CA allows g4y marriage

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Eyesore wrote:

troublezone wrote:

manny wrote:

No I am not that naive, but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to something that will not effect them in any way what so ever. It will not effect the size of their wallet, their marriage, their property values, etc.

I personally don't have a problem with two people getting married no matter what the sexual preference and I don't really understand why anyone would or for that matter why would anyone care, live and let live.

This has become a bandwagon that is cool to jump on these days. I'm pretty sure most that are speaking up for this wouldn't of 10 or 20 years ago. For me this is a morality issue... I'm all for live and let live but not when the left force their agenda on a established institution.

Where's the morality in denying someone a freedom that so many others have?

It's mine and many other's view based on bible scripture but i wouldn't expect you to agree.

troublezone wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

troublezone wrote:

manny wrote:

No I am not that naive, but I am surprised that so many people are opposed to something that will not effect them in any way what so ever. It will not effect the size of their wallet, their marriage, their property values, etc.

I personally don't have a problem with two people getting married no matter what the sexual preference and I don't really understand why anyone would or for that matter why would anyone care, live and let live.

This has become a bandwagon that is cool to jump on these days. I'm pretty sure most that are speaking up for this wouldn't of 10 or 20 years ago. For me this is a morality issue... I'm all for live and let live but not when the left force their agenda on a established institution.

Where's the morality in denying someone a freedom that so many others have?

It's mine and many other's view based on bible scripture but i wouldn't expect you to agree.

Which means you are discriminating. And based on what? A book that is not law. For all you can prove, it's simply a book. This issue has nothing to do with religion.

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Well, I'm clearly speculating, but I don't imagine a single man on this forum is turned off by two women getting down. Society as a whole is far more accepting of merry women than men. There's no denying that.

Well, I'm clearly speculating, but I don't imagine a single man on this forum is turned off by two women getting down. Society as a whole is far more accepting of merry women than men. There's no denying that.[/quote]

As long as they are attractive women!!!

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Those guys who go to anti-merry rallies and then go home and masturbate to lesbian porn.

Schbopo wrote:

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Those guys who go to anti-merry rallies and then go home and masturbate to lesbian porn.

Is this from experience? Have you seen them do it? There's always going to be some hypocrites but don't generalize everyone.

Eyesore wrote:

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Well, I'm clearly speculating, but I don't imagine a single man on this forum is turned off by two women getting down. Society as a whole is far more accepting of merry women than men. There's no denying that.

There's nothing like two trucker ladies going at it.

Quote :

Which means you are discriminating. And based on what? A book that is not law. For all you can prove, it's simply a book. This issue has nothing to do with religion.

It has been voted on and is "law". All prior civilization has always been against it until recently. You can call the bible a book but a lot of our laws originated from the bible's influence like the ten commandments.

Schbopo wrote:

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Imagine if this was just an issue of two women wanting to marry. Oh, right, it wouldn't be an issue then.

Who says?

Those guys who go to anti-merry rallies and then go home and masturbate to lesbian porn.

troublezone wrote:

Quote :

Which means you are discriminating. And based on what? A book that is not law. For all you can prove, it's simply a book. This issue has nothing to do with religion.

It has been voted on and is "law". All prior civilization has always been against it until recently. You can call the bible a book but a lot of our laws originated from the bible's influence like the ten commandments.

Ah, it's a law. Are you married? It may be against the law for you to have sex with your wife in any position besides missionary (her on bottom, you on top). Does that make it right? All prior civilization (talk about generalizing, huh?) used to think all blacks deserved to be subservient to whites or die. How many Christians quoted the bible in that justification?

Tell me, what's the difference between blacks and gays? What makes discriminating against one okay and the other a travesty?

The problem with that argument Eyesore is that Blacks are born.....Black. Many people maintain (and it's not been proven otherwise despite what you might read) that gheys are not born ghey. Many people believe it's a choice.

In other words, it's wildly different. Apples -vs- couches.

I for one believe you are born merry, when I was kid my father never sat down to me and explained that you must like girls, I just knew one day girls went from having the cooties to becoming a life long obsession.

I am sure it is that way with homosexuals.

I am oversimplifying human sexuality which is very complicated, but I am sure very few people who are merry would choose to be merry, especially in their teenage years. High school is hell enough without adding the stigma of being a homosexual, why would anyone choose to be so different, risk scorn, etc.

But even if it is a choice should n't adults have that right? I hear all the time about smaller goverment, but at the risk of repeating myself it shouldn't be small enough to fit into our bedrooms.

OOPs!!!! I stated in earlier posting I was done with this thread.

scottmitchell74 wrote:

The problem with that argument Eyesore is that Blacks are born.....Black. Many people maintain (and it's not been proven otherwise despite what you might read) that gheys are not born ghey. Many people believe it's a choice.

In other words, it's wildly different. Apples -vs- couches.

It's not been proven. Nor has the existence of God. Tell me this, you have any fetishes? Anything weird sexual things that turn you on? You don't have to tell anyone what they may be, but some people find feet incredibly attractive. Some men like to suck on toes; others like a woman to masturbate them...with her feet. Some dudes like a finger up their the turkey shoot while a woman goes down on him. Are these choices a man makes? Does a man just decide one day that he wants a woman to get him off with her feet? Or is this just part of the man?

Considering the wide variety of things people like sexually, is it really a stretch to imagine another man simply being attracted to another man? Or a woman to a woman? And what if it is all a choice? What does that change?

