Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Changeup on February 05, 2013, 04:41:13 PM
-
WTG BRITAIN!!!!!!! Pretty soon, you all will legislate yourselves into evaporation!
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/uk-lawmakers-vote-gay-marriage-bill-18409059
See Rule #14
-
Do you have a problem with it?
-
Do you have a problem with it?
Why yes, it's ok that you don't, lol
-
The British people's freedom of self-determination bothers you?
-
The British people's freedom of self-determination bothers you?
Nope. They have every right to self-determine. Its never freedom...it's always what stupid decisions they make while practicing it. You're not very good at this game are you? Lol
-
By removing a ban they've given every British citizen a little more freedom.
What exactly do you have against this?
-
Why yes, it's ok that you don't, lol
I am 99% sure i'm getting a rule #14 for this but I don't care. This needs to be said.
(http://www.thefoundist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/for_the_foundist.jpg)
If you don't like the whole Gay marriage thing then don't get one. Don't tell others how to live - they don't do it to you. When was the last time a gay/lesbian said you couldn't have a heterosexual marriage to you?
-
By removing a ban they've given every British citizen a little more freedom.
What exactly do you have against this?
Freedom to do what that they didn't already have? Lmao. Freedom to marry? Because the formality of marriage solidifies love?
(http://i909.photobucket.com/albums/ac300/Changeup1/photo_zps4535e7dd.jpg)
-
I am 99% sure i'm getting a rule #14 for this but I don't care. This needs to be said.
(http://www.thefoundist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/for_the_foundist.jpg)
If you don't like the whole Gay marriage thing then don't get one. Don't tell others how to live - they don't do it to you. When was the last time a gay/lesbian said you couldn't have a heterosexual marriage to you?
I never told anyone how to live...I just said I thought it was utterly stupid. Lol...I think they should have lots of gay marriages in Britain sir. I think the British people have spoken...what they've said is what's ridiculous
-
Freedom to do what that they didn't already have? Lmao. Freedom to marry? Because the formality of marriage solidifies love?
(http://i909.photobucket.com/albums/ac300/Changeup1/photo_zps4535e7dd.jpg)
No. However, they only being allowed a "civil union", not being able to say that they're "married" set them apart from straight couples. That's discriminatory.
-
No. However, they only being allowed a "civil union", not being able to say that they're "married" set them apart from straight couples. That's discriminatory.
Ahhhh....the "outsider" phobia. Yes, that's a good reason. I'm certain their heterosexual friends will think, "Bob, Dave! Congrats!!! You're just like us now!". Maybe Parliment decided birth control needed a chemical-free method.
Please....
-
I never told anyone how to live...I just said I thought it was utterly stupid. Lol...I think they should have lots of gay marriages in Britain sir. I think the British people have spoken...what they've said is what's ridiculous
The way they've said it, or at least what they said is totally irrelevant to the topic. It's about gay marriages.
You said (Or at least implied) that you were against it in your 3rd post, replying to GScholz. If you're against something that usually means you wont want it to happen and you will take actions against it. But then you go ahead and say that there should be gay marriages.
Which side are you on?
-
The way they've said it, or at least what they said is totally irrelevant to the topic. It's about gay marriages.
You said (Or at least implied) that you were against it in your 3rd post, replying to GScholz. If you're against something that usually means you wont want it to happen and you will take actions against it. But then you go ahead and say that there should be gay marriages.
Which side are you on?
I have an employee that shows up real late every now and then....I think he's stupid for taking a chance that could cost him his job. I'm not against him being late because he gets his work done, I just think he's making a stupid decision. Get it?
I won't even quote morality on this issue....I don't have to. How many of mother natures finest do you see having same sex sex? Prolly none...know why? Because they think it's stupid too
-
Over here we are about 10 years (at least) ahead of you guys in social freedom. Our former finance minister, and briefly prime minister, is gay, and he was from the conservative party. Btw. he was finance minister in a center-right coalition government with a prime minister (and priest) from the Christians Peoples party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per-Kristian_Foss
Edit: I feel the need to clarify that this post is not about politics, but only to show that a homosexual person can obtain, and be accepted in, a position of power and prestige in our society. Also, accepted across the political spectrum.
-
How many of mother natures finest do you see having same sex sex? Prolly none...know why? Because they think it's stupid too
You'll have to excuse my ignorance, I'm just a silly foreigner after all, but what exactly do you mean by "mother natures finest" ?
