The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[Johnnypenso]

A bit of lipstick, a touch of mascara... the usual.

Considering that 6/9 are male, this ruling is pretty much a foregone conclusion then

 

[Mike458]

Considering that 6/9 are male, this ruling is pretty much a foregone conclusion then

Maybe, but this was an issue that should have been resolved from the start. Why is this an issue anyway?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Maybe, but this was an issue that should have been resolved from the start. Why is this an issue anyway?

What issue?

 

[Mike458]

What issue?

You know, this Supreme Court issue!

 

[Johnnypenso]

You know, this Supreme Court issue!

Not sure what you mean. Resolved from the start? You mean in 1776?

Just so you know, the response of mine you initially quoted was a joke about the male members of the board wearing mascara and lipstick...

 

[Mike458]

Not sure what you mean. Resolved from the start? You mean in 1776?

Just so you know, the response of mine you initially quoted was a joke about the male members of the board wearing mascara and lipstick...

Ah, right. Fair enough.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Ah, right. Fair enough.

I do think it should really be a non-issue if that's what you're getting at. I know the conservative leaning Americans are all up in arms about this, but here in Canada same sex marriage was legalized nationally about 10 years ago with some fanfare of course, but since then it's been a non-issue as far as I can tell. I think the issue the Supreme Court will struggle with is whether this is an issue that should be decided for the whole country by them in a ruling or whether it should be decided at the state or federal level through referendum or legislation.

 

[Zuku]

I do think it should really be a non-issue if that's what you're getting at. I know the conservative leaning Americans are all up in arms about this, but here in Canada same sex marriage was legalized nationally about 10 years ago with some fanfare of course, but since then it's been a non-issue as far as I can tell. I think the issue the Supreme Court will struggle with is whether this is an issue that should be decided for the whole country by them in a ruling or whether it should be decided at the state or federal level through referendum or legislation.

It will still be issue for many years to come. I just can't wait for the other stuff to come down the pipe though this is going to be fun.

Still I don't agree with it not even using religon it just goes against nature, and most of the old arguments have officially been discarded(born/not a choice). For the record I'm moderate leaning left, but I just will never agree with it, and personally that's just my own opinion I just don't like to be attack for having that opinion though.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It will still be issue for many years to come. I just can't wait for the other stuff to come down the pipe though this is going to be fun.

Still I don't agree with it not even using religon it just goes against nature, and most of the old arguments have officially been discarded(born/not a choice). For the record I'm moderate leaning left, but I just will never agree with it, and personally that's just my own opinion I just don't like to be attack for having that opinion though.

"Marriage" is a man made institution, it's not a natural phenomenon so I don't see how letting same sex couples get married goes against nature if that's what you mean. What animals (nature you see) get married? And for the record, homosexuality in the animal kingdom (nature you see) is common..and therefore natural.

I've never understood though, how the born/choice debate has any relevance to gay marriage. I wasn't born married to my wife and marriage didn't just happen naturally. It was a choice we both made. I don't see the difference.

 

[Dan]

"Marriage" is a man made institution, it's not a natural phenomenon so I don't see how letting same sex couples get married goes against nature if that's what you mean. What animals (nature you see) get married? And for the record, homosexuality in the animal kingdom (nature you see) is common..and therefore natural.

I always make this argument whenever I hear people call gay marriage "unnatural." Guess what. Marriage itself is unnatural!

 

[Johnnypenso]

I always make this argument whenever I hear people call gay marriage "unnatural." Guess what. Marriage itself is unnatural!

I see you've met my ex-wife

 

[CodeRedR51]

I hope the Supreme Court decides in favor of the issue, just so I can watch this country explode.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Still I don't agree with it not even using religon it just goes against nature

You and me baby, we ain't nuthin' but mammals. Let's, errr... anyway...

Marriage is a legal bond created by societies advanced enough to legislate for them, it has nothing whatsoever to do with "nature", that's just ridiculous.

The bible does not forbid same-sex marriage although I did once find a nice passage.

So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God. Now concerning the betrothed, I have no command from the Lord, but I give my judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. I think that in view of the present distress it is good for a person to remain as he is. Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you do marry, you have not sinned, and if a betrothed woman marries, she has not sinned. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. ...

 

[Scaff]

Still I don't agree with it not even using religon it just goes against nature,

Including humans homosexuality has been observed in over 1,500 species....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

.....so I would have to disagree that it just goes against nature; nature seems quite at ease with it.

and most of the old arguments have officially been discarded(born/not a choice).

Sorry are you saying that being born gay and it not being a choice has been discarded or the arguments against that have been discarded? Its not clear.

 

[Daniel]

Language warning.

 

[niky]

against nature

Lifetime monogamy goes against nature. That's why you have serial monogamy, instead, and what is called the "seven year itch"... people tend to be faithful in a union for about four to seven years... long enough to raise a single child and to keep it safe. Once the child is able to fend for itself, there's no biological reason for the parents to stay together.

-

Thus, a lifetime marriage contract is itself completely against nature.

-

Of course, those of us who've signed up for lifetime commitments and who've stuck to them aren't doing so for purely biological reasons.

 

[Zuku]

"Marriage" is a man made institution, it's not a natural phenomenon so I don't see how letting same sex couples get married goes against nature if that's what you mean. What animals (nature you see) get married? And for the record, homosexuality in the animal kingdom (nature you see) is common..and therefore natural.

I've never understood though, how the born/choice debate has any relevance to gay marriage. I wasn't born married to my wife and marriage didn't just happen naturally. It was a choice we both made. I don't see the difference.

Simple put the being born/choice debate was one of the most pervalent things I can remember of the past 10 years at least in America.

