Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Hollywood's gay agenda marches on

2

Comments

  • TheocritusTheocritus Member LegendaryPosts: 10,014
    Originally posted by Gameloading




     
    A person who supports gay marriage wouldn't be able to become president of the US, as there are stil far to many ignorant and close minded religious voters.



     

          I can tell you have never read a page of the bible........

  • ZindaihasZindaihas Member UncommonPosts: 3,662
    Originally posted by Gameloading
     Actually, the concept of marriage is far to old to be traced back and there is a good chance marriage was around before religion.



     

    In Genesis 2:22-25, God instituted marraige between the first man and woman.  So I guess you are correct from that standpoint.  But note that God married a man and a woman, not two men or two women.

  • MarleVVLLMarleVVLL Member UncommonPosts: 907
    Originally posted by Gameloading

    A person who supports gay marriage wouldn't be able to become president of the US, as there are stil far to many religious voters.

    Fixed.

    Blessings,

    MMO migrant.

  • TsollessTsolless Member Posts: 448
    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by goneglockin


    California should be embarassed about Prop 8.  Just a bunch of dumb asses denying the undeniable and delaying the inevitable.

    Barack Obama is against recognizing gay unions as marriage. I guess he is a dumb ass. Interesting that liberals don't call him out on it.

     

     

    No because we are intelligent enough to know that there are certain issues that a president has to take a certain stance on because, otherwise he cna't be president.

    Edit:

    No close minded is good enough. Do homosexuals in any way affect your life? At all? If they did I would understand but they don't at all. So why do you care if they can marry? It doens't hurt anyone. It is close minded to say it's wrong and shouldn't be allowed even if it doesn't affect you.

  • TsollessTsolless Member Posts: 448
    Originally posted by Gameloading

    Originally posted by Zindaihas


    snip

     

    Actually, the concept of marriage is far to old to be traced back and there is a good chance marriage was around before religion.

     

    This is useless to bring up in a debate against people who are religious as they don't think that it's possible.

  • ArndurArndur Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 2,202
    Originally posted by Gameloading

    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by goneglockin


    California should be embarassed about Prop 8.  Just a bunch of dumb asses denying the undeniable and delaying the inevitable.

    Barack Obama is against recognizing gay unions as marriage. I guess he is a dumb ass. Interesting that liberals don't call him out on it.

     



     

    A person who supports gay marriage wouldn't be able to become president of the US, as there are stil far to many ignorant and close minded religious voters.



     

    There ya go call em dumb asses, ignorant and close minded. Im sure as soon as they see comments like these theyll see the light and flock to your way of thinking..........

    Im sick of this stuff I wish th egovt could just step in and give them the right to a civil union so this shit would end. Also don't listen to what hollywood says. Its like what Carlos Mencia said when I saw him live, they are there for our entertainment nothing more we should not be taking out poltical views from them.

    Hold on Snow Leopard, imma let you finish, but Windows had one of the best operating systems of all time.

    If the Powerball lottery was like Lotro, nobody would win for 2 years, and then everyone in Nebraska would win on the same day.
    And then Nebraska would get nerfed.-pinkwood lotro fourms

    AMD 4800 2.4ghz-3GB RAM 533mhz-EVGA 9500GT 512mb-320gb HD

  • SamuraiswordSamuraisword Member Posts: 2,111
    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    image

  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627
    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

  • GameloadingGameloading Member UncommonPosts: 14,182
    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.



     

    In that case, There should also be the following laws:



    People who are not able to get children are NOT allowed to get married.

    Married couples should be enforced to have children within a specific timelimit.



    It's absolutely hilarious the ignorant right wing always drags "Natural things" into the discussion when Marriage isn't a natural thing in the first place.

    but really, there is not much point in discussing this. Gay marriage will be fully legalized eventually, the question isn't if, it's when.

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by Gameloading




    It's absolutely hilarious the ignorant right wing always drags "Natural things" into the discussion when Marriage isn't a natural thing in the first place.
     