-
You'll have to excuse my ignorance, I'm just a silly foreigner after all, but what exactly do you mean by "mother natures finest" ?
The entire animal kingdom...a silly foreigner...do you have the same acceptance phobia or are you being sarcastic?
-
I have an employee that shows up real late every now and then....I think he's stupid for taking a chance that could cost him his job. I'm not against him being late because he gets his work done, I just think he's making a stupid decision. Get it?
I won't even quote morality on this issue....I don't have to. How many of mother natures finest do you see having same sex sex? Prolly none...know why? Because they think it's stupid too
So you're not against it, but you think its utterly retarded and one of the worst decisions ever made? Ok...I guess that makes sense if you don't think about it.
As for the second part, if you wanna see some homosexual acts, just go to a naughty site here on the good ol' internet and watch a few videos.
I'm sure you could find both heterosexual and homosexual videos there. Not only do humans practice homosexuality, some animal species do it too - if that's what you're getting at.
-
Over here we are about 10 years (at least) ahead of you guys in social freedom. Our former finance minister, and briefly prime minister, is gay, and he was from the conservative party. Btw. he was finance minister in a center-right coalition government with a prime minister (and priest) from the Christians Peoples party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per-Kristian_Foss
I'm not sure I'd agree....not because of this issue but because we, Americans....colonials, decided it was time to go. Anytime your country has a mass exodus for needed freedoms, you never get to claim a higher score in the social freedom column :D :aok
-
The entire animal kingdom...a silly foreigner...do you have the same acceptance phobia or are you being sarcastic?
The occurrence of homosexuality in mammals is fairly ubiquitous. Giraffes have been called "especially gay" for often engaging in same-sex sexual behavior more than heterosexual.
Have you ever owned male dogs?
-
Just a side note:
I can't take Gscholz posts seriously with that avatar. :rofl :D
-
I'm not sure I'd agree....not because of this issue but because we, Americans....colonials, decided it was time to go. Anytime your country has a mass exodus for needed freedoms, you never get to claim a higher score in the social freedom column :D :aok
It has been argued that some, if not most, left because their bigotry and fundamentalism was not welcome where they came from. If you can't burn witches in Europe anymore... move to Salem.
-
I think he is stating the traditional religious argument against homosexuality and hence homosexual marriage.
That homosexuality is a choice, not an imbalance of hormones or series of events altering the sexual preference and behavior of a person.
Homosexuality is a natural occurrence, it is something that animals, humans and more than likely aliens, partake in every single hour of every day and have done so ever since the dawn of time.
Making homosexuality and homosexual relationships legally recognized is a step in the right direction. Persecuting someone for their sexual orientation is just as bad as persecuting a race. It is something that the individual has close to no control over, sure gays can FORCE themselves to be straight, but that's like forcing an African tribesman to dress in an American style, speak English and adopt Christianity........ *cough , effing, cough*. Your not going to change the fact that this person is gay, or this person is an African. You are simply forcing them to work to your idea of what they should be and in a land supposedly calling itself "of the free" that is inherently wrong.
-
Just a side note:
I can't take Gscholz posts seriously with that avatar. :rofl :D
:D
-
Please don't kill me skuzzy, I know this is breaking all the rules but please please don't hurt me
ok with that out the way.
Animals aren't gay? well... how about the king of animals, one of the deadliest hunters on the planet, famous in kids songs and legends as a fierce killing machine? He couldn't be gay could he?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8gttC6P3bE
well guess what.
-
How many of mother natures finest do you see having same sex sex? Prolly none...know why? Because they think it's stupid too
Ok, a short google later and I have the answer for you: 1,500.
"Bagemihl's research shows that homosexual behavior, not necessarily sex, has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
-
Hey Gscholz, hate to burst your argument open but......
no witches were burnt in salem......
they were hanged :devil :aok
-
I stand corrected. ;)
-
Making homosexuality and homosexual relationships legally recognized is a step - it will take decades to determine if it was the right one. Persecuting someone for their sexual orientation is just as bad as persecuting a race.
^^^^^^^this guys got it!
Except for one thing...until it costs the rest of society....and it will.
