One Thread for Homosexuality, Marriage, etc., etc... My Take, for the Record

[DiveCon]

Let me thank the n00bs for starting what must be the 3,000th thread about homosexual marriage on USMB this calendar year. I just didn't think we had enough.

and it wont be the last

 

[Liability]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

Gay IS homosexuality. Homosexuality is Gay.

The word "is" does not really have multiple subtle nuanced "meanings," either, by the way.

 

[KittenKoder]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

Gay IS homosexuality. Homosexuality is Gay.

The word "is" does not really have multiple subtle nuanced "meanings," either, by the way.

Um ... no ... gay is a catch all for anything that isn't "straight" ... you don't have to mix the two, unless you think that straight is only about sex to ... in which case we should not explain to the children about any relationship, love, or family for that matter. Hell, family has more sexual content than being gay does.

 

[bigdaddygtr]

Republicans are for small gov't unless your talking about Abortion, Gay Marriage, Tax cuts for the wealthy, oh, and anything else they like

 

[DiveCon]

Republicans are for small gov't unless your talking about Abortion, Gay Marriage, Tax cuts for the wealthy, oh, and anything else they like

yeah, nice broad brush there

 

[Political Junky]

Kitten's right.

"Marriage," by its VERY definition, is a sacrament of the church. The "beenies" that come along with it (insurance, property woes, hospital visitation, POA, etc.) should be handled with a contract known as "domestic partners," "civil unions," or whatever, for straight AND gay. Also, if the gays want to be married, there are plenty of liberal churches that see no problem with marrying homosexuals, they can go there.

No one has asked to force any church to marry same sex couples. There are many churches who perform those ceremonies regularly ... unfortunately they're only recognized in a hand full of states.

 

[KittenKoder]

Kitten's right.

"Marriage," by its VERY definition, is a sacrament of the church. The "beenies" that come along with it (insurance, property woes, hospital visitation, POA, etc.) should be handled with a contract known as "domestic partners," "civil unions," or whatever, for straight AND gay. Also, if the gays want to be married, there are plenty of liberal churches that see no problem with marrying homosexuals, they can go there.

No one has asked to force any church to marry same sex couples. There are many churches who perform those ceremonies regularly ... unfortunately they're only recognized in a hand full of states.

That's not what Oscar was saying ...

 

[Gunny]

As long as we have to have govt. in the marriage business, gays should have the LIBERTY, notice I said LIBERTY, not "right," to marry.

Sorry if that ruffles your feathers, but that's the way it's becoming until the libertarian ideal of the benefits of marriage becoming "domestic partnerships" while marriage is applied as a sacrament of the church.

Again with one of you newbies misusing the word "libertarian." Since when did libertarians become the champions of the ideal "equality under law"?

And how do you figure you ruffled his feathers by saying the same thing he did? He says he has no problem with civil unions. When this issue was on the front burner, the majority of Americans didn't have an issue with civil unions. Gay rights activists rejected such a notion. Marriage or nothing. Tough. They got what they asked for. Nothing.

There are a couple of easy fixes for this, but none will work because activist homosexuals demand their aberrant behavior be accepted as normal and given legitimacy. Well, fact is, it's not normal behavior and that's that, period. No convoluted argument changes that fact.

One easy fix is since "marriage" is being coined in the same breath as "religion", and that is the issue, the state simply divorces itself from the term marriage. The church has no legal standing with the state to demand what to the state are actually already civil unions be called "marriage." Churches can still perform marriages as a matter of convenience to the state, but in the state's eyes, all "marriages" and "civil unions" are in fact civil unions.

The REAL issue here is discrimination against who one can legally name as next of kin or beneficiary. THAT however, does not promote the homosexual agenda, diminishing their role since it discriminates against anyone who is not married, or someone who is but wishes to name someone other than their spouse as beneficiary.

 

[midcan5]

"At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols." Aldous Huxley


How wonderful. How wonderful that the internet exists today so buffoons like 'tha malcontent' can post stupidity. It seems we have gained fools on USMB from where? Idiotville.

Why is your opinion on homosexuality worth any effort at all? This nonsense is repeated often but that doesn't change it from stupid.