I don't plan to stay in this thread very long because I know how this turns out. Do I hate homosexuals no, but I just don't support anything they are doing. Even if it did become legalize I wouldn't accept it.

 

[Daniel]

Even if it did become legalize I wouldn't accept it.

Then don't get married to one of them.

 

[Joel]

I do think it should really be a non-issue if that's what you're getting at. I know the conservative leaning Americans are all up in arms about this, but here in Canada same sex marriage was legalized nationally about 10 years ago with some fanfare of course, but since then it's been a non-issue as far as I can tell. I think the issue the Supreme Court will struggle with is whether this is an issue that should be decided for the whole country by them in a ruling or whether it should be decided at the state or federal level through referendum or legislation.

It's pretty funny to me when you consider that people voted for Wynne in the last election because they found Hudak morally repulsive

 

[TheCracker]

Do I hate homosexuals no, but I just don't support anything they are doing. Even if it did become legalize I wouldn't accept it.

Why? How does it effect or interfere with your life?

 

[Famine]

I just don't like to be attack for having that opinion though.

Don't confuse having your opinion questioned with you being attacked for it.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Simple put the being born/choice debate was one of the most pervalent things I can remember of the past 10 years at least in America.

I don't plan to stay in this thread very long because I know how this turns out. Do I hate homosexuals no, but I just don't support anything they are doing. Even if it did become legalize I wouldn't accept it.

I'm talking from a logic standpoint here. People debate that for their own reasons, I just don't see how it's relevant to gay marriage. If I'm born gay I can get married, but not if I choose to be gay? Or if I choose to be gay I can get married but not if I'm born that way? Makes no sense from a logic standpoint. As I said, I wasn't born loving my wife, I chose to date her, I chose to marry her, I chose to have kids with her etc. From a rational standpoint, born/choice bears no relevance to the gay marriage debate, it's simply a scientific curiousity steeped in emotion.

 

[Zuku]

Don't confuse having your opinion questioned with you being attacked for it.

I'm not saying you guys are attacking, and this is why I'm not staying on this thread beyond this. Because as you've just done you're overthinking what I'm saying.

All specfically said is if I disagree with it I don't want anyone calling me or any one else names. This doesn't mean I think you've attacked me, or anything, but I've disagreed with it before, and people have constantly called me (insert whatever name) you can think of. All because I told them nicely I don't agree with it.

With that I'm out. Please don't overthink the second part I've said it's literally cut and dry lol.

@TheCracker

Never said it did interfare with my life, but I can disagree with a lot of things a lot I have been vocal about. Such as adultery I've never agreed with that a day in my life.

@Daniel

So you got that out of what I said?

 

[Mike458]

I hope the Supreme Court decides in favor of the issue, just so I can watch this country explode.

I'm thinking of moving to Britan when this happens, or Canada! That, and I'll be sipping some hot chocolate while all 🤬 breaks loose in America...

 

[dylansan]

I'm not saying you guys are attacking, and this is why I'm not staying on this thread beyond this. Because as you've just done you're overthinking what I'm saying.

All specfically said is if I disagree with it I don't want anyone calling me or any one else names. This doesn't mean I think you've attacked me, or anything, but I've disagreed with it before, and people have constantly called me (insert whatever name) you can think of. All because I told them nicely I don't agree with it.

If anyone calls you names that would be breaking the AUP and would be dealt with. Most of us just want to have a reasonable discussion.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I'm not saying you guys are attacking, and this is why I'm not staying on this thread beyond this. Because as you've just done you're overthinking what I'm saying.

All specfically said is if I disagree with it I don't want anyone calling me or any one else names. This doesn't mean I think you've attacked me, or anything, but I've disagreed with it before, and people have constantly called me (insert whatever name) you can think of. All because I told them nicely I don't agree with it.

With that I'm out. Please don't overthink the second part I've said it's literally cut and dry lol.

But you didn't just disagree, you gave a reason for your disagreement and in a discussion forum when you give your reasoning behind your opinion, that reasoning will be the subject of debate.

Still I don't agree with it not even using religon it just goes against nature, and most of the old arguments have officially been discarded(born/not a choice). For the record I'm moderate leaning left, but I just will never agree with it, and personally that's just my own opinion I just don't like to be attack for having that opinion though.

If you had left out the "goes against nature" (which it most assuredly does not)I wouldn't have responded, except maybe to ask "why", because the rest of your response is entirely opinion.

 

[eiriksmil]

Equal rights for people regardless of where they from, skin color, gender or sexuality.. I don't get why this is so damn hard to grasp for people in 2015

 

[squadops]

I hope the Supreme Court decides in favor of the issue, just so I can watch this country explode.

I'm thinking of moving to Britan when this happens, or Canada! That, and I'll be sipping some hot chocolate while all 🤬 breaks loose in America...

What do you guys think is going to happen exactly? I'm expecting a day like any other day after their decision is handed down regardless of what it might be. There will be lots of talking heads with opinions filling the news shows for a few days, parades and celebrations if it goes in favor, and maybe some small protests if not.

 

[CodeRedR51]

What do you guys think is going to happen exactly? I'm expecting a day like any other day after their decision is handed down regardless of what it might be. There will be lots of talking heads with opinions filling the news shows for a few days, parades and celebrations if it goes in favor, and maybe some small protests if not.

I just want to see the religious population freak out.

 

[Johnnypenso]

What do you guys think is going to happen exactly? I'm expecting a day like any other day after their decision is handed down regardless of what it might be. There will be lots of talking heads with opinions filling the news shows for a few days, parades and celebrations if it goes in favor, and maybe some small protests if not.

I think they'll pass it along to the states and the voters.