quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King So your saying that if someone were to call a gay person a Fag, that person shouldnt take it PERSONALLY?

Im still trying to figure out how you came to that conclusion.

orbax: do enlighten me, what has "womens lib" fucked up exactly? You claim it's screwed stuff up. Lemme guess, womens lib has created more gay women? I love your sweeping generalizations

"i don't care about africa, they're all fucked up". I'm sure that you've visited africa alot in the last 50 years and are an expert on what consituties a "fucked" continent.

You said that homosexuals becoming integrated into socitiey benefits no one. How mental are you? It benefits them. You Human/Dog marriage anology was pathetic at best. I think you're very ignorant to the world around you. Being an english speaking christain puts you in the minority.

quote:

Originally posted by failsafe orbax: do enlighten me, what has "womens lib" fucked up exactly? You claim it's screwed stuff up. Lemme guess, womens lib has created more gay women? I love your sweeping generalizations

it actually had nothing to do with homosexuality. Thus me stating that I was digressing. It was more of a social commentary about how relationships are these days. I love how you jump to conclusions, you should make a game

quote:

"i don't care about africa, they're all fucked up". I'm sure that you've visited africa alot in the last 50 years and are an expert on what consituties a "fucked" continent.

Mission work in Kenya good enough?

quote:

You said that homosexuals becoming integrated into socitiey benefits no one. How mental are you? It benefits them. You Human/Dog marriage anology was pathetic at best. I think you're very ignorant to the world around you. Being an english speaking christain puts you in the minority.

I want to see you go tell a CEO that you need a raise because you deserve it and itll benefit you. Selfishness sucks, no one wants to help you. Societies protect the whole, not the few.


and speaking of sweeping generalizations? English Christian? I will at least admit to having stereotypes and thinking they are justified. You sir, are a hypocrite. Go smoke some pot hippy

Good ol Orbinox

I agree with you that marriage is an entity steeped in religious and cultural tradition, and that's exactly why the state, in my opinion, should not even be in the "business" of marriage in the first place. A "civil union" license and "marriage" license as granted by the state are essentially the same things except for what they are called; their official name. So basically when it comes to a secular institution like the US government granting a loving couple a license sought to solidify and consummate the love they feel for each other, if you're pro- “civil unions” license but anti-“gay marriage” license, you're essentially only defending the "sanctity" and “tradition” of one word. I would go as so far to argue that placing the term “civil union” on that same marriage license goes above and beyond the rights of everyone else, and grants these “misfits” special privilege; something you profess to be against.

I believe, as I’m sure you do, the state should not have the power to tell a church, synagogue, or mosque whom they should wed, but this is because I also feel, as Thomas Jefferson did, that in an ideal society there should be a wall separating church and state. I’m not one of those people who care about what it says on our money or on the Pledge of Allegiance, and I'm also against France's recent push to ban clothing with religious symbolism in public schools. But I’m fervently against those who wish to use the institution of government as a means of imposing their religious beliefs on the entire population of our country as our current leadership in Washington has done. I’m sure you also know as well as I that there are religious institutions out there that do wed homosexual couples, yet they are still not recognized as married couples by the state. I can even name some churches in Austin Texas that wed gay couples. Yes TEXAS. It’s my belief Orbax, that if the church you go to wants to deny marriage rights between same sex couples, that’s perfectly fine in a free society. But, when we have religious institutions that are ahead of the secular government in terms of equal treatment, I do see a problem there. And if you want to know how I feel about the past persecution of the Mormons for polygamy by the US government, I think it was wrong too.

As I sit here and write this, I can’t help but feel that this denial of homosexuals a license that completes and solidifies a couple’s love for each other contingent upon whom they choose to love is a policy based on the assumption that these people are inferior and/or immoral compared to the rest of us. I believe that there are homosexual couples out there that are committed to each other in loving relationships, and are probably more stable (and arguably “moral”) than many heterosexual couples whose partners may scoff at the concept of monogamy. That’s why in my heart, I simply cannot accept the current policy of our government. If that makes me a “pussy” as you’d put it, then so be it. As I’ve said before, the true measure of the “freedom” of a country is based upon how free the minority is. That “minority” can include anyone from young people (us), to ethnic or religious minorities, to homosexuals.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSaenz Good ol Orbinox

Harr!