What makes you think you even know anything about homosexuality and marriage and children? What are your qualification in any of these areas, besides the inane exhibitionism of a fool who thinks this stupidity has value?


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Escape-Evil-Ernest-Becker/dp/0029024501/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246326435&sr=1-3]Amazon.com: Escape from Evil: Ernest Becker: Books[/ame]

 

[Aztaz]

Let me get some things Clear so there isn't any Confusion about my Stand regarding some Issues in Modern Politics regarding Homosexuals and their Agenda.

1.) I am Against Criminalizing Homosexual Sex for Consenting Adults... ANY Deviant Sex for Consenting Adults, to be Clear.

I think most people can agree with that.

2.) I am FOR Civil Unions, and AGAINST Homosexuals Redefining Marriage Exclusively for their Deviancy. Marriage is a Reflection of our Natural Design, and I Believe, as does the Blue DemocRAT State of California, at least THE PEOPLE of Cali, that Marriage should remain Legally between ONE Woman and ONE Man.

Let's whip out some sub points on this:

1. "Marriage" vs. "Civil union" is simply a semantics debate. For example, I could care less what it is called. I don't believe churches should be forced to perform same sex ceremonies, but I also don't get how two strangers can have a union that is state sanctioned while a couple who has been together for years can be denied, simply due to biology. We tend to try to be so cerebral and above base biology as a species, yet cannot get over insert tab A into slot B when it comes to homosexual issues.

2. "Deviancy"? Really? You've gotta go there right out of the gate? Please, spare me the dicitonary links. It comes to semantics again, and either contradictory or magnanimous at that. I'm sure the gay community should be thrilled that you will suffer their "deviancy" by permitting them rights that you deign valid, but the fact that you feel the need to throw that term out there speaks volumes.

3. I've kind of always thought that one of the big pluses of our country is that it's designed to protect the minority from the majority. Big whoop. The majority of California agrees with you. So what? Neither you or the people of california are going to spontaneously combust if two gays marry.

3.) I am AGAINST Children who are NOT of Consenting Age regarding Sex, being Indoctrinated by Pro-Homosexual Advocates on my Tax Payer Dime in Public Schools.

What are we considering indoctrination? "Hey kids! You're all gay but you just don't know it yet!" Yeah, let's all agree that's a bad thing.

"Hey kids! Some kids have two mommies or two daddies. They love their parents, and there's nothing wrong with that. So don't make fun of them or stick their heads in a toilet. Leave the condemnation at church." Hopefully we can agree that that is ok.

But what do I know, since I don't have any kids. Hey! Wait a minute! Where's the refund of my tax payer dime that goes to public education? I want that dime to go to fix the pothole down the street.

These are the Basics... There are more Expanded Discussions that can be had, but that's where I will start, and this Thread will be Reference point for the Ignorant in the Future when they make Assertions about me without Knowing.



peace...

Reference point? SHould we bookmark this thread or something?



Peace. S. How do you decide which words to capitalize? Is it purely random, or is there a method to your madness?

 

[Liability]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

Gay IS homosexuality. Homosexuality is Gay.

The word "is" does not really have multiple subtle nuanced "meanings," either, by the way.

Um ... no ... gay is a catch all for anything that isn't "straight" ... you don't have to mix the two, unless you think that straight is only about sex to ... in which case we should not explain to the children about any relationship, love, or family for that matter. Hell, family has more sexual content than being gay does.

Um ... no. "Gay" is a catchall only for things that are homosexual. Lesbian women and homosexual (gay) men. The two are already inexorably mixed. One can be "gay" (i.e., homosexual) without engaging at any particular moment in sexual behavior. But one cannot be truly be gay (i.e., homosexual) without REFERENCE to sexuality.

Straight refers to Non-gay (i.e., non-homosexual).

Bi is something else again, as is transgender.

I don't see why you try to draw such meaningless and irrelevant distinctions. Words have meaning.

 

[KittenKoder]

Gay IS homosexuality. Homosexuality is Gay.

The word "is" does not really have multiple subtle nuanced "meanings," either, by the way.

Um ... no ... gay is a catch all for anything that isn't "straight" ... you don't have to mix the two, unless you think that straight is only about sex to ... in which case we should not explain to the children about any relationship, love, or family for that matter. Hell, family has more sexual content than being gay does.

