A New Stance on Morality

[MissileMan]

Dishonest argument. While pedophilia is the harsher crime, it in no way dismisses the fact that some are homosexual attacks and some are heterosexual attacks.

How is it dishonest? Noone has proven a link between homosexuality and pedophilia.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't see how this would be such a forceful event. Gay people getting married would not affect your life negatively at all. It would make theirs much better and have literally 0 impact on the rest of society.

Only a fool things that one persons choices don't effect society. Our actions have tremendous effects on those who surround us. Great changes in society come through the simple actions of a few.

Tell me, how would gays being married make their life better? And if it has no societal impact, why should we change the laws?

 

[Powerman]

Dishonest argument. While pedophilia is the harsher crime, it in no way dismisses the fact that some are homosexual attacks and some are heterosexual attacks.

Harsher crime? First we would need another crime to compare pedophilia to, to give it a comparative description. You do realize that homosexuality isn't a crime don't you?

 

[Powerman]

Only a fool things that one persons choices don't effect society. Our actions have tremendous effects on those who surround us. Great changes in society come through the simple actions of a few.

Tell me, how would gays being married make their life better?

Tell me. Would life be as great for straight people if none of them could get married?

Look if gay people want to get married and a lot of them do then what's the fucking problem?

 

[Gunny]

Harsher crime? First we would need another crime to compare pedophilia to, to give it a comparative description. You do realize that homosexuality isn't a crime don't you?

It is when it is committed against a child. It is STILL a homosexual pedophile that is an adult male abusing a male child.

 

[Powerman]

It is when it is committed against a child. It is STILL a homosexual pedophile that is an adult male abusing a male child.

Yes and so is heterosexual pedophilia. Quit being a jackass and answer the question I asked you. Is homosexuality in and of itself a crime?

 

[Gunny]

Tell me. Would life be as great for straight people if none of them could get married?

Look if gay people want to get married and a lot of them do then what's the fucking problem?

What's the fucking problem with Farmer Brown marrying his mule?

Buy a clue ... you've already got at least one person who refuses to debate with you because you are a condescending jackass. Is a polite conversation above and beyond your abilities, or what?

 

[Powerman]

What's the fucking problem with Farmer Brown marrying his mule?

Well seeing as a mule can't consent I think we're looking at 2 different situations. I thought you would be smart enough to figure that one out.

 

[Gunny]

Yes and so is heterosexual pedophilia. Quit being a jackass and answer the question I asked you. Is homosexuality in and of itself a crime?

Let's get somethign straight, nimrod ... you want to discuss this topic with me, grow up and get some damned manners.

If you can't, talk to the hand.

 

[Annie]

Let's get somethign straight, nimrod ... you want to discuss this topic with me, grow up and get some damned manners.

If you can't, talk to the hand.

Good observation, PM is just rude and a bully. If he has any points to make, they are lost in his skreeches.

 

[Powerman]

Kathy. I just don't like people who are dishonest and want to play games. I asked him if homosexuality was a crime. He respones with this: Well it is if it's done on a child.

NO SHIT!!!!!!!!

All child molestation is illegal. I asked you if you thought homosexuality was a crime. You obviously thought it was if you were comparing pedophilia to it as being a worse crime.

 

[Avatar4321]

Tell me. Would life be as great for straight people if none of them could get married?

Look if gay people want to get married and a lot of them do then what's the fucking problem?

Nice dodge of my questions. Would be nice if you actually responded.

And how would you suggest stopping a man and a woman from marrying? If government stop legally recognizing it, that doesn't mean we wouldnt be able to marry. We can still make committments before God to be faithful to one another.

Also, even if the government says they are married doesn't mean same sex couples would be truly married. It would only be a mockery of the true order of things.

 

[Gunny]

Kathy. I just don't like people who are dishonest and want to play games. I asked him if homosexuality was a crime. He respones with this: Well it is if it's done on a child.

NO SHIT!!!!!!!!

All child molestation is illegal. I asked you if you thought homosexuality was a crime. You obviously thought it was if you were comparing pedophilia to it as being a worse crime.

I'm dishonest and want to play games because you don't like my response?

I made a simple point .... a legitimate one.

Speaking of playing games and being dishonest, that's EXACTLY what those of you pro-homo types are all about when you attempt to disassociate the homosexuality from the pedophilia.

 

[Powerman]

Dude nevermind. Your inability to see the difference between consenting adult homosexuals and pedophilia is just absurd. No point in talking to someone as clueless as you.

 

[Nienna]

Each average individual homosexual pedophile molests many times the number that the average individual heterosexual pedophile molests. So, if you were law enforcement, and you could take out one pedophile, you'd probably spare more children taking out a homosexual than a heterosexual.
http://us2000.org/cfmc/Pedophilia.pdf

 

[Gunny]

Dude nevermind. Your inability to see the difference between consenting adult homosexuals and pedophilia is just absurd. No point in talking to someone as clueless as you.

