Gay Marriage

  • Thread starter 1X83Z
  • 2,302 comments
  • 85,012 views
The Supreme court struck down Texas' sodomy law today, along with 12 other states. It refers to the couple I mentioned ealier in this thread. The gist of the judgement is that sodomy cannot be perfectly legal for herosexual couples and not for gay couples. It also means that the government has no business in the bedroom of consenting adults. Justice Scolia dissented, saying that morality does not have to be rational. The rest of them agreed, but noted that morality is not law. So the supreme court has made both ends of the spectrum this week. They blew it on the UofM affirmative action case, but did good by America for this one.
 
Originally posted by milefile
They blew it on the UofM affirmative action case, but did good by America for this one.
Click to expand...

No they didn't, they got rid of the absurd points system that U of M used. The other case wasn't nearly as racist.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
No they didn't, they got rid of the absurd points system that U of M used. The other case wasn't nearly as racist.
Click to expand...

They said that because you're a minority, you still get points toward being accepted and the such. Basically, it's still reverse-racism.
 
Racism is racism no matter who does it or condones it. It's a joke. They are saying, in essence, racism is okay, as long as it meets certain state requirements.
 
Affirmative action is a joke. It's ok to descriminate as long as it's good for minorites.

It makes about NO SENSE AT ALL!


I'd like to point out that the only black person on the supreme court panel that voted on it voted against affirmative action.
 
I think it should be banned.. look at it this way, if it were meant to be, men would have the ability to have babies. Carrots don't grow on trees and banannas don't grow underground right?
 
Originally posted by Der Alta
You made that choice because you felt that you were gay.
Click to expand...

Hey, DA, thanks for telling me all about my feelings, my 'choices', what I felt, and why I 'decided'! It's so kind of you to assume all sorts of things about something and someone you know nothing about.

I'm not going to push this argument, because you're really deeply seated into category three. All I'm going to say is that there's no 'preference' aspect... you don't 'prefer' women over men, do you? Your body physically responds to female-centric sexual stimulation, and should not physically respond to male-centric sexual stimulation if you're truly heterosexual. In short, I never *chose* to be homosexual... heterosexuality is impossible for me for the simple fact that I CANNOT SHOVE MISTER HAPPY INTO A COOCHIE AND GET HIM TO UPLOAD MY DNA INTO A WOMAN. I don't know how else to explain it.


It's entirely too frustrating when someone wants to argue something that's so completely inherent. That fact, coupled with the fact that I've been through this song and dance way too many times before already, is why I won't keep pushing the point.

The only thing I've chosen here is my battles.

--

By the way, I'm sure it wasn't intended, but I'd like to thank you anyway for saying that I'm a genetic 'mistake' in your post. Many of my fibers of patience have been expended, but I've still retained enough restraint to resist describing you with a very pertinent adjective that I have in mind.
 
He has a point. There have been some tentative studies that show a possible difference in brain structure between homosexuals and heterosexuals that could account for different inherent sexual preferences. Bisexuals are just odd, no scientific reason for that...
 
Originally posted by rjensen11
They said that because you're a minority, you still get points toward being accepted and the such. Basically, it's still reverse-racism.
Click to expand...
No such thing as reverse racism, my man. Milefile's got it.
 
You know, after reading this whole thread, I still don't get the point: Why can't we let consenting adults do whatever the hell they want? Simple, so simple! As long as they don't invade anybody else's rights while doing it, what's the problem? Let them have at it; I'm not affected in anyway, and neither should anybody else.
 
Originally posted by Sage
Why can't we let consenting adults do whatever the hell they want?
Click to expand...
Because people are lousy, bigoted beings that are overcome with some absurd concept called "morals" that is twisted to justify every bigoted action.
 
hondakid said:
Hey, DA, thanks for telling me all about my feelings, my 'choices', what I felt, and why I 'decided'! It's so kind of you to assume all sorts of things about something and someone you know nothing about.