Um ... no. "Gay" is a catchall only for things that are homosexual. Lesbian women and homosexual (gay) men. The two are already inexorably mixed. One can be "gay" (i.e., homosexual) without engaging at any particular moment in sexual behavior. But one cannot be truly be gay (i.e., homosexual) without REFERENCE to sexuality.

Straight refers to Non-gay (i.e., non-homosexual).

Bi is something else again, as is transgender.

I don't see why you try to draw such meaningless and irrelevant distinctions. Words have meaning.

Really? Eunuchs which have no sex? What about hermaphrodites? They do exist ...

Anti-sexuals? We are always called "gay" by the straight men (or women though that's less common) we turn down.

Go anywhere, it's always a "straight or gay" context, I didn't make the meaningless distinction, society did, I just repeat it.

 

[mal]

Let me get some things Clear so there isn't any Confusion about my Stand regarding some Issues in Modern Politics regarding Homosexuals and their Agenda.

1.) I am Against Criminalizing Homosexual Sex for Consenting Adults... ANY Deviant Sex for Consenting Adults, to be Clear.

I think most people can agree with that.

2.) I am FOR Civil Unions, and AGAINST Homosexuals Redefining Marriage Exclusively for their Deviancy. Marriage is a Reflection of our Natural Design, and I Believe, as does the Blue DemocRAT State of California, at least THE PEOPLE of Cali, that Marriage should remain Legally between ONE Woman and ONE Man.

Let's whip out some sub points on this:

1. "Marriage" vs. "Civil union" is simply a semantics debate. For example, I could care less what it is called. I don't believe churches should be forced to perform same sex ceremonies, but I also don't get how two strangers can have a union that is state sanctioned while a couple who has been together for years can be denied, simply due to biology. We tend to try to be so cerebral and above base biology as a species, yet cannot get over insert tab A into slot B when it comes to homosexual issues.

2. "Deviancy"? Really? You've gotta go there right out of the gate? Please, spare me the dicitonary links. It comes to semantics again, and either contradictory or magnanimous at that. I'm sure the gay community should be thrilled that you will suffer their "deviancy" by permitting them rights that you deign valid, but the fact that you feel the need to throw that term out there speaks volumes.

3. I've kind of always thought that one of the big pluses of our country is that it's designed to protect the minority from the majority. Big whoop. The majority of California agrees with you. So what? Neither you or the people of california are going to spontaneously combust if two gays marry.

3.) I am AGAINST Children who are NOT of Consenting Age regarding Sex, being Indoctrinated by Pro-Homosexual Advocates on my Tax Payer Dime in Public Schools.

What are we considering indoctrination? "Hey kids! You're all gay but you just don't know it yet!" Yeah, let's all agree that's a bad thing.

"Hey kids! Some kids have two mommies or two daddies. They love their parents, and there's nothing wrong with that. So don't make fun of them or stick their heads in a toilet. Leave the condemnation at church." Hopefully we can agree that that is ok.

But what do I know, since I don't have any kids. Hey! Wait a minute! Where's the refund of my tax payer dime that goes to public education? I want that dime to go to fix the pothole down the street.

These are the Basics... There are more Expanded Discussions that can be had, but that's where I will start, and this Thread will be Reference point for the Ignorant in the Future when they make Assertions about me without Knowing.



peace...

Reference point? SHould we bookmark this thread or something?



Peace. S. How do you decide which words to capitalize? Is it purely random, or is there a method to your madness?

It's Odd... I only do it when I am Ranting...

I don't do it @ Work, and I Write a Sizable amount through the Day...

Emphasis, Most likely.



peace...

 

[mal]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

That's Newspeak...

What Distinquishes the "Love" of a Homosexual for another and a Heterosexual for another, Specifically in the Realm of Marriage, IS Sex...

Otherwise, what is it?...

Women are Attracted to Women and Men to Men in Non-Sexual ways all of the Time.

It's the Sexual Attraction that's the Distinction.



peace...

 

[xotoxi]

It's Odd... I only do it when I am Ranting...

I don't do it @ Work, and I Write a Sizable amount through the Day...

Emphasis, Most likely.



peace...

