TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Homosexual Matrimony
Pages (16): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 »

quote:

Originally posted by Schadenfreude also homosexuals > people that put ketchup in the fridge. godless fucks.

what about Parmesan cheese?

quote:

Originally posted by ivofivo Come on now..really? Animals? If they had a generous thought about making money, cheating on their loved ones, and a dream about driving a Ferrari, I would consider that information valid. Why? Because we, humans, have reason. And that reason is quiet simple. Have sex...but with an opposite sex...so it can all make sense. And @ your religious aspect. Yea, you got it all figured out. Open the bible buddy. Or any other testament. Fail.

With talent like this I can�t believe you guys lost the cold war!!

quote:

Originally posted by boris_the_bear maybe it's just an observation, a conclusion based on statistical information, on facts, on logics.

Well don't keep it all in, pumpkin. Share with us all of these hard facts and statistics your experienced self has formed an exceedingly logical conclusion on.

quote:

Originally posted by jonSun what about Parmesan cheese?

in the cupboard until ready to use, like your nonna.

facists don't get food poisoning.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie You know what assertive means, of course?

well, sorry for my imperfect english once again. i meant people who are too busy proving their point to sometimes review/reconsider it, have doubt in it. you can count me one sometimes. we're all human ffs

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Well don't keep it all in, pumpkin. Share with us all of these hard facts and statistics your experienced self has formed an exceedingly logical conclusion on.

no thanks. i'd rather keep it all in. too tired. but let me ask you this instead: do you not find one of the following to be natural for a human being - heterosexual / homosexual? don't you think nature has a cause for things like that? why is blood pumped through your veins and shit through your colon? mighty lord, my views have become limited indeed. i'm sorry but i'm not it the mood to prove a point. you could say i fail if that makes you sleep tight

quote:

Originally posted by boris_the_bear well, sorry for my imperfect english once again. i meant people who are too busy proving their point to sometimes review/reconsider it, have doubt in it. you can count me one sometimes. we're all human ffs

Uh, you mean exactly like you're doing? Lol. Your stance is the epitome of narrow-minded and under-developed. Lmao. Troglodyte.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie Troglodyte.

such a good word.

They can do what they want, one question.. Why are some gay men overly flamboyant.. we get it you're trying to be as feminine as possible.. how come some of these guys are more "feminine" than women you would meet? Taking the script over the top imo

It really depressed me that some people want to take rights away from others like this. Fucking ignorance.

quote:

Originally posted by boris_the_bear no thanks. i'd rather keep it all in. too tired.

You need to prove yourself, back the things up that you're saying if it's fact and not opinion. Even so, back up your opinions.

quote:

Originally posted by Aesthetic They can do what they want, one question.. Why are some gay men overly flamboyant.. we get it you're trying to be as feminine as possible.. how come some of these guys are more "feminine" than women you would meet? Taking the script over the top imo

They have their reasons.

Some gay men act feminine, some act masculine, some act straight, some don't care, some are jocks, some are ravers, some are nerds...Some have gender identity disorder, some do not. Each person is a different case.

Also, please note that there is no set standards of what a woman acts like.

Women can act in just as many different ways as men, the same is true for homosexuals, heterosexuals and bisexuals.

So, for the sake of argument I'm going to assume that when you say "act like a woman" you are referring to gender roles. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

On that basis, I do not see any of my gay friends acting particularly like a stereotypical housewife.

So the short answer to all this is:

It depends.

you know what i'm talking about.. the ones that are outrageously FABULOUSSSSSSSSSSS

quote:

Originally posted by Aesthetic you know what i'm talking about.. the ones that are outrageously FABULOUSSSSSSSSSSS

Heteros can be just as loud and outrageous. Again, depends on the individual case.

quote:

Originally posted by boris_the_bear but let me ask you this instead: do you not find one of the following to be natural for a human being - heterosexual / homosexual? don't you think nature has a cause for things like that?