I'm not going to push this argument, because you're really deeply seated into category three. All I'm going to say is that there's no 'preference' aspect... you don't 'prefer' women over men, do you? Your body physically responds to female-centric sexual stimulation, and should not physically respond to male-centric sexual stimulation if you're truly heterosexual. In short, I never *chose* to be homosexual... heterosexuality is impossible for me for the simple fact that I CANNOT SHOVE MISTER HAPPY INTO A COOCHIE AND GET HIM TO UPLOAD MY DNA INTO A WOMAN. I don't know how else to explain it.
Click to expand...

Thank you. In all seriousness, thank you. It's tough to see life from your point of view, and it's tough to see life from my point of view. I'm looking for "Why" you believe you didn't have a choice. You've stated the fact as your body does not respond to female centric stimulation. That helps me understand your view and what you believe. It gives new life for me to ponder and help define why I believe what I do.

Now I ask, did you look at yourself in a mirror? Probably not. My post got you too heated and you had to respond as soon as you read it. Did you take 2 hours and read my post. Think about the thoughts that I posted, or simply respond in the defensive manner you are so accustomed to?

My guess is that you are so used to defending your lifestyle, you've never looked at the fact that your body is built to procreate. Argue that fact. Tell me your body (Not your brain, mind, or emotion) is not designed to (as you so eloquently posted) UPLOAD YOUR DNA.

I'll make no argument that you think and believe that you are gay, always will be and always have been. That is an emotion from another human being that I don't have. I'll respect that most certainly, and allow you all the privileges it warrants. You are a person willing to face adversity for your choices, and that is rare to find in any person.

HK also said:
By the way, I'm sure it wasn't intended, but I'd like to thank you anyway for saying that I'm a genetic 'mistake' in your post. Many of my fibers of patience have been expended, but I've still retained enough restraint to resist describing you with a very pertinent adjective that I have in mind.
Click to expand...

I apologize for that comment. I should not have been directed at you. You may not believe me when I say that it troubled me when I posted it. However...I'll stand by the fact, the line of thinking you've stated (Born Gay) makes my think Genetic Mistake. Before you blow your top, take a moment and ponder what I say. A male body is designed with the intention of physically interacting with a female body. Nature intended it. Can you fathom that? Can you understand and accept that? If not, I give up trying to give you insight into what I believe, and you have no need to read further.

If you can grasp the concept that nature intended for the male and female body to physically interact and nature intended that humans procreate, we'll take a baby step to the next line of thinking. You've stated that you have no ability to do this. "You can't stick Mr. Happy into Ms. Choocie and upload your DNA". Therefore nature is saying you are a defect.

Does that make you a bad person? Nope. Just a person that can't have children.

Am I trying to argue that you should "Go Straight"? No, only that you take a moment and see where I'm coming from. I believe that being gay is a choice. These reasons above are why I do.

Now, as a last point, if after reading all this, and you still can't see where I'm coming from, give up and PM me the "pertinent adjective" and why you wish to describe me as it. Give me something other than 3rd grade euphamisms to help me understand why you believe you were born gay.

Thank you,

AO
 
The fact that men and women have sex while trying very hard NOT to procreate, destroys DA's argument from the outset. The naturalistic moral against homosexuality is a moral of convenience. If it held any water at all the same people who make such flimsy claims would see that hetero sex that is purely for the purpose of pleasure and clearly not for the purpose of procreating is just as wrong. What's that you say? Something about love? Makes no difference at all. Show me how to measure love. The argument negates itself in contradiction.
 
Originally posted by milefile
The fact that men and women have sex while trying very hard NOT to procreate, destroys DA's argument from the outset. The naturalistic moral against homosexuality is a moral of convenience. If it held any water at all the same people who make such flimsy claims would see that hetero sex that is purely for the purpose of pleasure and clearly not for the purpose of procreating is just as wrong. What's that you say? Something about love? Makes no difference at all. Show me how to measure love. The argument negates itself in contradiction.
Click to expand...

Surely you can see the differences in your hetero example. Again, it is a choice in your example to try and not propigate. I am anxiously awaiting hondakid's replies to Der Alta's questions as I would also like to know.
 