Dogs exhibit same sex sexual BEHAVIOR....for dominance and although thousands of studies have been done recognizing homosexual BEHAVIOR in thousands of species, , no species has ever had a recorded member participate to the exclusion of the opposite sex or for any measurable length of time, (Simon Levay)....except one. Sheep. So, let's get the sheep married
-
Evolution has (through the evidence of survival) proven same sex couples to be inferior. It is only man that insists on forcing the natural to uphold the unnatural. IMHO, gay marriage has nothing to do with love. marriage or a yearning to procreate and leave your genetic marker on life, it has only to do with low to NO self esteem and forcing those who disagree to not only accept but to hold up homosexuality as equal or better than heterosexuality. Gay marriage will not stop the debate or satisfy their lack of self esteem. Not caring is not good enough for them, they want the non believers to agree and care more for their way of life than the non believers care for their own!
my philosophy, do what ya want and leave me the *#*^ alone. I will never agree to something I do not agree with!
I guess I'm with Changeup :D
JUGgler
-
Evolution has (through the evidence of survival) proven same sex couples to be inferior. It is only man that insists on forcing the natural to uphold the unnatural. IMHO, gay marriage has nothing to do with love. marriage or a yearning to procreate and leave your genetic marker on life, it has only to do low to NO self esteem and forcing those who disagree to not only accept but to hold up homosexuality as equal or better than heterosexuality. Gay marriage will not stop the debate or satisfy their lack of self esteem. Not caring is not good enough for them, they want the non believers to agree and care more for their way of life than the non believers care for their own!
my philosophy, do what ya want and leave me the *#*^ alone. I will never agree to something I do not agree with!
I guess I'm with Changeup :D
JUGgler
Like I said, I think it's profoundly ignorant, genetically, financially, and socially. To be equal with hetero couples? That will never happen because they cannot procreate but we can prop them up and make them feel better. I don't agree with that either but I don't get a vote.
Life is a beeeyatch boys....get a damn helmet
-
Please don't kill me skuzzy, I know this is breaking all the rules but please please don't hurt me
ok with that out the way.
Animals aren't gay? well... how about the king of animals, one of the deadliest hunters on the planet, famous in kids songs and legends as a fierce killing machine? He couldn't be gay could he?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8gttC6P3bE
well guess what.
Sexual behavior? Or sex? Basic zoology teaches the difference. Sexual behavior is used by competing males to exhibit dominance....next?
-
Like you say... They can't procreate. So why do you care? What "harm" is being done? What does it "cost" us?
-
It has been argued that some, if not most, left because their bigotry and fundamentalism was not welcome where they came from. If you can't burn witches in Europe anymore... move to Salem.
Hmmm, I wonder if the Scots and Irish have that same sentiment....surely you don't want me to go there, right? We all have our dirty little pasts, right? It's was sure nice of the Brits to send all those folks to Australia wasn't it?
-
I'm not British... Not that there's anything wrong with that. ;)
I come from a place with an, if possible, even dirtier past.
-
Like you say... They can't procreate. So why do you care? What "harm" is being done? What does it "cost" us?
Ahhh....the real argument. Let's just say time will be the only judge of this decision for the people of Britain...and the people of America because it's coming here too.
It costs us, as a people, everything. Marital identity, money, it could imply moral issues, it could imply religious issues and for what? So that two men or women can "be like hetero couples"? That will never, ever, ever happen. Stupid decision.
-
Sexual behavior? Or sex? Basic zoology teaches the difference. Sexual behavior is used by competing males to exhibit dominance....next?
Not quite. Take penguins for example. Pairs of male penguins court each other, build a nest, and huddle over a round stone in lieu of an egg. One captive pair of chinstrap penguins, Roy and Silo of New York's Central Park Zoo went even farther. When curious zookeepers gave them a real egg stolen from another nest, they successfully hatched, and raised, the chick. Pairs of female penguins get in on the act as well. Perhaps a tenth of penguin pairings in the wild are same-sex, a remarkable phenomenon when one considers that penguins often mate for life.
-
I'm not British... Not that there's anything wrong with that. ;)
I come from a place with an, if possible, even dirtier past.
Fixed my last.
Ahhh...Herr Scholz. Understood.
-
Like you say... They can't procreate. So why do you care? What "harm" is being done? What does it "cost" us?
Well, I don't care. I think they should be shunned, like the unbathed kid who sits in the back of the class eating his boogers. They go directly against the survival of the human race and it is only our weird self proclaimed compassion that encourages it.
After all the only reason for any and all species on this planet is continuation. Homosexuals are Anti-continuation in other words they are for oblivion!