     

    Philosophical difference between people who subscribe entirely to the Bible and those that do not.  It has nothing to do with left or right.  Those that believe what is written in the Bible, believe it is describing the natural order.  So arguing with someone who believes marriage is a sacred religious act over it being natural or not is flawed.  You choose to call it ignorant and wrong that someone believes the Bible.  Honestly, that is just as bad as the "ignorant right's" argument against gay marraige.

     

    But that is why I say we need to move both sides beyond the emotional and philosophical differences on this subject and just ask ourselves:  In this day and age, doesn't every American deserve equal treatment, representation and rights under the law?

  • GameloadingGameloading Member UncommonPosts: 14,182
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Gameloading




    It's absolutely hilarious the ignorant right wing always drags "Natural things" into the discussion when Marriage isn't a natural thing in the first place.
     

     

    Philosophical difference between people who subscribe entirely to the Bible and those that do not.  It has nothing to do with left or right.  Those that believe what is written in the Bible, believe it is describing the natural order.  So arguing with someone who believes marriage is a sacred religious act over it being natural or not is flawed.  You choose to call it ignorant and wrong that someone believes the Bible.  Honestly, that is just as bad as the "ignorant right's" argument against gay marraige.

     

    But that is why I say we need to move both sides beyond the emotional and philosophical differences on this subject and just ask ourselves:  In this day and age, doesn't every American deserve equal treatment, representation and rights under the law?



     

    Again, Marriage is not a natural concept. A natural concept is something that is existing in or formed by nature, marriage is not that. There is nothing in Nature saying we have to get married, marriage is a concept invented by human societies, not nature. It's Natural for people to be attracted to each other, have affection for each other and take care of each other. Marriage is just something made by human societies. Religion has nothing to do with that,  Those who say Marriage is natural because of the bible don't understand what the word "natural" means.

  • zipitzipit Member Posts: 487
    Originally posted by Sabiancym


    I would so grab this guy's ass just to see the reaction.  It would be priceless.



     

    LMAO! 

     

              Why is it that most anti-gay talk on the net comes from either raving mad Al-Qaida lunatics or the US? I'm straight, but love going to the Gay Parade here in Copenhagen, great fun, although, it is dwarfed by what the dutch have in Amsterdam or the germans in Berlin.

              The way I see it is, if you are comfortable with your own sexuality then you don't view other forms as a threat to your way of life or an affront to whatever ideologies you hold dear. Thus, people who keep waving the anti-gay flag must be less than fully comfortable/aware of their sexuality. Jesus  Christ, give the anti-this and anti-that a rest. And people who use religion as an argument are really starting to piss me off. If Jesus walked the earth now, he would weep over the intolerance and bigotry.

     

                      Bioware: Playerhousing was never a part of the deal !!!

    Player Community: We are altering the deal, pray we don't alter it any further...

     

        

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • ounumenounumen Member Posts: 129
    Originally posted by zipit

    Originally posted by Sabiancym


    I would so grab this guy's ass just to see the reaction.  It would be priceless.



     

    LMAO! 

     

              Why is it that most anti-gay talk on the net comes from either raving mad Al-Qaida lunatics or the US? I'm straight, but love going to the Gay Parade here in Copenhagen, great fun, although, it is dwarfed by what the dutch have in Amsterdam or the germans in Berlin.

              The way I see it is, if you are comfortable with your own sexuality then you don't view other forms as a threat to your way of life or an affront to whatever ideologies you hold dear. Thus, people who keep waving the anti-gay flag must be less than fully comfortable/aware of their sexuality. Jesus  Christ, give the anti-this and anti-that a rest. And people who use religion as an argument are really starting to piss me off. If Jesus walked the earth now, he would weep over the intolerance and bigotry.

     

                      Bioware: Playerhousing was never a part of the deal !!!

    Player Community: We are altering the deal, pray we don't alter it any further...

