The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[TenEightyOne]

@BobK, you're right, I just thought mastercate was a nice pun that I'd missed

 

[Carbonox]

The point was that the sarcasm wasn't, I felt, evident from his culinary choices... I was more puzzling over "mastercate", I thought there was some play on "master race".

Mastercate (although apparently mistyped) is a funny word I once learned, which is really close to that other term describing back-and-forth movement.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Mastercate (although apparently mistyped) is a funny word I once learned, which is really close to that other term describing back-and-forth movement.

Yes, masticate just means to chew. If you were linking it with "masturbate" you should spell it "masturcate" Oddly, that isn't the strangest advice I've ever given.

On the subject of operpopulation; if the DNA switch theory that I made up a few posts ago is true then we'll see a drop in homosexuality as the world's population begins to shrink in the next few years. We won't because, like I say, I made it up

 

[Agent_47]

It's the same group of people bashing religion yet want to use one of the focal points of religion; marriage. Liberals always contradict themselves.

Their argument is that marriage is not religious though.

 

[Liquid]

Their argument is that marriage is not religious though.

Exactly, it isn't. 'Marriage' comes from the Latin maritare and simply means "to provide with husband or wife", its definition does not include, mention, need or require divine intervention or permission. As a social union between two partners marriage certainly predates Christianity and all religions and organised civilisations.

There is even evidence of primitive marriage between Neanderthals, a completely different species to us.*

Religion has monopolised marriage as another method of controlling followers. Basically, using marriage as 'evidence' or a reason for being against homosexuality is wrong, inaccurate and weak.

*Ref: New Scientist, Volume 213, Issue 2847, Pages 26-27
*Wikipedia - Neanderthal behaviour

 

[Danny]

Words I didn't read

I love you.

 

[Liquid]

Fortunately, Danny, we live in a country where two men can get married and express their love.

 

[Danny]

 

[Azure Flare]

And I live in the so called "greatest country in the world" and I can't do the former, and if I do the latter, I would get chastised for it in certain areas, like in the god-awful south, where I live.

I hate America...

 

[Liquid]

And I live in the so called "greatest country in the world" and I can't do the former, and if I do the latter, I would get chastised for it in certain areas, like in the god-awful south, where I live.

I hate America...

Move states.

(Although I appreciate that in principle, that's not the point.)

 

[Agent_47]

Exactly, it isn't. 'Marriage' comes from the Latin maritare and simply means "to provide with husband or wife", its definition does not include, mention, need or require divine intervention or permission. As a social union between two partners marriage certainly predates Christianity and all religions and organised civilisations.

There is even evidence of primitive marriage between Neanderthals, a completely different species to us.*

Religion has monopolised marriage as another method of controlling followers. Basically, using marriage as 'evidence' or a reason for being against homosexuality is wrong, inaccurate and weak.

*Ref: New Scientist, Volume 213, Issue 2847, Pages 26-27
*Wikipedia - Neanderthal behaviour

Does 'husband' not mean male, and 'wife' not mean female? Look, religion has not monopolized anything. Save the anti-religion rant for another thread. All Christianity has done is chosen to view marriage as being between one man and one woman. It was politicians that chose to give special privileges to certain groups.

I agree with giving people equal opportunity - meaning that homosexuals should have all the same legal protections that others have. That doesn't mean forcing people to have a favorable opinion towards it, especially when that opinion is based on religious belief that Americans are supposed to be allowed to hold.

 

[Liquid]

Right but does 'husband' not mean male, and 'wife' not mean female?

Pretty much. But the definition of marriage only means for "a partner" to have either a husband or wife. It does not exclude the possibility of husband + husband and wife + wife.

 

[Agent_47]

Pretty much. But the definition of marriage only means for someone to have either a husband or wife. It does not exclude the possibility of husband + husband and wife + wife.

If a 'husband' is a male, and a 'wife' is a female; and marriage describes the joining of these two in a social union; then 'marriage' in the Latin definition means one man, one woman = marriage.

Taking one thing and calling it something else doesn't change what it is. This is beside the point anyway. The core issue here is equal protection under the law, to which I am not at all against.

And I live in the so called "greatest country in the world" and I can't do the former, and if I do the latter, I would get chastised for it in certain areas, like in the god-awful south, where I live.

I hate America...

If you hate it so much, then leave. The beauty of America is that you can speak your mind and try to change things if you don't like the way things are.

 

[Exorcet]

Marriage = join X with husband or wife

X = husband or wife

Marriage = join husband with husband OR join husband with wife OR join wife with wife.

 

[Agent_47]

Marriage = join X with husband or wife

X = husband or wife

Marriage = join husband with husband OR join husband with wife OR join wife with wife.

So could I marry multiple women, or marry animals if I wanted to?

 

[Liquid]

So could I marry multiple women, or marry animals if I wanted to?

There's no reason why you theoretically shouldn't be able to. Polygamy is fine as long as there is no deception is involved and all parties consent to it.

Although why people automatically, almost reflexively, jump to this conclusion I don't know...

 

[Azure Flare]

@Agent_47 Nobody is being forced to want same-sex marriage to be legal, people are just becoming more acceptable of the idea of it.

And the whole "1 man 1 woman" schtick didn't take hold until Christianity took hold across Europe. In ancient Greece and Rome, it was completely legal, then after it started to spread, all of those who were in same-sex marriages were promptly executed.

Religion plays a huge part in that whole mess.

And no, same-sex marriage is not a slippery slope to polygamy and beastiality, thats just ****ed up.

And if I could get the hell out of this country, I would. With all the cock-blocking (for lack of a better phrase) that is going on in Washington DC, that will not change any time soon.