I say no thanks to oblivion
JUGgler
-
Not quite. Take penguins for example. Pairs of male penguins court each other, build a nest, and huddle over a round stone in lieu of an egg. One captive pair of chinstrap penguins, Roy and Silo of New York's Central Park Zoo went even farther. When curious zookeepers gave them a real egg stolen from another nest, they successfully hatched, and raised, the chick. Pairs of female penguins get in on the act as well. Perhaps a tenth of penguin pairings in the wild are same-sex, a remarkable phenomenon when one considers that penguins often mate for life.
A. Captive pairs
B. Chinstrap and Emporer Penguin males are solely responsible for hatching of eggs due to the females leaving the nesting fields to hunt.
C. That is an example of parenting
-
Ahhh....the real argument. Let's just say time will be the only judge of this decision for the people of Britain...and the people of America because it's coming here too.
It costs us, as a people, everything. Marital identity, money, it could imply moral issues, it could imply religious issues and for what? So that two men or women can "be like hetero couples"? That will never, ever, ever happen. Stupid decision.
Marital identity and "religious issues" loses its meaning in a nation like mine with 85% atheists.
-
Marital identity and "religious issues" loses its meaning in a nation like mine with 85% atheists.
That doesn't make it right...it just makes it the way it is
-
Well, I don't care. I think they should be shunned, like the unbathed kid who sits in the back of the class eating his boogers. They go directly against the survival of the human race and it is only our weird self proclaimed compassion that encourages it.
After all the only reason for any and all species on this planet is continuation. Homosexuals are Anti-continuation in other words they are for oblivion!
I say no thanks to oblivion
JUGgler
Homosexual couples do not procreate, and thus their genes do not carry on. Forcing homosexual people, trough stigmatization, to hide and procreate in heterosexual relationships on the other hand...
Seven billion and counting... We are doing too much procreation for our own good.
-
That doesn't make it right...it just makes it the way it is
"Right" is subjective. Over here, this is what is considered "right", "fair", and "just".
-
IF
Homosexuality is unnatural, why does it exist.
If God did not intend man or indeed any animal, to be gay, why is homosexuality even here?
I am straight, I personally don't understand how men find other men attractive. And I am sure many straight women ask that about other women as well, however bi and homosexuality is far more common in females than in males.
However do I believe any of us have the right to say what a man or woman can or cannot do, if it doesn't directly effect society? No. Absolutely not.
So what there are gays, so what they can marry? If your straight, and I'm straight, we are going to, or indeed have, found a woman who is similarly inclined and procreate.
Does us finding women attractive make us any better than them, no. It doesn't. We are all human beings, we all feel attraction, we all feel love (except sociopaths). Sure,
some races may be more athletic, some may be more intelligent, some may be more socially applicable. But at the core all men and women are equal.
So to persecute someone, or anyone for who they are... is wrong.
-
IF
Homosexuality is unnatural, why does it exist.
If God did not intend man or indeed any animal, to be gay, why is homosexuality even here?
I am straight, I personally don't understand how men find other men attractive. And I am sure many straight women ask that about other women as well, however bi and homosexuality is far more common in females than in males.
However do I believe any of us have the right to say what a man or woman can or cannot do, if it doesn't directly effect society? No. Absolutely not.
So what there are gays, so what they can marry? If your straight, and I'm straight, we are going to, or indeed have, found a woman who is similarly inclined and procreate.
Does us finding women attractive make us any better than them, no. It doesn't. We are all human beings, we all feel attraction, we all feel love (except sociopaths). Sure,
some races may be more athletic, some may be more intelligent, some may be more socially applicable. But at the core all men and women are equal.
So to persecute someone, or anyone for who they are... is wrong.
I said nothing of god!
I said unnatural and evolution does not lie and it is not compassionate.
I also never said persecute or harm or torment or kill or segregate. I said SHUN
They are unnatural and work hard against human survival!
JUGgler
-
Here's a thought. If it's all about procreation and the "survival of the species"... Should heterosexual couples that cannot, or chose not to procreate be equally stigmatized?
-
Does us finding women attractive make us any better than them
Evolution has proven beyond any speculation that in the realm of survival (which is the only goal any species strives for) we are better!
JUGgler
-
Evolution has proven beyond any speculation that in the realm of survival (which is the only goal any species strives for) we are better!
JUGgler
Yay! We are better at procreation! Yay!