I, too, am a disestablishmentarianist hehe.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it kind of sounded like even though you wished for seperation of the two, it still bothered you that the state wouldnt recognize their committment to one another's love.

Marriage, as is most commonly defined by the Bible, is the union of souls. Flesh and Spirit, as one, forever. I dont remember what the Koran says about it, or the hindus, but US tends to go off of euro-judaic roots for that kind of stuff. The point is that the clergy are the ones who have to decide whom to wed (like you said) but fault is in the governments lap for giving rewards to views they like.

and, yes, I am in the camp of protecting what I perceive to be a holy union in the word of Marriage, one that I feel would be defiled by a homo-sexual marriage.

And dont even get me started on how corrupt most "religious" people are, how the divorce rates add up, and how wholesome and strong heterosexual families are (sarcasm on last one hehe)

I have a 95% percent theory. You may have heard of it. But its basically that 95% of pretty much everything is screwed up.

edit** ah reread it. As long as they are connected they shouldnt be buddy buddy is what you say. Again comes down to the Civil Union vs Marriage. Call me a stickler for words, but if Shakespeare had gone off the idea that all words basically mean the same thing, wed be out of brilliancy! English is an awesome language because it can describe anything. I think semantics are extremely important. Maybe thats why Im trying to get into law school

Last edited by Orbax on Jan-10-2004 at 07:08

"Go smoke some pot hippy"?

You're relating my belief that homosexuals should be allowed to legally marry as an indication that i'm a pot smoking hippy. I can only imagine the voltage of the power lines you must have lived under as a child.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Im still trying to figure out how you came to that conclusion.

Becuase you beleive that "gayness and PERSONHOOD" is what is being propagated as a single entity..implying that it should be different.

___________________
"This place isn't big enough for me to blow it up."
-MARCO V

quote:

Originally posted by failsafe "Go smoke some pot hippy"? You're relating my belief that homosexuals should be allowed to legally marry as an indication that i'm a pot smoking hippy. I can only imagine the voltage of the power lines you must have lived under as a child.

I hope you smile at your own hypocrisy. You think me believing that you are a pot-smoking hippy is an indication I lived under high-voltage powerlines as a child.

Hehe. I should make one of those posters "Political Forum Members: Unabashed hypocrites since 1873!" and have some dude punching himself in the face or something as the picture.

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Becuase you beleive that "gayness and PERSONHOOD" is what is being propagated as a single entity..implying that it should be different.

People have the property of Gayness, homosexuality is not something that makes you a person. Dolphins are homosexuals. Does that make them people?

So no, I dont think they should be sold as a package. Its just BS mindtrip shit to get people to say in a bleeding heart kind of way "They are people too!" implying that someone who doesnt like the gayness hates the person and wants them killed. Its a brilliant strategy and it worked. People now think that by attacking homosexuality you are attacking the person. Im not. Im attacking their judgment, their social integration, their policies, their actions, and their role in society. Im sure they are nice people.

People arent all up in arms about poor people being poor (well a lot are) but a commonly held idea is that poor people are poor because they made stupid decisions. I have found that to be mostly true, but that isnt my point. Point is that people do all sorts of stupid shit, and to make a property an integrated piece of personhood is a great way of fucking things up.

Hitler did it. With Jews. Jews are bad people he said. Kill them. Now its Gays are good people, love them.

It was fucked up 60 years ago, its fucked up now.

