking bums more than breasts deviant? In terms of world numbers, of course, we then have to accept that all US citizens are deviants anyway.

And at the end of the day the biggest deviant of all would be the person who was average and statistically normal (heck, the average person has only one testicle).

So until you can figure out what really is normal, the whole deviant thing is moot.

[Torque]

Originally posted by Martlet
Actually, that exactly qualifies homosexuality,  as is indicated by the current proposed legistion in most states.

In 2000, the last state law banning interracial marriage in Alabama was finally repealed Mart.

[Frogm4n]

Originally posted by Torque
In 2000, the last state law banning interracial marriage in Alabama was finally repealed Mart.

Yet another issue that had all the scared white biggots screaming the world was going to end and that people would be marrying chickens and dogs next.

[Martlet]

Kieran was right.  It doesn't matter how many times you answer the question, you ignore it and ask the same question over again.  I'll answer it one last time.

Through legalization of SSM, your are inferring that a homosexual relationship is on the same footing as a heterosexual relationship.  Most people don't hold this to be a core belief.

The majority of Americans realize that homosexuality, even though it is a deviant behavior, hurts no one.  Therefore, the regulations surrounding it are being universally lifted in spite of the "yuck" factor.

When you put homosexuality on equal footing as heterosexuality, you are no longer teaching tolerance.  You are forcing the community to accept a deviant behavior as normal.  Again, this goes against some people's core beliefs.

[Kieran]

Originally posted by Thud
It isn't deviant behavior, it just isn't the same as heterosexuality. What would you like to teach them exactly?

And I mean exactly...

I hold the exact opposite viewpoint.

Exactly what should be taught about homosexuality? Absolutely nothing. Just as our society does not allow the values of religion to be taught in public schools, so should it be with homosexuality.

[Frogm4n]

The reason why we keep asking the same question is due to the fact that the so called answer you give really isnt an answer. It has no content. The idea that  'im against it because its deviant from what the bible says' is not a logical arguement. What we are asking is a logical reason why you are against it. Prove to us how society will crumble, and how everyone will turn gay. Give examples in history( since it is circular and we do continue to repeat ourselves).  Something other then 'cause i think its wrong but cant tell you why'.

[Martlet]

Who said anything about the bible?

Because you you don't agree with my answer, doesn't make it any less relevant.

[Frogm4n]

No it does martlet, you still havnt told us any negitive outcomes of gays getting married. How will it affect your life so poorly?

[Martlet]

I have answered that question 3 times.  I'm sorry you don't understand it.

[Kieran]

Well I could point to the illogical argument about it not affecting me, therefore it's none of my business. Does that mean that anything that doesn't directly impact me should be legal? Really? Careful how you answer...

[Thrawn]

So schools will probably be teaching the homosexuality is normal or natural soon enough (just like they do evolution), whether or no homosexuals are allowed to get married.  Because that's what the science indicates.