Please, Mr Freakin' Einstein, DO tell ..... WHAT is it that makes a homosexual pedophile who commits his crime against a male child NOT a homosexual as well as pedophile?

Well, besides the fact that those of you attempting to legitimize homosexual behavior as normal try to sweep that dirty little fact under the rug ......

And before you presume to call me "cluesless," maybe you should ask yourself why it is you pretty-much stand for everything wrong with this Nation.

Fucking idiot.

 

[Powerman]

And before you presume to call me "cluesless," maybe you should ask yourself why it is you pretty-much stand for everything wrong with this Nation.

I seriously doubt you have any clue what my political stances are outside the realm of the religious topics.

But let's get this straight

Me-for equal rights

You-homophobic bigot

We've at least got that one figured out in this thread.

 

[no1tovote4]

I always hate the use of the word "homophobic". This would be a person who is afraid of people like them. That would be a man who was afraid of men, or a woman afraid of women not somebody that was prejudiced against gays.

The word itself is simply an erroneous use of the language.

However, I cannot see why what two adults that consent do to themselves should have any bearing on what happens in my life or any need to create laws to 'protect them from themselves'.

Every child molester, whether homosexual or hetero deserves to burn to death but it won't change that I believe that if two adults want to self-destruct with their behavior I have no need to delegitimize it.

 

[kurtsprincess]

I have to say that I've argued this issue with many people and that is probably the most rational, fairly written response that I've gotten (without agreeing with me).

As I've said before, I'm not asking people to agree with it. If you are deeply religious and this is something that violates your faith, do I expect you to embrace gay marriage? Do I expect you to march in the gay pride parades?

No, not at all. But I stress the difference between acceptance and tolerance. Just because people in your (and when I say "you" and "your" I am speaking in general terms) country violate that part of your religion, doesn't make you any less religious. You are not "sinning," they are. Therefore, while you may not accept it as a way of life for you, that doesn't mean you should prevent it as a way of life for others. Faith is not telling people how to behave; it's believing it yourself.

As for the national impact of the marriage. If I revert back to my original post, I wrote about how things effect you and how we should treat each other. If people aren't violating your rights or the rights of any others, why must we concern ourselves with the issue? Many people on the other side of this argument claim that it is being forced on them. I ask how? If we put a gun to your head and said have gay sex and get married, then maybe I'd agree. But NO ONE is telling opponents of gay marriage that they have to participate in it, so I see that argument as irrational.

The argument of harming the country intrigues me. I've been on other messageboards where I've had all statistics thrown in my face to prove the intrinsic evil of homosexuality. They molest more children, they tend to have a poor upbringing, they all have AIDS, they're all sick perverts, etc. To me that is plain bigotry. But I see no reason why this weakens our country or the institution of marriage itself. The current argument from the President is "we need to protect the sanctity of marriage." That is, quite frankly, bullshit. If there was any "sanctity" in marriage, would there be divorce? Adultery? And why are we saying the word "sanctity" in the same sentence as the marriage sponsored by the GOVERNMENT AND NOT THE CHURCH?

Whatever the case, it saddens me that we are apparently teaching the world a lesson about freedom, when we can't apply it within our own borders.

Without stating how I feel about gay marriage I think most of the opposition comes from a feeling that the nation is traipsing on a slippery slope. The majority opposes gay marriage and if it is granted through legal decisions, rather than by voter approval, then where will it all stop? Will the next step be that marriage is not just between two people, but any number of people?

How does our society (the majority) make their desires known other than by voting? It is very disquieting to think that the granting of rights is decided by a very small minority (courts). It is a minority "judging" what they think the majority should accept. For a society to function, the majority has to feel their beliefs and values are being upheld or there will be revolution at some point.

Different countries have different views of marriage. Some allow multiple partners, and the age of the participants can vary quite a bit, and yet our society has not decided this is appropriate for us at this time. Even though many have argued that it is their "right" to have these freedoms.

So, regardless of whether gays "deserve", or have the "right", to be allowed to legally marry, it still should be up to the majority to decide through the voting process when it is ready to change the definition of marriage. Look how long it took women to gain voting rights, regardless of whether it was our right to vote, we still had to wait until the majority decided society was ready for the shift (which wasn't until 1919).

Perhaps if there was less vocalizing about the "right", and more energy put into showing society how same-sex couples contribute to society as a unit, there might be a shift in the thinking of society and eventually the majority will decide they are ready for this new aspect of life.

Calling people who don't embrace the idea of same-sex marriage "bigoted assholes" doesn't help the cause at all.

 

[Powerman]

However, I cannot see why what two adults that consent do to themselves should have any bearing on what happens in my life or any need to create laws to 'protect them from themselves'.

Which is my whole point. There is no way that 2 gay people getting married will negatively affect any straight person's life.

And for those of you who are always saying "We're sick of those queers shoving their lifestyle down our throats...yadayada"

I can promise you, you would hear much less from gay people if they had equal rights. They wouldn't have much to talk about if they were equal would they?