     

        

     

     

     

     

     

     



     

    To the first quote, I would like to see the beating you took for it also. That is the reason people in general vote against gay rights. Because most want to make others uncomfortable by shoving in our face and then demanding acceptance. I dont have to accept anything, but I will tollerate it. As to the second I am all for it as I said on page 2 I think. The thing is we in America have not gotten to the point were we like our sexuality shoved into your face. That is the reason most folks are so turned off by this. Religion is probably second but unfortianatly the most vocal. If the looneys on both sides STFU and let the average person decide I bet we would all agree there is no reason this should not happen. I dont care if marriage is to defined as POOPSOCK.  All people are equal to start, then they speak and become retarded.

    "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". No one can stop anyone from pursuing happiness, but life and liberty are said to only exist if they are deliberately sought and paid for".

  • OckhamOckham Member Posts: 110
    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    You're forgetting the human physiology of the homosexual brain.  It does not drive a homosexual to want a mate of the opposite sex or cause arousal in those situations.  A persons physiology is much more than their genitalia.

    And proper role models to me are people who extend equality to everyone and practice tolerance.  There was a time when marriage traditionally did not allow inter-racial mixing.  Thank goodness that equality and tolerance won out there.  And, it will eventually win out here as well.

  • GameloadingGameloading Member UncommonPosts: 14,182
    Originally posted by ounumen

    Originally posted by zipit

    Originally posted by Sabiancym


    I would so grab this guy's ass just to see the reaction.  It would be priceless.



     

    LMAO! 

     

              Why is it that most anti-gay talk on the net comes from either raving mad Al-Qaida lunatics or the US? I'm straight, but love going to the Gay Parade here in Copenhagen, great fun, although, it is dwarfed by what the dutch have in Amsterdam or the germans in Berlin.

              The way I see it is, if you are comfortable with your own sexuality then you don't view other forms as a threat to your way of life or an affront to whatever ideologies you hold dear. Thus, people who keep waving the anti-gay flag must be less than fully comfortable/aware of their sexuality. Jesus  Christ, give the anti-this and anti-that a rest. And people who use religion as an argument are really starting to piss me off. If Jesus walked the earth now, he would weep over the intolerance and bigotry.

     

                      Bioware: Playerhousing was never a part of the deal !!!

    Player Community: We are altering the deal, pray we don't alter it any further...

     

        

     

     

     

     

     

     



     

    To the first quote, I would like to see the beating you took for it also. That is the reason people in general vote against gay rights. Because most want to make others uncomfortable by shoving in our face and then demanding acceptance. I dont have to accept anything, but I will tollerate it. As to the second I am all for it as I said on page 2 I think. The thing is we in America have not gotten to the point were we like our sexuality shoved into your face. That is the reason most folks are so turned off by this. Religion is probably second but unfortianatly the most vocal. If the looneys on both sides STFU and let the average person decide I bet we would all agree there is no reason this should not happen. I dont care if marriage is to defined as POOPSOCK.  All people are equal to start, then they speak and become retarded.

    homosexuality is not shoved in your face anymore than heterosexuality. in fact, it's quite the opposite. Every song I hear on the radio is about love of which many is about a man and a woman. 99,99% of love plots in movies are about a man and a woman. When was the last time you saw a gay sex scene on TV? You might have seen a lesbian scene a couple of times, but nothing else.

     

    Ofcourse being straigth myself this doesn't bother me as much as I'm not exactly looking for man on man scenes in my movie (or any "scenes" for that matter) but the point is that I don't really understand how people can say homosexuality is pushed onto society.

    Also, religion is the number 1 reason, not the 2nd.

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by Gameloading





     

    Again, Marriage is not a natural concept. A natural concept is something that is existing in or formed by nature, marriage is not that. There is nothing in Nature saying we have to get married, marriage is a concept invented by human societies, not nature. It's Natural for people to be attracted to each other, have affection for each other and take care of each other. Marriage is just something made by human societies. Religion has nothing to do with that,  Those who say Marriage is natural because of the bible don't understand what the word "natural" means.