Now why do we need to stigmatize them? Do you feel it is equaly "right" to stigmatize heterosexual people who are unable to procreate?
We are so much better than them... That poor barren woman should be shunned, like the unbathed kid who sits in the back of the class eating her boogers.
-
Just for clarification - this was approved by the UK Government, not the people of the UK - there is a difference.
Wurz
-
Here's a thought. If it's all about procreation and the "survival of the species"... Should heterosexual couples that cannot, or chose not to procreate be equally stigmatized?
you are using the word stigmatize as something bad or evil or unnatural.
Stigmatize : Describes or regards as worthy of disgrace or great disapproval.
I think in this case Evolution finds this meaning accurate. In fact Evolution is faaaaaaaar less kind to same sex couples, in fact I'd say evolution finds homosexuality disadvantaged :aok and not only shunns it but outright destroys it over time. We, humans are the only thing that keeps this unnatural way of living at the forfront of society. If left to its own means (with no outside support of any kind) homosexuality would cease in one generation <--- this is what evolution has to say about the issue :aok
JUGgler
-
Just for clarification - this was approved by the UK Government, not the people of the UK - there is a difference.
Wurz
This seams to be a trend!
Hey wurz!!!! :O :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
JUGgler
-
Honestly, I don't think we should have gay 'mairrage', at least not yet. Now before you jump to conclusions, hear me out.
If you allow gay mairrage, you'll piss off a LOT of people, where as a 'domestic partnership', or whatever you wish to call it, is much more acceptable to the narrow minded. Give them all the same benefits of mairrage, so you get the change without causing a riot. After that, it would likely be a lot easier to accept a change of what the relationship is called, as opposed to 'giving' gay couples the right to mairrage.
Work around ignorance, don't try to fight it. You'll be a lot happier.
As to the discrimination, that will never end untill almost all gays stop trying to set themselves apart in any major ways. Its the 'look, we're different' message that elicits the 'oh hell no!' response. The same goes for any discrimination. The real fight isn't in getting equal rights, its in making what was once stigmatized become a normal and accepted fixture of society.
This is not to say that I don't think they should stand up for their rights, only that I think any and all militant, or even argumentative, attitude is far, far, FAR more detrimental than it is helpfull.
-
Just for clarification - this was approved by the UK Government, not the people of the UK - there is a difference.
Wurz
This seems to be a trend
Hey wurz :rock :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :x
JUGgler
-
Honestly, I don't think we should have gay 'mairrage', at least not yet. Now before you jump to conclusions, hear me out.
If you allow gay mairrage, you'll piss off a LOT of people, where as a 'domestic partnership', or whatever you wish to call it, is much more acceptable to the narrow minded. Give them all the same benefits of mairrage, so you get the change without causing a riot. After that, it would likely be a lot easier to accept a change of what the relationship is called, as opposed to 'giving' gay couples the right to mairrage.
Work around ignorance, don't try to fight it. You'll be a lot happier.
As to the discrimination, that will never end untill almost all gays stop trying to set themselves apart in any major ways. Its the 'look, we're different' message that elicits the 'oh hell no!' response. The same goes for any discrimination. The real fight isn't in getting equal rights, its in making what was once stigmatized become a normal and accepted fixture of society.
This is not to say that I don't think they should stand up for their rights, only that I think any and all militant, or even argumentative, attitude is far, far, FAR more detrimental than it is helpfull.
-
I know why I will not practice homosexuality. Unfortunately, if I were to explain to some people why I believe it is a perversion I would be labled such things as a bigot, homophobe, old fashioned, or a BBS rule violator...so I'm going to leave it at that.
-
I know why I will not practice homosexuality. Unfortunately, if I were to explain to some people why I believe it is a perversion I would be labled such things as a bigot, homophobe, old fashioned, or a BBS rule violator...so I'm going to leave it at that.
-
Just for clarification - this was approved by the UK Government, not the people of the UK - there is a difference.
Wurz
Th UK gov doesn't represent the people?
-
I know why I will not practice homosexuality. I also know that I have no moral authority over other people. if I were to explain to some people why I believe it is a perversion I would be labled such things as a bigot, homophobe, old fashioned, or a BBS rule violator...so I'm going to leave it at that.
-
... if I were to explain to some people why I believe it is a perversion...
It is a perversion. However, so is many heterosexual sex-acts that I really enjoy receiving, and giving. Perversion is fun! :aok
In its most strictest sense, any sex-act not done specifically to procreate is a perversion.
