U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,145 posts, read 14,066,940 times
Reputation: 7064

Advertisements

The case against gay marriage is a quickly dying battle. Now with 53% of Americans in favor of gay marriage and 6 states with legalized gay marriage, there's just no going back. Even of a Republican takes back the white house in 2013 and bans gay marriage, the battle will go on. The ban will be repealed later on. And in the meantime, gays will still be gay and continue to have gay sex, just as straights continue to have straight sex BEFORE MARRIAGE, which is AGAINST the BIBLE TOO! Therefore, why not make premarital sex illegal? Why, in the minds of Christians is a gay relationship worse than a bunch of other things that are "wrong" according to the damn Bible? If they believe in God as they say they do, then why are they creating these laws? Why not leave it up to God to judge everyone at the end (which is 100% baloney anyway).

It's a dying battle. It will be one of those things in 100 years from now we will look back as a society and say "geez....I can't believe gays were not allowed to marry back then," in the same manner as how we look down upon slavery, which by the way is ADVOCATED in the BIBLE! The religious are cherry picking from the Bible what they want to believe and enact. I reject that notion completely. The Bible is either 100% true or 100% false. And I contend that there is a 99% chance that it is 100% false.

 
Old 07-09-2011, 10:00 AM
 
23,851 posts, read 19,808,548 times
Reputation: 9381
The only proof I need is the human anatomy. Every crack, crevice, and cavity has a purpose. Yes, heterosexuals twist one particular cavity into a sexual playground too, but, at the most basic level i'm just not of the opinion that the male anatomy was intended for another male's anatomy.

Notice I didn't bring Jesus into the conversation, just biology. So if biology points solidly to male/female human sexual interaction, then how can male/male sexual interaction be contorted to be natural and acceptable? And now we want the law to call it natural and acceptable? This baffles me to no end.

For a group of people who love to tout science, it seems that you all are quick to ignore science in favor of the law. Am I wrong?

Where do we draw the line? How many more times will we ignore biology and morality in order to promulgate some other groups' utopic view of America?
 
Old 07-09-2011, 10:11 AM
 
14,920 posts, read 11,136,051 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The only proof I need is the human anatomy. Every crack, crevice, and cavity has a purpose. Yes, heterosexuals twist one particular cavity into a sexual playground too, but, at the most basic level i'm just not of the opinion that the male anatomy was intended for another male's anatomy.

Notice I didn't bring Jesus into the conversation, just biology. So if biology points solidly to male/female human sexual interaction, then how can male/male sexual interaction be contorted to be natural and acceptable? And now we want the law to call it natural and acceptable? This baffles me to no end.

For a group of people who love to tout science, it seems that you all are quick to ignore science in favor of the law. Am I wrong?

Where do we draw the line? How many more times will we ignore biology and morality in order to promulgate some other groups' utopic view of America?
Biology shows us that there are many normal and natural variants of life - and that includes normal and natural variants of sexuality. Homosexuality has been observed in essentially all higher level animals and is particularly prevalent in birds and mammals (humans are mammals). There are many biological theories why homosexuality has been selected for and maintained in so many species over millions of years of evolution. We even have some concrete examples of how homosexual directly aids in the propagating of some species.

Furthermore, something like homosexuality in humans could simply be a vestigial trait. What you said above isn't really true ("Every crack, crevice, and cavity has a purpose"). Many organisms possess vestigial structures, traits, and behaviors.

Last edited by hammertime33; 07-09-2011 at 10:25 AM..
 
Old 07-09-2011, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,145 posts, read 14,066,940 times
Reputation: 7064
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
The only proof I need is the human anatomy. Every crack, crevice, and cavity has a purpose. Yes, heterosexuals twist one particular cavity into a sexual playground too, but, at the most basic level i'm just not of the opinion that the male anatomy was intended for another male's anatomy.

Notice I didn't bring Jesus into the conversation, just biology. So if biology points solidly to male/female human sexual interaction, then how can male/male sexual interaction be contorted to be natural and acceptable? And now we want the law to call it natural and acceptable? This baffles me to no end.

For a group of people who love to tout science, it seems that you all are quick to ignore science in favor of the law. Am I wrong?