Originally posted by Pako
Surely you can see the differences in your hetero example. Again, it is a choice in your example to try and not propigate. I am anxiously awaiting hondakid's replies to Der Alta's questions as I would also like to know.
Click to expand...
I surely can, and the difference is irrelevant and insignificant.
 
milefile is reading my post incorrectly. Men and women try very hard not to procreate. This does not destroy my line of thinking. In fact it solidifies it further.

For women and men to make a choice not to procreate means "They make a concious choice".

What I am saying is "The human body is designed to procreate". Last time I checked that required a male and a female.

Nature has no morals. It only has preset rules. "Procreate or face extinction". Tell me that is wrong. Throw your morals and emotions out. Argue that fact. You can't. Where's the irony.

Men and women try very hard not to procreate. I'm a fine example of that. I made a choice not to have children. One surgery later, it became fact. I will never have kids. Does this make me a genetic defect? Nope, I made a choice. It lands me squarely in your "Sex for pleasure" category. I'm not arguing how you get your pleasure, only that pleasure is one more choice.

Hondakid is saying he didn't have a choice. His lifestyle was predetermined before he was born. Was it something his mom ate? Nope, He in fact hasn't given a reason, other than "I was born gay". He came out of the womb with no desire to procreate.

It is a choice.

Love makes all the difference in the world. Does Hondakid love his partner? I'd be willing to bet so. Do you love your wife? I'd throw money down on that one as well. Love means every thing between two people that care deeply about each other. (the basis for my argument that civil unions are necessary). How often have you heard "There is a difference between making love, sex, and ***king"? can you grasp that concept? Why can't we through "Procreating" in there? Surely it's the same thing.

So...Here's a tough question, milefile. You've recently a child, that means there was a night of conception. On that night in particular, did you make love or one of the other 3 choices? See that, you'd have to make a choice.

The basis for my arguement is the human body is designed to procreate. Therefore anything beyond that is a choice. Hetero, Homo, or even by yourself in the bathroom it's all a choice that each one of us makes.

Explain to me how my line of thinking is wrong.

AO
 
I never said your line of thinking is wrong. It is too correct. I first of all need to make clear that whether gayness is a choice or not is not important to me. It has no usefulness aside from judging people.

You hold up procreation as if it is the reason for sex. I guess it is. If it wasn't necessary for a species to reproduce there'd be no male or female, no sex organs. But humans have sex for other reasons. Once that line is crossed making any more distinctions is ridiculous. It is a cascading effect where you end up with things as frivolous as right and wrong sexual positions. The second a condom is put on, the second a tube is snipped, it no longer matters what you stick it in, you have abominated nature. And nobody cares. Nobody takes sex seriously anymore. It's just another thing to do. That is sad. It took me a long time to find a woman who felt like me. If a gay man can find another gay man, and take sex seriously like me, and see it as something sacred between two poeple, something not to be taken lightly, then they are worth more to the species than the bar slut who gets knocked up on accident by a guy she can't even remember. They are worth more than small people who give it up at the drop of a hat for fear of being rejected if they don't.

The basis of your agrgument emphasizes the least important aspect of sex for humans. You emphasise the amoral physicality, which is routine, obvious, and too easy, and then twist it into some kind of natural law.

Perhaps gayness is inherited, if that even matters. But having sex is a choice. That is true. And society should reward responsible, meaningful choice over biased, dogmatic adherence. But our society is still to primitive for that.
 
milefile said:
You hold up procreation as if it is the reason for sex. I guess it is. If it wasn't necessary for a species to reproduce there'd be no male or female, no sex organs. But humans have sex for other reasons. Once that line is crossed making any more distinctions is ridiculous. It is a cascading effect where you end up with things as frivolous as right and wrong sexual positions. The second a condom is put on, the second a tube is snipped, it no longer matters what you stick it in, you have abominated nature. And nobody cares. Nobody takes sex seriously anymore. It's just another thing to do. That is sad. It took me a long time to find a woman who felt like me. If a gay man can find another gay man, and take sex seriously like me, and see it as something sacred between two poeple, something not to be taken lightly, then they are worth more to the species than the bar slut who gets knocked up on accident by a guy she can't even remember. They are worth more than small people who give it up at the drop of a hat for fear of being rejected if they don't.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with what you state right there. No if, and or buts. That is the number one reason why I am for gay marriage. If two people can stand next to each other and say beyond a doubt, that they are dedicated to each through thick and thin, I want them to have all the rights of a man and a woman joined in marriage.

