Question for anti gay marriage people.

[73109]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Then you sir are a homophobe and incredibly short sighted. There is nothing I can do about it. I just hope one day, you will need a gay person to help you out...and they might not be there for you.

[SovereignDream]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Explain to me, in detail, how            with a non-consenting animal is ANYTHING like            with an adult          who consents?

The fact that an adult          consents to it makes it even worse...

[SovereignDream]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Then you sir are a           and incredibly short sighted. There is nothing I can do about it. I just hope one day, you will need a gay person to help you out...and they might not be there for you.

Can't you face it? There are many sane people that see the wrongness of gayness. That you do not see the clear violation of human dignity in the act is not of my concern.

[icysk8r]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Explain to me, in detail, how            with a non-consenting animal is ANYTHING like            with an adult          who consents?

The fact that an adult          consents to it makes it even worse...

Again.  Explain IN DETAIL how it is bad and anything like having sex with a non-consenting animal.

[73109]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Then you sir are a           and incredibly short sighted. There is nothing I can do about it. I just hope one day, you will need a gay person to help you out...and they might not be there for you.

Can't you face it? There are many sane people that see the wrongness of gayness. That you do not see the clear violation of human dignity in the act is not of my concern.

Ok dude...whatever you say...

[GuineaPig]

You know, the most interesting thing about this thread in retrospect is that SovereignDream has been posting this entire time with an avatar that features the lead in one of the most homoerotic movies ever swallowing a banana.

[73109]

No...the Spartans were buff, macho, and cocky ...go look at this dudes thread entitled "A Fight To Remember" It makes sense.

[SovereignDream]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Explain to me, in detail, how            with a non-consenting animal is ANYTHING like            with an adult          who consents?

The fact that an adult          consents to it makes it even worse...

Again.  Explain IN DETAIL how it is bad and anything like            with a non-consenting animal.

What the hell do you even mean by "in-detail" both are morally abhorrent.
I'm quite sorry you do not see it my way.

Oh, and one last thing:


THIS IS SPARTA!

[icysk8r]

You know, the most interesting thing about this thread in retrospect is that SovereignDream has been posting this entire time with an avatar that features the lead in one of the most homoerotic movies ever swallowing a banana.

Damn you.  I was waiting for something about Felicio to be posted so I could have the best avatar quote ever and you just ruined it.

[SovereignDream]

No...the Spartans were buff, macho, and cocky ...go look at this dudes thread entitled "A Fight To Remember" It makes sense.

Haha  

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.

[icysk8r]

Ah...now we have the age old              =zoophilia

Just so you get an idea of what I equate a (physical) gay relationship to. I've no problem with the emotional love in a gay relationship.

Explain to me, in detail, how            with a non-consenting animal is ANYTHING like            with an adult          who consents?

The fact that an adult          consents to it makes it even worse...

Again.  Explain IN DETAIL how it is bad and anything like            with a non-consenting animal.

What the hell do you even mean by "in-detail" both are morally abhorrent.
I'm quite sorry you do not see it my way.

I mean that when debating something you have to support it with legitimate reasons other than "because it's what I think"

No...the Spartans were buff, macho, and cocky ...go look at this dudes thread entitled "A Fight To Remember" It makes sense.

Haha 

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.

EDIT: reported.

[j]

Jesus, that was hard to read.  The last few pages of this thread are an absolute train wreck on all sides.  Except for this:

You know, the most interesting thing about this thread in retrospect is that SovereignDream has been posting this entire time with an avatar that features the lead in one of the most homoerotic movies ever swallowing a banana.

For the record Sovereign, I completely disagree with you, but I'm impressed that you're able to keep a sense of humor while everybody else is losing their shit in an emotional whirlwind.

-J

[SovereignDream]

[/quote]

Haha 

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.
[/quote]
EDIT: reported.
[/quote]

Reported? Are you kidding me? For humorously offering to spot a kid bench pressing?
There's a couple types of people I greatly dislike, but lying, exaggerating snitches rank at about 2 or 3.
I'm very strongly encouraged to call you something that rhymes with 'cussy'.

[SovereignDream]

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.
EDIT: reported.

Reported? Are you kidding me? For humorously offering to spot a kid bench pressing?
There's a couple types of people I greatly dislike, but lying, exaggerating snitches rank at about 2 or 3.
I'm very strongly encouraged to call you something that rhymes with 'cussy'.

[icysk8r]

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.
EDIT: reported.

Reported? Are you kidding me? For humorously offering to spot a kid bench pressing?

Then you should have nothing to worry about.