Both sexual orientations are natural for human beings. Is it not extremely fucking obvious by the evidence that gay people, you know, exist?

I am well the fuck aware that the point you are trying to establish is that man+women=children is the "natural" way of things, and indeed, you are not wrong in this, as it is the practice most humans endeavor on. But just where is your evidence to suggest that homosexuality is unnatural? It has already been established in this thread that all range of other animals practice it as well - do you think they were corrupted by liberal society as well?

Where does "natural" end for you and "unnatural" begin though? Can you answer that? Can anyone answer that? It seems to me that people base this off of what their gut tells them, and that's typically just a reflection of what mom or dad taught them. But fucking truly - what reason do you have to object to the happiness of others, much less the equal recognition by government amongst citizens?

There is a much larger issue for me here, and it does not have to do with homosexuality. Whatever your views are and whatever reasons you suppose for holding them are of limited concern to me. I've participated in enough of these threads to know that I am not really going to change anyone's mind, and truly - that's not my directive here. What I object to, however, is egocentricism in a civic sense; By this, I mean opinion's oppression on civil liberties. In this instance, people can't get over their fucking selves to realize there is a very real breach of rights here - for the government and people to say that an entirely consensual union between people is inferior to others merely because of the parties involved is a gross injustice. It's like enough people agreeing with one another that red is an inferior colour to blue because the ocean is blue and the ocean is natural, thereby placing a ban on red, and worse still, getting away with it. It's fucking cherry-picking in the worst, most irresponsible sense because the majority of people can almost wash their hands entirely clean of it when it's not in their face, but the silent minority must merely sit back and accept their branding in society as unnatural, second-class citizens, with second-class benefits.

It's very reminiscent of fights that have already been fought - particularly those over skin colour or ethnicity. To make an analagous point of this: I do not care if you are racist, your views are yours, but for you to use your government as a platform to project your ego, to merely perpetuate your own half-baked views at the expense of the others' basic, human rights for equal governmental recognition... well if you don't see a problem with that, this conversation was over before it started.

quote:

Originally posted by Aesthetic you know what i'm talking about.. the ones that are outrageously FABULOUSSSSSSSSSSS

Though I do know what you are talking about, I think it's important to keep in mind that heterosexuality is in the overwhelming majority, and many, many human endeavors exist for the sole purpose of facilitating fertility. Indeed, the sexual hegemony of human beings is likely one of the largest contributing factors to the relative "dominance" of our species. It is also why a sexually liberated species could probably stand to to grow that much stronger by facilitating amorousness in whatever way it manifests - this means the widescale acceptance and recognition (at least by authoritative entities such as governments) of any consensual endeavor that alleviates stress and brings people towards common causes for coping with our existence as fundamentally social, yet complex and lone beings in a universe that may as well be the epitome of unnaturalness if our considerations are homogenous.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Though I do know what you are talking about, I think it's important to keep in mind that heterosexuality is in the overwhelming majority, and many, many human endeavors exist for the sole purpose of facilitating fertility. Indeed, the sexual hegemony of human beings is likely one of the largest contributing factors to the relative "dominance" of our species. It is also why a sexually liberated species could probably stand to to grow that much stronger by facilitating amorousness in whatever way it manifests - this means the widescale acceptance and recognition (at least by authoritative entities such as governments) of any consensual endeavor that alleviates stress and brings people towards common causes for coping with our existence as fundamentally social, yet complex and lone beings in a universe that may as well be the epitome of unnaturalness if our considerations are homogenous.

You didn�t explain why fags feel the overwhelming needs to speak like idiots.

I felt that was best left to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On I felt that was best left to you.

Fair enough.

Sushi, why do fags feel the need to speak like idiots?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Fair enough. Sushi, why do fags feel the need to speak like idiots?

Dickhead

As far as the States go, I find it interesting homosexuality has not been deemed by the high courts as a fundamental right, since the right to procreate and the right to marriage have been. When, and if, it is ever deemed fundamental, will surely be a momentous day for the homosexual community, since strict scrutiny will be applied to any case henceforth.