Having sex is a choice. In my thoughts, so is hetero and homosexuality. It is a choice. Does that make a difference to me? No. I'll again agree with you. What I want Hondakid to understand is why I believe that it is a choice.

We're talking in circles here. How can I prove that it is a choice? By using facts. Choices are based on opinions.

"I'm gay because I'm gay" is not an argument or a fact. Any more than Escher's stairs are. Let Hondakid accept or even acknowledge it.

I'll agree with you that our society is too stubborn to let responsible, meaningful choices preside over religious choices. It pains me to no end that people can't get beyond the simple facts without letting other influences cloud the issue.

This is probably why I have such a tough time dealing with my mother. She'll stand on her moral high ground, no matter what comes. She slaps on the religious blinders and rides her high horse everywhere she goes. Makes it tough to talk about things like this.

Hondakid is the same way. He can spout about how he feels, but can't defend you why he feels that way. I apologize to him for noting his name so often without him around to answer.

milefile said:[i/]
The basis of your agrgument emphasizes the least important aspect of sex for humans. You emphasise the amoral physicality, which is routine, obvious, and too easy, and then twist it into some kind of natural law.
Click to expand...


Throw the word amoral out of that and that's what we're down to. The physical act of sex is about procreation, first and foremost. Is procreation not a natural law? The emotional side of sex is pleasure and a whole slew of additional emotions that come with physical act. Tab A goes into Slot A. Tab A does not go into slot B. Can it? Yes. Is it enjoyable? For some people, Yes. Stand in front of a mirror and tell me differently.

Procreation is the basis of my argument. You’re saying that without that point, I’ve got nothing to stand on. Without that basic fact, there are no other aspects of sex to argue, it all becomes pleasure. Which is based on emotions. Emotions are choices.

Humans have tapped many different ways to enjoy sex. I'll not argue with anyone of those, as long as it is between consenting adults.

Hondakid will never accept that homosexuality is a choice. I'll never accept that it isn't.

AO
 
Originally posted by Der Alta
it all becomes pleasure. Which is based on emotions. Emotions are choices.
Click to expand...
I don't know if that is true. Seeing the way a baby reacts to a particular stimulus compared to another makes me think otherwise. They can't make choices, and haven't learned anything beyond the most basic functions like how to move hand to mouth or that crying solves the problem. And yet they are different. You can probably see it in your birds, too. They have different personalities and emotions; but can you say they choose anything?

I've had an aversion to crowds and noise since I was a baby, they make me feel anxious. From there it can become anger, depression, etc. I don't choose that. In fact I've gone to great lengths to change it. But it won't work. The best I can hope for is to fake it when necessary and get by. It works when for whatever reason it benefits me to do so. I interpret gayness to be something like that. Unfortunately, faking it must become an unbearable burden in this instance. Eventually it must become necessary for the health of the being to become fully realized, and it must also mean living gay. I'm glad I don't have to worry about it.

So I believe one is born gay, just as one is born not gay. To live gay is a choice, technically, the consequences of which are probably hard to imagine.

They are discussing this on NPR right now. Of course they bring in the two extremes and set them loos on eachother. Radical rhetoric from both sides. Pretty sad. The homosexual lobby. I love that one. Nevermind freedom and liberty. If they're different from me they're a "special interest" and don't deserve it.
 
