The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[Scaff]

Sure your logic says that handing out money to something of no to very little social value is useless when there are a thousand other causes it could be used better for. Or prove me wrong, at least I reasoned my opinion there.

What you have done is repeatedly made a claim of something happening, something that you have been asked to provide a source so and have faield to do so.

This was not opinion you were posting, its a statement of fact, as such its your responsibility to provide a citation so it can be discussed further.

Without one is a pointless piece of hyperbole, and even if it were true its a reason to change tax and benefit laws not to stop gay people marrying.

 

[XoravaX]

What you have done is repeatedly made a claim of something happening, something that you have been asked to provide a source so and have faield to do so.

This was not opinion you were posting, its a statement of fact, as such its your responsibility to provide a citation so it can be discussed further.

Without one is a pointless piece of hyperbole, and even if it were true its a reason to change tax and benefit laws not to stop gay people marrying.

With the current marriage laws in the US (and many other countries) just expanded to allow same-sex marriages, married gay couples would gain financial incentives, wouldn't they?

I'd just move some of the incentives to couples or single parents with children only, so they would be used better.

 

[Scaff]

With the current marriage laws in the US (and many other countries) just expanded to allow same-sex marriages, married gay couples would gain financial incentives, wouldn't they?

I'd just move some of the incentives to couples or single parents with children only, so they would be used better.

I can only speak for the UK and the only financial incentives they would have would be the same ones as married straight couples without kids would get (which is almost none). The only way in which they would gain any form of child related financial benefit would be if they had children (adopted or from previous relationships, etc.) which would allow they the same ability to support and raise the children as a straight married couple would have.

In other words they would not be taking advantage of any one, and again if they were than would be an issue for a change in tax/benefit law and not a reason to ban gay marriage (unless you wish to argue that any straight couple defrauding the same system would be reason to ban straight marriage).

 

[Exorcet]

Well, I think the ideal environment for children is a home of a loving mother and father (that the children see a good example of both a man and a woman, not that an example of an individual of the other gender is left for some other people to show) who've got enough money to take care of their children well enough.

Assuming that male and female need different roll models (I disagree), why couldn't a gay couple provide such a thing? My extended family has been in contact with me since forever. If I only had one parent or gay parents, then I very easily could have found a male/female/whatever roll model for myself. As a matter of fact some people outside my family could have done just as well.

The need for male/female roll models also raises the question of single parents. Are these roll models so important that they should (re)marry? If not then it doesn't seem like much of a reason to place heterosexual marriage above homosexual when it comes to kids.

Lastly, what happens when one of the roll models is bad? Certainly, that is worse than same sex parents.

Change often is just uncontrolled, which may cause problems. Of course there is no such thing as a completely controlled change, but it's something to strive for.

People are asking for laws allowing gay marriage, that sounds pretty controlled.

Maybe, maybe. If you read that wall of text I wrote in my previous post you might understand my stance better.

Some guy in a bar does not represent everyone if that's what you're talking about. He certainly has no effect on logical arguments for gay marriage.

 

[Carbonox]

I'd just move some of the incentives to couples or single parents with children only, so they would be used better.

Why's that exactly? Even though birth rate is going down here, I highly doubt people would make kids just because of extra money.

@Ranman, you made my day once again.

 

[Johnnypenso]

TL;DR - You think same-sex marriage is fine. That is the topic of this thread (or at least the issue of the moment in the Homosexuality thread).

That's good enough for me.

You challenge me on the incest and polygamy points, I respond and you quit. I expected more.

 

[cgg]

What's the problem with it? Have you ever uncontrollably loved someone? People don't choose their sexuality, it's one if the only things that is completely out of control for anyone. It's the same principle as simple opinions. Homosexuality isn't a problem, in fact, it a good thing, because it means there's more variety within people. Some I the nicer people I know are gay, and I don't care about it. Saying homosexuality is a problem, is like saying white people are a problem, black people are a problem, Asian people are a problem. That totally wrong. People don't accept racism, sexism, and god knows what other ism, but people don't seem to understand homophobia.