[PlaysLikeMyung]

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.
EDIT: reported.

Reported? Are you kidding me? For humorously offering to spot a kid bench pressing?
There's a couple types of people I greatly dislike, but lying, exaggerating snitches rank at about 2 or 3.
I'm very strongly encouraged to call you something that rhymes with 'cussy'.

fussy?

this thread makes my head hurt.

[SovereignDream]

Trust me, lifting weights is awesome. Maybe I'll spot you on the bench one day...so long as we keep the gayness at 0.
EDIT: reported.

Reported? Are you kidding me? For humorously offering to spot a kid bench pressing?

Then you should have nothing to worry about.

Seriously, who reports people? It's obvious I'm getting to your head here and you want to "get back" at me. I get it.
Just don't be surprised when you get called a "little girl," you little girl.

YOU GIRLY MAN

[PlaysLikeMyung]

To be fair, SD, some of your comments towards both 13085193458 and icy have been borderline offensive. If you haven't already, I suggest reading the "How to aruge on the internet" sticky

[sneakyblueberry]

SD, Dude, you need to relax.  You're being totally disrespectful and now you're just insulting people willy nilly.  You really should read the rules before you post.

[SovereignDream]

SD, Dude, you need to relax.  You're being totally disrespectful and now you're just insulting people willy nilly.  You really should read the rules before you post.

Maybe it is a little hard to tell, but I assure you that these "insults" are not serious. I'm just being facetious.

[PlaysLikeMyung]

we can't tell that on the internet

which is why we don't insult people at all, joking or not, while having an argument like this

[Seventh Son]

Jesus, that was hard to read.  The last few pages of this thread are an absolute train wreck on all sides.  Except for this:

You know, the most interesting thing about this thread in retrospect is that SovereignDream has been posting this entire time with an avatar that features the lead in one of the most homoerotic movies ever swallowing a banana.

For the record Sovereign, I completely disagree with you, but I'm impressed that you're able to keep a sense of humor while everybody else is losing their shit in an emotional whirlwind.

-J

It is kind of funny, although I can't blame them for doing such a thing. Unfortunately I can't foresee this topic going well at all or staying open any longer.

SD: The reason nearly everyone has lost their cool with you is because every single point seems to be backed up with "Because I said so". You're free to think that way if you want, but I not a lot of people are going to take you seriously if you refuse to back up your points (Which I've yet to see). And the avatar is pretty ironic 

If you're willing to back up what you're saying with actual points then I'm sure the forum will be willing to take you seriously.

[Super Dude]

For the record guys, don't soil my image by referring to this guy as SD.  Let's not dirty that name, shall we?

Second, SovereignDream, you might be interested by this little historical tidbit:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_(film)

Leonidas' description of the Athenians as "boy lovers" [is] ironic, since the Spartans themselves incorporated institutional pederasty into their educational system.

Yep, your hero not only partook of homoerotic pleasures; it was with young boys.

And another one I found particularly interesting:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Europe

In the Symposium (182B-D), Plato equates acceptance of homosexuality with democracy, and its suppression with despotism, saying that homosexuality "is shameful to barbarians because of their despotic governments, just as philosophy and athletics are, since it is apparently not in best interests of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or physical unions, all of which love is particularly apt to produce".

Barbarians, a.k.a the Germanic and Frankish tribes from which you and your ilk are likely descended, looked down upon homosexuality.  The Greeks and Romans, who are the basis for modern Western civilization, and without whom you and your ilk would still be barbaric headhunters and militant religious berserkers, were strong proponents of homosexuality not only as socially acceptable, but as being of particular utility to the development of character, wisdom, and camaraderie.

If you're going to hate people just for loving who they want to love or marrying who they want to, then I suggest you buy the next flight to that distant planet of yours.  Or to be more realistic and possibly more practical, ask yourself if treating another human being as less than human is a truly Christian thing to do.  By supporting such bigotry, are you really making this world a better place?  I mean it, step away from your computer for just an hour, and seriously chew on that.

Also stop attacking my friends.  I find your treatment of them and just your conduct to be utterly despicable.

[GuineaPig]

Not to mention Spartan women took measures to masculinize their appearance for their wedding days so that their husbands wouldn't be confused when it came to consummation 

[El Barto]

Personally, I thought the weightlifting comment was pretty funny.  I suppose Sovereign, being a noob and all, doesn't have the rapport required to pull off facetiousness quite yet.  Still, I wouldn't consider that particular remark to be an actual insult. 

[Ħ]

I can see two reasons a person would be anti-gay marriage. 