 

[Exorcet]

So could I marry multiple women, or marry animals if I wanted to?

Yes, unless there was some problem with that. Also, why the jump to polygamy and animals? Would that suddenly go away if the definition of marriage were changed to exclude non-heterosexual couples? Does this mean that you think polygamy and bestiality are alright as long as it isn't gay?

 

[Carbonox]

Slippery slope?

Out of all logical fallacies out there, @Agent_47 had to pick slippery slope.

Let's see what @Exorcet had to say again:

Marriage = join X with husband or wife

X = husband or wife

Marriage = join husband with husband OR join husband with wife OR join wife with wife.

I don't see "join husband with husband with wife" or any other threesomes.

Neither do I see "join husband with dog" or any other animal for the record.

I don't even. Is slippery slope the only solution people have once they're driven into a corner?

 

[Famine]

If a 'husband' is a male, and a 'wife' is a female; and marriage describes the joining of these two in a social union; then 'marriage' in the Latin definition means one man, one woman = marriage.

Nope. The Latin definition is "to provide with a husband or a wife". You can, under that definition, provide a man with a husband - or in fact any number of men, women or transgendered people - and that definition predates Christianity.

And "husband" means "house owner" and "wife" means "vagina".

If you hate it so much, then leave. The beauty of America is that you can speak your mind and try to change things if you don't like the way things are.

Why tell him to leave then?

So could I marry multiple women, or marry animals if I wanted to?

Can multiple women consent? Can an animal?

There's your answer.

 

[Rage Racer]

If you hate it so much, then leave. The beauty of America is that you can speak your mind and try to change things if you don't like the way things are.

If you want to change something real serious - provide a referendum then!

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Although why people automatically, almost reflexively, jump to this conclusion I don't know...

It's because, generally, people who are against gay marriage are against homosexuality entirely, and so they think if they equate homosexuality to something less socially acceptable that people will change their minds about gay marriage.

 

[ledhed]

The US dictator says go for it . Or he will have IRS introduce you to it .

 

[Liquid]

The US dictator says go for it . Or he will have IRS introduce you to it .

Define, explain and cite references.

 

[Azuremen]

And I live in the so called "greatest country in the world" and I can't do the former, and if I do the latter, I would get chastised for it in certain areas, like in the god-awful south, where I live.

I hate America...

Move, you hate your state not America. Really really sick of the self-loathing mindset of those that view themselves as progressive, worst case of the grass is greener I've ever seen.

Oh, and I live where marijuana is legal, along with gay marriage, and we have cheap road tax and awesome mountain roads.

 

[ledhed]

Liquid can you tell by my Sarcasm, I am not a big fan of Comarade Obama ? Nor his disregard of the US Constitution?
Or the fact he used the NSA to spy on the US ?
Or the Fact he used the IRS to punish the opponents of his administration.
Or the fact he is in charge of foriegn policy faulures that are forever a stain .
And much more ?
Like health care sham .
No pipeline .
And changed stance on states rights to decide policy on Gay marriage issue .
If you can't tell , I have made my position clear and refuse to relitigate his shame of an attempt to be a President .
He and his administration and its propaganda wing , the national media , have pushed the pro gay agenda down our collective throats with pro gay groups , using boycotts And other media to silence any didsent with the blessing of the Facist in chief .
Now the NSA has me on record .
Will edit later after my blood pressure drops .

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Here we go. Again. Good god, the number of Americans who have been completely indoctrinated by the far right is scary.

 

[Liquid]

@ledhed14 Oh, okay. Just do the usual tin hat conspiracy lunacy nonsense and don't contribute anything meaningful.

Guess what? If you've ever touched a coin, the Feds have your DNA on file so they can clone you at any time. Sleep well.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Liquid can you tell by my Sarcasm, I am not a big fan of Comarade Obama ?

Dude, you're crazy You make yourself say comrade there, that makes you the thing you're trying to make him

Or the fact he used the NSA to spy on the US ?

Blimey O'Reilly, go back through the presidencies for all kinds of internal spying. What makes you think the US just interferes in our lives over here? And you think Obama had that system designed, built and delivering in his two terms?

Or the Fact he used the IRS to punish the opponents of his administration.

Pretty new trick, huh?

Or the fact he is in charge of foriegn policy faulures that are forever a stain .

This is where my sarcasm gauge is flipping wildly between Definitely and Huh. Straight answer; if the US had a pristine history of Foreign Policy and external intervention under every other President then this would be true, possibly. Such a case will never be true however.

He and his administration and its propaganda wing , the national media , have pushed the pro gay agenda down our collective throats with pro gay groups

No, they continue to resist efforts of the low-foreheaded right wing to propogate Ol' Murica's lifestyle of white hetero-male social control. Guess what, you're not the only party in the village.

with the blessing of the Facist in chief

But... he was comrade earlier on? I'm not sure that you know what you're talking about

That's with the exception of demonstrations of bigotry or really poor sarcasm, you're certainly very good at one of those.

 

[squadops]

Liquid can you tell by my Sarcasm, I am not a big fan of Comarade Obama ? Nor his disregard of the US Constitution? .....

....He and his administration and its propaganda wing , the national media , have pushed the pro gay agenda down our collective throats with pro gay groups , using boycotts And other media to silence any didsent with the blessing of the Facist in chief .

Our President tramples the constitution on a regular basis, he's entitled to(after all he was a community organizer and all).

The strong arm part of your post is very real, much like Jessie Jackson and all that jazz.

Led is not an indoctrinated by the far right anything, more of a moderate free thinker 👍