    Your argument is flawed, not because it is "wrong", but because the people who believe the Bible to the letter feel that it describes the natural order.  You are looking at the Bible as words written on parchment, they are looking at it as the word of God.  God, the creator of Heaven and Earth is nature.  How much more "natural" can that be in their eyes?  Honestly, saying that someone is wrong or doesn't understand something's true meaning because they believe the Bible is hypocritical.  I'm not saying I disagree with your definitions, but you are failing to see the disconnect that true believers have with your thought process. 

     

    I am saying we need to move past that disconnect, stop arguing about semantics, and declare that all humans deserve equal rights under the law.  Marriage carries legal rights and privileges which should be available to all regardless of sexual preference.  Therefore, my statement is that as long as marriage carries rights, it should be available to all.  If certain churches want to abstain from supporting gay marriage then they can refuse to do those marriages in their church.  I don't believe that either side should be able to force the other to comply against their belief.

     

    Now, all that said, numerous times this law has been put to the test, and numerous times it has been defeated across the nation.  I am also of the opinion that regardless of how much you dislike the outcome of a popular vote, in our form of government, it does rule.  No matter the level of ignorance required.  So, until another proposition comes along, suck it up.

  • qazymanqazyman Member Posts: 1,785
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Gameloading





     

    Again, Marriage is not a natural concept. A natural concept is something that is existing in or formed by nature, marriage is not that. There is nothing in Nature saying we have to get married, marriage is a concept invented by human societies, not nature. It's Natural for people to be attracted to each other, have affection for each other and take care of each other. Marriage is just something made by human societies. Religion has nothing to do with that,  Those who say Marriage is natural because of the bible don't understand what the word "natural" means.

    Your argument is flawed, not because it is "wrong", but because the people who believe the Bible to the letter feel that it describes the natural order.  You are looking at the Bible as words written on parchment, they are looking at it as the word of God.  God, the creator of Heaven and Earth is nature.  How much more "natural" can that be in their eyes?  Honestly, saying that someone is wrong or doesn't understand something's true meaning because they believe the Bible is hypocritical.  I'm not saying I disagree with your definitions, but you are failing to see the disconnect that true believers have with your thought process. 

     

    I am saying we need to move past that disconnect, stop arguing about semantics, and declare that all humans deserve equal rights under the law.  Marriage carries legal rights and privileges which should be available to all regardless of sexual preference.  Therefore, my statement is that as long as marriage carries rights, it should be available to all.  If certain churches want to abstain from supporting gay marriage then they can refuse to do those marriages in their church.  I don't believe that either side should be able to force the other to comply against their belief.

     

    Now, all that said, numerous times this law has been put to the test, and numerous times it has been defeated across the nation.  I am also of the opinion that regardless of how much you dislike the outcome of a popular vote, in our form of government, it does rule.  No matter the level of ignorance required.  So, until another proposition comes along, suck it up.

    I think it could be argued that civilization, the church and marriage are all part of nature. They certainly have been some of the most consistent and natural human activates ever since man began walking upright. By the same token Science, free thought, and protection for individual behavior are decidedly less natural and have only recently become a factor. These things have become a factor because of the success of civilizations. Just because something is factually or logically correct, it dosent mean it will (or can) be accepted by the "natural" world. This may be the "disconnect". 

     

    Just a thought 

     

  • GameloadingGameloading Member UncommonPosts: 14,182
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Gameloading





     

    Again, Marriage is not a natural concept. A natural concept is something that is existing in or formed by nature, marriage is not that. There is nothing in Nature saying we have to get married, marriage is a concept invented by human societies, not nature. It's Natural for people to be attracted to each other, have affection for each other and take care of each other. Marriage is just something made by human societies. Religion has nothing to do with that,  Those who say Marriage is natural because of the bible don't understand what the word "natural" means.

    Your argument is flawed, not because it is "wrong", but because the people who believe the Bible to the letter feel that it describes the natural order.  You are looking at the Bible as words written on parchment, they are looking at it as the word of God.  God, the creator of Heaven and Earth is nature.  How much more "natural" can that be in their eyes?  Honestly, saying that someone is wrong or doesn't understand something's true meaning because they believe the Bible is hypocritical.  I'm not saying I disagree with your definitions, but you are failing to see the disconnect that true believers have with your thought process. 