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 They do have the same rights. They are humans just like the rest of us,They deserve no more rights than the rest of us. Capice? Easily,You aren't born gay. You choose to be that way. I'm against the lifestyle,It's not good for anyone. Simple, You can change being gay. There have been many that have come out of the lifestyle. They are glad they have too. Might want to hear them speak sometime,It would help you understand things better. You know nothing of pain in the stomach,Do not get me started on that subject.Alright? I really don't want to talk about it.. It's hazardous to your health. It's not just to your health,it's emotionally hazardous. I'm sure there are many here who disagree with me,and that's fine. But, at the moment I really don't care, I have way more important things that are happening right now,and if I don't concentrate on them, things might get worse. You know why it's spreading in Africa? They are so promiscuous. We're talking orgies homosexuality...the whole nine yards. That's why they have AID's spreading like they do. Deny it,or believe it.That's up to you.

Once again, they can't get married (Or at least have a civil union), so therefore they do not have the same rights. I'll just repeat that again, since you obviously find it extremely hard to comprehend. They do not have the same rights as everyone else.

You assert that you aren't born gay. Do you have any evidence to back up that claim, any evidence whatsoever? As far as I know it has not been conclusivley established as of yet.

Most of your claims seem to be based on typical right wing Christian propoganda. The only cases of people supposedly being "converted" from homosexually were outlined in a book by Joseph Nicolosi. Unfortuntley, his claims have been denounced by basically every reputable medical association that has commented on it. A review of the book (Undertaken by James D. Weinrich, Ph.D), which essentially contains a rebuttal of his claims that gay people can be converted to hetrosexuality, can he found [/QUOTE]here. Other than that, I have never seen anyone claim that gay people can be converted to hetrosexuality before. Any evidence you have would be apreciated.

Your claim that it's emotionally hazardous is interesting. You know why? Because they face discrimination every day from people who seem to enjoy gay bashing. They can't change being gay, it isn't their choice. I have a resonably close gay freind, and he gets crap all the time from people, and he hasn't even come out. Even people who claim to be his freind make 'ass loving' jokes now and then, openly discriminate against gay people, or use 'fag' as an insult in his presence.

Once again, your claims about why AIDS is spreading in Africa really don't hold much weight unless you present some credible evidence to support them. A study, for instance.

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King You must be the most brainwashed person ive seen on these boards. Are you trying to be sarcastically stupid? If you arent, its Ok, you are 17...i understand your highschool mentality.

It's not always the best idea to lump age in with maturity, or assume that because someone is a certain age that they will believe something/act in a certain way. All i'll say on the topic is that from what I understand i'm actually a tad younger than Nellie, but I have an entirley different viewpoint to her on this particular topic.

___________________
Currently Whoring:

• Space Tribe Vs Electric Universe - Rabbit Hole
  
• CPU - So It Begins
  
• Too Short & Mistah FAB - The Sideshow
  

Surprised to see that this thread is still alive. Orbax is making a very good point here and unfortunately you all seem to be ignoring it.

Let's give a hypothetical example: Jack has a bizarre sexual fetish that involves pulling down his pants and sticking easter eggs up his ass in public. In fact, it's such a strong fetish that it's gotten to the point where he is unable to get off any other way. It's all-consuming.

Jack gets cuffed for indecent exposure. His argument to the court is:

• He has had this fetish for as long as he's known. He was probably born with it. He has actively seeked out help and seen psychiatrists but none of them have been able to cure him of his fetish.
  
• In recent times, there has been a surging increase in the number of people who have admitted to having the easter-egg-up-the-ass-in-public fetish.
  
• No one is being harmed by this behaviour - Jack simply loves easter eggs. Up his ass. In public places.
  
• It's unfair to deny Jack his rights to get himself off sexually because of the person he is. He can't change it. He's been taunted and teased all his life about his fetish, but never thought that the government would actually step in and take away his rights to his sexuality.
  
• It's unfair that society hates and bashes on these people because of their easter egg fetish. They are people too. Just because they like doing this doesn't mean they're animals, and they should have the same rights as everybody else, including the rights to perform the egg-shoving in public.
  

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here