Empathy. It's very good.

Put your self in the shoes of a black kid, who goes to school in a community where all the other kids are white. These kids don't like the black kid, because he's black. They hurl abuse at him. How does he feel?

Put yourself in the shoes of a gay kid, who goes to school in a community where all the other kids are straight. These kids don't like the gay kid, because he's gay. They hurl abuse at him. How does he feel?

The same principle. People can't help their ethnicity, their family, their interests, there sexuality

 

[Ranman20]

Do you have a source?

 

[cgg]

A source for what?

 

[Terronium-12]

I gather he's attempting to placate the whole "back up your claim" bit.

 

[Ranman20]

A source for what?

What do you mean people don't choose their sexuality? Do you have any proof?

 

[Carbonox]

Do you have a source?

Do you?

 

[cgg]

Well... Everyday day at school, homophobic comments are made to me pretty mug all day. My friendship group (who don't do it) contains a number of Asian guys. Now, those people don't get any racist comments. Is it fair?

For 🤬 sake ranman. Have you ever love somebody? I mean properly, uncontrollably. Did you think "oh yeah... I'm gonna love that person there because I like ther car" Of course not. That's not how people's minds work. Therefore, a homosexual person doesn't think "I'm going to love someone of my own gender for a laugh" Things don't work like that. The love emotion, is completely independent of anything.

 

[Dennisch]

What do you mean people don't choose their sexuality? Do you have any proof?

Did you choose to be straight, and if so, can you point out exactly how it happened?

 

[Ranman20]

Did you choose to be straight, and if so, can you point out exactly how it happened?

I chose to be strait because I like girls and I like to follow God's standards.

 

[Doth1s]

I chose to be strait because I like girls and I like to follow God's standards.

So you are saying that you've had boys and you've had girls and decided that you liked the girls over the boys?

 

[cgg]

But why do you like girls? That's not really an answer. Put it his way. What makes you like girls?

 

[Ranman20]

So you are saying that you've had boys and you've had girls and decided that you liked the girls over the boys?

No just had girls. Is this questionaire?

 

[cgg]

Why though?

 

[Ranman20]

But why do you like girls? That's not really an answer. Put it his way. What makes you like girls?

Missed this. I like girls because of their cute faces, some girls personalitys turn me on, body features, smart girls are nice people.

 

[Danny]

because I like girls and I like to follow God's standards.

Pick one.

 

[Ranman20]

Pick one.

Gods standard if you mean one or the other.

 

[cgg]

There's your answer. Nowhere in your life though, have you decided to like girls cute faces, and there personalities that turn you on. That's the bit that is uncontrollable.

 

[Dennisch]

I chose to be strait because I like girls and I like to follow God's standards.

....

So, if I rape your sister, she has to marry me, and you would agree?

 

[cgg]

No Dennisch. No sex before marriage is God's word.

 

[Carbonox]

Gods standard if you mean one or the other.

So Ranman, if you find yourself having a crush on a woman already in a relationship, will you cut your eye off because it's what God wants you to do?

 

[Dennisch]

No Dennisch. No sex before marriage is God's word.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29.

 

[Terronium-12]

Gods standard if you mean one or the other.

So let me see if I have this straight (no pun intended): you only like women because it's God's standard?

 

[cgg]

(Whisper) He's gone a little quiet.

 

[Famine]

I chose to be strait

When did that happen then?

I mean, I must have missed that day or something, 'cos I don't recall having a choice in it.

I like to follow God's standards.

Which one? The Jewish standards of the Old Testament where you must marry your rapist or be stoned to death, forego prawns, tattoos and mixing fabrics or the Christian standard of loving your fellow man without prejudice?

Interesting how often the Bible is misused by biased Christians seeking to insert prejudice into love when they believe the dude their religion is named after preached the opposite...