     

    I am saying we need to move past that disconnect, stop arguing about semantics, and declare that all humans deserve equal rights under the law.  Marriage carries legal rights and privileges which should be available to all regardless of sexual preference.  Therefore, my statement is that as long as marriage carries rights, it should be available to all.  If certain churches want to abstain from supporting gay marriage then they can refuse to do those marriages in their church.  I don't believe that either side should be able to force the other to comply against their belief.

     

    Now, all that said, numerous times this law has been put to the test, and numerous times it has been defeated across the nation.  I am also of the opinion that regardless of how much you dislike the outcome of a popular vote, in our form of government, it does rule.  No matter the level of ignorance required.  So, until another proposition comes along, suck it up.



     

    Again, you don't understand what the term natural means. When believers think "God" did anything, it's called "Divine", Not "Natural".  Marriage is considered a "Spiritual bond", not a "Natural Bond"

  • Jimmy_ScytheJimmy_Scythe Member CommonPosts: 3,586

    I just want to reply to some of the "if you dislike fags then you must be a closet queer in denial" respones. To begin with, that's an ad hominum attack and doesn't have a place in genuine discussion. But if you want an actuall explaination...

    A person can be disgusted by an activity without secretly desiring to participate in said activity. If you truely think that everyone that is offended by homosexuality is really gay deep down inside then you have to admit that you yourself are really a closet necrophilic deep down inside. To make this assumption means that we are zoophiles, pedophiles, corporalphilliacs, etc. in denial.

    In conclusion: your reply is a nice, short, snarky, catchy phrase that fits well on a T-shirt or bumper sticker, but it has all the depth of piss on a flat rock.

     

  • ElikalElikal Member UncommonPosts: 7,912

    *rolls eyes*

    Ya know guys, as much as this subject concerns me personally, at some point here it has become only bickering, bitching and ridiculing, and there is no real chance to "solve" this. As much as I wish. If just everyone would be a bit more tolerant towards EVERY other kind of lifestyle or way to be. There really is no need to think of "agendas" or whatever, or argue about "what supports what". Let everyone be as he/she is, and end of story. Everything else is just pretense-debate that leads to zero. Be of kind and open heart and dont rationalize your prejudice.

    I know you cant convert someone to respect gay people by logic. It must reach the heart that gay people are not worse (or better) than any other person. And that usually comes when people know someone who is gay in the personal circle and realize that a gay person is not something exotic like a creature from a fairy tale. You really dont need to "explain" anything. Practice respect to all forms of "being". People "are", they must not be judged for being what they are.

    Just try to not concern yourself with the doings or not doings of others in their bedroom. Its really not anyones matter. Love and do what you will.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • RedwoodSapRedwoodSap Member Posts: 1,235
    Originally posted by Ockham

    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    You're forgetting the human physiology of the homosexual brain.  It does not drive a homosexual to want a mate of the opposite sex or cause arousal in those situations.  A persons physiology is much more than their genitalia.

    And proper role models to me are people who extend equality to everyone and practice tolerance.  There was a time when marriage traditionally did not allow inter-racial mixing.  Thank goodness that equality and tolerance won out there.  And, it will eventually win out here as well.

    A homosexual brain is not a normal aspect of physiology. The drive for procreation is the normal brain function seeded physiologically in human evolution. Homosexuals are disfunctional as a result of environment. You are not born homosexual.

    image

  • GameloadingGameloading Member UncommonPosts: 14,182
    Originally posted by RedwoodSap

    Originally posted by Ockham

    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    You're forgetting the human physiology of the homosexual brain.  It does not drive a homosexual to want a mate of the opposite sex or cause arousal in those situations.  A persons physiology is much more than their genitalia.