Does that mean everything with random capitalization is a rant?

Is the above quote a rant?

 

[Aztaz]

It's Odd... I only do it when I am Ranting...

I don't do it @ Work, and I Write a Sizable amount through the Day...

Emphasis, Most likely.



peace...

I don't get it, but I do respect the discipline behind it. I have a hard enough time remembering to capitalize the begining of a sentence when I'm posting.

 

[KittenKoder]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

That's Newspeak...

What Distinquishes the "Love" of a Homosexual for another and a Heterosexual for another, Specifically in the Realm of Marriage, IS Sex...

Otherwise, what is it?...

Women are Attracted to Women and Men to Men in Non-Sexual ways all of the Time.

It's the Sexual Attraction that's the Distinction.



peace...

Really? so you think that all adult relationships and love have to have sex to exist?

 

[Aztaz]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

That's Newspeak...

What Distinquishes the "Love" of a Homosexual for another and a Heterosexual for another, Specifically in the Realm of Marriage, IS Sex...

Otherwise, what is it?...

Women are Attracted to Women and Men to Men in Non-Sexual ways all of the Time.

It's the Sexual Attraction that's the Distinction.



peace...

I don't know. I think that's kind of an oversimplification. I have some gay friends who are only attracted to straight guys. There are both heterosexuals and homosexuals who have entire sex lives built around gratification that has nothing to do with intercourse. Judging by the number of fetish sites out there, quite a few.

I think sex and sexual attraction are two complex to boil down into one of two categories, and then in turn try to balance society's success or failure based on putting everyone into one of them.

 

[KittenKoder]

Marriage is obsolete anyway ... so meh. If they want to fuck up their lives with it, let them. Straight folk have already made marriage nothing but one big joke.

Also, gay is not about sex, homosexuality is.

That's Newspeak...

What Distinquishes the "Love" of a Homosexual for another and a Heterosexual for another, Specifically in the Realm of Marriage, IS Sex...

Otherwise, what is it?...

Women are Attracted to Women and Men to Men in Non-Sexual ways all of the Time.

It's the Sexual Attraction that's the Distinction.



peace...

I don't know. I think that's kind of an oversimplification. I have some gay friends who are only attracted to straight guys. There are both heterosexuals and homosexuals who have entire sex lives built around gratification that has nothing to do with intercourse. Judging by the number of fetish sites out there, quite a few.

I think sex and sexual attraction are two complex to boil down into one of two categories, and then in turn try to balance society's success or failure based on putting everyone into one of them.

Bingo.

 

[Liability]

Um ... no ... gay is a catch all for anything that isn't "straight" ... you don't have to mix the two, unless you think that straight is only about sex to ... in which case we should not explain to the children about any relationship, love, or family for that matter. Hell, family has more sexual content than being gay does.

Um ... no. "Gay" is a catchall only for things that are homosexual. Lesbian women and homosexual (gay) men. The two are already inexorably mixed. One can be "gay" (i.e., homosexual) without engaging at any particular moment in sexual behavior. But one cannot be truly be gay (i.e., homosexual) without REFERENCE to sexuality.

Straight refers to Non-gay (i.e., non-homosexual).

Bi is something else again, as is transgender.

I don't see why you try to draw such meaningless and irrelevant distinctions. Words have meaning.

Really? Eunuchs which have no sex? What about hermaphrodites? They do exist ...

Anti-sexuals? We are always called "gay" by the straight men (or women though that's less common) we turn down.

Go anywhere, it's always a "straight or gay" context, I didn't make the meaningless distinction, society did, I just repeat it.

Eunuchs are NOT called "gay." Hermaphrodites are victims of just some biological foul-up. What about them? Yeah. They exist, but that doesn't make them "gay."

Anti-sexuals? Not gay in the slightest. Not quite hetero, either. Since it does not involve an interst in having sex, it is not "gay" nor is it straight. So what? Men being sexually attracted to men is what is gay. Or women to women. That is why I noted (correctly) that gay = homosexual and vice versa.

Society did not make the distinction whatsoever. And you aren't "repeating" anything "society" has said. You MIGHT be repeating something you HEARD. But what you heard is misguided and off-base. It's incorrect.

Thank me very much.