One, because they think that being gay is, well, wrong.  Likely because of religion.  The problem I see is that there are plenty of things that we do that are against religion.  For example, we look at women with lust in our eyes.  Should that be illegal too?  It's hard to know where to draw the line once you start combining religion with politics.

Two, because they don't want a liberal domino effect.  This issue might not be a big deal, but once it blows over, something else becomes the target.  The gay-marriage issue therefore becomes a type of "shield" for conservatives, so that liberals don't actually attack something even more significant.  The problem is that while this is certainly a good strategy, it's not really honest.  But this is politics, and the other side will destroy you if you have any degree of integrity.

I am reluctant to give my own view because I am undecided as of now.

[SovereignDream]

I can see two reasons a person would be anti-gay marriage. 

One, because they think that being gay is, well, wrong.  Likely because of religion.  The problem I see is that there are plenty of things that we do that are against religion.  For example, we look at women with lust in our eyes.  Should that be illegal too?  It's hard to know where to draw the line once you start combining religion with politics.

Two, because they don't want a liberal domino effect.  This issue might not be a big deal, but once it blows over, something else becomes the target.  The gay-marriage issue therefore becomes a type of "shield" for conservatives, so that liberals don't actually attack something even more significant.  The problem is that while this is certainly a good strategy, it's not really honest.  But this is politics, and the other side will destroy you if you have any degree of integrity.

I am reluctant to give my own view because I am undecided as of now.

Basically, for religious and personal views, I deem gayness wrong.

[El Barto]

As for secular reasoning, I see a couple of things. 

First and foremost, like most things that are Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Conservative issues, it's just made-up bullshit to keep people both active and divided.  As I keep saying, there isn't much tangible difference in what the candidates will actually do, so irrelevant causes likely to create passionate opinions are foisted upon us.  Abortion and immigration fall into the same category.   Every politician goes to Washington to grab money and power,  which all comes from the same players.  These sorts of issues are what allows them to stay in the game.  "I'm going there to take care of the good people who share my values!"  sounds a lot better than  "I'm going to get rich and pork interns while doing nothing that will ever help you!"

The other thing, and I'm guessing it's the point that Bosk doesn't want to get into in this particular environment, is the legal ramifications of granting marital status to homos.  Do they get the same benefits as normal couples?  Tax breaks.  Insurance?  Marriage in this country comes with plenty of legal implications.  Then you have to determine how to handle marriages from other states.  What if two married lesbians show up in a state that doesn't recognize their marriage.  I can see how it might be a pain in the ass.  Personally, I disagree with this as a concern.  Marriage shouldn't be a legal matter, anyway. 

[bosk1]

I have no problem with discussing the legal ramifications.

[El Barto]

When Cole asked you what your secular reasons were, I took a guess that it was along those lines.  If not, I'd be interested in hearing what they are. 

[bosk1]

Oh, I see.  No, I was just saying I don't really want to get into the discussion in general.  My reasons are largely based on the fact that my religious convictions lead me to believe homosexuality is sinful.  Since nobody here is interested whatsoever in that argument, whether or not I can articulate it in a reasonable manner or not, and that even voicing that opinion will lead to all manner of untrue accusations being flung my way (not by you, but plenty of others who post here), I can't really be bothered to "argue with a brick wall," so to speak.  My more "secular" reasons aren't really worth hashing out because (1) comparatively (i.e., in comparison to my religious reasons) they aren't ultimately of much significance to me, (2) they are admittedly colored by my religious reasons, and (3) I've said them before.  If you and I were sitting down over a couple of beers (well, I'd be drinking diet Coke, but w/e), I'd be happy to talk it through with you, and I'm confident I would enjoy the discussion and feel like I had grown and become a better person from having it with you.  But as for hashing it out on an Internet forum with kids who can't comprehend that anyone who thinks differently than their high school language arts teacher isn't productive.

[icysk8r]

For the record guys, don't soil my image by referring to this guy as SD.  Let's not dirty that name, shall we?

Second, SovereignDream, you might be interested by this little historical tidbit:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_(film)

Leonidas' description of the Athenians as "boy lovers" [is] ironic, since the Spartans themselves incorporated institutional pederasty into their educational system.

Yep, your hero not only partook of homoerotic pleasures; it was with young boys.

And another one I found particularly interesting:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Europe

In the Symposium (182B-D), Plato equates acceptance of homosexuality with democracy, and its suppression with despotism, saying that homosexuality "is shameful to barbarians because of their despotic governments, just as philosophy and athletics are, since it is apparently not in best interests of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or physical unions, all of which love is particularly apt to produce".