Sorry that I've left you all hanging... I didn't realize my presence was so important in this debate. I've been running around looking for parts for my car and planning my next roadtrips; as you can imagine, I've been very busy this summer. It's unusual, and it makes me feel like I have a life. :P

Don't give up on me just yet, DA. Just because I haven't replied yet doesn't mean that I don't plan on it. To effectively get my point across, I need to organize my thoughts; since I've been through this so many times before, I hope that you understand I'm not exactly enthused about going at it for the umpteenth time, especially when I could be focusing on more fun things like college, cars, and tourism. :P

I must say that the last line of your post doesn't exactly encourage a response, however: "Hondakid will never accept that homosexuality is a choice. I'll never accept that it isn't." If you won't accept that it isn't a choice, then why would I bother to stress *myself* out and engage in a futile argument?

I find it so much easier to discuss issues like this instantaneously. Having to respond to a mountain of counterpoints is overbearing. You're welcome to instant message me at any time and post the contents of our discussion if you wish. If you don't have AIM, perhaps you'd have an IRC chatroom or other similar venue in mind. If this avenue is not feasible for you, I understand. Your repsonse will come... just let me clear my head and digest everything you've written. Please be patient.
 
I apologize for that last line. In fact, I had to go back and read your second post about the three types of people. I'd much rather be in the second group of people than the third. Unfortunately my last sentence was a bit heavy handed. I try very hard to keep my opinion and thoughts open. Maybe that last line should read “Until Hondakid accepts that I believe it is a choice, I might be able to accept that it isn’t a choice".” And maybe I can sway your opinion enough to consider me part of that second group.

I'm most certainly patient. I'm sorry to drag you through this again (honestly) but it helps me to understand different view points, and possibly (hopefully) gain insight from an opposing viewpoint. Which allows me to debate my own reactions, choices and theories. I’ll thank you for willingly taking on this discussion.

I can understand how busy you are and will certainly wait to read your response. I’m certain there are a number of other things you’d rather be doing. I would too. My seasons pass to the beach isn’t getting much use. Milefiles short post has had me thinking most of the day, so your response will help.

As for AIM and real time conversations I find it very difficult to respond instantaneously, as it doesn't give me ample time to analyze my thoughts. Often times a quick response can be taken the wrong way and it's tough to dig up from that. Until the computer comes on-line at home, I'll not have a public AIM contact.

Your opinion is probably the most important as it holds the best viewpoint on the Born gay vs. Choice subject. Take your time, I’ll certainly appreciate it.

Thanks,

AO
 
DA, mile, honda:

You guys have all been in an intimate scenario. You know that there are certain preferences that we all have. For example, one person might prefer that his wife (could be male or female) dress up like a cheerleader, or put on some leather and smack him around a little.

What I'm getting at here are little preferences that we all have in the bedroom. For some people it's small, for other's it invovles re-designing the house. Now let's say for the sake of argument (I'm going to borrow from Drew Carey here) you really like to have your partner dress up in a squirrel outfit.

You didn't chose to get turned on by the squirrel outfit. It has nothing to do with procreation or really anything else besides some sort of psychological event that happend in your subconcious (perhaps when you were young). But there it is, you have a thing for the squirrel outfit. You chose to indulge yourself, but it wasn't your choice to like the squirrel outfit in the first place.

I see no difference with homosexuality. The result of homosexuality is that procreation is impossible, but this is a byproduct of a particular fetish. And fetishes of all kinds and varieties are not rooted in an original choice, but a preference that came about through psychological (and perhaps some genetic) foundations. It's really not choice.
 

Similar threads

TexRex
Banned Books
2 3 4
Replies
112
Views
23K
TexRex
TexRex
Com Fox
The current state of the political climate.
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
UKMikey
UKMikey
Danoff
Ballot Propositions and Amendments
Replies
4
Views
717
Danoff
Danoff
MatskiMonk
What's in a name? Sir Lewis Carl David Larbalestier-Hamilton MBE HonFREng
Replies
11
Views
2K
NotThePrez
NotThePrez
KAlex122
Power-Band / ECU vs. Power restrictor with AT
Replies
9
Views
3K
bread82
bread82

Latest Posts

Back