-
As to the discrimination, that will never end untill almost all gays stop trying to set themselves apart in any major ways. Its the 'look, we're different' message that elicits the 'oh hell no!' response. The same goes for any discrimination. The real fight isn't in getting equal rights, its in making what was once stigmatized become a normal and accepted fixture of society.
That is the case here now. Most gays you don't even realize are gay unless they're very effeminate.
Like I posted earlier, this is a gay man over here:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Per-Kristian_Foss.jpg/220px-Per-Kristian_Foss.jpg)
-
you are using the word stigmatize as something bad or evil or unnatural.
Stigmatize : Describes or regards as worthy of disgrace or great disapproval.
I think in this case Evolution finds this meaning accurate. In fact Evolution is faaaaaaaar less kind to same sex couples, in fact I'd say evolution finds homosexuality disadvantaged :aok and not only shunns it but outright destroys it over time. We, humans are the only thing that keeps this unnatural way of living at the forfront of society. If left to its own means (with no outside support of any kind) homosexuality would cease in one generation <--- this is what evolution has to say about the issue :aok
JUGgler
All homosexual people are products of heterosexual procreation. There is no way to eradicate it, except the Nazi way.
-
You didn't answer my question if you think we should shun heterosexual couples that cannot, or chose not to procreate?
-
Always wanted to ask those who oppose gay marriage...how does gays affect your everyday life? :headscratch:
-
You didn't answer my question if you think we should shun heterosexual couples that cannot, or chose not to procreate?
They should not be shunned as infertility is not a choice
JuGgler
-
If they choose not to procreate?
-
If they choose not to procreate?
Then they choose not to.
Are you a homosexual?
JUGgler
-
Then they choose not to.
So you would not shun them for not reproducing just like the other couples mentioned?
-
Then they choose not to.
But do you think they should be shunned for their choice?
Are you a homosexual?
That is a very personal question, but no, I am not gay.
-
Always wanted to ask those who oppose gay marriage...how does gays affect your everyday life? :headscratch:
It doesn't affect anyone in a negative way. People just pull the Bible card as their excuse.
-
Always wanted to ask those who oppose gay marriage...how does gays affect your everyday life? :headscratch:
I'm sure this isn't your first venue of gay marriage discussions. If it is, you need to get out more but ok, I'll bite.
Gays do not affect my everyday life...they never have, and they never will. For me, granting gays the same socio-economic status as hetero couples is stupid. To me, it makes zero sense...So, lets legalize prostitution. People do it anyway and prostitutes deserve W4's and health benefits and they shouldn't be frowned upon right? They provide a service, if they're legalized, they would be regulated by their pimps and income reported...hell, they could start a union. Why not? Other countries do it...to me it falls right in line with gay marriage only gay marriage will cost me, the taxpayer, more money and legalizing prostitution won't...it will GENERATE revenue.
In the gay marriage argument, I will pay my share (and so will the rest of the country) of their tax relief...married filing jointly pays SIGNIFICANTLY less income tax than single filers. The burden of spousal healthcare, retirement, social security benefits...not the individual benefits, gay get that already, but the survivor benefits. Who pays those? We do...and adding a couple million more people to that benefit line will mean one of two things...I don't get mine that I have paid in for my entire life and you don't get yours OR we pay MORE to support that additional group of people who are now "married" and can receive survivor and/or disability payments for their "spouse".
I think its stupid because I don't think gay couples are equal to hetero couples because they aren't. They bring nothing to the table of society. Diversty isn't an answer. I don't want to pay more for diversity...
-
It doesn't affect anyone in a negative way. People just pull the Bible card as their excuse.
Please...the bible card is only played by people who don't have the nuts or are too unintelligent to make an argument. Bible card...lol. Its unintelligent to even suggest the bible card for people to use.
-
But do you think they should be shunned for their choice?
That is a very personal question, but no, I am not gay.
I will ask you the same question you asked earlier, why do you care? i have said that i don't care. I have only hilighted the irrefutable evidence that evolution has chosen its superior method of sexual orientation and proves its results thru the sum of survival. Are you trying to debate evolution thru me?
Evolution cares nothing of feelings or esteem and it demands progressive adaptation for the continued survival of all species. Someday 2male camels may produce species continuing offspring but as of yet evoltion has deemed it inferior to survival than male/female copulation
JUGgler
-
It doesn't affect anyone in a negative way. People just pull the Bible card as their excuse.