    And proper role models to me are people who extend equality to everyone and practice tolerance.  There was a time when marriage traditionally did not allow inter-racial mixing.  Thank goodness that equality and tolerance won out there.  And, it will eventually win out here as well.

    A homosexual brain is not a normal aspect of physiology. The drive for procreation is the normal brain function seeded physiologically in human evolution. Homosexuals are disfunctional as a result of environment. You are not born homosexual.

    The vast majority of the scientific community agrees that homosexuality is decided at birth.

     

  • OckhamOckham Member Posts: 110
    Originally posted by RedwoodSap

    Originally posted by Ockham

    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    You're forgetting the human physiology of the homosexual brain.  It does not drive a homosexual to want a mate of the opposite sex or cause arousal in those situations.  A persons physiology is much more than their genitalia.

    And proper role models to me are people who extend equality to everyone and practice tolerance.  There was a time when marriage traditionally did not allow inter-racial mixing.  Thank goodness that equality and tolerance won out there.  And, it will eventually win out here as well.

    A homosexual brain is not a normal aspect of physiology. The drive for procreation is the normal brain function seeded physiologically in human evolution. Homosexuals are disfunctional as a result of environment. You are not born homosexual.

    Well, you just went against the overwhelming evidence coming from the scientific community and the psychological community, not to mention just about 99.999% of every homosexual who will tell you flat out that they were born that way.  But hey, if you want to feel like you know better than all of them to make yourself feel esteemed, then go right ahead.  Personally, I kind of believe my gay friends who have no reason to lie to me about it.  I think they understand themselves more than you. 

  • RedwoodSapRedwoodSap Member Posts: 1,235
    Originally posted by Ockham

    Originally posted by RedwoodSap

    Originally posted by Ockham

    Originally posted by Samuraisword

    Originally posted by Draq


    To clarify Obama's position on gay marriage, as stated by Joe Biden during the vice presidential debates that none of you apparently watched, Obama is for giving gays the right to a civil union, which basically is marraige without the M word, but he's against forcing any religious institution to recognize gay marriage.



     

    Gays already have the right to a civil union within the context of receiving significant other status. But that's not good enough for Gays. They  want their civil unions to be recognized and called marriage, to be equal in every way to a marriage between a man and a woman. Obama does not support that view like most sensible people.

    Marriage traditionally has been defined as being between a man and a woman and deserves the elevated status of this definition only. The human physiology for procreation is proof positive that a special relationship exists between the opposite sexes. This relationship extends beyond procreaton and has been supported by evolution for the purpose of raising children and providing proper role models of the sexes.

    It has nothing to do with religion. This is a red herring that lefties throw out there. I myself don't worship deities as I am agnostic. It's about common sense and supporting traditional values which provide the best environment for raising a family.

    You're forgetting the human physiology of the homosexual brain.  It does not drive a homosexual to want a mate of the opposite sex or cause arousal in those situations.  A persons physiology is much more than their genitalia.

    And proper role models to me are people who extend equality to everyone and practice tolerance.  There was a time when marriage traditionally did not allow inter-racial mixing.  Thank goodness that equality and tolerance won out there.  And, it will eventually win out here as well.

    A homosexual brain is not a normal aspect of physiology. The drive for procreation is the normal brain function seeded physiologically in human evolution. Homosexuals are disfunctional as a result of environment. You are not born homosexual.

    Well, you just went against the overwhelming evidence coming from the scientific community and the psychological community, not to mention just about 99.999% of every homosexual who will tell you flat out that they were born that way.  But hey, if you want to feel like you know better than all of them to make yourself feel esteemed, then go right ahead.  Personally, I kind of believe my gay friends who have no reason to lie to me about it.  I think they understand themselves more than you. 

    If you agree it's a birth defect rather than a normal aspect of human physiology, then yes you could be born confused like that. Hopefully they will find a cure.

    image

  • WaterlilyWaterlily Member UncommonPosts: 3,105

     Why do actors always believe because they are in the spotlight that their opinion counts for more, or that they are somehow suddenly knowledgeable about issues they never studied.

Sign In or Register to comment.