Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-26-2012, 02:50 AM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,854,602 times
Reputation: 3806

Advertisements

Lemme check a few things here, LeftyTrav:
you're against same sex marriage because in your mind it isn't "natural" --
it isn't "natural" because it can't reproduce biologically --
And it is "disgusting --
between two males --
but it is a turn on if it is between two females --
and you'd like to be involved in a menage a trois --
with two females --
but the two females you have sex with can't be married to each other.

Sound pretty well thought out to you?
Would you like the two females to be married to you if the law allowed?
Just checking.

 
Old 01-26-2012, 03:06 AM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,854,602 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
Let's clear up one thing, shall we? Proposition 8 passed in large part due to the votes of blacks and hispanics. 70% of blacks and 53% of hispanics voted for Prop 8. Only 51% of whites voted for Prop 8.

Please note that the Central Valley, this "nest of bigotry ... and racists", is 30% hispanic, and most of them voted for Prop 8.

Prop 8 won in Imperial County with 70% of the vote, and the county is 76% hispanic.

So, please get over this ridiculous notion that opposition to same-sex "marriage" has anything to do with racism. It's total nonsense. All races and all cultures recognize that marriage is, by definition, fundamentally the union of male and female.
Okay Pilgrim,

btw: I can think of a culture that doesn't recognize your definition of marriage above as a correct application of the intention: Gays ... but we'll just skip over that one for now, shall we?

Now, let's say that all races and cultures historically recognize marriage as you say: union of male and female.
Do we then assume that because it has been so in the past it should always be thus? I can think of an awful lot of things that used ta be, that ain't held so dear no mo'. Want a list? Warning: you won't like it.

Marriage historically -- way back when it started -- wasn't hardly based much on love at all, you know ... in most primitive cases, and continuing up until fairly recent times (several hundred years or less) it was a pretty bizarre hook up with choices made by parents. Kind of a practical deal having to do with transfers of wealth and power ... having to do with selecting for potential lineage / breeding ... and so forth. It was supported culturally to create families of lineage and service. Is this what we still need you think?

Nowadays, silly us, we actually have tried to create this new romantic idea of promise and commitment called: love -- to be the foundation of quality relationships. New deal. New players. Based on love and sharing and concern. Think that's limited to between a man and a woman?
 
Old 01-26-2012, 08:47 AM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,643,913 times
Reputation: 2622
Quote:
All races and all cultures recognize that marriage is, by definition, fundamentally the union of male and female.
A minor clarification, Many races and many cultures recognize that marriage is, by definition, fundamentally the union of male and females.

Throughout history, marriage was never thought of as the culmination of romantic love as it is in America today. In most of history marriage was a tool for species perpetuation and for alignment of interests. Even today in many parts of the world the bride and groom do not meet until the wedding day. Incidentally, statistically, those marriages are sounder than American marriages.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 10:14 AM
 
749 posts, read 836,315 times
Reputation: 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
Lemme check a few things here, LeftyTrav:
you're against same sex marriage because in your mind it isn't "natural" -- Incorrect....can you show me where I said that?
it isn't "natural" because it can't reproduce biologically -- Once again, incorrect. I couldn't care less about this...hell, my wife and I refuse to have children. We could use less population in this world.
And it is "disgusting --
between two males -- Yes, IMHO
but it is a turn on if it is between two females -- somewhat, but I suppose I feel this way compared to the alternative
and you'd like to be involved in a menage a trois --
with two females -- I was joking with jaijai...but if you want to take my humor at face value....be my guest.
but the two females you have sex with can't be married to each other. See above

Sound pretty well thought out to you? Yes...save for all the innaccuracies
Would you like the two females to be married to you if the law allowed? Uhhh, no thanks. One wife is load enough!
Just checking.
^^^^^
 
Old 01-26-2012, 10:21 AM
 
1,658 posts, read 3,538,256 times
Reputation: 1710
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
Let's clear up one thing, shall we? Proposition 8 passed in large part due to the votes of blacks and hispanics. 70% of blacks and 53% of hispanics voted for Prop 8. Only 51% of whites voted for Prop 8.
49% of whites (and asians), actually.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Glendale, CA
1,299 posts, read 2,531,044 times
Reputation: 1395
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
Let's clear up one thing, shall we? Proposition 8 passed in large part due to the votes of blacks and hispanics. 70% of blacks and 53% of hispanics voted for Prop 8.
That's mostly due to the influence of the Southern Baptist and Roman Catholic churches, respectively.

But at the end of the day this should have nothing to do with religion, as you can go to the local courthouse and get married.

We're not requiring the Catholic Church to marry gays, for God's sake (pun intended).
 
Old 01-26-2012, 10:30 AM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,854,602 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftyTrav View Post
^^^^^
Ok then ... clarifications noted in my notebook
Whew! You had me there for a minute last night!
 
Old 01-26-2012, 10:50 AM
 
749 posts, read 836,315 times
Reputation: 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
Ok then ... clarifications noted in my notebook
Whew! You had me there for a minute last night!
Must have been an uneven night for me. I'll get the hang of this place eventually.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 12:13 PM
 
281 posts, read 254,875 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by katnip kid View Post
It just gets more ridiculous! What about the straight couples who have NO SEX even though they are married?

Gay marriage is something else? WRONG! It is 2 people in love, same as heterosexual love.
I agree, the prospect of something called "same-sex" marriage IS ridiculous.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 12:16 PM
 
281 posts, read 254,875 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
Lemme check a few things here, LeftyTrav:
you're against same sex marriage because in your mind it isn't "natural" --
it isn't "natural" because it can't reproduce biologically --
And it is "disgusting --
between two males --
but it is a turn on if it is between two females --
and you'd like to be involved in a menage a trois --
with two females --
but the two females you have sex with can't be married to each other.

Sound pretty well thought out to you?
Would you like the two females to be married to you if the law allowed?
Just checking.
The redefinition of Marriage to ANYTHING other than a union between a man and a woman, is destructive to the institution of marriage, and harmful to society. It is to be avoided at ALL Costs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:39 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top