Where do we draw the line? How many more times will we ignore biology and morality in order to promulgate some other groups' utopic view of America?
You're only looking at the anatomy. You're not taking into consideration sex genes or chemical/hormonal variations. I am gay. For some reason, I am never aroused by females, but am always aroused by males. Don't ask me why, but that's just the way it is. I understand this concept might be obscure or challenging for a heterosexual to grasp. But that is the reality with gay people.
 
Old 07-09-2011, 10:15 AM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,700,460 times
Reputation: 18036
Bascially I do not thnik gay marriage is as favored as somethig it is. That is why they were shocked when California rejected it and want to do it thru political bodies. It took alot more than just chrictian that rejected it. But even then it really means that regardless of passing a law its likely not a law theat will be excepted by thsoe poepl and mean much less.Also such polical laws are subject to change evry quickly. We see that abortio itself is likely to never be finally settled because like gay marriage its a core belief with many on both sides.
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
6,899 posts, read 4,401,391 times
Reputation: 2738
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
Civil marriage is a contract, given power by the State, that confers to the couple contracting it some 1400 civil rights. As a construct of our civil law that confers a collection of civil rights, the 14th Amendment requires that it be applied equally to all (hence why the Supreme Court found laws banning interracial couples from contracting civil marriages unconstitutional).

You're right. The Constitution in no way requires States or the Feds to craft something in the law called civil marriage - they're free not to. However, if they do, they can't discriminatory decide which groups of people get those civil rights and which don't.
Hammer, that is a solid point and I won't make the weak argument of well the states and fed should not have been involved at all since they have choose to do so. I am honest enough to admit I do not know enough to dispute the above but it will give me something to think about when I am doing my farm work.
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:30 AM
 
269 posts, read 217,457 times
Reputation: 114
Of course it does. Because the only reasons to be against it are based on homophobia.
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
71,700 posts, read 83,289,352 times
Reputation: 41536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlarson21 View Post
If you feel that your fellow citizens shouldn't have the same right as you than you must not LIKE them in SOME way... otherwise you wouldn't treat them like that.

Also, that means you FAIL to recognized that there ACTUALLY ARE people BORN with a different sexual orientation than you and that they have no choice in the matter.

IN other words, you don't like their difference and you have no empathy. You feel that (from your safe viewpoint of already having the right in question to marry in accordance with your orientation) that someone else shouldn't have that right.

It's almost like these people are saying that gay people are doing something wrong by being gay and there's a tinge of hostility towards them because of something the didn't choose.


Also, why are so many STRAIGHT ANTI gay people more passionate about GAY issues than GAY people are... WE are the ones that HAVE TO LIVE as a GAY PERSON! (which BELIEVE ME is NOT a choice).. Obviously people who are ANTI GAY and MORE passionate than I am about GAY ISSUES has SEVERE ISSUES since NONE Of these things EVEN AFFECTS them in ANY WAY.
you think what you want about who is and is not homophobic, but please answer one question? Why do you and so many others start niew gay versus straight threads on a daily basis?
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:46 AM
 
1,202 posts, read 1,578,405 times
Reputation: 823
Have to agree with Mnita.

There are seriously 4 or 5 threads alone(on the homepage of this forum) that talk about the SAME exact thing (homophobes, gay marriage, mental disorders, etc) started by homosexuals. It's a bit obsessive and bizarre. Even if every heterosexual in here was a homophobe I'm unsure of how that is beneficial to homosexuals or what they will get out of it? A cookie?

I'm not against gay civil marriages, but I find these topics and threads labeling every heterosexual that doesn't like homosexuality a "homophobe" or "mental"--very narrow-minded and bizarre. Most heterosexuals do not like homosexuality--nor should they if they don't want to. I don't think labeling them with mental disorders or as homophobes will make any heterosexual like homosexuality anymore than they already do. It won't make a difference to a heterosexual that a homosexual thinks he/she is a homophobe. So creating threads like this really serve no point other than creating tension and unnecessary nasty remarks(made by both sides).

Because as noted, many of the heterosexuals that have responded to this thread could care less that a homosexual has called them a homophobe--they still have their opinion and will keep it regardless.

If this is "the" way to push for gay marriage(calling people homophobes and labeling with mental disorders) then I'd say it's not working.
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:52 AM
 
899 posts, read 707,924 times
Reputation: 590
Gay marriage is all about money and nothing more. Keep your GD sexual habits in your GD bedrooms like the rest of us and shut up about it. We're sick of your constant whining.
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

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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:54 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top