Sorry, Stu, but this is only for the United States. Your time will come, slugger. Just as soon as those scanners start coming around. I promise.

quote:

Originally posted by boris_the_bear thanks for popularizing electronic music, fags!

Got nothing have you?
Keep walking idiot

quote:

Originally posted by ivofivo Was on an airplane next to 2 gays, I felt uncomfortable and violated when they looked at me.

Probably because looking like your mum dressed you made them feel violated.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Fair enough. Sushi, why do fags feel the need to speak like idiots?

Hahahaha! ACE!

I actually revert my original position and take the affirmative on the topic. A homosexual influence on the human species may be just what we need. This would lead to a good population control mechanism.


I have nothing against homosexuals as long as we are dealing with the same genus.

quote:

Originally posted by R.j. Because tradition dictates that marriage is a man + a woman. Simple concept. edit: Like I said, I'm not about to approve a break of that tradition. Were it to be that gay marriage at some point became the norm, then I would certainly tolerate it. But I wouldn't be happy about it.

Hmmm... well if we shouldn't deviate from tradition or reformulate our ideas surrounding traditions, then I vote we get those black men back in the cotton fields and women back in the kitchens and popping out babies.

quote:

Originally posted by R.j. I've read half of the Old Testament. I'm pretty sure that's more than most people. Unfortunately, I don't/didn't believe any of it.

So you aren't Jewish... You Christian then? Brought up Christian? You must have some religious background.

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith North Americans seem to have a pragmatic view about what is 'unnatural' when it suits them, its simply a product of a demented society which considers sex shameful and violence is a form of entertainment.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I find it amazing that �free speech� apparently extends to corporate entities and their bribery of elected officials, but not to two hot women who want to say �I do� before getting down in a serious tribbing extravaganza.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Both sexual orientations are natural for human beings. Is it not extremely fucking obvious by the evidence that gay people, you know, exist? I am well the fuck aware that the point you are trying to establish is that man+women=children is the "natural" way of things, and indeed, you are not wrong in this, as it is the practice most humans endeavor on. But just where is your evidence to suggest that homosexuality is unnatural? It has already been established in this thread that all range of other animals practice it as well - do you think they were corrupted by liberal society as well? Where does "natural" end for you and "unnatural" begin though? Can you answer that? Can anyone answer that? It seems to me that people base this off of what their gut tells them, and that's typically just a reflection of what mom or dad taught them. But fucking truly - what reason do you have to object to the happiness of others, much less the equal recognition by government amongst citizens? There is a much larger issue for me here, and it does not have to do with homosexuality. Whatever your views are and whatever reasons you suppose for holding them are of limited concern to me. I've participated in enough of these threads to know that I am not really going to change anyone's mind, and truly - that's not my directive here. What I object to, however, is egocentricism in a civic sense; By this, I mean opinion's oppression on civil liberties. In this instance, people can't get over their fucking selves to realize there is a very real breach of rights here - for the government and people to say that an entirely consensual union between people is inferior to others merely because of the parties involved is a gross injustice. It's like enough people agreeing with one another that red is an inferior colour to blue because the ocean is blue and the ocean is natural, thereby placing a ban on red, and worse still, getting away with it. It's fucking cherry-picking in the worst, most irresponsible sense because the majority of people can almost wash their hands entirely clean of it when it's not in their face, but the silent minority must merely sit back and accept their branding in society as unnatural, second-class citizens, with second-class benefits. It's very reminiscent of fights that have already been fought - particularly those over skin colour or ethnicity. To make an analagous point of this: I do not care if you are racist, your views are yours, but for you to use your government as a platform to project your ego, to merely perpetuate your own half-baked views at the expense of the others' basic, human rights for equal governmental recognition... well if you don't see a problem with that, this conversation was over before it started.

+ 2438509824509823

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.