Or that those individuals lack THE drive shared by all species: reproduction. And when you think about it, that's just strange as all hell.
From the standpoint of evolution, they are failures.
There is also clearly SOME physiological difference, given that they lack the urge to contribute to the species.
A whole plethora of reasons. It is not JUST ignorance that fuels the hatred. To pretend otherwise is also ignorant.
-
So you would not shun them for not reproducing just like the other couples mentioned?
Correct. I don't judge gays for lack of reproduction, i judge them for being gay! With that said i also don't care but as i have said evolution does :aok
JUGgler
-
Sorry for the triple post earlier. Dang Iphone froze up while I was trying to post and the battery died shortly afterwards.
Are some of you guys really going to take sexual advice from something that could very well eat its own poop? :huh
-
Sorry for the triple post earlier. Dang Iphone froze up while I was trying to post and the battery died shortly afterwards.
Are some of you guys really going to take sexual advice from something that could very well eat its own poop? :huh
If eating your own defecate was beneficial to survival as a species, then yes. Evolution knows what it's doing.
-
So if there was a gay couples tax increase you'd be okay with it?
-
If eating your own defecate was beneficial to survival as a species, then yes. Evolution knows what it's doing.
It was meant to be humorous, Tank-Ace, but thanks for the nature fact. :aok
-
No. However, they only being allowed a "civil union", not being able to say that they're "married" set them apart from straight couples. That's discriminatory.
They could however say they were in a civil partnership. Marriage was clearly defined in law, as the union of one man and one woman. How long until they want the government to rule that heterosexual couples being able to have children is discriminatory?
I really dont mind one way or the other, I am just playing devil's advocate, however all the rights of marriage are encompassed in civil partnerships, except for the word "marriage".
There is, in my limited field of experience, no more under-represented group than straight white males.
We have the gay police association, gay and lesbian police association, black police association, association of women police officers, yet no organisation for the benefit of the group that are most prevalent in the force. I would put money on it being the same situation throughout every organisation.
Very often as one group recieves more rights it is at the expense of the erosion of the rights of other groups.
-
In 20-30 years gay marriage will be in the same category as the disbelief that once interracial marriages were also illegal...and those who who cling to some type of religious, economic, or social reasoning for their opposition will be equally regarded as an anachronism (as they already probably are)
Tronsky
-
I am pleased to anounce that The GFC will have a "Gay" advisory section in our forum :old:
No Danny I am afraid i am already married, thanks anyway :old:
-
I am pleased to anounce that The GFC will have a "Gay" advisory section in our forum :old:
No Danny I am afraid i am already married, thanks anyway :old:
:cry
-
Crikey.
-
WTG BRITAIN!!!!!!! Pretty soon, you all will legislate yourselves into evaporation!
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/uk-lawmakers-vote-gay-marriage-bill-18409059
Oh My God!!!! So, us in Denmark are done. I knew it.... first country in the world to grant legal recognition to same-sex unions,the State helps lesbians with IVF (In vitro fertilisation), gay men can adopt and now (since 2012), they can even get married in a Church!!! Damn!!And i have to pay for all this!!!! Ohhhh wait... ok ok... they do pay taxes like me, ALRIGHT,couple of them have paid in 1 year what i'll pay in 3 or 4 life times....
Here, we are in 2013..which year are you on? :) :neener:
IENA
-
Or that those individuals lack THE drive shared by all species: reproduction. And when you think about it, that's just strange as all hell.
From the standpoint of evolution, they are failures.
There is also clearly SOME physiological difference, given that they lack the urge to contribute to the species.
A whole plethora of reasons. It is not JUST ignorance that fuels the hatred. To pretend otherwise is also ignorant.
I don't want kids. Sure, you could say iv'e failed in the whole evolution and survival deal, but I honestly hate children. I can live without them. If you're saying that someone who doesn't want kids is "strange as all hell" then what's "normal," at least to you?
-
What is it about people which makes it impossible for them to walk away from a situation they know is wrong, and worse, they participate in it?
Everyone one of the posters in this thread knew the first post was wrong, yet here we are. Personally, when I see a fire, I do not throw gasoline on it, I call the fire department.
Everyone who fanned the flames should be banned from the forums. It seems that may be the only way to get the attention of everyone.