Quote :

It's not been proven. Nor has the existence of
God. Tell me this, you have any fetishes? Anything weird sexual things
that turn you on? You don't have to tell anyone what they may be, but
some people find feet incredibly attractive. Some men like to suck on
toes; others like a woman to masturbate them...with her feet. Some
dudes like a finger up their the turkey shoot while a woman goes down
on him. Are these choices a man makes? Does a man just decide one day
that he wants a woman to get him off with her feet? Or is this just
part of the man?

Considering the wide variety of things
people like sexually, is it really a stretch to imagine another man
simply being attracted to another man? Or a woman to a woman? And what
if it is all a choice? What does that change?

It's a fair question. However, I believe all of this (differing desires and fetishes) are cultural, by and large. Especially in affluent cultures where we have time on our hands (not spending every waking hour simply trying to survive). If you look back through history at different times in different cultures it's been fashionable to be ghey or to have "a boy on the side" (for lack of better expression). We're in such a cycle now. It's fashionable to either be ghey, or support it. It proves that you're progressive and enlightened if you support it whether or not you're ghey yourself. Everyone else is a low-brow, Bible thumping over-zealous neanderthal fundamentalist loon.

The "why would I choose this life" doesn't fly, in my opinion. Why do people, why does anyone, choose a particular activity that might bring massive scorn (not just homosexuality?). I'm a firm believer that people love to be different, and revel in the attention. My wife is a counselor, and one of her main points about dealing with "behavior"(...whatever it might be), is that attention - whether positive or negative - does the trick. Negative attention is still attention. Why do goth kids dress and act so incredibly different knowing they'll be reacted to by the general population in a negative way? Why are they drawing such obvious attention to themselves? They love it!!!!

Like Manny, I'm done before it gets ugly, unless someone brings up something so awesome (or awesomely dumb ) that I have to say "Yes"! or....."huh"?

scottmitchell74 wrote:

It's fashionable to either be ghey, or support it. It proves that you're progressive and enlightened if you support it whether or not you're ghey yourself. Everyone else is a low-brow, Bible thumping over-zealous neanderthal fundamentalist loon.

I couldn't agree more. Again, don't tell me to keep my faith out of politics and deny who I am and what I stand for.

I don't usually delve into these kind of threads, but I browsed it a bit and wanted to throw my 2 cents in. If you don't agree, or even if you don't like what I say rest assured that I don't honestly care. This is my opinion, and ain't nothing gonna change it (minus God himself).

Why do some feel such a need to rail against this "issue"? Let them get "married" if they want. If you believe their lifestyle to be a sin, and that God is against it, it won't be a legit marriage in any way except in the eyes of the state and their own minds.

Yah, I'm a Christian, and I'm usually strongly conservative, but seriously....this "issue" is such a load of bollox. Why rail so hard against it? Man will do as man will do. State your beliefs, put your faith in Him, and leave it well enough alone if others don't agree.

Thumping those that don't believe in Him over the head WITH Him and screaming loudly with a shrill voice at them that they are sinners isn't winning any battles. Last I checked, Christians that acted like that ARE THE FODDER for dimwits like Olbermann and his ilk. If Christians would focus more on the needs of the poor, the abused, the downtrodden, the struggling believer, the marriage in crisis, merely trying to spread the word of Him (not beat him down peoples throats), and using their lives as EXAMPLES of His love this world might become a bit better off.

I am so damn sick of people screaming "it's wrong cause the Bible says it is". Yes, I KNOW that. But guess what? THEY DON'T BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE AND YOU CONSTANTLY ACCUSING THEM AND DEBASING THEM ISN'T GOING TO BRING THEM AROUND TO YOUR POINT OF VIEW!

xyz wrote:

scottmitchell74 wrote:

It's fashionable to either be ghey, or support it. It proves that you're progressive and enlightened if you support it whether or not you're ghey yourself. Everyone else is a low-brow, Bible thumping over-zealous neanderthal fundamentalist loon.

I couldn't agree more. Again, don't tell me to keep my faith out of politics and deny who I am and what I stand for.

You guys are better than this sort of thinking. I'm sorry. Fashionable? Come on. You don't have to agree with being merry, or any such nonsense. But why is it so hard to simply believe that these people truly, deeply feel a natural attraction to someone of the same sex? You're attributing evolution (as in evolution of people discarding their prejudices) with something being fashionable. It's not fashionable. It's ACCEPTABLE. Society is evolving, and for the better, I think.

As for faith and politics, they do not belong. Who says you have to deny who you are when it simply comes to right and wrong? This isn't a merry issue at all. This is about right and wrong.

By the way, I hope no one is getting pissed off here.

Quote :

Ah, it's a law. Are you married? It may be against the law for you to have sex with your wife in any position besides missionary (her on bottom, you on top). Does that make it right? All prior civilization (talk about generalizing, huh?) used to think all blacks deserved to be subservient to whites or die. How many Christians quoted the bible in that justification?

I was referring to the law against it passing.

Quote :

It's fashionable to either be ghey, or support it.

I agree!!! It's also cool to be Bi-sexual with that never ending (girls gone wild) commercial being forced on the kids of this generation. They're being tought that anything goes and moral decay is alright. The "turkey shoot" is an exit for body waste not for stretching out like a woman giving birth.

Eyesore wrote:

scottmitchell74 wrote:

The problem with that argument Eyesore is that Blacks are born.....Black. Many people maintain (and it's not been proven otherwise despite what you might read) that gheys are not born ghey. Many people believe it's a choice.

In other words, it's wildly different. Apples -vs- couches.

It's not been proven. Nor has the existence of God.

excellent!

Why did AIDS start in the merry community? I'm just curious if anyone knows.

it didn't start there. it was only discovered there in the US.