Barbarians, a.k.a the Germanic and Frankish tribes from which you and your ilk are likely descended, looked down upon homosexuality.  The Greeks and Romans, who are the basis for modern Western civilization, and without whom you and your ilk would still be barbaric headhunters and militant religious berserkers, were strong proponents of homosexuality not only as socially acceptable, but as being of particular utility to the development of character, wisdom, and camaraderie.

If you're going to hate people just for loving who they want to love or marrying who they want to, then I suggest you buy the next flight to that distant planet of yours.  Or to be more realistic and possibly more practical, ask yourself if treating another human being as less than human is a truly Christian thing to do.  By supporting such bigotry, are you really making this world a better place?  I mean it, step away from your computer for just an hour, and seriously chew on that.

Also stop attacking my friends.  I find your treatment of them and just your conduct to be utterly despicable.

I'm pretty sure you just won the thread.  This was great.  It probably won't win, but I nominate POTY.

[TempusVox]

  But as for hashing it out on an Internet forum with kids who can't comprehend that anyone who thinks differently than their high school language arts teacher isn't productive.

 

[j]

First and foremost, like most things that are Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Conservative issues, it's just made-up bullshit to keep people both active and divided.  As I keep saying, there isn't much tangible difference in what the candidates will actually do, so irrelevant causes likely to create passionate opinions are foisted upon us.  Abortion and immigration fall into the same category.   Every politician goes to Washington to grab money and power,  which all comes from the same players.  These sorts of issues are what allows them to stay in the game.  "I'm going there to take care of the good people who share my values!"  sounds a lot better than  "I'm going to get rich and pork interns while doing nothing that will ever help you!"

Couldn't have said it better.

The other thing, and I'm guessing it's the point that Bosk doesn't want to get into in this particular environment, is the legal ramifications of granting marital status to homos.  Do they get the same benefits as normal couples?  Tax breaks.  Insurance?  Marriage in this country comes with plenty of legal implications.  Then you have to determine how to handle marriages from other states.  What if two married lesbians show up in a state that doesn't recognize their marriage.  I can see how it might be a pain in the ass.  Personally, I disagree with this as a concern.  Marriage shouldn't be a legal matter, anyway. 

I think the primary argument from a secular point of view is economically based.  Why should the state give gay couples all the financial benefits of marriage?  What state interests do they serve?

While I think it's obvious that there will be inherent differences in a "family unit" with a man and a woman versus one with two dudes, I have no idea if or to what degree they're meaningful.  And frankly, since the field of psychology is such a mire of bullshit, unverifiable speculation, and God knows what else, I really have no desire to investigate it further.

Personally, I still lean toward taking marriage out of the hands of the government--at least for the most part--and making it a purely private contractual affair between two consenting parties.

  But as for hashing it out on an Internet forum with kids who can't comprehend that anyone who thinks differently than their high school language arts teacher isn't productive.

 

-J

[Seventh Son]

Oh, I see.  No, I was just saying I don't really want to get into the discussion in general.  My reasons are largely based on the fact that my religious convictions lead me to believe homosexuality is sinful.  Since nobody here is interested whatsoever in that argument, whether or not I can articulate it in a reasonable manner or not, and that even voicing that opinion will lead to all manner of untrue accusations being flung my way (not by you, but plenty of others who post here), I can't really be bothered to "argue with a brick wall," so to speak.  My more "secular" reasons aren't really worth hashing out because (1) comparatively (i.e., in comparison to my religious reasons) they aren't ultimately of much significance to me, (2) they are admittedly colored by my religious reasons, and (3) I've said them before.  If you and I were sitting down over a couple of beers (well, I'd be drinking diet Coke, but w/e), I'd be happy to talk it through with you, and I'm confident I would enjoy the discussion and feel like I had grown and become a better person from having it with you.  But as for hashing it out on an Internet forum with kids who can't comprehend that anyone who thinks differently than their high school language arts teacher isn't productive.

Come on bosk, I think there's a huge difference in what you've said and what SD has. I completely disagree on it being immoral, but I can understand why one's religious convictions can lead one to seeing it that way and I have no problem with that. My issue is some of the comments SD made regarding gays that is nothing more than an ad hominem and presenting it forth as a valid argument. Ehra's and number's comments were quite harsh yes, I'll concede that, but I really do doubt that the forum would act the same upon you as did SD.

And for the record, you seem like a really nice guy, and someone that would seem to be cool to have a classic coke with (Diet coke bosk? DIET COKE?! WHERE IS YOUR PRIDE MAN?!).